From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Sep 30 18:14:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA21555; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:02:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:02:08 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Cannot learn electrochemistry by ESP In-Reply-To: <960930152139_72240.1256_EHB201-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NLd342.0.dG5.ws6Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1252 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 30 Sep 1996, Jed Rothwell wrote: > To: Vortex > > Martin Sevior writes: > > "If a theory of CF is ever devised it will be the most radical departure > from what is known ever in the history of Physics. What is currently > known about Physics says the transmutations reported recently occur over > 187 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE too fast. Under those circumstances the onus is > absolutely on the CF scientist to convince the sceptical scientist using > every means at his disposal." > > Well, many CF scientists have already used every means at their disposal. I > mean, what more can you expect EPRI to do? They published a 128 page report + > microfiche. If they could build power plants I know they would! They have said > so many times. Miley volunteered to go on national television, and he will > report at ICCF6. I do not know any other mainstream scientist who would stick > his neck out so far in support of a despised, heretical field like CF. > That would be fantastic Jed. I fully admire his courage and his attempts to get the field legitimized to say nothing of his Science. I hope that he is absolutely ready to backup all replication attempts with a full published protocol, including all the tricky bits. I hope he will make himself available to help others through replication problems. Martin Sevior PS. On a totally different note, about 4 months ago we heard yet another rumour that the P&F Nice facility was about to be shut down. Given that they're appearing at ICCF6 it appears their death was prematurely reported again. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Sep 30 18:18:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA22644; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:07:48 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Lattice disruptions cause explosions? In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19960930104542.771fd20a@world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"oiUXJ.0.gX5.sx6Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1253 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 30 Sep 1996, Mitchell Swartz wrote: > > It is refreshing to see any science here or on spf at all. > > Nonetheless, not sure about your numbers. > > First, atomic space? is not ~1-2 10^-10 meters a little closer? > > if you mean lattice,it might be twice that, so > 3.9 E-10 meters seems right for palladium. > ok? > I was doing a conservative order of magnitude estimate Mitch. Just to see what size material would be needed to absorb a "typical" nuclear event. I think 1 micron cubed is not too far out. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Sep 30 18:19:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA21372; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 18:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32506CBE.7195@interlaced.net> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:01:37 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger@interlaced.net Organization: NASA (retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter References: <960930182550_321151977@emout01.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"BrFuI2.0.mD5.8s6Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1251 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Puthoff@aol.com wrote: > > Vortexians, (snip) > Have calorimeter, etc., will measure. Have computer, will publish. That's > it. > > Hal Puthoff, Ph.D. > EarthTech International, Inc. Dear Dr. Hal: I feel that the most important thing EarthTech has to offer to me (and, perhaps, to others on this list) is pure ACCESSIBILITY! I'm an anomalous science advocate - I have a limited amount of time to search the haystack for CF/ZPE nuggets - I don't need 10 periodicals to search through each month - I like to have one source I can trust. EarthTech is here, you guys seem reasonably competent(I don't demand infallibility from any human organization.), and I trust you to be "up front" with any results you may find, + or-. I hereby express my simple THANKS for your efforts. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Sep 30 21:40:45 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA10580; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:32:50 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961001043515.006f2fb8@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 21:35:15 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Hooper Effect - a prediction X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"BuHqc3.0.Cb2.mx9Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1255 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Why is iron so special ? At 11:12 AM 9/26/96 -0800, you wrote: >Prediction based on the expansion effect: the radial electrostatic field >should be many times larger for a given current if the bi-directional >interleaved conductor coil is made of iron wire, provided the wire is not >magnetically saturated. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Sep 30 23:49:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA03624; Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Sep 1996 23:48:04 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 06:47:38 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3251b53b.24477630@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"DkIru2.0.Yu.ZwBKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1257 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 30 Sep 1996 10:01:17 -0400 (EDT), John Schnurer wrote: > > > Dear Jeff, > > In a darkened room, with your rig shrouded to prevent light from=20 >escaping IT use a CRT from a scope which is off to see if you are=20 >generating X rays. Other phosphors work as well. One is from X ray=20 >film cassettes, a used one from when they upgrade. Have to talk to=20 >radiologist. A nice one will give you a cassette .... those wiht high = JQ=20 >[jerk quotient] do not usually do so. > > JHS > > Wouldn't a simple flourescent tube work too? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 00:06:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA06077; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:05:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:05:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 03:03:24 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961001030143.4cff5fd8@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"nDplY.0.oU1.iACKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1258 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:57 PM 9/30/96 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >For example, I've read one of McKubre's papers and, although he made >Herculean efforts to avoid calorimetry errors, the absolute value of the >excess heats he did see are so small that I believe (from my own calorimetry >experience) that they are likely to be artifactual. > Scott, could you please elaborate. Why are the likely artifactual reasons based upon your calorimetry. thanks in advance. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 01:02:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA13858; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:00:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 03:57:38 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: EarthTech as Arbiter Message-ID: <961001075737_100060.173_JHB76-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"aZIUJ3.0.OO3.6-CKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1261 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hal, >> We offer to make measurements on publically-defined instruments, write and publish the results on the net, and do this free of charge. Have calorimeter, etc., will measure. Have computer, will publish. That's it. Hal Puthoff, Ph.D. EarthTech International, Inc. << Great - but how do you propose to overcome the knee-jerk reaction of the establishment which has killed any general public acceptance of any ou demo? Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 01:03:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA13818; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 01:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 03:57:43 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Read the lit., Horace. Pack it y'sel Message-ID: <961001075743_100060.173_JHB76-3@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"7Cgzb3.0.UN3.szCKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1260 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> There's this kind of assumption going around that people who do CF are a bunch of half-arsed plumbers who can't do proper science. Sheesh. << Scientists they might be, but Engineers ??? I was referring to some of the Heath-Robinson spaghetti that Jed showed us, and which he criticised. >> Sure, the CETI boys and all the ones who think that they've found the crock at the rainbow's end are equivocal about publishing, but that leaves quite a few who aren't. And, no, I do NOT like these F&P-type papers which tell of their results without giving a full protocol. << What this means, surely, is that we have a fragmented jigsaw of data which only the dedicated, like you, Jed and Gene are prepared to try to sort out - and more power to your elbows. Unfortunately, the establishment has created a mythological "crackpot" label for anything the "underground" press publishes, and until a well respected (by the estab.) outfit comes clean and confirms the ou effect with one of the devices, or someone actually markets a useful product, then its the outback for CF etc etc IMHO. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 01:04:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA13797; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:59:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 03:57:40 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Norman is right; but they did already Message-ID: <961001075740_100060.173_JHB76-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WEgh2.0.QN3.szCKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1259 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chrissy >> Good honest travail seems to be out of fashion these days. << I wasn't referring to the enormous efforts of you 3. I was suggesting that no matter how much effort is expended by "outsiders" the "insiders" ignore it. Keep your knickers on mate! Whats all this about >> Hydrosonic device demo system in Darkest New Hampshire? << Do tell! Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 06:35:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA26915; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 06:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 06:30:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 09:27:35 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Little misunderstands McKubre Message-ID: <961001132735_72240.1256_EHB56-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"zIect2.0.Pa6.NpHKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1262 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: "I've read one of McKubre's papers and, although he made Herculean efforts to avoid calorimetry errors, the absolute value of the excess heats he did see are so small that I believe (from my own calorimetry experience) that they are likely to be artifactual." The absolute value of heat typically peaked at 1 to 4 watts, holding steady for a week or two. That is not small. Input usually ranged from 8 to 12 watts. You could measure these levels of heat with confidence using any calorimeter. With the SRI equipment "excess heat bursts [are] outside the standard deviation of the random errors by factors up to 50." (It was as high as 90 sigma in later experiments, after that was written.) Quoting the paper: For the thermodynamically closed and intentionally isothermal systems described here, output power was observed to be as much as 300% in excess of the electrochemical input power or 24% above the known total input power. When excess power was present, it was more typically in the range 5%-10%, in a calorimeter that was accurate to better than +0.5%. There is a great deal of confusion about these numbers. "Known total input power" means all power going into the cell, including the compensation heater that is turned down as electrolysis power or excess heat increases. SRI cells consume far more power than other designs, but only a fraction of the input power goes into electrolysis. Scott claims that 300% excess in an instrument that can detect better than 0.5% is "so small." That is wildly incorrect. I am sorry, but do not believe there is *any* scientific justification for his statement that McKubre's observations "are likely to be artifactual." When Scott dismisses the work in this cavalier fashion, it makes me doubt his ability to "serve effectively as an objective arbiter of . . . quality." I do not think that he has read the literature carefully. I doubt he can come up with any plausible technical arguments to back up this claim, beyond the fact that "the numbers look small." The output numbers look small because SRI uses a compensation heater to keep the temperature fixed at all times. Compared to electrolysis input power, and considering the sensitivity of the instruments, these numbers are large and indisputable. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 07:03:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA01773; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 06:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 06:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 08:58:54 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610011358.IAA28039@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"_bAjV3.0.aR.mEIKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1263 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:03 AM 10/1/96 -0400, Mitchell wrote: > > Scott, could you please elaborate. >Why are the likely artifactual reasons >based upon your calorimetry. First, let me say that McKubre's calorimetry is the best I've even seen. He and his co-workers have gone to extremem efforts to remove potential sources of error from their system. His positive results look impressive when displayed as "net excess heat" values (i.e. with the input power subracted) but they are typically less than 1.1 times the input power (see p. 65 of "Isothermal flow calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd and H/Pd systems", M.C.H. McKubre, et al). I've seen a lot of slightly anomalous readings in the 0.90 to 1.10 region in my calorimeters that I eventually attribute to subtle errors, rather than real effects. Hence I tend to be dubious of calorimetric results that are in the 1.00-1.10 region. Maybe I shouldn't judge McKubre's results so harshly. He does not get anomalous negative (i.e. <1.00) results. I can't point to any one thing that is a possible problem with his measurements...I just have a sinking feeling that, if he built a new calorimeter 10 times better than his present one, the apparent excess heat he sees would shrink accordingly. OK, Jed...roast me alive on this one.... 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-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 07:38:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06224; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:20:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:20:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 10:18:27 -0400 Message-ID: <961001101827_321782835@emout13.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Resent-Message-ID: <"-7Eqf.0.6X1.LYIKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1264 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman wondered: "Great - but how do you propose to overcome the knee-jerk reaction of the establishment which has killed any general public acceptance of any ou demo?" First, we would intend to make the demo available for detailed, independent inspection. Second, my own contacts in the scientific and government community are sufficient that I would brief on the device in detail everywhere and attempt to build up consideration that there might be something to it. (Example: This year I gave the 1996 Sigma Xi Lecture to the General Motors research staff, talking in part about the possibility. I would have a return engagement to say we now have it. Example: I regularly brief admirals and generals on technology trends in the energy area. Again, I would obtain a return engagement to say that it had now been done.) Beyond that, we would bring in substantive investment (we have substantial investors standing at our shoulders waiting for us to give the word on something we have hands-on confidence in), we would be interested in design work to steadily increase COP, develop partners, etc., depending on the inventor's wishes if it was a device of theirs instead of one of our own. Out of all this I would forsee steady acceptance emerging in time. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 07:38:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06465; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:21:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:19:32 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Reason for withdrawal of Podkletnov paper (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"I5MtF1.0.va1.IZIKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1265 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Did Gary's attached message get through? I show it as bounced, but I also received a double message. Maybe only one copy bounced, and everyone's seen this? Re: the below message I think: damn. There he goes, retracing the path of P&F. Let's hope that he is *able* to develop the invention outside the scientific community with lines of communications cut off. If not, then that's the last we'll be hearing of Podkletnov. If the key to turning Podkletnov's discovery into a useful device actually lies with some scientist somewhere else who has never read the papers, then going secret is the kiss of death. If his theory is faulty, then the device could forever remain a lab curiousity. A darkly secret lab curiousity. And just because "going secret" has been the kiss of death for any number of overunity inventions in the past, I fear that there is something about working alone in secret which breeds a behavior which assures failure. The Muses notice your greed and abandon you? And why would someone associate themselves with physics research at a university if the moment they make an important discovery they hide it and go off to sell it to someone? If this behavior was common, science would not exist. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 29 Sep 1996 20:09:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Gary Hawkins To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Reason for withdrawal of Podkletnov paper Linda Howe talked to Podkletnov this week. She is always interviewed in the first half hour of Art Bell's show called Dreamland, Sunday evening from 7 to 10 pm, Pacific time. For stations, see: http://www.artbell.com/ Podkletnov said his paper was withdrawn not for any political reasons, but that private companies have stepped forward to fund it, and there were "proprietary issues" to be dealt with. In other words, they want to protect their interests worldwide through the patent process first I would presume (and so it might take some time to try to cover all of the bases). Podkletnov said he does not understand why the effect occurs. For those who receive this right away, Art's guest tonight 'till 10 pm, Brian O'Leary, is talking about the world of "rebel science", and how rapidly things are changing. Gary Hawkins From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 10:12:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA25994; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 09:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 09:15:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610011614.JAA16429@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: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 09:14:10 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Resent-Message-ID: <"3odiH.0.1M6.jEKKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1266 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 03:57 AM 10/1/96 EDT, you wrote: >Hal, > >>> We offer to make measurements on publically-defined instruments, write and >publish the results on the net, and do this free of charge. > >Have calorimeter, etc., will measure. Have computer, will publish. That's >it. > >Hal Puthoff, Ph.D. >EarthTech International, Inc. << > >Great - but how do you propose to overcome the knee-jerk reaction of the >establishment which has killed any general public acceptance of any ou demo? > >Norman > > Well now this is an interesting question, all righty, and I think that the answer is not so apparant as might seem at first blush. I have been rambling through the underbrush where the great unwashed hang out talking about o-u, radioactivity neutralization and transmutations for the past three years or so and I must say that the general public is a lot more willing to take a flyer than you think it is. They, the unwashed, ARE NOT the source of conservatism here, mainly because they have a healthy, instinctive skepticism of all self-styled experts, including scientific pronouncements. The great unwashed, for instance, dominately believes that there is a psychic nature to things and also, despite 40 years of concerted official dis-information campaigns, suspects that IT actually IS ET out there sneaking around in the skies. The great unwashed will instantly embrace an o-u demo, if it is clear enough, which unfortunately provides the ability of people like Dennis Lee (no relation to our Dennis Lee) to operate and take people on a ride for a while. I am personally amazed at how many people think that perpetual motion, anti-gravity, and God may be entirely possible or even highly probable. The source of the conservatism is the media channels. Knowing nothing, the use considerable caution in starting stories, unless it is on their personal agenda. The media is like a herd of large herbivores. Once one starts to move suddenly, they all start a stampede. So most of the media, to avoid collective embarressment, tend to treat business and some science news with caution, preferring someone else to legitimize the story. Since those stories are rarely "timely", they can afford to treat them with caution. As a part of this caution, they tend, as a herd, to collectively ignore and sometimes blacklist certain stimulus. Have you noticed that further discussion of Willie's sex life has been blacklisted, along with the arrest of his brother on drug trafficing charges? Cold fusion, ET, and other subjects are in the same boat. Have you noticed that anything related to computers can get printed and ANY bogus claim or hype about the InterNet will receive worldwide transmission in the big media? So it goes. And the establishment is loaded with "closet" cases of early adapters of new views. So the key is not the establishment per se, it is the media.... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 10:56:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA01568; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 10:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 10:31:13 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:27:30 -0400 Message-ID: <961001132728_115574005@emout11.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, RVargo1062@aol.com, tlpst+15@pitt.edu Subject: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"Td5c12.0.7L.dKLKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: formail -D 8192 msgid.cache X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Today I was told by the Utility boss that I no longer had a job. Thirty seven engineers including myself were let go in this latest round of downsizing. It been a rough day. I worked there for 14 years and have many friends that I will miss. I thinking of what my next move should be. Where does a 43 year old engineer go next? Who needs a zero point energy advocate? It been rough. It will take some time to regroup and pull myself together. Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 12:08:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA18613; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:43:31 -0700 Message-Id: <199610011843.LAA24380@li.oro.net> X-Sender: tessien@oro.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: tessien@oro.net (Ross Tessien) Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"waC7E3.0.wU4.kQMKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: formail -D 8192 msgid.cache X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Today I was told by the Utility boss that I no longer had a job. Thirty >seven engineers including myself were let go in this latest round of >downsizing. It been a rough day. I worked there for 14 years and have many >friends that I will miss. I thinking of what my next move should be. Where >does a 43 year old engineer go next? Who needs a zero point energy advocate? > It been rough. It will take some time to regroup and pull myself together. > >Frank Znidarsic > Hey Frank; Sorry to hear about the news. What sort of engineering do you do, and where do you live? Regarding a ZPE engineer, I could sure use one but cannot afford one. Maybe that will change. In any case, I think you just begin the best years of your life since each one is always better than the last. If that doesn't seem to help, take a short vacation to a small town in Mexico and consider the individuals living in the brick huts with grass roofs and dirt floors. They are happy, and yet I am certain that compared to them you live like a king. I know that I do, despite my pitiful (by American standards) scale of living. It is great or horrible, and it all depends on how you look at it. Relativity comes into play here as well! Have any background in electronic design? What do you do? Send me a resume at (916) 273-5119 (warning, fax modem is down when I am on the net so always ring twice! This gives me time to boot up the program) Hopefully the rest of the group can keep their ears open for openings too. I think this group has a lot of positive aspects to it and not the least of all is support. Help finding a new job seems to me well within the bounds of what we do here as a little benifit of back scratching. Let me know what you are looking for and I will keep my ears open, or perhaps you may have some time to consider some of the concepts I have been working on. I am getting ready to purchase some components and just build the darn thing, but need some assistance on certain electronic issues. Later, Ross From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 13:08:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04968 for billb@eskimo.com; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:08:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:08:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com Tue Oct 1 13:08:45 1996 Received: from austria.it.earthlink.net (austria-c.it.earthlink.net [204.119.177.44]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA04933 for ; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:08:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from roshi.com (roshicorp.earthlink.net [206.43.129.31]) by austria.it.earthlink.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA12544; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 13:08:27 -0700 (PDT) From: RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com (Chuck Davis) Old-Date: 01 Oct 96 13:08:21 -0800 To: johnkent Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <3251E170.4B65@andover.co.uk> (by: johnkent ) Message-ID: Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells Organization: ROSHI Corporation X-Mailer: MiniMail 1.4b (2.7.96) (c) 1996 by Pelle Claesson of TheEnd Amiga (http://www.lls.se/~volley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: On 01 Oct 1996 20:28 -0700 (+0100), John Kent wrote to me: > Chuck Davis wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Sep 1996 20:21:39 -0700, johnkent >> wrote: >>> This is my first time on the net. It is a fact that more energy is >>> released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to split >>> water. The excess is absorbed as heat during electrolysis. I have >>> built >>> four Meyer fuel cells and would like to contact anyone who has >>> practical >>> experience with the latter. I also have most of Meyers patents on >>> the >>> subject, 15 European and 12 US patents, if anyone would like to >>> interchange data please contact johnkent@andover.com.uk >> Congrats! It's nice to see someone succeed :) At what rate can >> you create the gas and have you tried using it, yet? > Small cell 10 PSI in 135 seconds, visible gas streams at 1 mA. That's quite a low current. Can you describe your voltage source? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 16:26:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA06354; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:37:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:37:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 18:14:07 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"Y_isH2.0.7Z1.opPKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1268 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I have submitted my latest paper entitled: "Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" for publication in Physics of Fluids. I don't anticipate any serious problems in getting it past the reviewers as the analysis is quite straightforward and consistant with Grad's thirteen moment technique in fluid dynamics (a standard and accepted technique). Since I wanted to get this paper published I did not mention that the additional term for the H density flux that I derived implies that heat may be conducted under some conditions in violation of the accepted constraints from the second law of thermodynamics. I have noted with some interest the concepts of Viktor Schauberger in which he proposes that energy may be produced through the negative entropy generating effect of a water vortex. According to my analysis such a vortex may possibly produce negative entropy. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 16:33:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA06947; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:39:54 -0700 (PDT) From: RoshiCorp@earthlink.net (Chuck Davis) Date: 01 Oct 96 13:29:10 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells (forwarded) Organization: ROSHI Corporation X-Mailer: MiniMail 1.4b (2.7.96) (c) 1996 by Pelle Claesson of TheEnd Amiga (http://www.lls.se/~volley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"B0hMr3.0.Ri1.EsPKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1269 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: - ----- Beginning of forwarded mail ----- - On 01 Oct 1996 20:28 -0700 (+0100), John Kent wrote to me: > Chuck Davis wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Sep 1996 20:21:39 -0700, johnkent >> wrote: >>> This is my first time on the net. It is a fact that more energy is >>> released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to split >>> water. The excess is absorbed as heat during electrolysis. I have >>> built >>> four Meyer fuel cells and would like to contact anyone who has >>> practical >>> experience with the latter. I also have most of Meyers patents on >>> the >>> subject, 15 European and 12 US patents, if anyone would like to >>> interchange data please contact johnkent@andover.com.uk >> Congrats! It's nice to see someone succeed :) At what rate can >> you create the gas and have you tried using it, yet? > Small cell 10 PSI in 135 seconds, visible gas streams at 1 mA. That's quite a low current. Can you describe your voltage source? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- - ----- End of forwarded mail ----- - -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 16:36:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA09385; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 15:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 16:22:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610012122.QAA06610@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"meNdI3.0.WI2.S0QKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1270 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 13:27 10/1/96 -0400, Frank S wrote: >Today I was told by the Utility boss that I no longer had a job. I'm sorry for the unavoidable stress, Frank...but this might turn out to be a good day for you. Please post yr resume to Vortex. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 17:52:01 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA01511; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:34:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:34:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610020027.RAA04194@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: The Hooper Effect - a prediction To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:27:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <199609261941.PAA10219@mail.inforamp.net> from "Quinney" at Sep 26, 96 03:41:11 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"I0mAi2.0.XN.vXRKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1273 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Colin. Sorry I read the message you sent today, but accidently deleted it before responding. Anyway, the idea of doing Hooper's experiment with iron (magnetic) wire is interesting -- and might do something. Horace's ideas of what happens are a consequence of the self-hall effect -- which would be increased by a magnitude of about 5000 times through use of iron wire. It would also be important to do it with copper wire and compare the difference. Lots of companies sell iron (or steel) wire. You can probably find this, uninsulated, at a hardware store. It may be hard to get with insulation. Check Thomas Register for suppliers. Anyway a light gauge which you can easily make into a hairpin coil might be best -- but still with some current carrying capacity. Maybe 18 or 20 AWG. Does 8000 turns sound like a lot. It is. Huge. Maybe you can do something with 2 or 3 thousand turns. You need a power supply, and some measuring instruments. It will take a lot of power to get a fairly large amount of current through iron wire. Also a lot of heat in the coil. The instrumentation used by Edwards is decent. But he did not check at all for weight loss, or gravitation. Aside from measuring potential and electric field strength, also use a magnetometer, a weighing scale, an accelerometer (gravitational field) sensor, and crystal oscillator -- to check for time dilation in a gravitational field. Let me know if I can offer further advice or suggestions. Regards, Robert Stirniman (robert@skylink.net) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 18:09:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA01216; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:32:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:32:55 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:44:10 -0400 Message-ID: <961001174410_115779705@emout18.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: thanks all Resent-Message-ID: <"ZXqO53.0.qI.sWRKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1272 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I'll think I'll need a little time to sort things out. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 18:09:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA01643; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 17:34:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:21:53 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter In-Reply-To: <961001075737_100060.173_JHB76-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"e9kPd2.0.UP.LYRKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1274 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 1 Oct 1996, Norman Horwood wrote: > > Great - but how do you propose to overcome the knee-jerk reaction of the > establishment which has killed any general public acceptance of any ou demo? > > Norman > The CETI POWERGEN demo was withdrawn from widespread investigation before widespread tests on it could be made. It was an "In your face" demonstration that was not allowed to be widely demonstrated! It wasn't just a knee-jerk reaction that supressed interest in CETI stuff, it was CETI plus the knee-jerk reaction. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 20:18:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01059; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:43:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 19:14:32 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Message-ID: <961001231432_100433.1541_BHG69-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"r4Xoy3.0.RG.4RTKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1279 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, > I can't point to any one thing that is a possible problem with his > measurements...I just have a sinking feeling that, if he built a > new calorimeter 10 times better than his present one, the apparent > excess heat he sees would shrink accordingly. I can't speak for everyone's psyschology, of course, but I think that these sinking feelings can be either a sign that one has half-noticed that something is wrong, or one does not want the paper to be real. In my own case, I think that if it is the former I feel urged to look more and more carefully at whatever it is. If it is the latter I tend to look away from it and 'not want to know'. Either is, of course, to a degree an emotional response - but I find that self-observation can be a great help in such cases. It's a bit like that trick for making decisions. You toss a coin and thereby find out which decision you really prefer. This may not work for everybody, but if you find you are driven to seek out the error in McKubre by studying and re-studying the paper very carefully - it perhaps means that you can 'feel' there is a problem with it. By the way, I've just finished spending quite a few hours with the new Miley paper. Never have I seen such a mass of supportive data and argument - so much so that all I can say about it is that it's immensely thorough and that I'm awash with facts and figures. Maybe I will be able to see it more clearly in a few days when I've absorbed it. It does not include the chemical analysis test which I suggest as a test for the transmutation hypthothesis. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 20:19:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01916; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:47:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 09:59:19 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Norman is right; but they did alread Message-ID: <961001135919_100433.1541_BHG96-3@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"iacdT2.0.sT.lUTKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1280 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman, > >> Hydrosonic device demo system in Darkest New Hampshire? << > > Do tell! It's the nearest thing we can get to an 'in-your-face' demonstration. Arthur Clarke generously offered to fund it, out of his winnings from writing "3001". Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 20:43:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA09797; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:19:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 09:59:23 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Message-ID: <961001135923_100433.1541_BHG96-4@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"2qx_01.0._O2.uyTKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1281 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, > For example, I've read one of McKubre's papers and, although he > made Herculean efforts to avoid calorimetry errors, the absolute > value of the excess heats he did see are so small that I believe > (from my own calorimetry experience) that they are likely to be > artifactual. The absolute value of the mass of an atom is also very small. Measurements are made, and assigned error values. Both of these are (in effect) relative. In the case of McKubre, the percentage excess heat is very much greater than the error range. The absolute value of the heat is - frankly - of little significance at all. Personally, I find that one of the biggest problems of 'anomaly science' is that one does not have the comfort of the consensus behind one. Essentially, one is out on a limb, and it is necessary constantly to recheck one's assumptions *and one's agenda*, the emotional bias we all bring to our work. For myself, I would say that I do not always succeed in doing that - but at least I try very hard to avoid logical error and arm-waving. Here are some typical examples of faulty thinking I have seen recently, as much from professional scientists as in the most casual of 'net postings: 1. We must believe the hypthothesis which most closely fits the facts. 2. If the universe were not very precisely the way it is, then we would not exist. Therefore it has been designed to suit us. 3. Ockham's Razor means, "Keep it simple, stupid." 4. This event was so improbable that we know it cannot have been a natural one. 5. Demonstrating that something is crap by showing (or claiming) that something else is crap then saying that the two are the same. 6. Believing in models of reality rather than in reality itself. 7. False extrapolation of data outside its range. 8. Elaboration through impeccable and complex reasoning or mathematics something which is based on (sometimes hidden) false assumptions or premises. 9. Being so determined that our own ideas are right that we stretch reality beyond its limits to 'prove' that we are - or that someone else is wrong. Seeing 'I am right' as more important than 'this is true'. Well, those are a few of the most common ones. Actually, (2) is just an example of (4). Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 20:52:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA10758; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:23:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:23:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: 01 Oct 96 09:59:15 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Read the lit., Horace. Pack it y'sel Message-ID: <961001135915_100433.1541_BHG96-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"6wg-x3.0.-d2.v0UKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1282 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman, > Scientists they might be, but Engineers ??? I was referring to > some of the Heath-Robinson spaghetti that Jed showed us, and which > he criticised. That was indeed half-arsed, but it was a trade-show demo rig. Frankly, it looked as though it was designed to obfuscate more than to inform. The other CETI-type demos (at SOFE and ICCF5) were much better. > What this means, surely, is that we have a fragmented jigsaw of > data which only the dedicated, like you, Jed and Gene are prepared > to try to sort out - and more power to your elbows. Not really. Plenty of published and peer-reviewed papers. What on earth Scott sees wrong with SRI's work I just can't imagine. And why people raise recombination when excess heat exceeds V*I I cannot imagine either. They build elaborate fantasies and ignore the bottom line. > Unfortunately, the establishment has created a mythological > "crackpot" label for anything the "underground" press publishes, > and until a well respected (by the estab.) outfit comes clean and > confirms the ou effect with one of the devices, or someone > actually markets a useful product, then its the outback for CF etc > etc IMHO. But it isn't all 'underground press'. And any well-respected lab which reports the effect is promptly damned for having done just that. As you say, it all depends on commercialisation (or perhaps a massive in-your-face demo like the Wrights were eventually forced to do). Where you go wrong is in your assumption that there is any sanity in any of that. There isn't. There was no sanity when the sworn affidavits of respected citizens who'd seen the Wrights fly were ignored. There was no sanity in the Wrights' idea that if they took advantage of that and tried to keep it all a secret then it would be worth more. There was no sanity in the people who read the Wrights' patents and decided that cambered wings were not essential to the replication. There was no sanity in the US when the ecstatic French reports of public flying by the Wrights were treated sceptically. The only real sanity came when individuals eventually persuaded the Wrights to do big public demos, and the US President intervened. The cry of shock and amazement from the crowd in the US as the 'plane lifted off and flew was the sound of reality being thrust down the throats of (a) the scientists, (b) the public, and (c) the Wrights themselves. And of course two brilliant scientists whose airscrews worked to within 1% of their predictions, scientists who invented the wind-tunnel and re-worked all the old and dubious data, are often seen as two lucky tinkerers - because they were not 'proper scientists'. The world is just as barking mad as it ever was. Vox populi, vox Dei. Thank God for the ordinary punter - he has a damn sight more sense than we clever-dicks do. For example, let's look at what is happening in Japan. On the NHE programme there is scarcely a single electrochemist. They concentrate almost exclusively on bulk-palladium and heavy water, and dismiss all other approaches. When they find loading difficult to measure, they reduce it so that they can make the measurements more easily. We are hoping to use ICCF6 and the fact that 'a prophet is not without honour save in his own country' to get them to look at Miley's work. I know this is not a popular sentiment, but all of that illustrates that the normal processes of science are not necessarily the way to do CF. This is one reason why I am not really very worried about the science community rejecting CF. Around the turn of the last century, parts of the science community did what appeared to be a damned fine job of making a flying machine - they were old and discouraged, there were plenty of good journals which had proved that their efforts were worthless, but they battled on. And they failed. The problem is that real problems often require genius as much as sound science. I'm not disputing that science has a role to play in CF. Let's just remember that it isn't a very important one. Its importance will come soon enough - if and only if the phenomena become accepted. There is no inevitability that it ever will, just as the Wrights might well have faded into oblivion after they could fly very well. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 21:41:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA26427; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:35:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:34:06 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre In-Reply-To: <961001231432_100433.1541_BHG69-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"bxYSQ.0.rS6.t3VKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1285 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > By the way, I've just finished spending quite a few hours with the new > Miley paper. Never have I seen such a mass of supportive data and > argument - so much so that all I can say about it is that it's immensely > thorough and that I'm awash with facts and figures. Maybe I will be > able to see it more clearly in a few days when I've absorbed it. It > does not include the chemical analysis test which I suggest as a test > for the transmutation hypthothesis. > Ah, at last the long awaited paper! Do you know where Miley wants to publish? Any chance of preprints? Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 22:03:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA01564; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 96 00:42:12 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: RE: Vortex energy To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"QCoco2.0.LO.fQVKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1286 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > I have submitted my latest paper entitled: > >"Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" > >for publication in Physics of Fluids. I am very interested in your thoughts on this subject. Could I get a pre-pub. copy or an email of more of the highlights of the paper? It is an almost universal idea within the groups I am associated with that the vortex holds a number of keys to understanding specific observed anomalies that appear contrary to thermo-dynamic law. Robert From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 1 22:15:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA03514; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 22:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 22:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 22:04:33 -0700 Message-Id: <199610020504.WAA27877@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: uh, 3001? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"YtqG4.0.os.IXVKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1287 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: >It's the nearest thing we can get to an 'in-your-face' demonstration. >Arthur Clarke generously offered to fund it, out of his winnings >from writing "3001". I guess this is relativity's time warp? :-} -AK- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 01:05:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA07430; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 01:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 01:03:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961002081037.006b8e18@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 01:10:37 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Free Energy MPEG movies available ! Resent-Message-ID: <"rxt6R1.0.vp1.x6YKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1288 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Figured some of you might like to check some of this out. Forwarded message: ... >There are: > >2 videos of Stanley Meyer and his Water splitting device and >car buggy ! > >2 videos of Griggs and his selling Hydrosonic pumps > >2 videos of Patterson and his CETI Water Fuel Cell ... =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D >Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:11:44 +0100 >From: harti@bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) >Subject: Free Energy MPEG movies available ! > >Hi, > >I just made 18 MPEG movies from videotapes from >my archive and it is 52 MB of MPEG files all in all ! > >These MPEG movies also play fine via a Software only >MPEG player like the new ActiveMovie MPEG player from >Microsoft, available at : > >http://www.microsoft/msdownload/ > >Be sure to download also from over there the new > >directx.exe file to accelerate your graphics card under >Win95 ! > >Then you can play these movies, which are mostly in 176x144 >resolution with 25 frames/sec and MPEG audio sound in it >like normal videoclips ! It runs also very well with the >Softpeg MPEG player from: > >http://www.compcore.com > >They have a dmeo player, latest version is 2.1 , > >and with the XingMPEG player 3.0 which is at: > >http://www.xingtech.com (look under the support page >for the download area !) > >If you now have got your MPEG player working go to the directory >of my new movies and load them all down. The movies are located >at: > >http://www.overunity.de/movies/ > >Please don=B4t forget the SLASH at the end behind the word movies/ >cause otherwise you will not see the directory.. (there is no index-file yet...) > >Please share these movies and the free MPEG player from Microsoft >with all your friends and relatives and show them, what is available TODAY= ! > >There are: > >2 videos of Stanley Meyer and his Water splitting device and >car buggy ! > >2 videos of Griggs and his selling Hydrosonic pumps > >2 videos of Patterson and his CETI Water Fuel Cell > >1 video of the Russian Tschernenkow (hope the spelling is right...) > >1 video of my visit to Joe Newman in 1987 and showing me his FAN >motor. > >6 movies of me doing work on my small rebuild Newman machine > >4 movies from a Newman public relation tape > >Please try to download them one after the other.... >If traffic is too much , please try later... > >Try to view these movies in 2x zoom mode, then the >screen size is better to view and you get more details ! > >I compressed these movies to 32 Kbytes/sec Videodata >rate and 6 Kbytes sound data rate, so they are pretty small >for video data, but still play okay to get all of the important >content !They still are at 25 and some at 30 frames/sec, >so they play very fluently, especially on a Pentium machine. >Be sure to get DirectX, then you can also watch them Fullscreen >wiuthout any slowdown ! >If you have the ActiveMovie player installed , then you can play >them via the Win95 Mediaplayer and to play them >in FULLSCREEN mode, do the following: > >As the movie is loaded, press: > >Control + F5 > >and then type the MCI command: > >play fullscreen > >and it will play the movie without any windows borders >in fullscreen mode. Be sure to have installed the DirectX.exe >accelerator program to get the speed for your SVGA card ! > >If you still have any questions, please let me know. > >Enjoy the movies and spread the message ! > >Regards, Stefan Hartmann. > >P.S.: I should mention that some movies are digitized from the >documentation movie: >"It runs on water"=20 >from Channel 4, England, UK (the MPEG movies >from Griggs, Meyer and Patterson) This tape had a bad >picture quality and the sound also was pretty noisy, cause it was >a 6th generation copy or so... so please bare with my >digitalisation quality... The other movies are a bit better... > > >-- >Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann >Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany >NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 >email: harti@harti.de harti@bbtt.de >Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de >Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de >My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:10:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15549; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:05:10 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Got slammed...now fired... Message-ID: <961002080510_100060.173_JHB44-3@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"hYeas3.0.oo3.Q4ZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1289 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank, >> I thinking of what my next move should be. Where does a 43 year old engineer go next? << FWIW I was in almost the same position at your age, with a family and a mortgage to support. What saved my bacon was aggressive selling of myself as an industrial consultant, and I took on any and every assignment which offered itself, from computer programming off-beat client requirements to product development and corporate investigations. You have to get the support of a bank or other fall- back finance, and that can be difficult, but enthusiasm and well documented project plans help. Its sell yourself time, and good luck. Oh yes, I nearly forgot - don't rely on old professional friends, they tend to disappear when you need "help". Personal friends and family are a necessary support for your morale. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:11:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15619; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:05:13 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Message-ID: <961002080512_100060.173_JHB44-4@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"sbAPe1.0.sp3.X4ZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1292 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> By the way, I've just finished spending quite a few hours with the new Miley paper. Never have I seen such a mass of supportive data and argument - so much so that all I can say about it is that it's immensely thorough and that I'm awash with facts and figures. << OK, can we treat this as a case study? I don't have a copy yet, but if all the data and calorimetry spec. can be isolated from the theory, and presented clearly, we could all pick it to pieces. If there is a consensus in Vortex in favour of incontrovertible ou above say 50%, then a press release by a media wiz should be prepared, and the cell replicated by Scott and Hal and hyped to the full. Want to bet that replication won't work? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:11:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15597; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:05:08 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Message-ID: <961002080508_100060.173_JHB44-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"h24mJ1.0.Wp3.V4ZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1290 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mike, >> So the key is not the establishment per se, it is the media.... << Undoubtedly true. So what is required is a good spin doctor to accept the challenge - for a slice of the action of course. No hay, no pay. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:12:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15636; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:05:06 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Message-ID: <961002080506_100060.173_JHB44-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"5dqMF2.0.fp3.V4ZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1291 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hal, >> Norman wondered: "Great - but how do you propose to overcome the knee-jerk reaction of the establishment which has killed any general public acceptance of any ou demo?" << Thank you for your detailed response to my wondering. If your connections are as wide and deep as you say, and I have no reason to doubt it, then you are probably the nearest to "establishment" that we could hope to get. IMHO under the circumstances, any low-budget scientist/inventor would be foolish NOT to take advantage of your offer. In my early days I would have given my eye teeth for such a generous offer. I had to struggle through rip-off merchants and lost 3 good products, sadly now out of time, due either to choosing the wrong partner, or failure to penetrate the establishment. I was very lucky to be introduced to an honest businessman, and my biggest scheme was eventually completed, but even then it took 12 years and a friendly bank manager!! Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:12:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA15656; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:05:16 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Norman is right; but they did alread Message-ID: <961002080515_100060.173_JHB44-5@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"FIIWk.0.zp3.Y4ZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1293 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> It's the nearest thing we can get to an 'in-your-face' demonstration. Arthur Clarke generously offered to fund it, out of his winnings from writing "3001". Chris << Great! Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 02:50:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA19759; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:46:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 04:30:22 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Message-ID: <961002083021_100433.1541_BHG147-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WkY_B1.0.bq4.IeZKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1294 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, > Chris, I opened this post with considerable trepidation, half > expecting to receive another "blast"...but you've responded calmly > with a perfectly rational and correct point that needed to be > made. Another blast? Oh, I hope I don't do 'blasts'. The big problem we all have out on this limb is that of reading our own minds and emotional agendas. "The bubble reputation" is one problem, do some reputations here and elsewhere depend upon never seeing over-unity? Chris (who's glad he has no reputation to worry about) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 03:28:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA24939; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 03:27:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 03:27:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 02:32:37 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: The Hooper Effect - a prediction Resent-Message-ID: <"zgHZV2.0.a56.5EaKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1295 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Why is iron so special ? > If I remember correctly, soft iron wire is easy to work with due to its malleability, does not permanently magnetize (has low coercive force), has a high permeability, a high saturation flux density, and three mutually perpendicular easy directions of magnetization. Iron is an element so hopefully can be obtained in a fairly pure form, not alloyed with Si or other things which reduce its conductivity and other desirable characteristics. Iron also is less magnetostrictive than Co or Ni, so should distort less in operation. Steel is not nearly as good due to its higher coercive force and lower saturation density. If the other qualities could not be sacrificed too much, especially high perameability, high saturation flux density and low coercive force, it would be good to find an alternative with higher conductivity. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 05:07:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA06725; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 05:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 05:05:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 04:10:40 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Transmutation vs CF heat Resent-Message-ID: <"reAj02.0.-e1.1gbKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1296 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is another attempt to more clearly communicate what I think is a very important issue. For the sake of easier communication let's define "heavies" or "heavy products" to mean transmutation products more massive than 4He. Therefore "lights" or "light products" should mean transmutation products less massive than 4He or 4He. It appears that doing easily reproducible CF experiments which clearly produce heat energy exceeding the electrical energy input is very difficult, as is producing highly accepted measurements of light products produced. There have been seven years of effort in this area with no highly accepted results. That is not to say that such results may not be around the corner, but for the sake of discussion let's assume not. On the other hand, it appears that when heavies are looked for there is a fairly high success rate at finding the heavies in CF experiments, or at least indications that further research should be done. It therefore seems like searching for heavies should be given much priority by low budget researchers and amateurs, as there is great potential for success. Heavies in CF style experiements are just fruit on another branch of the CF tree. If fruit on that branch is found, fruit on the other branches will be found as well. An easily reproducible, simple, and cheap experiment for producing heavies could be the ticket to opening this field up in mainstream science. The difficulty with heavies is accurate detection in minute quantities, especially dynamically, while an experiemnt is running. A dynamic non-destructive testing method would add much to the ability to control and quickly tune experimental parameters to maximize the results. I think there is much this group could do to identify and disseminate inexpensive but reliable testing methods for very minute quantities of some of the heavies involved. Typical heavies, depending on choice of electrode and electrolyte, include Ca, K, Fe, Co, etc., for which very good titration test kits are available. However, chemical tests may not have sufficient sensitivity. It would be good to be able to purchase or build a relatively cheap spectrometer for detecting very minute quantities of one or more specific heavies. I think a good goal would be to be able to build/buy such a device for $2000 or less, excluding computer. This would be the calorimeter analagous device in the heavies transmutation race. It sees to me that spectrophotometery and possibly NMR could be candidates in that range, at least for homebrew devices. Another alternative might be to identify an inexpensive heavies testing service which could be performed. The problem here is the need to take samples and the delay. The obvious advantage is that a much wider range of experimenters could do experiments due to the hopfully much lower cost resulting from economies of scale. Another level of such support could be in the confirmation stage, to verify the process in totality as real. One issue is the method for identifying the best heavies generating *experiment* to utilize for bringing transmutation to the public. The results of such a determination then determines what heavies tests are key. Finding "the" experiment quickly requires a mass spectrometer or other expensive instrmentation to look at all possible heavies. If an experiment is identified which very reliably creates one or more heavies, then a specific experiment and test method could be devised focusing on the heavy most easily and cheaply detected. This would be a good approach for a company like Earthtech. For low budget amateurs like me the best approach is maybe different. Maybe choosing a specific test heavy, like Ca, and then developing the test means is a good initial route. The main variations in my search would then be choices of electrolytes and electrodes, voltages, geometries, loading protocols, etc. Anyone have any thoughts as to a highly sensitive but cheap test means for any heavies? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 06:05:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA13988; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:02:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:02:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 09:00:10 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Little versus McKubre Message-ID: <961002130009_72240.1256_EHB167-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"F52Li2.0.SQ3.gVcKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1297 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Regarding McKubre, Scott Little writes: His positive results look impressive when displayed as "net excess heat" values (i.e. with the input power subtracted) but they are typically less than 1.1 times the input power (see p. 65 of "Isothermal flow calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd and H/Pd systems", M.C.H. McKubre, et al). I've seen a lot of slightly anomalous readings in the 0.90 to 1.10 region in my calorimeters that I eventually attribute to subtle errors, rather than real effects. Hence I tend to be dubious of calorimetric results that are in the 1.00-1.10 region. First of all, as noted on page 65, the excess was not limited to this range, it was sometimes as high as 25% and much higher on a few occasions. We cannot throw out the higher numbers and pretend that McKubre has only sees 5 to 10%. We cannot pick and choose the data to fit the hypothesis. Second, Scott claims it is difficult to measure a 5 or 10% excess. I submit that this statement by itself is meaningless. He says that his calorimeter malfunctioned and showed a spurious 10% excess. The question is, 10% of what? Were the absolute power levels comparable to McKubre's? It is difficult to measure the difference between 0.78 watts and 0.86. It should be dead simple to detect the difference between 10 watts and 11. More problems and artifacts are seen in the lower power domain, where noise from things like electrolysis and recombination become a significant factor. If Scott has frequent difficulty detecting 10% in the range of 5 to 15 watts (where McKubre operates) then I would say Scott is not very good at calorimetry. If Scott has seen artifactual 10% excess in 80 different experiments over a period of years after hundreds of trials, and if this spurious heat has sometimes gone up to 20%, 30% and even 300%, then Scott owns the world's worst calorimeter and he should contact the Guinness Book of World Records. Third, McKubre describes an exhaustive set of tests to verify that there was no subtle error. Millions of dollars and years of effort were devoted to these tests. Would these tests reveal the subtle error (or errors) that Scott found? Scott experienced subtle errors A, B and C. If McKubre carefully and repeatedly checked for A, B and C then Scott does not have a leg to stand on. He must point to errors E, F or G, or he must concede that there is no subtle error. He cannot invoke invisible, undetectable, unfindable errors. This is science, not voodoo. To summarize, we must ask whether Scott's artifactual results are *in any way comparable* to McKubre's. Are power levels in the same range? Are the number of trial runs and blank runs within a factor of 10, or 100? Did Scott see this artifact produce 300% spurious excess? Did McKubre act to prevent and detect the specific errors Scott found? Did Scott replicate his calorimeter and give it to a third party, and did they verify the effect? Scott says: Maybe I shouldn't judge McKubre's results so harshly. He does not get anomalous negative (i.e. <1.00) results. I can't point to any one thing that is a possible problem with his measurements...I just have a sinking feeling that, if he built a new calorimeter 10 times better than his present one, the apparent excess heat he sees would shrink accordingly. The equipment has been improved over the years, the signal has not faded. I asked for a technical reason to doubt McKubre. Scott's response, in essence, is that he has a gut feeling something might be wrong. That's a non-starter. A technical critique of an experiment must be grounded in specific, quantitative claims that can be proved true or false, not "sinking feelings." OK, Jed...roast me alive on this one.... That will not be necessary; you have roasted yourself. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 06:16:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA15589; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:13:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:13:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:13:00 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Scott Little's CF attempts In-Reply-To: <199610011358.IAA28039@natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tLR2Z1.0.Pp3.WfcKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1298 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Tue, 1 Oct 1996, Scott Little wrote: > I've seen a lot of slightly anomalous readings in the 0.90 to 1.10 region in > my calorimeters that I eventually attribute to subtle errors, rather than > real effects. Hence I tend to be dubious of calorimetric results that are > in the 1.00-1.10 region. Scott, have your subtle errors acted like continuous excess heat, or have they appeared and then vanished? In other words, have they mimicked the "turn on" phenomenon? Won't an experimental setup act as it own control if it can sit there producing approx. 100% throughput, and then suddenly, with no changes made and nothing disturbed, start displaying a few percent excess? Or has this not occurred in your setup? I can see how an undiscovered measurement error can easily lead to a false baseline for throughput, but I can't see how measurement errors could produce a long pulse of heat output. By analogy, in the field of electronics I wouldn't trust a DC measurement to be without undiscoverd errors, just as I wouldn't entirely trust peak and timing measurements of a pulse. But if I see a pulse, and I didn't accidentally wiggle anything, and I can produce the pulse at will, I would put this observation of a pulse in an entirely different class than I would the measurements of the *characteristics* of the pulse. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 06:50:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA22334; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 06:47:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: Richard Milton Subject: The "Bockris/Pauling" feedback effect In-Reply-To: <961001135915_100433.1541_BHG96-2@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hBWn8.0.qS5.s9dKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1299 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 1 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > > Unfortunately, the establishment has created a mythological > > "crackpot" label for anything the "underground" press publishes, > > and until a well respected (by the estab.) outfit comes clean and > > confirms the ou effect with one of the devices, or someone > > actually markets a useful product, then its the outback for CF etc > > etc IMHO. > But it isn't all 'underground press'. And any well-respected lab > which reports the effect is promptly damned for having done just that. The above exchange brings to mind an entry I've been working on for "Symptoms of Pathological Skepticism:" Indulging in circular reasoning regarding the expertise of scientists who investigate "disreputable" topics. If you judge the competence of a researcher based on your beliefs about the reputation of the field he/she investigates, then you make a great error if you should ever judge the reputation of that field based upon your beliefs about the competence of the researchers involved. Cold Fusion is pathological science because everyone involved in it has questionable judgement, and no sane, reputable people believe that the results are real. - and - If reputable researchers begin to take Cold Fusion seriously, then they obviously indulge in pathological science, they reveal themselves to have faulty judgement and questionable sanity, and their reputation is destroyed. The anti-CF crowd seems blind to the fact that "disreputatble" is in the eyes of peers. If peers ignore the real world, and judge everything based on closed loops of "reputation," then positive feedback effects can easily arise. I wouldn't be surprised if this phenomenon is the major reason for the sudden appearance of taboos in science. A Taboo field is seen as disreputable, and it destroys the reputation of any who touch it. But a Taboo field is like a vortex spawned and powered by the circular thinking of the majority, and without the circular thinking it could not exist. I guess it's too early in the morning here: I'm getting visions of a Meteorology of Taboos: write a paper which ridicules someone's work, and you generate a tiny 'vortex' which gathers energy from surrounding skeptics, grows and grows while attracting other condemnations and swallowing the reputations of victims, and soon a new Taboo Field of Research has appeared. Sometimes the effect has no upper limit, and it grows to encompass the whole world. Entire populations destroy their reputations and begin believing fantastic ideas, and only a few sane people remain who still know that atoms don't exist, space flight is bunk, etc. (New justification for the name of vortex-L?! Been sucked in, eh? ) This positive feedback taboo-genesis effect needs a name. I was calling it the Linus Pauling Effect, (as in, "I'll believe in alternative health when a scientist of great reputation takes it seriously.") But maybe it would be more appropriate to call it the "Bockris effect"? Or does it already have some other pithy, memorable name? .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 07:19:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA27629; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:11:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:11:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 02 Oct 1996 07:11:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/02/96 07:11:22 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"SB_uY2.0.dl6.jWdKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1300 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/02/96 02:10 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Norman: Would you write me personally at MHUGO@EPRI.EPRI.COM? I would like to share some personal thoughts with you. Yours, Mark Hugo From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 07:20:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28149; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:14:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 10:11:42 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: ILENR2 tape quality Message-ID: <961002141142_72240.1256_EHB56-3@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"PYnMI1.0.kt6.sYdKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1301 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry and various other people have asked me about the quality of the ILENR2 tapes. They want to know whether you can read the viewgraphs when the camera pans in. Alas, no. At least I can't read most of them. It seems the camera operator learned how to work the thing better after a while. Later lectures and the free discussion came out better and you can read more of the viewgraphs. I thought the discussion was good. The audio quality is iffy in places but okay. Just turn the TV volume up. The quality is not as good as the ICCF5 tapes. They were made by Akira Kawasaki, who did a great job using a super-deluxe camera equipped with complicated doodads. However, the ICCF5 Proceedings took forever to come out, whereas Hal Fox says he will print the ILENR2 Proceedings very soon. The proceedings together with the video would be a killer combination! I understand this Miley paper much better, having listened to the tape twice and the live lecture once. There is a lot to be said for a spoken presentation. It is good to have the author explain things. That's why we still have meetings. I expect I'll get a lot more out of the papers by Szpak, Minevski and Swartz too, thanks to their presentations. One reason lectures are good is because time is limited and the author is forced to present the essentials only and simplify a little, which makes it easier to understand. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 08:13:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06302; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:44:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 07:44:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 10:41:36 -0400 Message-ID: <961002104135_322852677@emout05.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Resent-Message-ID: <"4818z2.0.HY1.5_dKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1302 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: In response to my posting about EarthTech being willing to assist inventors with measurements, reports, connections, Norman said: " IMHO under the circumstances, any low-budget scientist/inventor would be foolish NOT to take advantage of your offer." Thanks Norman. That's what I would think also, but only three have so far, two of whom's devices did not work, the third still being under study. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 08:15:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA10164; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 08:02:32 -0700 (PDT) From: RoshiCorp@earthlink.net (Chuck Davis) Date: 02 Oct 96 08:00:59 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: <961002080510_100060.173_JHB44-3@CompuServe.COM> (by: Norman Horwood <100060.173@CompuServe.COM>) Message-ID: Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Organization: ROSHI Corporation X-Mailer: MiniMail 1.4b (2.7.96) (c) 1996 by Pelle Claesson of TheEnd Amiga (http://www.lls.se/~volley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"T6xms.0.eU2.5GeKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1303 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 02 Oct 96 4:05 -0400 (+0400), Norman Horwood wrote: > Oh yes, I nearly forgot - don't rely on old professional friends, they te= nd to > disappear when you need "help". Personal friends and family are a necess= ary > support for your morale. Man O' man, ain't that the truth? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 08:25:42 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA10892; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 08:05:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 08:05:29 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:04:14 -0400 Message-ID: <961002110413_322868652@emout02.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Resent-Message-ID: <"WDi5k2.0.yf2.rIeKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1304 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Chris said: "The bubble reputation" is one problem, do some reputations here and elsewhere depend upon never seeing over-unity?" Whoever might fall into that category doesn't include Scott Little, Hal Puthoff, or EarthTech. Our doors are open to anyone who can bring in a device and show o/u. If it's there, we'll see it, and we'll make sure everyone knows we've seen it. Hal From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 09:55:45 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA18420; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:45:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 96 14:31:52 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: RE: Got slammed...now fired... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, RVargo1062@aol.com, tlpst+15@pitt.edu X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"WBZxY3.0.GS4.zPMKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: formail -D 8192 msgid.cache X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Frank, Sorry to hear! Let me know what you would like to do and I will see what I can do to help. Robert From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 11:18:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA13744; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:11:34 -0600 (MDT) From: -steve ekwall- X-Sender: ekwall2@november To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: stored excessive heat.. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"8N2il3.0.gM3.E1hKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1305 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: odd-but true-and perplexing to the ignorent author.. (thinking)...:( Winter: Hunting Season upcoming - Reminded me of the Outdoor HAND-WARMERs many hunters use (chemically exothermic - assumed/known) House Chores: Wife said fix the (black & decker Dust buster) or handheld vaccumm : (no torree moree type, suction was SHOT (not by hunter). Qualifications: Handy Man (ok deeer :) noshots here Diagnosis: (on newspaper - on kitchen table (sunday-during football:( )). Internal Diode blew, resulting in 'melted transformer' Action taken: (two fold problem: One fold suloution) Replace TRANSFORMER with a bigger / better(?) 12vac 20ma OUT to 200v bridge-rectifier. (humm- That should do the trick) oh, on the Diode trble/ so i could verify all batteries (9-12vdc??x4pack) BY-PASS all switches (on-off) attach +/- (red/black=duh) to Bridge Rectifier Output and 'Plug-in 110AC' (supervised - while i read am paper sports section:). NOTED: after about 15-20 minutes switch to ON- WRrrroooooom)(deeer - All fixed - hear it?) P&F can be premature on CF, so let's keep a smile on her face - ok.. (that's a smart handy-man).. * 1: Pull transformer from OUTLET - OVER HEATING 'BIG-TIME' :( 2: Diode still needs replacing to work.. (ok,ok..i'll get it) 3: Absent 20+ minutes (shower) TRANSFORMER= STILL HOT (0warm) QUESTION with this disclaimer (while not an insulation expert, i have been a metal welder for years.. molten plasmic steel puddles will cool in normal work-shop ambient air tempertures from white-red to cool to touch in well under 20 minutes.. sooo, ?: Is this just the plastic housing around the Transformer allowing for (like a hand-warmer (shoot))..trapping the heat? ??: or is this a potential of 'false readings in P&F CF' of unknown effect from core-windings and the 'core' in "storing great amounts of heat?? ???: I know (and probably have welded-cut-intwo-and melted to liquid), transformers multi-layer metal constuction has always acted like steel in its cooling down process. RFC??? Sorry for the 'light Question' to this serious group, maybe it will but a smile on your face for only a moment. Finally (the dust-buster is still in pieces and under timing to cool test in the garage .. (wife=moveit or loose it from the kitchen table:) upto 1 hour later still warm to touch (or above 98.6?).. can this add to any 'unkowns in the equation'?? /off to get a b&d diode/ :) -=Steve Ekwall=- POBox 1255-80150 ekwall2@diac.com 'SLEEP is NOT the wk.1.800.798.1100 303.293.2FAX Brother of DEATH, BUT the CML#41251 ------------------MOTHER of INTERRUPTS!'-------------------  From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 12:08:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA23377; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 11:59:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:00:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: stored excessive heat.. Resent-Message-ID: <"iylx4.0.Aj5.gkhKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1306 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Steve Ekwall wrote: [snip] >Action taken: (two fold problem: One fold suloution) Replace TRANSFORMER > with a bigger / better(?) 12vac 20ma OUT to 200v >bridge-rectifier. (humm- That should do the trick) oh, on the Diode trble/ (a) 20 mA rating sounds too small, and 12 V too large. (b) The current flows as large, but brief pulses when the transformer voltage exceeds the battery voltage. This makes the RI^2 power loss in the transformer windings (R is transformer secondary resistance plus (1/N^2) times primary resistance, N = transformer ratio) much larger than you expect. This is due to the difference between rms and average when the waveform has a pulse character. [snip] >?: Is this just the plastic housing around the Transformer allowing >for (like a hand-warmer (shoot))..trapping the heat? Very likely. Plastic is a poor thermal conductor. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 12:19:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA27148 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:19:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:19:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: ekwall2@diac.com Wed Oct 2 12:19:44 1996 Received: from diac.com (root@diac.com [207.17.190.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id MAA27124 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:19:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from november (ekwall2@[207.17.190.73]) by diac.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id TAA24630 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:19:45 GMT Old-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:19:45 -0600 (MDT) From: steve ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2@november To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: stored excessive heat.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Michael J. Schaffer wrote: > (a) 20 mA rating sounds too small, and 12 V too large. > (b) The current flows as large, but brief pulses when the transformer > voltage exceeds the battery voltage. > >for (like a hand-warmer (shoot))..trapping the heat? > > Very likely. Plastic is a poor thermal conductor. > > Michael J. Schaffer > General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA > Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > Thanks Micheal; (i suspect the insulation too), But the idea was shorting of the transformer, ANY Transformer - cooling wings and all.. tend to everheat when OVERdrawn upon... i'm a poor stated of questions i guess.. LET'S TRY THIS.. 1: throw away dust-buster and battery pack. 1a: OVERLOAD a transformer to specific temperture (near meltdown) 2: (i havn't done this yet, but imagine:) melting metal SAME TEMP. 3: Compare times to cool or difference in heat retention. My noted (1st observation) was the transformer remains 'Hotter' far longer than other hot objects..(-Jed should like this with his 1.00 to 1.90 error factor.. especially if there are any transformers in ANY circuit out there..) ----------------------------- i (duh-me) thought the multi-layered Core Plates in a transformer were insulated between themselves, hence layers not solid. QUESTION (reissued) can the SPACES between the layers RETAIN any excess heat, until REcalled through On-Switching of circuit (Any circuit) and RELEASE this heat (cooling the transformer -and ADDING to the ERROR factor? --------------------------- The actual events and battery voltage can be dismissed, just take a screw-driver and short your nearest transformer there to over-load a bit to get same demo.. (ps use disposable or fuseable type xfrmer). -=steve=- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 13:14:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA07901 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: ekwall2@diac.com Wed Oct 2 13:14:39 1996 Received: from diac.com (root@diac.com [207.17.190.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA07873 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:14:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from november (ekwall2@[207.17.190.73]) by diac.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA29473 for ; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:15:11 GMT Old-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:15:10 -0600 (MDT) From: -steve ekwall- X-Sender: ekwall2@november To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: junk t e s t ignore erase delete Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: O X-Status: p i n g . check ignore Please.. echo . check ignore Please.. -=se=- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 13:29:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA04847; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:58:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:58:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610021958.MAA16763@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 12:57:53 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Transmutation vs CF heat Resent-Message-ID: <"fe69B.0.eB1.bbiKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1307 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:10 AM 10/2/96 -0800, you wrote: >This is another attempt to more clearly communicate what I think is a very >important issue. > >For the sake of easier communication let's define "heavies" or "heavy >products" to mean transmutation products more massive than 4He. Therefore >"lights" or "light products" should mean transmutation products less >massive than 4He or 4He. > >Anyone have any thoughts as to a highly sensitive but cheap test means for >any heavies? > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > This was a really good post in my opinion, and I hope some positive results flow in as a result. The difficult thing in this area, as several generations of miners have encountered, is the colloidal behaviors of the precious, gold and platinim, in monoatomic form, are very sneaky and become hard to find. Platinum is so sneaky and hard to separate, it is widely commented upon by miners and professionals close to miners that the majority of placer gold can't get the value of their platinum because of the refiner's charge for getting it out of the gold exceeds the value of it, which can quite often run as high as 5%. These dissolve into each other and together into the other metals. Maybe this is just a refiner ploy and not really a valid technical concern. I have read of several controversies in this detection/separation arena and can't really evaluate them very well. The only sure way out appears to be the mass spec route. Perhaps Tinsley can rise to the occassion here with his chem analysis.... ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 13:41:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA09318; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:23:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 13:23:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:21:58 -0600 (MDT) From: steve ekwall X-Sender: ekwall2@november To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: t e s t ping/echo ignore delete check ok Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FYmSj3.0.RH2.cyiKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1308 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: t e s t ignore please From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 14:23:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA20238; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:12:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:12:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 16:39:47 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: 10 beats 20! Message-ID: <961002203947_72240.1256_EHB196-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"-egLM1.0.7y4.7hjKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1309 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Barry Merriman writes: Jed: I don't think you will find a scientist on this earth who doesn't believe in the supremacy of data. The point we try to make in citing theories is that (a) *some* theory is always used in interpreting experimental data . . . For example, in this business of the ``new'' elements observed in cathodes being far too deep to have gotten their by diffusion. This statement is based on the classical theory of diffusion in solids . . . When Bockris said at the meeting that it was not worth entertaining transport of impurities into the material because the effect is 10 orders of magnitude too small, he's making an essentially theoretical statement, but one supported by a certain body of experiment. However, his conviction with that statement is no different from that of the nuclear physicist who says cold fusion is impossible because the reaction rate is 20+ orders of magnitude too small. . . . experiment and theory are intertwined in a more complex fashion than you suggest. Well said! Touche. I confess, I did (knowingly) simplify the relationship. Einstein said something like: "what you call facts are really just your pet theories." But I think this idea can be taken to extremes. This leads to an infinite regression, in which everything is a theory and we know nothing. We might question Ohm's law, or wonder if the gravitation constant changed this morning. That kind of speculation is fine for a philosopher but engineers and scientists should avoid it. We should not question Ohm's law unless, of course, someone does an experiment that seems to disprove it! We should stick to the conventional way of thinking, in which long-accepted "theories" slip into being called "laws" or "facts" -- even though that is sloppy use of language, and we all know that they *might* slip back. If we go too far with the regression, we never get any work done. Maybe flow calorimetry doesn't work. Maybe the tritium observed at Los Alamos, TAMU and Amoco calls into question the basis for the liquid scintillation counters and other instruments. Okay, maybe. But I do not see any skeptics rushing to publish papers showing a problem with established tritium detection methodology. If the CF findings actually reflect a weakness in the conventional sciences of measuring heat, detecting tritium, or the theory of operation of AES, SIMS and other instruments Miley uses . . . well, someone should have spelled out these weaknesses years ago. Let me address the side issue that Barry raised here, to illustrate his main point. I'd like to quibble with those numbers. 40 orders of magnitude versus 10 is the score for this particular round, but we win the tournament. Yes, both of these numbers are derived from theory, but our theory beats your theory. Just looking at the theoretical probability for each event, alone and out of context, we might conclude that the silver did not come from transmutation or contamination. That's reasonable. Maybe the silver slipped in from a parallel universe. Maybe a ZPE event triggered nuclear events . . . But I say we shouldn't consider theoretical probability alone, out of context. We must look at the Totality Of Evidence, both in this experiment, and in the broader history of similar experiments. Totality means the big picture and the other observations: the silver wasn't in the cell in the first place; it wasn't even on earth, because it has peculiar isotopes; the appearance of silver was accompanied by massive, non-chemical excess heat. These observations point to transmutation, not material transport. Our analysis must not be based only esoteric theories of material transport by electrolysis (10 orders here), or only on esoteric theories about the coulomb barrier (see you, and raise you 10 more orders of magnitude). It must also be based on common sense, like the idea that stuff which isn't in the cell can't be transported. Furthermore, not all theories are created equal. Not all bodies of experiments are equally solid. Barry says that Bockris's "conviction with that statement is no different from that of the nuclear physicist" but it is quite different. Bockris's electrochemical theories are still holding up unchallenged as far as I know, whereas and the nuclear physicist is relying on an obsolete, incomplete body of experimental evidence and textbook theories that we shot full of holes years ago. We know there *are* nuclear events in metal lattices, because nobody has ever disproved the tritium at Los Alamos, or the heat from Just About Everywhere. Okay maybe it's ZPE + nuclear, but something is definitely changing the nuclei in metal lattices. We know that for the same reason we know hot fusion reactors, atom bombs and americium smoke detectors work. The instruments designed for conventional nuclear physics prove that CF is nuclear. If you doubt the CF tritium you must also call into question the tritium produced at the Savannah River plant. If you doubt EPRI's autoradiographs of used CF cathodes, you must show why autoradiographs of uranium ore do not indicate ionizing radiation. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 14:37:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA24059; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 14:29:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:28:53 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610022128.QAA12830@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little's CF attempts Resent-Message-ID: <"68W1-.0.qt5.jwjKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1310 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:55 10/2/96 -0500, BillB wrote: >Scott, have your subtle errors acted like continuous excess heat, or have >they appeared and then vanished? In other words, have they mimicked the >"turn on" phenomenon? It's a continuous thing...or at least a long-term drift...essentially an unexpected calibration shift. One of my latest problems has been a few percent increase in sensitivity over a week-long period observed with a resistive heater only in the chamber. I speculate that this is due to a gradual improvement in the insulation quality as the air/gas in the Styrofoam bubbles diffuse out because of the elevated operating temperature. I haven't ever seen a CF experiment run along at one output level for a good while and then suddenly increase..... 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 15:21:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA02672; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:14:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:14:18 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:13:23 -0400 Message-ID: <961002181323_200501185@emout07.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"y16Ru.0.ff.uakKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1311 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thank you Robert. Things are looking a bit better today. The company tells me that they have an opening in a temperory job for 4 years. I going to check it out. I may be working for four more years. I hoping to get the Yusmar working. Its a long shot but if I do things will be OK. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 15:38:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA03656; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:19:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "revtec@postoffice.ptd.net" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 12:27:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"tX9oj3.0.zu.bfkKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1312 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeff I gather that's your name from one of the responses you got. My e-mail doesn' t indicate you as more then revtec :>} I think you're off to a good start on your replication experiment. I would like to model the behavior of the device mathematically. If you get a chance, see if you can create a an i-v curve similar to Correa's Figure 1 in the patent, but with real numbers. Are you planning to test some of these pits in your cathode for the presence of transmutations? I would think the outside of the Al plates would make a good control surface to make a before and after comparison. Hank Scudder ---------- From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Monday, September 30, 1996 6:17AM > > >I bought a Grainger refrigeration pump last week for $285 and have been producing pulsed abnormal glow discharges for most of the week. Before I describe what I have done I must make this disclaimer. I may be an engineer but I am not a scientist. I'm just playing around with this stuff to see if I can make something happen. This is however serious playing for me since I have 1500 bucks into it already. I have read the IE articles repeatedly and have gotten copies of the patents. I have not attempted to duplicate Correa's results for the following reasons: 1. I can't afford 700 volts worth of rechargable batteries. 2. I can't afford 3400 microfarads worth of 350v capacitors. 3. I don't know how to work with glass. It seemed to me that a glass tube was not the way to go. Plates in a glass tube are thermally insulated and will over heat. They are difficult to align accurately and it is hard to scale up a glass device. The largest tube the Correas published had plates of 264cm2 ea. and they said bigger is better. So this is what I did. I got a 9" dia. x 1/2" wall acrylic tube 2-1/2" long and machined "o" ring grooves in each face. I then got two 10" x 10" x 1/2 aluminum plates for end caps and sealed them with vacuum grease. This gave me 300cm2 per plate. I drilled a vac connection into the tube to epoxy a glass stem for the vac hose. According to the patents .05 to .1 torr is a good operating range. The pump I bought maxes out at .025 torr. For a high voltage power supply I bought a .750 kva distribution transformer and wired it for 110vac input and a 440vac output. For filter caps I used a pair of 5600mf 350v items in series wired to a 1000v bridge rectifier. I installed a 5 A fuse in the primary circuit. When I tested the power supply, the fuse went off like a flash bulb. The inrush current on these filter capacitors was something else. I solved this problem by wiring a 250 watt heat lamp in series with the fuse. When the capacitors are charged the lamp goes out and I then bypasss the lamp with a switch. I found that no load volts on this power supply exceeds 600v. I connected the power supply to the PAGD unit with 260 ohms of ballast in series and turned it on. I used a clip on ammeter in the primary circuit. As expected with no vacuum there was no power consumption. I turned on the vac pump and watched intently for any sign of a glow not knowing if my power supply was really enough to light it off. About 5 min. into vac operation the cathode suddenly lit up and I shut off the pump. A few seconds later my pump made a funny noise and regurgitated vacuum oil all over the inside of my tube shutting down the reaction. I spent the rest of the evening disassembling and cleaning the tube components. I bought an isolation valve the next day. Soon after start up the next day the glow was back followed by brilliant sparkles jumping all around the cathode surface. This was apparently the PAGD effect. Primary current hovered near 1.5 A. A scope wired across 10 ohms of my ballast resistance showed voltage spikes as the tube resistance dropped with each PAGD event. These events were flashing across the cathode surface at nearly 10 per second at some random frequency since the auto triggering on the scope could not get a stabilizing lock on it. It could be seen through the clear tube that pits were forming on the cathode surface. It could also be seen that a conical cloud radiated upward from each burst. A noticeable deterioration in visibility was occurring as the device ran. Vaporized aluminum was apparently condensing on the inner surface of the acrylic. I tried reducing the value of the ballast resistors. This caused the intensity of the bursts to increase. I tried putting a pair of series capacitors across the plates. These increased the intensity of the bursts dramatically while reducing the frequency. The frequency was also stabilized to some degree since the scope now displayed a more regular pattern of spikes which now trailed off because of the caps. The 22mf 350v caps lasted only a minute before exploding. My next effort was to go after any excess energy that might be present. And as usual I was going to do it my way. I had already tested with low voltage simulation an active control circuit to collect the pulse energy. This circuit consisted of an SCR to divert the energy pulses to a large storage capacitor with a pair of 100 watt light bulbs to bleed off the charge. I wired the two bulbs in series since I expected the voltage to get to around 300v. The SCR also controlled a FET in the drive circuit to shut down the drive power while collecting the pulse energy. This was done to keep the power supply from charging the collecting circuit. The circuit seemed to work very well, but it did not collect much energy. I did not come close to lighting the bulbs. However, with the bulbs disconnected the capacitor would reach 350v after a minute or two. Numerous adjustments and variations on this control circuit failed to provide much improvement. It was painfully clear that I would have to back up a bit and try it the Correa way (sort of). I went back to fig. 9 in IE and wired that circuit with the following exceptions: 1. C3 nad C5 were 490mf instead of 34,000mf. 2. The voltage doubling components of C7 a and b, and D7 and D8 were omitted. 3. I used my 5600mf charge capacitor and light bulbs in place of a charge battery pack. Even with a measely 490mf across the tube, this represented the largest capacitor I had ever put in this part of the circuit. When I started up this circuit the PAGD events were so incredibly violent that I am not sure that they were not vacuum arc discharges since hot spots could be seen on the anode also. The instaneous current flow was so intense that I could hear audible clicks coming from the 490mf caps. Inspite of these violent reactions, next to nothing was going into the charge capacitor or bulbs. With the bulbs disconnected the charge cap never topped 24v. Nevertheless it is unimaginable what would happen if my 490mf caps were 34,000mf. This brings us up to date. I welcome any comment, questions, or advice. To be continued: >> >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 15:57:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA07943; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry@math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <3252EF1F.52BFA1D7@math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 15:39:27 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... References: <961002181323_200501185@emout07.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"PyuwI3.0._x1.jykKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1313 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > > I may be working for four more years. I hoping to get the > Yusmar working. Its a long shot but if I do things will be OK. > Frank: I wouldn't bank on the Yusmar ``working'' in the sense of more heat out than power in. However, thats really incidental to a succesful business anyway. The Yusmar is already a supposedly succesful commercial product back inPotapov's country....why don't you simply form a partnership for US distribution of the Yusmar, and build a business around that. After all, I seriously doubt the 100's of Yusmars being put into general service are all far over unity if the inventor himself can't get one to work at all in the US. Even if the real shipping Yusmars were, say 50% over unity, I doubt that we be the most critical factor in developing market share. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Internet email: barry@math.ucla.edu web homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 16:01:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA08843; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 17:41:50 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610022241.RAA19625@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: EarthTech's CF history Resent-Message-ID: <"Bz-Wh2.0.1A2.__kKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1314 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The following is a brief chronological history of EarthTech's CF investigations. APR89 - Earliest recorded data from initial P&F replication experiment. This experiment was constructed from the information presented in P&F's 1st paper. We used Pd sheet left over from some old neutron cross-section studies and LiOD electrolyte made by adding metallic Li to D2O. We made a water-flow calorimeter that achieved 2-3% relative accuracy. We monitored gamma emissions with a NaI scintillator and neutron emissions with a LiF scintillator. The experiment was run for weeks without positive results. A poster-session paper was presented in Santa Fe at ICCF1. At that meeting we met Ed Storms, Bob Huggins, and Stephen Crouch-Baker. After lengthy discussions with Huggins and Crouch-Baker, we returned home and mounted a serious replication of the Huggins-Crouch-Baker cathode preparation method (arc melting of the Pd under argon, assembly and filling of the cell in a nitrogen-purged glove box). Several such cells were made and operated more-or-less continuously over the next month without positive results. Nearly a year passed without further activity and then EarthTech was formed to investigate charge-cluster phenomena (theorized by H. E. Puthoff and originally investigated by Ken Shoulders) . Much was learned in the early days of EarthTech about calorimetry but no CF experiments were run until years later. 27SEP94 - We attempted to replicate the "double-nickel" CF experiment, a simple KCO3 light-water cell using 5 cent pieces as electrodes! This experiment was written up by Malcolm Ogle and published in New Energy News Vol 2 No 4. We chose it because it was simple, reported to be a reliable generator of excess heat, and we had a nice, calibrated calorimeter (known as the "differential" calorimeter) to put it in. We pursued that experiment (with the cells running more-or-less continuously) for one full month and never saw any sign of excess heat. 5MAY95 - Stimulated by Piantelli's first paper and a connection we saw with our ZPF theories, we started a series of related experiments in which we heated fine Ni wires in an atmosphere of H and measured the total heat evolved in our differential calorimeter. After a month of experimentation, which involved a variety of H pressures, temperatures, external magnetic fields, etc.) we concluded that there was no sign of excess heat. A typical result from one of these Ni-wire experiments can be seen on our web page (http://www.eden.com/~little). 10OCT95 - Stimulated by the Piantelli patent disclosure and a persistent apparent fit with our ZPF theories, we attempted a precise replication of his experiment. We constructed an apparatus similar to his and, over a two month period, tried a variety of stimulation methods (thermal shock, mechanical shock, magnetic shock) and a variety of surface preparations for our Ni rod. We never observed any excess heat in this system. 18DEC95 - Stunned by the reported performance of the CETI cell at the PowerGen show in Anaheim, we began our efforts to replicate the Patterson cell. We designed and constructed a flow cell similar to Cravens' cells and began researching the process of metal-coating plastic beads. Eventually we decided to have the beads made by a group that specialized in metal coatings on glass beads. We reasoned, perhaps incorrectly, that the substrate was probably not a critical factor in the performance of the beads. While waiting for the coated beads, we designed (with valuable contribution from Martin Sevior) and constructed a dual- method calorimeter to provide a cross-check on the electrolyte-flow methods that Cravens/Patterson had pioneered. After months of trials with various operating parameters, we have not observed any sign of excess heat in these experiments. A typical result from one of our CETI- style experiments can be seen on our web page. 29JAN96 - We embarked on a new series of CF experiments involving direct loading of Pd metal with H and D gas. We explored quite a range of pressures and temperatures in a specially designed chamber with differential calorimetric sensors without observing any sign of excess heat generation in the Pd. This work is ongoing and the details are covered by a non-disclosure agreement. 21JUN96 - Kirk Shanahan's Pd-coated plastic beads arrived and were placed in our CETI-style flow cell and into the dual-method calorimeter. One experiment was run continuously for 6 days following the Cravens-prescribed loading regimen...no sign of excess heat. A second batch of beads was received from Kirk, run similarly, and identical results were obtained. Results from the first of these experiments can be seen on our web page. >From mid-1995 to the present, we have also been engaged in an ongoing study with a local CF researcher who repeatedly observes the indication of substantial excess heat in his experiments. He uses an an open-air style of NLC calorimetry in which he measures the temperature rise of the CF cell above the ambient room temperature. He typically uses a second cell identical in construction to the active cell to effective gauge the ambient temperature. Every time we have placed one of his CF cells in one of our calorimeters we have seen no sign of excess heat. Because of his proximity, we have been able to get a cell "working" (showing excess heat) in his lab and then bring the cell quickly over to our lab (running off battery power during the 15 minute trip) and then place it in our calorimeter and continue running it with essentially no interruption in operation...but we have still not been able to observe the excess heat in our calorimeter. Just prior to performing these tests we typically test our calorimeter with a cell identical to his but containing only a resistive heater. The measured heat output on this calibration cell is typically within 1% relative of the input electrical power. Our standing disagreement in calorimetry is the subject of an ongoing investigation. Presently, the local CF researcher is planning to build his own closed calorimeter to study the problem more effectively. That concludes our CF experiment history. We plan to continue pursuing CF research in the future, including constucting and testing the special CF cell described to us by Mark Hugo (using a Pd tube he supplied), and a test of one of Prof. John Dash's CF cells. 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 16:04:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA09379; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 15:45:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 02 Oct 1996 14:29:14 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: 10 beats 20! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/02/96 14:29:35 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"lKCPm1.0.NI2.U2lKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1315 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/02/96 14:20 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: 10 beats 20! A comment on the "autoradiographs". The claim was made some time ago that these were due to exposure to hydrogen "reducing" the silver in the films, and that this hydrogen can penetrate the plastic covering that exist(ed) on some of the films. Dr. Oriani was concerned about this too, so he took a small pressure vessel, some dental Xray film, and a tank of H2. I think he went to 2 atm if I recall....Nul result, no effect even after several days exposure. Thus I'd say this arguement against the "auto-radiographs" is specious at best... MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 16:16:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA12904; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:00:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 02 Oct 1996 14:44:14 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Scott Little's CF attempts To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/02/96 14:44:15 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"8dupF2.0.X93.XGlKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1316 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/02/96 14:35 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Scott Little's CF attempts Scott? Do you still have my Pd tube? If you aren't going to set up my protocal, could you send it to Hank Scudder please? THANKS! MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 17:07:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA21075; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:33:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:33:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:33:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610022333.SAA24525@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Mark's tube Resent-Message-ID: <"E8uQz3.0.D95.FllKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1317 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 14:44 10/2/96 PDT, Mark wrote: >Scott? Do you still have my Pd tube? You think I would lose THAT!!!..... >If you aren't going to set up my >protocal, could you send it to Hank Scudder please? THANKS! MDH As I have mentioned we are presently very busy with some "non-energy" work that is likely to consume the next several months as well. I am certainly willing to let Hank have it for now. I'd like to reserve a chance at it again in the future, if possible. Hank, send me yr address. 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 17:36:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA25813; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:55:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610022349.QAA11993@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 16:50:14 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Resent-Message-ID: <"BJMtx.0.AJ6.M3mKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1318 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 11:04 AM 10/2/96 -0400, you wrote: >Chris said: > >"The bubble reputation" is one problem, do some reputations >here and elsewhere depend upon never seeing over-unity?" > >Whoever might fall into that category doesn't include Scott Little, Hal >Puthoff, or EarthTech. Our doors are open to anyone who can bring in a >device and show o/u. If it's there, we'll see it, and we'll make sure >everyone knows we've seen it. > >Hal > > It is in our intent to bring Muller down. We have arrangements yet to be made and have been busy earning a buck to support this expensive hobby. But you will hear more from us on this score. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 17:38:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA26348; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:57:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 16:57:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610022349.QAA11961@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 16:50:05 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: EarthTech as Arbiter Resent-Message-ID: <"-1O1S.0.bR6.c5mKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1319 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:05 AM 10/2/96 EDT, you wrote: >Mike, > >>> So the key is not the establishment per se, it is the media.... << > >Undoubtedly true. So what is required is a good spin doctor to accept the >challenge - for a slice of the action of course. No hay, no pay. > >Norman > > I have always tried to learn that but have been largely unsuccessful. When I was a college student I was in the school newspaper news almost daily as a student activist. And I got play also in the Seattle Times as a major feature story. For a short while I was slightly famous, or maybe infamous is a better word, in my home town. All of that was unsought attention. My conscious efforts to obtain attention have been TOTALLY IGNORED, except for third party book reviews I did up for another publisher and distributed to thousands of small town newspapers. So you figure... Infinite Energy has a chance of emerging as a channel, but it is a climb still for them. We subscribers know that there is no way you should put that in the same category as the other over-the-counter "undergroud" rags, but it is really easy to superficially categorize it as such. The science in it doesnt matter because the media/publishing twits know nothing about science and never evaluate stuff from that angle. They evaluate the who's who. Thus, NASA got worldwide headlines for its bogus "life on Mars" propaganda routine, not that I begrudge them because we should be exploring Mars. I figure that the InterNet is a back door method and allows a lot to happen as a substitute for the old fashioned mass broadcast type of news and attitude formation. I observe that attitudes are changing rapidly throught the net. There are a lot of proto news/media publishers on the Net and I think that is a useful media to get cozy with for the disemination of informtion about the new technologies, discoveries, etc. Takes a lot of contact work, though, just like any other area. You know, another entry is the incredible expansion of news channels. the electronic broadcasters are approaching a situation of content starvation. Right now MSM news channel is openly calling for content providers to provide multi-media content and they will pay development costs. I can see Tinsley's tongue in cheek as a clickable talk icon on a computer or TV screen providing coverage of "this week's wrap up of Vortex" in his inimitable style...or some such. hmmm. hmmmmmm. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 17:47:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA26798; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 17:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 17:00:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610022350.QAA12062@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 16:50:36 +0900 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Indian Herbal Fuel: An interesting story Cc: ksathiah@ihug.co.nz Resent-Message-ID: <"Y7t1h.0.aY6.38mKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1320 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Thanks for the tip on the url to news about the herbal fuel invention from India. The url you want to read is http://shell.ihug.co.nz/~ksathiah/TheFinalChapter.htm I don't have the time for idle speculation and tangental information, but this is a very interesting url. I highly recommend it to Jed, Eugene, Bill Beaty, and Tinsley. It is sort of a compressed manifestation of everything discussed on Vortex about inventor's disease, the split between experimentalists and establishment authorities, the problem of verification, etc. What is really intersting is that at this point no one can tell for sure anything, but the Indians are claiming, in effect, that the inventor is a cross between Dennis Lee and Newman, only they claim that they have caught the inventor red-handed in his trickery, to which the Tamil state government is responding by threatening public mass agitation if they do not issue the Tamil inventor a patent to protect his rights. Talk about an opera version of all of our issues...take a peek There is another interesting side to this story. The website from which the info is available, email: ksathiah@ihug.co.nz This New Zealand site demonstrates the ability of practicioners of the art of webbery to transcend space/time constraints, making it irrelevant, to provide nodes of instant topical coherency on a new subject, even on moving news targets as volatile as this herbal fuel story. I commend ksathiah for the resolute effort and the success in putting all points of view and opposing actions in a running webtape. The perspective one gets in this compressed form is very very valuable. It is a very good role model in my humble opinion of how we are going to build the noosphere of planetary civilization up out of the InterNet. This is how the new media is being created to surplant the centralized media establishments. I hope ksathiah can take the time to introduce him/her/itself to us. Best wishes, ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 19:20:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA05521; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:07:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610030207.WAA22256@nic.wat.hookup.net> X-Sender: nafziger@wat.hookup.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 22:08:00 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: R & D Nafziger Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"HYb821.0.BM1.Z_nKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1321 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 04:05 AM 10/2/96 EDT, Norman Horwood wrote (about the Miley paper): >OK, can we treat this as a case study? > >I don't have a copy yet, but if all the data and calorimetry spec. can be >isolated from the theory, and presented clearly, we could all pick it to >pieces. If there is a consensus in Vortex in favour of incontrovertible ou >above say 50%, then a press release by a media wiz should be prepared, and the >cell replicated by Scott and Hal and hyped to the full. > What an excellent idea. Is it possible to distribute the paper to this group? Regards, Rick Nafziger Wellesley, Ontario From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 19:20:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA07441; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:14:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3253216F.4444@interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 22:14:07 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger@interlaced.net Organization: NASA (retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: EarthTech's CF history References: <199610022241.RAA19625@natashya.eden.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8bEd1.0.3q1.J6oKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1322 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Scott Little wrote: (An excellent history of EarthTech's CF efforts) > Because > of his proximity, we have been able to get a cell "working" > (showing excess heat) in his lab and then bring the cell > quickly over to our lab (running off battery power during > the 15 minute trip) and then place it in our calorimeter and > continue running it with essentially no interruption in > operation...but we have still not been able to observe the > excess heat in our calorimeter. OK, Scott. It's time to call in the calorimeter EXORCIST! Otherwise, keep up the good work. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 19:30:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA08715; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 19:18:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3253224E.740A@interlaced.net> Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 22:17:50 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger@interlaced.net Organization: NASA (retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... References: <961002181323_200501185@emout07.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"o2B6I1.0.082.X9oKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1323 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > > Thank you Robert. Things are looking a bit better today. The company tells > me that they have an opening in a temperory job for 4 years. I going to > check it out. I may be working for four more years. I hoping to get the > Yusmar working. Its a long shot but if I do things will be OK. > > Frank Z Hey Frank, these days, a job that lasts for 4 years is a PERMANENT job! Hope it works out. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:01:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27983; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:37:24 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: is there a concise list? In-Reply-To: <961001135923_100433.1541_BHG96-4@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7T9Q93.0.3r6.kLpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1324 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On 1 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > > 2. If the universe were not very precisely the way it is, then we would > not exist. Therefore it has been designed to suit us. > If this was aimed at a post I made here a while ago then let me say it is obvious to me that the first sentence does not imply the second. Nevertheless I do not retract the post. We have discovered a few simple laws that describe how space-time works and how quarks and leptons interact. The immense, marvelous and complex phenomena we find in Universe arise as a consequence of the way these subatomic particles interact in space-time. Those laws contain a number of arbitary constants whose values have to be precisely tuned to allow carbon-based life to evolve. I find this observation to be extremely interesting and accordance with my own religous beliefs. So there is that word again, "belief"! Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:03:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA29448; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 20:46:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:44:07 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610030344.WAA15168@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"X5C9m2.0.1C7.wRpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1325 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 18:13 10/2/96 -0400, Frank wrote: >Thank you Robert. Things are looking a bit better today. The company tells >me that they have an opening in a temperory job for 4 years. I going to >check it out. Don't sell yourself short, Frank... temporary jobs should pay better than permanent ones. Scott From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:19:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA05500; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:11:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961003041814.006f406c@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 21:18:14 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Free Energy MPEG movies available ! Resent-Message-ID: <"sWMGj3.0.sL1.DqpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1327 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Figured some of you might like to check some of this out. Forwarded message: ... >There are: > >2 videos of Stanley Meyer and his Water splitting device and >car buggy ! > >2 videos of Griggs and his selling Hydrosonic pumps > >2 videos of Patterson and his CETI Water Fuel Cell ... =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D >Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 00:11:44 +0100 >From: harti@bbtt.de (Stefan Hartmann) >Subject: Free Energy MPEG movies available ! > >Hi, > >I just made 18 MPEG movies from videotapes from >my archive and it is 52 MB of MPEG files all in all ! > >These MPEG movies also play fine via a Software only >MPEG player like the new ActiveMovie MPEG player from >Microsoft, available at : > >http://www.microsoft/msdownload/ > >Be sure to download also from over there the new > >directx.exe file to accelerate your graphics card under >Win95 ! > >Then you can play these movies, which are mostly in 176x144 >resolution with 25 frames/sec and MPEG audio sound in it >like normal videoclips ! It runs also very well with the >Softpeg MPEG player from: > >http://www.compcore.com > >They have a dmeo player, latest version is 2.1 , > >and with the XingMPEG player 3.0 which is at: > >http://www.xingtech.com (look under the support page >for the download area !) > >If you now have got your MPEG player working go to the directory >of my new movies and load them all down. The movies are located >at: > >http://www.overunity.de/movies/ > >Please don=B4t forget the SLASH at the end behind the word movies/ >cause otherwise you will not see the directory.. (there is no index-file yet...) > >Please share these movies and the free MPEG player from Microsoft >with all your friends and relatives and show them, what is available TODAY= ! > >There are: > >2 videos of Stanley Meyer and his Water splitting device and >car buggy ! > >2 videos of Griggs and his selling Hydrosonic pumps > >2 videos of Patterson and his CETI Water Fuel Cell > >1 video of the Russian Tschernenkow (hope the spelling is right...) > >1 video of my visit to Joe Newman in 1987 and showing me his FAN >motor. > >6 movies of me doing work on my small rebuild Newman machine > >4 movies from a Newman public relation tape > >Please try to download them one after the other.... >If traffic is too much , please try later... > >Try to view these movies in 2x zoom mode, then the >screen size is better to view and you get more details ! > >I compressed these movies to 32 Kbytes/sec Videodata >rate and 6 Kbytes sound data rate, so they are pretty small >for video data, but still play okay to get all of the important >content !They still are at 25 and some at 30 frames/sec, >so they play very fluently, especially on a Pentium machine. >Be sure to get DirectX, then you can also watch them Fullscreen >wiuthout any slowdown ! >If you have the ActiveMovie player installed , then you can play >them via the Win95 Mediaplayer and to play them >in FULLSCREEN mode, do the following: > >As the movie is loaded, press: > >Control + F5 > >and then type the MCI command: > >play fullscreen > >and it will play the movie without any windows borders >in fullscreen mode. Be sure to have installed the DirectX.exe >accelerator program to get the speed for your SVGA card ! > >If you still have any questions, please let me know. > >Enjoy the movies and spread the message ! > >Regards, Stefan Hartmann. > >P.S.: I should mention that some movies are digitized from the >documentation movie: >"It runs on water"=20 >from Channel 4, England, UK (the MPEG movies >from Griggs, Meyer and Patterson) This tape had a bad >picture quality and the sound also was pretty noisy, cause it was >a 6th generation copy or so... so please bare with my >digitalisation quality... The other movies are a bit better... > > >-- >Hartmann Multimedia Service, Dipl. Ing. Stefan Hartmann >Keplerstr. 11 B, 10589 Berlin, Germany >NEUE Nummern : Tel: ++ 4930-345 00 497 FAX: ++ 4930-345 00 498 >email: harti@harti.de harti@bbtt.de >Web site: http://www.harti.de Webmaster of: http://www.detours.de >Have a look at the future: http://www.overunity.de >My favourite ladies on the WEB: http://www.nylon-fetish.com > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:21:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA05649; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:12:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 00:11:56 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961003001012.8a87fdfe@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: censorship Resent-Message-ID: <"EoAqp2.0.7O1.iqpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1328 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have written to this group to contribute for a while. In a spot check, many of my notes never came through. Is this list censored? Did someone choose which posts would be allowed to come through? I have read others stating this and did not pay attention to the degree I should have. comments? Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:27:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA05898; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961003041947.006ee888@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 21:19:47 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Free Energy MPEG ... Resent-Message-ID: <"UAqmc.0.3S1.erpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1329 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: My apologies for having sent that message again. Gary At 01:10 AM 10/2/96 -0700, you wrote: >Figured some of you might like to check some of this out. > >Forwarded message: > >... > ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 21:28:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA04367; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: 03 Oct 96 00:00:18 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Disappearing heat with bulk Ni Message-ID: <961003040018_72240.1256_EHB179-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"O_1tN.0.641.NlpKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1326 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little wrote: Because of his proximity, we have been able to get a cell "working" (showing excess heat) in his lab and then bring the cell quickly over to our lab (running off battery power during the 15 minute trip) and then place it in our calorimeter and continue running it with essentially no interruption in operation...but we have still not been able to observe the excess heat in our calorimeter. I presume this is a bulk Ni cathode in a closed calorimeter. If so, this is the same puzzling phenomenon that has been reported by a number of people, including Bockris, Cravens, Srinivasan, Droege, Mills and others. Mills, the original discoverer of Ni CF, believes he can explain it according to his theory. He thinks you must remove the shrunken hydrogen pairs (dihydrinos) or they poison the reaction. When the apparent excess heat was less than I*V, which is often the case with bulk Ni, most workers who observed this phenomenon assumed it meant the heat was caused by recombination, and most of them stopped investigating at that point. I am not aware of any rigorous test to prove it really was recombination. Where the apparent excess was greater than I*V this "disappearing heat" problem remains a mystery. Cravens finally shrugged his shoulders and decided he did not trust any Ni CF. I proposed a hypothesis: the excess was a real effect (not recombination), but in a closed cell free oxygen poisons the reaction. Either that, or dirt washed from the recombiner destroys the reaction. (Recombiners are notoriously unclean.) I do not recommend the use of bulk Ni, or the use of closed cells with Ni. If you must run a closed cell for some reason, I recommend you draw off the gas and recombine it in another vessel. Do not return the newly formed water to the cell. Bulk Ni with electrochemical loading has very low power density. Gas loading supposedly works better, but the methods developed by Mills and Piantelli remain corporate secrets. Thin film, developed by Patterson as we all know, works much better. Therefore I conclude it must be a surface or near surface reaction, since thin film has so much more exposed surface than a bulk cathode of the same dimensions. As the people who have tried to replicate Patterson can testify, you cannot use just any thin film. It has to conform to the first Patterson patents. That is, it has to absorb hydrogen more rapidly than normal Ni, in larger amounts, and it must hold it without distending, splitting, or otherwise self- destructing. Among the independent replicators, only Miley has performed tests to ensure these conditions are met. The splitting and film shedding reported by Little and Merriman indicate that the material is wholly unsuitable. Patterson struggled for many years to develop films, bead material, and the interface flashing that would prevent this self-destruction. Before he met Patterson, Miley was working on this problem. His thin devices did heat up with anomalous CF energy, but they always self-destructed spectacularly within about 6 minutes of onset of excess heat. The geometry of the bead and the choice of Ni as the host metal are two important advantages of Patterson's approach, but they cannot by themselves guarantee success. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 22:04:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA16636; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:59:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:59:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:59:19 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610030459.XAA20356@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: censorship Resent-Message-ID: <"0qSOC1.0.r34.qWqKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1330 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 00:11 10/3/96 -0400, Mitchell wrote: > I have written to this group to contribute for a while. >In a spot check, many of my notes never came through. > > Is this list censored? I've never noticed any of my posts getting eaten...other than when Vortex has gone down...which it hasn't lately. I'd venture to guess that none of Jed's posts are getting squelched either. There's an "opinion gulf" the size of Jupiter between the two of us so you shouldn't be having any problems at all! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 22:07:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA17423; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:03:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:03:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 15:02:54 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... In-Reply-To: <199610030344.WAA15168@natashya.eden.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"tkd2o.0.9G4.HaqKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1331 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Scott Little wrote: > At 18:13 10/2/96 -0400, Frank wrote: > > >Thank you Robert. Things are looking a bit better today. The company tells > >me that they have an opening in a temperory job for 4 years. I going to > >check it out. > > Don't sell yourself short, Frank... temporary jobs should pay better than > permanent ones. > > Scott > I agree. Firing people then immediately hiring them back is an incredibly cynical excerise at manipulation. Talk to your other 36 collegues and try to make sure the company doesn't get to lower your wages and conditions. Good luck. You deserve much better. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 22:19:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA20513; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:16:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 00:15:26 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610030515.AAA21510@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Disappearing heat with bulk Ni Resent-Message-ID: <"zXUyG2.0.O05.LmqKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1332 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 00:00 10/3/96 EDT, Jed wrote: >I presume this is a bulk Ni cathode in a closed calorimeter. if you mean closed _cell_...then, yes. >If so, this is >the same puzzling phenomenon that has been reported by a number of people, >including Bockris, Cravens, Srinivasan, Droege, Mills and others. Thanks for the idea, Jed...I've never heard of this before and will be on the lookout for it. However, our situation is different: The apparent excess heat doesn't disappear when the cell remains at the other guy's house...it's only when we put the cell in our calorimeter. I'm presently thinking that this situation is due to a subtle error in his style of calorimetry because he is only sensing the temperature of the electrolyte in the cell and, with a recombiner, about 1/3-1/2 of the input power is dissipated in the recombiner up in the head space above the electrolyte. In my calorimeter, the entire cell goes in the chamber and all the heat it emits is measured. Yes, there are some second order effects in my calorimeter due to the shape and size of the heat emitter but I have calibrated those out in this case by using a dummy cell that is full of oil to the same level as his electrolyte with series-connected calibration resistors both immersed in the oil and suspended in the head space above the oil with resistance values chosen to closely mimic the heat patterns from the actual cell. ...but, since we haven't really nailed down the problem, the jury is still out. 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 22:21:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA21159; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 22:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961003052527.0071a4e0@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 22:25:27 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: censorship Resent-Message-ID: <"dzjLs1.0.XA5.GpqKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1333 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:11 AM 10/3/96 -0400, you wrote: > > I have written to this group to contribute for a while. >In a spot check, many of my notes never came through. > > Is this list censored? > > Did someone choose which posts would be allowed to come through? > > I have read others stating this and did not pay attention >to the degree I should have. > > comments? > > Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) > I'll jump in on this one. There is a procmailrc file that is used to enable automatic archiving of these messages. It could also be used to filter, an enormous number of different ways. But Bill has his procmailrc file for this list world readable, and I just took a look at it, NO filtering. Another possibility, one that got me for awhile, is the filters in your own software, if there. Are your own messages being placed in a "keep" mailbox you've forgotten about? Lastly, different servers inject certain lines in the headers, and Smartlist", the "mailman" for this thing, has its own filters to reject anything that looks like it's coming from a daemen. Recommend you ask your provider first if there is a possibility of a problem there, and then contact Bill if not, and/or if it is definitely a consistent trouble. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 23:25:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA04598; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 15:49:36 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Message-ID: <961002194935_100433.1541_BHG39-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"2I6fx1.0.g71.AgrKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1334 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Norman, > I don't have a copy yet, but if all the data and calorimetry spec. > can be isolated from the theory, and presented clearly, we could > all pick it to pieces. If there is a consensus in Vortex in > favour of incontrovertible ou above say 50%, then a press release > by a media wiz should be prepared, and the cell replicated by > Scott and Hal and hyped to the full. This isn't a calorimetry paper. It's on transmutations in the cathode. Chris (That boy at the back - pay attention!) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 23:26:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA05978; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:24:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 16:24:38 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Message-ID: <961002202437_100433.1541_BHG134-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"OuZES2.0.KT1.wmrKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1335 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hal, > Whoever might fall into that category doesn't include Scott > Little, Hal Puthoff, or EarthTech. Our doors are open to anyone > who can bring in a device and show o/u. If it's there, we'll see > it, and we'll make sure everyone knows we've seen it. No, I was making a point in general. I know I am beating this particular horse to death, but the basic point is fundamental and I am trying to make sure that at the least everyone here (whom I am sure know the idea) has got the message. As you know, Hal, I support strongly your 'back to basics' physics - which is so appealing for so many reasons. Frankly, I hope it succeeds, if only because I see it as a physics which could tell us that doors are open to us - doors which we are constantly (and rather sneeringly) told are closed forever. Doors which could open onto whole new technologies for the human race. However, I still say that each and every one of us must in conscience decide exactly what we are trying to do, what is our back-of-the-mind agenda. You personally have always put your work ahead of worrying about what others might think of you for doing it (see also Bill's comments on that), while I personally am rather pleased to have the freedom which lack of any reputation gives me. Others are not able always to act and think so freely, and should at least be aware of the problem. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 23:36:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA07972; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:33:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:33:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: 02 Oct 96 17:24:17 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The magnificent Miley/Patterson paper Message-ID: <961002212417_100433.1541_BHG48-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"5TRfF1.0.Uy1.turKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1336 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin, > Ah, at last the long awaited paper! Do you know where Miley wants > to publish? Any chance of preprints? It has already gone to the printers, complete in every detail, as part of IE#9. Those who haven't done so should subscribe NOW! We must remember to call it the "Miley/Patterson" paper, by the way. I have now spent quite a lot of time on it, it is a mind-numbing mass of data - I feel tired just reading the thing, I just do not see how they managed to get all that work done. There is no doubt whatever in my mind, this is far and away both the best and the most important CF paper to date - and will at some stage in the future probably become the single most-cited paper in the field. (It makes me quail, the thought that my small contribution to getting it into IE may have errors (I did the "scanner-output -> clean-text" side. At least one error slipped past me, I hope there are no others. Quite a good story - the email was running very slow, so Jed and I had to link our modems across the Pond, TWICE. And Gene was working for 30 hours straight). While I still believe that the beads should be digested and a full quantitative chemical analysis done on the cell contents, that is my only complaint so far. The efforts to avoid contamination, the depth and quality of the work done on the bead coatings, shows me just what can be done in this field when different departments of a University collaborate so effectively. Truly this paper is a wonder. Tomorrow I intend to post here a selection of my favourite quotes from it. Sadly though, I just do not see how even this paper can in itself change anything - except, just possibly, the direction of 'cold fusion' research. The arms of some people will wave like propellors or - more likely - they will simply say, "Oh, must have been some kind of contamination," but requests to put numbers on the source and nature of that contamination will not be answered. I take the point that the number of orders of magnitude for this to be nuclear is far higher than the amount by which our understanding of atom-migration would have to be wrong - but the big question has to be where the contaminant materials are supposed to have come from, AS WELL as the atom-migration problem. Now, both sides need 'two miracles'. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 2 23:55:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA10937; Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 23:48:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961003065443.006e7954@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 02 Oct 1996 23:54:43 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"jxTiw2.0.pg2.r6sKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1337 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 03:02 PM 10/3/96 +1000, you wrote: > > >On Wed, 2 Oct 1996, Scott Little wrote: > >> At 18:13 10/2/96 -0400, Frank wrote: >> >> >Thank you Robert. Things are looking a bit better today. The company tells >> >me that they have an opening in a temperory job for 4 years. I going to >> >check it out. Go for contract terms instead of employee. Usually make more $$, just without the bennies. Contractors and employees at Microsoft walk the same halls, desks near each other, all looking at each other wondering why the other side would accept the terms they've got. :> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 04:15:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA13885; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 03:53:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 03:53:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Transmutation vs CF heat Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:52:07 +0000 Message-ID: <19961003105205.AAA14293@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"GQ57m.0.oO3.LivKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1338 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 12:10 PM 10/2/96 +0000, you wrote: > >For low budget amateurs like me the best approach is maybe different. Maybe >choosing a specific test heavy, like Ca, and then developing the test means >is a good initial route. The main variations in my search would then be >choices of electrolytes and electrodes, voltages, geometries, loading >protocols, etc. > >Anyone have any thoughts as to a highly sensitive but cheap test means for >any heavies? > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > The biggest problem in confirming the presence of heavies is finding a technique which is specific for a particular metal ion. For instance, in testing for silver, one has to be concerned with the presence of lead, mercury, copper bismuth to name a few. But, in transmutations, the presence of any of these metal ions after an experimental run is great news if they were not there before. A simple test for silver ion is adding a solution of sodium chloride, if silver is present, the solution will turn cloudy. A book, "Microtechnique of Inorganic Analysis" by Benedetti-Pichler, (John Wiley, 1942) (I guess that dates me.) has a number of neat methods of detecting small amounts of metals. These are methods that can be done by the amateur. Another book "Qualitative Analysis by Spot Tests" by Feigl (Elsevier Publishing, 1946) requires that the analyzer has at his disposal an array of special reagents. I'm sure there are later books on the subject. Once the presence of a heavy is firmly established by you, I would then let a professional lab confirm its presence as well as getting a quantitative figure. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 05:27:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA21186; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 11:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32515E0A.2855@interlaced.net> Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 14:08:11 -0400 From: "Francis J. Stenger" Reply-To: fstenger@interlaced.net Organization: NASA (retired) X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Lost Job ! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"uXYnV.0.o75.FbMKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: formail -D 8192 msgid.cache X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank! You warned that this might happen - but I'm still shocked! You have a lot of friends on this list (me, for one!) who, I think, will help if they can. I'm sorry I'm retired for so long - and out of touch with job prospects. Circle the wagons - tend to those investments - don't waste capital on long shots. You'll be OK, I know you are a competent engineer. Let us (me) know what comes next! Your friend, Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 05:34:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA21699; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 01 Oct 1996 13:05:13 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/01/96 13:05:53 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"uUhBj3.0.uI5.uySKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1276 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/01/96 12:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Hey Frank, VERY, VERY, VERY sorry to hear that. As you told me though, you are NOT a spend thrift, and have invested well. I think you could live off your savings for quite a few years. Maybe it's time a good, qualified, INSTRUMENT AND CONTROL engineer like yourself got into the CF game. I'm sure you could be doing well in about 3 months. Don't forget buddy, this is like a DEATH in the family. So there is some grieving to do. - Call me whenever you need to. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 06:18:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA20073; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 21:01:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 22:58:59 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610020358.WAA10076@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Resent-Message-ID: <"4Ga0b.0.Vv4.rZUKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1284 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:59 AM 10/1/96 EDT, Chris wrote: >The absolute value of the mass of an atom is also very small. >Measurements are made, and assigned error values. Both of these are (in >effect) relative. In the case of McKubre, the percentage excess heat is >very much greater than the error range. The absolute value of the heat >is - frankly - of little significance at all. Chris, I opened this post with considerable trepidation, half expecting to receive another "blast"...but you've responded calmly with a perfectly rational and correct point that needed to be made. Thanks, Scott From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 06:20:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA13463; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:15:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:15:08 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: censorship In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19961003001017.63f7deba@world.std.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"dnb6J1.0.CI3.enxKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1339 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: > > I have written to this group to contribute for a while. > In a spot check, many of my detailed notes never came through. > > Is this list censored? Nope. I occasionally yell at people in private if they descend to the insults level, but that's it. And the collecting of messages for the archive is automatic. Have you checked the archives? Are your messages are missing from there, or do you just mean that others have not received them? I get a LOT of message bounce errors from various people on vortex-L, meaning that their providers are rejecting email. Unfortunately I can't warn people of this, if I did, it would be a full-time job! If this happens for more than ?5? days, eskimo.com stops re-sending that mail and discards it. If this happens for more than a week or so, the list automatically de-subscribes the offending account. Vortex-l subscribers which experience this often can request to be put on a non-unsubscribe list (but then they can't unsubscribe themselves with a command.) In mid-august eskimo's telco hardware was dead for a week (started aug 12? approx.) and lots of mail was lost. In mid-sept the email hardware crashed and reset, and all mail in the queues was lost. This stuff seems to happen every couple of months. Perhaps you've had bad luck in posting messages at exactly the time that this system died? A crude solution to this is to watch for your own message to come back from vortex-L. This didn't work months ago when vortex-l took days to forward stuff, but recently it takes hours or sometimes miniutes. If you don't see your own message after a day, then go into your email program's sent-mail list and re-transmit. P.S. for subscribers on Unix shell accounts: I've finally set up my account to automatically store incoming mail from vortex-L in its own folder (the month's archive file, actually,) so I don't have to hand-sort the vortex-L incoming mail. This can be done with a .forward and a .procmailrc file placed in your top directory. Email me if you want info on how to do this yourself. ((((((((((((((((((((( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))))))))))))))))))))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb@eskimo.com www.eskimo.com/~billb EE/programmer/sci-exhibits science projects, tesla, weird science Seattle, WA 206-781-3320 freenrg-L taoshum-L vortex-L webhead-L From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 06:32:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA16484; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:26:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: 03 Oct 96 09:24:26 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: censorship Message-ID: <961003132426_72240.1256_EHB57-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"J0B2h.0.S14.TyxKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1340 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mitchell Swartz asks: "I have written to this group to contribute for a while. In a spot check, many of my notes never came through." Yes, that happens. Welcome to the information age! "Is this list censored? Did someone choose which posts would be allowed to come through?" Only if the Internet computer network has reached a critical mass and achieved consciousness. It would, I'm sure, form a malevolent and mischievous intelligent entity. Intelligent life created by computer hacker misfits would make Dr. Frankenstein's baby look like Ann Landers. I cannot imagine the Internet Monster puffing on a cigar and sighing in contentment: "fire - good, smoke - good" unless it had deliberately set fire to an oil refinery. As far as I know there is no intelligent life on Internet. Computers are still as stupid as ants and nasty as scorpions. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 06:32:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA16629; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:27:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:27:16 -0700 (PDT) Date: 03 Oct 96 09:24:14 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Disappearing heat with bulk Ni Message-ID: <961003132413_72240.1256_EHB57-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"h-2tw3.0.j34.pyxKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1341 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: ". . . if you mean closed _cell_...then, yes." Oops. Yes, that's what I meant. "The apparent excess heat doesn't disappear when the cell remains at the other guy's house...it's only when we put the cell in our calorimeter." You mean it is the very same cell, lock, stock and recombiner? How strange. "I'm presently thinking that this situation is due to a subtle error in his style of calorimetry because he is only sensing the temperature of the electrolyte in the cell and, with a recombiner, about 1/3-1/2 of the input power is dissipated in the recombiner up in the head space above the electrolyte. In my calorimeter, the entire cell goes in the chamber and all the heat it emits is measured. Well . . . shouldn't that make him think there is no heat or negative heat? It sounds like you should see more heat than he does. Or do you mean that he is assuming no recombination, and he might be getting some? That sounds plausible. By the way, I mentioned oxygen poisoning the reaction. One mechanism that has been discussed by Notoya and others is that the oxygen recombines with hydrogen at or near the surface of the nickel (which makes a good recombiner), and this chemical process blocks some other process like maybe H2 formation which is necessary for CF. In other words, the oxygen is not necessarily getting into the nickel and polluting it. It could be hanging around in the neighborhood causing trouble. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 07:48:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04444; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:33:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 06:37:42 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"41U9U3.0.H51.ewyKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1342 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just happened to notice an advertisement for a "NEW ENERGY CHIP" in the Businesslink newsletter. They are going public. They adveritse they can "take any fuel & create electricity with no moving parts". To obtain a free prospectus call (800) 778-0764. The website is at: Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 08:14:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA10209; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:53:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 07:53:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 03 Oct 1996 07:48:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: New Energy Chip Advertisement To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/03/96 07:48:15 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"Htp-I2.0.PV2.3EzKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1343 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/03/96 07:42 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: New Energy Chip Advertisement I called, left my address. I said, "I am a writer, and write on interesting energy claims---I am not an investor..." (True, in one way or another!) - We'll keep the group informed. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 11:52:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA21559; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:46:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: censorship To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:41:05 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "William Beaty" at Oct 3, 96 06:15:08 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"eihSL3.0.kG5.Ll_Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1347 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > if I did, it would be a full-time job! If this happens for more than ?5? > days, eskimo.com stops re-sending that mail and discards it. If this > happens for more than a week or so, the list automatically de-subscribes > the offending account. Actually, when the MCI routers went down for 13 hours a couple of weeks ago, vortex-l automatically unsubscribed me. (This isn't a complaint, just an observation.) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 11:53:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA15835; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "revtec@postoffice.ptd.net" , Vortex-L Subject: PAGD Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:14:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"OTyyF.0.Ft3.-L_Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1344 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Jeff I gather that's your name from one of the responses you got. My e-mail doesn' t indicate you as more then revtec :>} I think you're off to a good start on your replication experiment. I would like to model the behavior of the device mathematically. If you get a chance, see if you can create a an i-v curve similar to Correa's Figure 1 in the patent, but with real numbers. Are you planning to test some of these pits in your cathode for the presence of transmutations? I would think the outside of the Al plates would make a good control surface to make a before and after comparison. Hank Scudder ---------- From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Monday, September 30, 1996 6:17AM > > >I bought a Grainger refrigeration pump last week for $285 and have been From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 11:57:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA21393; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:45:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:45:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 09:46:42 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"NlLYh.0.1E5.Mk_Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1346 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: >*** Reply to note of 10/03/96 07:42 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: New Energy Chip Advertisement >I called, left my address. I said, "I am a writer, and write on interesting >energy claims---I am not an investor..." (True, in one way or another!) >- >We'll keep the group informed. MDH Thanks. It is interresting that on the webpage there is a claim that energy is neither created nor destroyed, yet later it states: "For example, a Honda=AE generator will produce only 2.1 kilowatts from a gallon of gasoline, while a PETA Powertm hybrid system will produce more than 23 kilowatts from that same gallon of gasoline, or about 11 times as much electricity as the Hondatm generator." Must be some confusion or typos or something. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 11:58:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA16601; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Censorship Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 10:20:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"mDBFH1.0.H34.aP_Ko"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1345 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I find that about 10% of my sent messages seem to go astray somehow. I am afraid this is just endemic with the current state of the internet. I just check the Vortex-l mail for the next couple of days, and if it doesn't appear I resend it. I just did that today. Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 12:03:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24767; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 11:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 11:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:00:42 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610031800.NAA15088@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Disappearing heat with bulk Ni Resent-Message-ID: <"zdAv01.0.q26.-40Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1348 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 09:24 10/3/96 EDT, Jed asked: >Well . . . shouldn't that make him think there is no heat or negative heat? It >sounds like you should see more heat than he does. Or do you mean that he is >assuming no recombination, and he might be getting some? That sounds >plausible. His calorimetry works by measuring the delta-T (probe in the electrolyte) that occurs when a given power is put into the cell. Some of that power is dissipated in the recombiner and most of that heat he misses because his probe is in the electrolyte. You're right that he's sorta not counting the recombiner heat...but he's folded that loss into his calibration coefficient. His method has compounded corrections built into it and therein may lie the problem. Anyway, we are pursuing this anomaly and will write up a decent report on it when we get it resolved. He's building a closed calorimeter now. This should enable him to simultaneously measure the heat output by both methods. 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-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 12:13:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA06702 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:12:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:12:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: bsu!chem!postmaster%chem.bsu.minsk.by@gw.bsu.minsk.by Thu Oct 3 12:12:46 1996 Received: from gw.bsu.minsk.by ([195.50.1.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA06570 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:12:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsu.UUCP by gw.bsu.minsk.by with UUCP (sendmail 8.6.6/8.6.8) id m0v8u69-000306C; Thu, 3 Oct 96 20:10 Received: by bsu.minsk.by; Thu, 3 Oct 96 20:15:00 +0200 (EDT) Received: by chem.bsu.minsk.by (UUPC/@ v4.07 from Ache, 22Mar92); Thu, 03 Oct 1996 21:15:38 MSD To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-Id: Organization: Chemistry Department From: postmaster@chem.bsu.minsk.by (Postmaster) Old-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 96 21:15:36 +0300 (MSD) Subject: Re:10 beats 20 ! X-Mailer: BML [MS/DOS Beauty Mail v.1.25] X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: From: Ben Filimonov To: Vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: 10 beats 20! Mark Hugo wrote: A comment on the "autoradiographs". The claim was made some time ago that these were due to exposure to hydrogen "reducing" the silver in the films, and that this hydrogen can penetrate the plastic covering that exist(ed) on some of the films. Dr. Oriani was concerned about this too, so he took a small pressure vessel, some dental Xray film, and a tank of H2. I think he went to 2 atm if I recall....Nul result, no effect even after several days exposure. Thus I'd say this arguement against the "auto-radiographs" is specious at best... MDH Mark, there are hydrogen and `hydrogen'. Gaseous H2 can't reduce Ag but `hydrogen' reloaded from H-absorbing metal is `active' one containing both atomic hydrogen H and excited H2* molecules. This matter does can reduce silver and can diffuse up to tens centimeters in air before relaxation/ molarization (H, H2* -> H2). The same for `hydrogen' from electrolysis using cathodes non absorbing hydrogen. What about penetration through plastic films/coverings, I don't know certainly, but it may be the same as in the air with accounting a factor of 10^-3, i.e. some shares of millimeter. Ben> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 12:52:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA10803; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:27:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:27:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610031912.MAA14196@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 12:12:30 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"J29nk1.0.ce2.PE1Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1350 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:37 AM 10/3/96 -0800, you wrote: >I just happened to notice an advertisement for a "NEW ENERGY CHIP" in the >Businesslink newsletter. They are going public. They adveritse they can >"take any fuel & create electricity with no moving parts". To obtain a >free prospectus call (800) 778-0764. The website is at: > > > > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > verrrrrrrry very interestingly tantalizing this smells real. i've asked for their prospectus. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 12:52:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA17849 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:52:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: bsu!chem!postmaster%chem.bsu.minsk.by@gw.bsu.minsk.by Thu Oct 3 12:52:21 1996 Received: from gw.bsu.minsk.by ([195.50.1.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id MAA17618 for ; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 12:51:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bsu.UUCP by gw.bsu.minsk.by with UUCP (sendmail 8.6.6/8.6.8) id m0v8u6A-000307C; Thu, 3 Oct 96 20:10 Received: by bsu.minsk.by; Thu, 3 Oct 96 20:15:06 +0200 (EDT) Received: by chem.bsu.minsk.by (UUPC/@ v4.07 from Ache, 22Mar92); Thu, 03 Oct 1996 21:16:36 MSD To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-Id: Organization: Chemistry Department From: postmaster@chem.bsu.minsk.by (Postmaster) Old-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 96 21:16:34 +0300 (MSD) Subject: Re:David Doty please help! X-Mailer: BML [MS/DOS Beauty Mail v.1.25] X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: O X-Status: Greetings to all, Frank Znidarsic wrote: As you may be aware I am working with the distinguished Russian scientist Yuri Potapov. We are attempting to prove to the world that his Yusmar cavitation system does produce energy by a process of cold fusion. This recalls me one Russian anecdote, and I share it with you. Its main person is Russan famous schoolboy Vovochka [-> Vova -> Volodya -> Vladimir]. Once at a lesson a teacher [young woman Maria Ivanovna] asks pupils: - Kids, what will be your professions, when you'll be adults? - A fireman.. a cosmonaut [astronaut].. an actress.. and so on. - And you, Vovochka..? - I'll be a sexopatologist. - Wow! Do you understand anything in that matter? - Of cource. For instance, M.I., look through the window. Whom do you see? - There are three young women at the street eating an eskimo [!] icecream. - More detailed, please. - Well, one of them licks it, other sucks, and third bites. - M.I., for your mind, which one of them is married? - Mmm, I think, the third one. - No, M.I.! That one who has a wedding ring on her left [right in original version] hand. But.. I like the way you think. Being a cold-fusioneer, I don't consider Yusmar as CF device. But, Frank.. I like the way you think. Of cource, *apriori* approaches are useful for such a matter as New Energy devices, so namely they determine what to be looked for. But, before quessing CF, or ZPE (sorry, Hal), or UQT (sorry, Lev [Sapogin]), let's try something simpler. The null hypothesis: is o/u in Yusmar a real sign of excess energy generation or rather of latent stored one? A reason for thinking so is the fact that maximal Yusmar COPs were observed at the beginning of experiment and then they tend asymptotically to unit value. Another one: isn't Yusmar some sort of heat pump tapping heat from environment? This model also needs occurence of heat-to-latent-form-energy conversion and vice versa, similar to 0-case. These models have certain sequels which can be easily checked and certain though limited resource of improving - I mean up to the thermodynamic `COP' value of heat pump which is well o/u. They surely don't discredit Yusmar but provide certain reference points - what to be looked for. Some more complex cases also propose clear criteria for experimenter. For instance: Lev Sapogin's UQT requires a liquid containing more free protons than water. So, let's try with sulfuric acid [a joke again, and bad one]? This case is good one, so it isn't necessary to check it - it had been already done. It's known that water based organic substances solutions (antifreeze) and even non-water organic liquids containing immensely less free protons than water also work. Ben> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 13:53:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA26809; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry@math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <325421EF.2781E494@math.ucla.edu> Date: Thu, 03 Oct 1996 13:28:31 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex energy References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"U9EXM.0.iY6.E82Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1352 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Larry Wharton wrote: > > To: Vortex > > I have submitted my latest paper entitled: > > "Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" > > for publication in Physics of Fluids. I don't anticipate any serious > problems in getting it past the reviewers as the analysis is quite > straightforward and consistant with Grad's thirteen moment technique in > fluid dynamics (a standard and accepted technique). Since I wanted to get > this paper published I did not mention that the additional term for the H > density flux that I derived implies that heat may be conducted under some > conditions in violation of the accepted constraints from the second law of > thermodynamics. Uh, Larry, don't you think you should include such a thing for the sake of scientific advancement? Seems like a major point. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Internet email: barry@math.ucla.edu web homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 13:54:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA24115; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:16:42 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"ch74u1.0.iu5.iz1Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1351 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: H. Heffner forwarded: >It is interresting that on the webpage there is a claim that energy is >neither created nor destroyed, yet later it states: > >"For example, a Honda=AE generator will produce only 2.1 kilowatts from a >gallon of gasoline, while a PETA Powertm >hybrid system will produce more than 23 kilowatts from that same gallon of >gasoline, or about 11 times as much >electricity as the Hondatm generator."... "Gallon of gasoline" is meant to be an ENERGY unit, whereas kW is a POWER unit. If they can't distinguish energy and power, or if their attitude toward information on their web page is so cavalier, then one ought to be very suspicious. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 14:16:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA29202; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 03 Oct 1996 11:56:11 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Sounds like maybe the "wall" is cracking. To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/03/96 11:56:58 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"KG2pM.0.687.aH2Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1353 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Sounds like maybe the "wall" is cracking. - I'm getting a copy of Miley's paper mailed to me. I wouldn't advise other's asking for one, however, as the couple of publication venues are coming up in the next week---and it sounds like Miley would like to default to this route after that time...and well he should. - He has had over 200 "requests" for the paper. Sounds like they aren't just hobbiests, or CF affectionadios...but rather WIDE RANGING. - Maybe we have three most major events of the 20th century: 1. The Apollo landing in '69, 2. Pearl Harbour, 3. Miley's paper on Trans. (A little tounge in cheek there.) - My advise: HOLD YOUR HORSES until this time next week. By that time you'll probably find Miley's work on John's web page, in a pull out section of Time magazine, on the weekly missilette at your local catholic church, posted on the back of busses in Chicago, and being made into a major motion picture---starring Tom Hanks as the mission commander. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 14:42:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA03584; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:54:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:54:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610032039.NAA01373@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Vortex energy To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 13:39:44 -0700 (PDT) Cc: gravity137@delphi.com In-Reply-To: from "Larry Wharton" at Oct 1, 96 06:14:07 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"535Wb2.0.tt.nV2Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1354 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Lawrence Wharton writes: > I have submitted my latest paper entitled: > "Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" > Since I wanted to get this paper published > I did not mention that the additional term for the H > density flux that I derived implies that heat may be conducted under > some conditions in violation of the accepted constraints from the > second law of thermodynamics. Hi Larry. Sounds exciting. Hope we can all read it soon. Pardon my compulsion to drag gravitation into this. Have you read the third patent of Henry Wallace? (referenced below) Wallace found an experimental connection between: heat flow, constriction of degrees of freedom (forced alignment) of the spin of unpaired nucleons (quantum angular momentum), and the gravitomagnetic field. Wallace was an engineer at GE. He did this work, including actual devices and measurable experiments, in the early 1970s. Wallace's experiments and patents are well written and unusually credible. One of his embodiments is an "anti-gravity chamber". Wallace's work has been largely ignored -- but maybe not by all. Interestingly, some modern theories of the gravitomagnetic field now also incorporate the idea of alignment of the spin of un-paired nucleons -- i.e. Dr Ning Lee at UAH/NASA. Regards, Robert Stirniman (robert@skylink.net) ====================================================================== US Patent #3626605 -- "Method and Apparatus for Generating a Secondary Gravitational Force Field" Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971 US Patent #3626606 -- "Method and Apparatus for Generating a Dynamic Force Field" Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Ardmore PA Dec 14, 1971 US Patent #3823570 -- "Heat Pump" (based on technology similar to the above two inventions) Awarded to Henry Wm Wallace of Freeport NY July 16, 1973 Other than the above patents, there is almost nothing else available in literature about Wallace's work -- except for one brief article which appeared about 15 years ago in the British magazine "New Scientist" (February 1980). This was written nearly ten years after Wallace was awarded his patents. Here's a interesting paragraph from the article. "Although the Wallace patents were initially ignored as cranky, observers believe that his invention is now under serious but secret investigation by the military authorities in the US. The military may now regret that the patents have already been granted and so are available for anyone to read." Yes, and if Wallace's work was the only case relating to gravitational science, which has dropped out of sight, maybe I could believe that these things have somehow all just slipped through the cracks. ================================================================== From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 15:16:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA12081; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 14:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 14:30:43 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 17:28:48 -0400 Message-ID: <961003172847_324218594@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: sound of Yusmar.,.better today Resent-Message-ID: <"8hA7j3.0.ey2.z13Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1355 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hey all I finally figured out how to put the sound of the Yusmar on my home page so that it will be played by all browsers. The trick was to put in an ftp link. ftp://members.aol.com/fznidarsic/figyus.wav or see my home page at http://members.aol.com/fznidarsic.index.html If you download the file and play it back at slow speed you with hear the pinging of cavitation really good. Things are looking better today. I get a one years pay severance package. I can: 1. Go to school and pick up some training in natural science. This will be added to my business and engineering degree. 2. Look for a job external to the company. 3. Apply for a temp position (4 years) at another location 30 minutes away from where I live. 4. Apply for a full time postion 200 miles away from where I live. Prows and cons. Educuation is always nice but I have six years of college. Is more really going to mean better? I can learn with I need for my hobies by reading. A temp postion is easy...but is that in the direction I want to go it? External jobs...what is the market for a 43 year ald engineer? The 200 mile away position. Of the last group of severed people many of them got layed off at their new locations one year later after they incured the expense of moving. I have a lot to think about. Yusmar testing has therefore been delayed until next week. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 17:04:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA05090; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:10:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Robert Stirniman , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Vortex energy Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 16:06:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ntoBz3.0.KF1.cV4Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1356 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Robert Where within GE did Henry Wallace do his work? What Department? Does GE hold the patents, or did he do this on his own? To partially answer my own question I would guess it was the Missle and Space Division, which is in Valley Forge, PA, near Ardmore. I don't know what part of GE is on Long Island-Freeport Maybe he retired there? Hank Scudder ---------- From: Robert Stirniman To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: gravity137@delphi.com Subject: Re: Vortex energy Date: Thursday, October 03, 1996 1:39PM Pardon my compulsion to drag gravitation into this. Have you read the third patent of Henry Wallace? (referenced below) Wallace found an experimental connection between: heat flow, constriction of degrees of freedom (forced alignment) of the spin of unpaired nucleons (quantum angular momentum), and the gravitomagnetic field. Wallace was an engineer at GE. He did this work, including actual devices and measurable experiments, in the early 1970s. Wallace's experiments and patents are well written and unusually credible. One of his embodiments is an "anti-gravity chamber". Wallace's work has been largely ignored -- but maybe not by all. Interestingly, some modern theories of the gravitomagnetic field now also incorporate the idea of alignment of the spin of un-paired nucleons -- i.e. Dr Ning Lee at UAH/NASA. Regards, Robert Stirniman (robert@skylink.net) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 19:13:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA08937; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 18:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 18:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: 03 Oct 96 06:10:25 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: is there a concise list? Message-ID: <961003101025_100433.1541_BHG155-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"wX9qx3.0.YB2.LY6Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1357 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Martin, > > > 2. If the universe were not very precisely the way it is, then > we would > not exist. Therefore it has been designed to suit us. > > > > If this was aimed at a post I made here a while ago then let me > say it is obvious to me that the first sentence does not imply the > second. No, it was not aimed at any post here. Some while ago, I saw an Eminent Personage expounding the "Anthropic Principle" on TV, and it was all rather silly (to me). I do not recall your posting. > Those laws contain a number of arbitary constants whose values > have to be precisely tuned to allow carbon-based life to evolve. I > find this observation to be extremely interesting and accordance > with my own religous beliefs. My own religious beliefs assume the correctness of the C14th proofs that it is not possible using formal logic to prove from study of the universe the existence of anything outside it. Or to disprove it either. I am told that Godel's theorem does much the same for some branch of mathematics. Fred Hoyle gives a nice example of this error, he commented that if a golf-ball landed on a specific tuft of grass then we can work out the very high odds against that happening, and make conclusions from that improbability. This is backwards reasoning. Were the universe not as it is, we would not be here to argue that it was designed to suit us. My own view is that the anthropic principle reflects a possibility, but is by its nature a logical fallacy. Belief in God can be based upon either simple faith (which I'm not attacking, but have no personal experience of) or upon direct experience. That experience is (in my own case) subjective, but none the less real for being that. Nobody can prove or disprove it, which does not bother me in the least since I know it to be real. However, since (presumably) God can act in any way He pleases, others may see things differently and it is not for me to second guess those ways. There is a role for emotional thinking, it may even be the correct way to think, it just isn't a way which appeals to me. Perhaps I'm such an awkward sod, and so incapable of faith, that I needed to have my arse kicked. Each to his own way, perhaps all roads (and none) lead to the same place in the end. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 19:29:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA12396; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 18:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 18:43:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 20:41:22 -0500 Message-Id: <9610040141.AA22583@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"e21b3.0.X13.ik6Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1358 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: Hi Horace, At 06:37 AM 10/3/96 -0800, you wrote: >I just happened to notice an advertisement for a "NEW ENERGY CHIP" in the >Businesslink newsletter. They are going public. They adveritse they can >"take any fuel & create electricity with no moving parts". To obtain a >free prospectus call (800) 778-0764. The website is at: > > I dropped by that site, and noticed the extreme emphasis on the idea that they were merely extending prior inventions. I suspect they don't want anyone to get the idea that these devices could possibly violate any laws of physics. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 20:50:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA10185; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 20:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 20:29:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 03 Oct 1996 20:28:20 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: sound of Yusmar.,.better today To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/03/96 20:28:24 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"VR3dG2.0.2V2.cI8Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1359 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/03/96 15:06 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: sound of Yusmar.,.better today Frank: You aren't hurting money wise. Why not Yusmar test, and perhaps CF test for a year? Hey, two good buddies of mine are "former" Univac (excuse me, Uni-sys) employees, with about the same amount of time in as you have. One of them just was a good saver, used his severance bennies (like some "re-education" stuff, converted himself to a contemporary "Visual Basic" programer, works a good paying job for a local small manufaturer---and spent a year and 1/2 (during the "re-education" phase, PLAYING...! Since he likes to in-line skate, and to down hill ski, he did more of that than he'll ever do again in his life....is in PHENOMINAL physical shape, and whined about having to go back to work eventually...! The other fellow, LIKE YOU, knew something was up (for about 10 years) bought rental property, and lives off the income from that now. (He's no land barron, just 2 duplexes and 4 quadraplexes in good areas of Mpls.) The rental propertie s didn't come without a little "sweat equity", but that work pays off in spades. You probably have to learn to treat your relationship with GPU LIKE A DIVORCE! There is NO GOING BACK. Do yourself a favor, FIND A NEW LIFE... (PS, consider a trip out to MN to play with my CF equipment, see the leaves turn, get away...If you make it after Oct. 27th, we'll introduce to the ROLLERDOME---! MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 21:14:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA16926; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 20:55:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 20:55:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 23:51:42 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961003234939.49a731e8@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Cold Fusion Times - volume 4 number 4 is out, web site updated Resent-Message-ID: <"rxrA73.0.N84.jg8Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1360 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: The COLD FUSION TIMES web site http://world.std.com/~mica/cft.html is now updated with the present issue Fall 1996 (volume 4, number 4). ----------------------------------------------- The COLD FUSION TIMES continues to present hard-core science and engineering issues, with analysis of developments in the field which now may have to deal with nucleosynthetic pathways as well as excess heat. Some of the contents in this issue include the following: - Reports of de novo Nucleosynthesis - Anomalous Isotopic Distributions - Cavitation Induced Fusion - Reports from Japan, California, Texas .. - Summary Reports of ILNER2 - Critical Discussion of meeting and reports - Latest most critical patents in this field from around the world - Reviews of Books, Papers and reports on cold fusion and select other "forbidden sciences" - Updates on Equipment, Supplies Available - Practical Information and Reference Vectors - "What's Happening", "Material Science and Engineering" - "People in the News" columns and more Also at the web site is the "TIMELINE"-choice with the covers over four years -past and present issues - and web-links world wide for other info. ====================================== "The truth is still out there" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 3 23:08:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA17492; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 20:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961002035809.006dae04@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 01 Oct 1996 20:58:09 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"LSI5J3.0.5H4.IQUKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1283 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: At 06:14 PM 10/1/96 -0400, you wrote: >density flux that I derived implies that heat may be conducted under some >conditions in violation of the accepted constraints from the second law of >thermodynamics. > I have noted with some interest the concepts of Viktor Schauberger in >which he proposes that energy may be produced through the negative entropy >generating effect of a water vortex. According to my analysis such a >vortex may possibly produce negative entropy. > >Lawrence E. Wharton >NASA/GSFC code 913 >Greenbelt MD 20771 >(301) 286-3486 > > > I don't think we're going to be able to avoid "orgone" if this jigsaw puzzle is ever to be finished. As a cohesive force, tending toward its areas of higher strength, it could possibly explain your observations. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 00:33:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA11658; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 00:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 00:21:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961004072816.006edae8@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 00:28:16 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"_PuNS1.0.0s2.xhBLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1361 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:58 PM 10/1/96 -0700, I wrote: >I don't think we're going to be able to avoid "orgone" >if this jigsaw puzzle is ever to be finished. As a >cohesive force, tending toward its areas of higher >strength, it could possibly explain your observations. > >Gary Hawkins > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today > http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA > That message of mine took over three days to get and back to me. On the other hand, it survived a reboot of the Eskimo server yesterday. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 00:54:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA19162; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 00:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 00:42:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 03:38:39 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Message-ID: <961004073839_100060.173_JHB130-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"nAvlR3.0.Eh4.W_BLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1362 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> This isn't a calorimetry paper. It's on transmutations in the cathode. << Your undisputed communication skills deserted you Chris - you should have said - we don't all spend every waking hour immersed in this subject you know! Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 01:36:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA21724; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 96 21:15:34 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: The Project To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"kHMWg3.0.JJ5._ySKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1277 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Folks, I am now a fool as I have always been a fool, so to suggest a foolish idea is in no way harmful to my reputation. As many of you may know, I have been doing little things in the now former soviet union (FSU) for over a dozen years. Having provided many in the west with answers to problems and questions that were paramount. Sometimes I failed, but most often I succeeded. The situation in the former soviet union is better now for a few and much worse for many than it was when the union was intact. Entropy that was rampant in the past has accelerated to near light speed at present time. Winter is coming on in the FSU and much of the military has not been paid in months. I feel the soldiers with conventional weapons and nukes will get taken care of sooner or later...hopefully before the communists are "voted" back in to power. It is sad to think that there are a number of military scientists that will not be taken care of. To waste such talent is not the worst of the problems of the FSU, but to reverse this trend could be of benefit to the world as a whole. I suggest that a group be formed in who's care will be placed one of the larger scientific centers in Russia. Though many of the cream of the crop scientists from the FSU are now in Iraq, North Korea and the US, there are many who wish to remain in Russia. It would be possible to take the best volunteers to work at this center. Western volunteers would also be welcome. Key problems that face humanity would be attacked in such a way as never before. It is a fool idea, but one that has support in both the FSU and the west. The task of funding would of coarse be the most difficult, but still not an impossible task. In order to aide in the support of the cause, a global television channel would be created originating from the center to report on activities within. There will be no secret agenda's. Science for humanity will be the mission statement. All finding would become public domain. Anyone interested in working with me? Robert From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 02:17:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA28530; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 09:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 09:24:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 12:17:07 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961001121526.819f304e@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"BvCU6.0.dz6.XMKKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1267 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:58 AM 10/1/96 -0500, Scott Little wrote: >At 03:03 AM 10/1/96 -0400, Mitchell wrote: >> >> Scott, could you please elaborate. > >>Why are the likely artifactual reasons >>based upon your calorimetry. > >First, let me say that McKubre's calorimetry is the best I've even seen. He >and his co-workers have gone to extremem efforts to remove potential sources >of error from their system. neither of these are reasons to claim he confuses artifacts for science, are they? ================================================= > >His positive results look impressive when displayed as "net excess >heat" values (i.e. with the input power subracted) but they are typically >less than 1.1 times the input power (see p. 65 of "Isothermal flow >calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd and H/Pd systems", M.C.H. McKubre, >et al). would not sensitivity therefore depend upon the noise level in HIS experiments? ================================================= > >I've seen a lot of slightly anomalous readings in the 0.90 to 1.10 region in >my calorimeters that I eventually attribute to subtle errors, rather than >real effects. Hence I tend to be dubious of calorimetric results that are >in the 1.00-1.10 region. > Are you not confusing noise in YOUR system, for your presumed guess (?) of noise in his? Why is your system's noise applied to his system anyway? ================================================= >Maybe I shouldn't judge McKubre's results so harshly. He does not get >anomalous negative (i.e. <1.00) results. That is not quite correct, but I know what you mean, and that distribution of data points, in the high-current drive region of his loaded cells, was exactly one of reasons why you were asked this question. This point about the distribution of data points in McKubre's data which you note, also incidentally does not prove confusion of artifact with science, does it? ================================================= > I can't point to any one thing >that is a possible problem with his measurements...I just have a sinking >feeling that, if he built a new calorimeter 10 times better than his present >one, the apparent excess heat he sees would shrink accordingly. > >OK, Jed...roast me alive on this one.... >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 sounds like - based upon your post - that you base your criticisms on your "feeling" rather than McKubre's data. Scott, is your only evidence that your own calorimeter had a low signal to noise ratio? why throw out his data, its statistical distribution, and apply your own feeling? Given that you recognize issues of noise, statistics, and are aware of his data, do you have any serious reason or basis for putting his work down like this? Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 02:20:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA29965; Thu, 3 Oct 1996 11:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 3 Oct 1996 11:36:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: 03 Oct 96 06:08:18 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@CompuServe.COM> To: vortex Subject: Miley/Patterson quotes Message-ID: <961003100818_100433.1541_BHG133-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Zq2t_.0.4K7.0U0Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1349 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To:Vortex Gnorts, everyone. Here is my (highly personal and selective) set of quotes from the Miley-Patterson paper. Please note that I have not attempted to show where my cuts occur, so do not assume that one paragraph follows on from another in the original. ------------------------------------------------------------ The analysis of a run with 650-[Angstrom] film of Ni is presented here. Following a two-week electrolytic run, the Ni film was found to contain Fe, Ag, Cu, Mg, and Cr, in concentrations exceeding 2 atom % each, plus a number of additional trace elements. These elements were at the most, only present in the initial film and the electrolyte plus other accessible cell components in much smaller amounts. That fact, combined with other data, such as deviations from natural isotope abundances, seemingly eliminates the alternate explanation of impurities concentrating in the film. Reaction products were analyzed using a combination of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), Auger electron spectrometry (AES), energy dispersive x-ray (EDX) analysis, and neutron activation analysis (NAA). Results showing a broad array of products such as found here have also been obtained with thin film coatings of other materials, e.g., Pd and multi-layers of Pd and Ni. The yields of the major elements contributing depend on the film material, however. Some of that work is still being analyzed and will be presented at ICCF-6 The array of products found in these experiments is consistent with recent studies of solid Pd and Au electrodes by Mizuno et al., 1996 and Ohmori and Enyo, 1996, respectively. A distinct advantage of thin electrode construction used here, however, is that the reaction zone becomes well defined, enabling quantitative measurements of the amounts of various products. Nuclear reaction products were obtained in all cases, with several runs resulting in over 40 atomic % of the original coating materials being transmuted to reaction products such as Fe, Si, Mg, Cu, Cr, Zn, and Ag. The present paper deals with the specific case of a single nickel thin film, since it has been analyzed most thoroughly to date and appears to be representative of the behavior observed in the other runs. The use of thin-film coatings originates from the "swimming electron layer" (SEL) theory proposed earlier (Hora, Miley, et al., 1993; Miley et al, 1993; Miley et al., 1994), which suggests that nuclear reactions are assisted by the use of multilayer thin films with alternating metals that have large differences in Fermi energy levels. The resulting increase in electron density at the film interface is shown to "squeeze" excess electrons between ions, greatly reducing the Coulombic barrier, thus enhancing nuclear reactions. Reaction product measurements have utilized a combination of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), Energy Dispersive x-ray (EDX) analysis, Auger Electron Spectroscopy (AES), and neutron activation analysis (NAA). SIMS is used to obtain a broad view of both high and low concentration isotopes present and their isotopic ratios, while NAA provides a quantitative measure of the masses of key elements. EDX provides confirmatory data for elements having high concentrations, while AES is used for depth-profiling of high concentration elements. NAA can obtain total quantities of elements in a sample typically containing 10 microspheres, while the other techniques are restricted to probing a local area on single microspheres. Positive [thermal energy] outputs were observed in all cases, but due to the calorimeter technique, the values are only considered to be accurate to +0.4 W. More precise calorimetry is in use in several laboratories studying excess power from the Patterson cell, but here the cell design was focused on ease of reaction product measurement. A temperature rise across the cell of less than 0.5 [deg]C was obtained throughout the run, representing an output of 0.5 +/- 0.4 watts. Calibration corrections due to heat losses and flow-pattern variations prevented a more accurate measurement, but the output always indicated a positive excess heat. The cell employed for the run used all plastic fittings with the exception of the pressure and flow meters and the pump. (To further decrease possible impurity sources, a loop with all plastic components except for the electrodes was developed for subsequent runs. As noted later, this modification did not cause a noticeable change in film products.) Titanium electrodes were used. NAA was carried out at the University of Illinois (UI) TRIGA research reactor (Landsberger, 1996). Thus the key issue is whether there is another source of these isotopes in the cell or loop. Potential sources of impurities include the Li2SO4 itself, the cell glass, the insulating anode salt beads, the Ti (or Pt in some cases) electrodes, and other loop components. Those components which were easily accessible plus the electrolyte and filter paper were analyzed by NAA since higher precision is required than is possible using manufacturer's specifications for impurities. Masses for representative key elements (Ag, Al, Cu and V) based on NAA analyses of the microspheres, the electrolyte, and the filter paper are summarized in Table 4a. The key potential source of impurities in the microsphere film is the electrolyte. However, as seen from the table, the ratio of total mass of the four key elements in the electrolyte to that in the thin film was < 10% for Ag, Cu, and V, but was comparable for Al. Thus, at least for the first three elements, impurities in the electrolyte could not possibly account for present observations Impurities on the filter paper itself are also negligible. The total impurity masses in the electrodes are larger, but most of it is not "accessible." For example, while the Ti electrode was 100 fg Cu, if it is assumed as much as 1% of the Ti in the anode was dissolved and deposited in the Ni film, the Cu would be only 1 fg, or 0.1% of the increased Cu found there. Examination of anode surfaces after the runs indicates no observable erosion. Further, if large erosion occurred, more Ti would be expected on the microsphere surfaces than was found. Thus, the 1% erosion assumed here is, if anything, a gross overestimate. For these reasons, the Ti anode cannot account for the observed elements in the Ni film, and the ppm of other elements in the electrode rule it out as their source also. Analyses of the plastic components and other fittings leads to a similar conclusion for them. In no case is the upper limit for the amount of accessible material in any system component (singularly or taken together) enough to account for the key element concentrations found in the microsphere films, Al being a notable exception. Balances for the many other elements found in the film have not been carried out (other than for subtraction of initial amounts found in the film by NAA or SIMS prior to a run). Thus, there remains a concern that some may be associated with trace impurities. Still, a number of the products found are not nominally anticipated to be present in materials used in the experiment. Thus, the likelihood that the entire array could have this origin seems unlikely. Several additional checks on possible component contamination were run. In one, special microspheres with a conducting surface created by sulfonation were run in the cell with a voltage-current applied to simulate a Ni run. Subsequent NAA analysis of the microspheres (see Table 4b) and the filter paper showed that no build up of the important elements occurred on them. Additional strong evidence was obtained in more recent work where runs are done in a special "clean" cell where all plastic parts are used in the loop except for the electrodes. The electrolyte is further purified by pre-test runs. Results from operation with this new cell are still being analyzed, but preliminary results confirm that the elements reported here are still formed despite the further reduction of possible impurities. There is additional extremely strong evidence that the reaction products are not from external source contamination. First, many of the products observed show shifts from isotopic ratios in natural elements (see Fig. 11, discussed later), uncharacteristic of normal impurities. Second, in the other runs (not presented here) many different elements are found, varying according to the material used for the thin film. If the source were elsewhere in the loop, the same elements would be expected, irrespective of the specific film material. Third, as discussed later, the yields of key elements appear to be consistent with independent results from different, but related experiments by Mizuno et al. (1996), and Ohmori and Enyo (1996). Such a coincidence seems unlikely if impurities were involved due to the differences in experimental set-ups. In summary, the finding that the masses of the key isotopes are large compared to possible sources of such isotopes from loop components, the negative results from simulation runs without Ni films, the observation of isotope shifts from natural abundance, and the observation that the isotopes vary with film material, combine to provide very strong evidence that the products reported are due to nuclear reactions. It is interesting to compare these results to those reported by Mizuno et al., 1996, who ran a high-current-density Pd electrode in a cell at high pressure and temperature with a heavy water Li2CO3 electrolyte. They report a rich variety of reaction products at 1-mm depth, concentrated in groups with atomic numbers 6 , 20-30, 46-54, and 72-82. While a one-per-one comparison is not possible since the present study used Ni rather than Pd, this distinct grouping of products is consistent with the present results where major products group between Z = 12-14, 20-30, and 46-56. Other key features observed in Figs. 8 and 9 that must be accounted for by any theory include the "gaps" between high yield products and the high Ag and Cd yields. Ag (and Cd) production is particularly challenging, since Ag occurs in large quantities but is not favored energetically. Ag's position, well to the lower binding energy side of Ni, infers an endothermic reaction (-Q-value), which in turn suggests energy transfer to the reactants must occur to drive the reaction. CONCLUSIONS The results presented here defy conventional views in many ways. First, chemically-assisted nuclear reactions are not widely accepted by the scientific community. The present results not only confront that disbelief, but add a new dimension to the issue by reporting copious light and heavy element reaction products that seem to imply multi-body reactions due to the formation of heavier elements such as Cu and Ag from Ni. Further, a reaction which does not emit intense high-energy gammas is required by the experimental results. All of these features are difficult to comprehend and at first glance seem to point to impurities. However, as stressed, an extensive effort to find an impurity source has not uncovered one. Also, there is other strong evidence (such as isotope shifts, the different products occurring when the coating material is changed, and the similarity in yield trends with results from other workers), which supports the conclusion that the elements observed are reaction products. Fortunately, cell experiments of this type are relatively straightforward and inexpensive. Thus far, reaction products, such as reported here, have been detected by the authors in all dozen experiments of this type performed, using a variety of metallic films. In this sense, the phenomenon seems highly reproducible. The use of thin films as developed here offers a way to simplify the analysis since a large fraction of the film contains the new elements and their localization in the film allows a qualitative determination. Hopefully, open-minded scientists will attempt to replicate the experiments to convince themselves. If verified, the thin-film approach to chemically assisted nuclear reactions opens the way to a whole new field of science. [end] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 02:28:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA21765; Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 1 Oct 1996 19:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 01 Oct 1996 13:23:13 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Got slammed...now fired... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/01/96 13:23:32 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"Vqn-J2.0.yJ5.8zSKo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1278 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/01/96 10:39 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Got slammed...now fired... Oh yes, hate to show up like a bad penny. But I myself have considered going on a national lecture circuit if I lose my job, which would put me in a similar life situation to Frank. I think the title of my lecture would be, "Young people, students, up and coming generation---why engineering is a BAD, BAD, BAD career choice---and how to avoid it." It would center on the concept that most engineering schools give their students very POOR preparation for the real world. I think many people who have gone through engineering school---if they have the guts and the fortitude to stand BACK and observe and admit it--would agree with this. Most engineers are not stupid, and they compensate for this lack of specific preparation for "the real world" by joining XYZ company, and becoming an expert in XYG products. Problem is, that with rare exceptions (such as software/hardware engineering in "silicon valley" or (once upon a time, some sorts of manufacturing on the East coast) if you worked for XYZ company in say, Columbus, Ohio--and you came upon your 20th year, and your 42nd to 48th year chronologically, suddenly things went bad for XYZ, they went belly up, and you were (are) out on the street. Now unlike the sheetmetal worker, who has work in any town or metro area, or the painter, or the Doctor, or the dentist, or the auto mechanic, or the medical electronics technician (see the alternatives?) you, poor sap, walk out onto the market, with your 4, 5, 6 or 8 years of education, you put out a resume proudly stating your "Twenty years of experience designing and refining XYZ Widgets", and when you (mistakenly) try to look for a job in your geographical area, you find potential employers looking at you and saying, "Gee this is great, but we don't make XYZ widget's here, we make ABC gadgets..." and then they look at you like you've got big, running sores all over your body. - So next, you expand your resume sending, and eventually you get a couple of nibbles from previous XYZ compeditors, problem is they are located in "Hell's kitchen, NYC", or some small (<30,000) town in northern Missisipi. Hummmmmm....So for the sake of your "family", you take a job 1000 miles away from "home", and eventually your children hate you, your wife (who is a nurse, and can be employed anywhere---so who's smarter, you or her?) divorces you, and you join the 45-55 year old, rootless wonder engineering group that is looking back and saying, "What happened to my life." Now my recommendation to young people is: "Avoid engineering and engineering schools like the PLAUGE.... ONLY go the route of getting a "technical" degree, such as Physics or Chemistry or Biology, if it is a stepping stone to being a Dentist, a Doctor, a Vet, a Pharmasist (sp) or an RN. Also, investigate closely the "tech schools". Who's better off? An engineer earning 24-30$ and hour, or a certified garage mechanic, who spends 2 years in school and gets paid $16 to $24/Hour and NEVER is out of work (for more than a week?) in the long run? - PS, my warnings also apply to people getting "higher level" degrees in the sciences. (PHd's in Phys, chem, etc.) Although I think a lot of people have caught on as to the unemployability of some "advanced" degrees in the last 20 years, at least from what I hear about grad school numbers, and that is GOOD!!!!) - Input anyone? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 05:09:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA04503; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:08:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:08:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 08:07:18 EDT From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: The Project Message-ID: <961004120718_76570.2270_FHU15-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"PUqaa1.0.G61.5vFLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1363 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert, An excellent, excellent idea I would certainly be interested in working with you on this project, provided that one of the major if not **THE** focus of activity of such a center be specified to be exotic new energy processes, i.e. O/U devices, their investigation and development (and, of course, antigravity, should that work pan out). There is a former Russian engineer, now a recently graduated patent attorney, living in Concord, NH, who could also help out with matters of translation and customs. (Ironically, he was raised in Moldova!). Jed Rothwell is fluent in Japanese, and so would afford a connection on that end. Chris Tinsley would be our European connection -- he speaks British. May I suggest also a Journal/Magazine would be required for this Center that would keep the light of publicity on what was going on with said center and its internaitonal activities. We at Cold Fusion Technology/Infinite Energy magazine have lots of experience doing this. What we don't have is -- you guessed it -- money! We have a lab/publishing office that needs to be supported. That could be the US-based site for interaction with the Russian group. Your turn, Robert... Best, Gene Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D. Editor-in-Chief and Publisher INFINITE ENERGY Magazine Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Phone:603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 76570.2270@compuserve.com P.S To all -- Issue #9 of Infinite Energy is at printers, has the full Miley paper in it -- hope to get the mailing out before departure for ICCF6 on Oct.11. If you want a free copy, you have ot get to ICCF6 -- otherwise, you need to subscribe. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 05:22:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA06095; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 08:16:25 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961004081417.3607c3d4@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: censorship Resent-Message-ID: <"-eKSP.0.4V1.T1GLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1364 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I want to thank Bill, Jet, John, Gary, John, Henry, Robert, Scott and the others who graciously answered. FYI, my posts have finally this AM issued - albeit 4 days after the posts - and even more astonishing, after other posts which weer posted later preceeded them, going right through and even beating their arrival. No FIFO there. So much for expectation that the internet is a linear time-invariant system. ;-)X Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 05:39:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA09700; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 05:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 08:33:54 EDT From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: sound of Yusmar.,.better today Message-ID: <961004123354_76570.2270_FHU39-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"BH9VJ2.0.UN2.bJGLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1365 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank, Sounds like you have an ideal situation -- I'd call this a marvelous stroke of GOOD LUCK, your situation! Severance? WE here in the non-9-to-5 real world of cold fusion and new energy know a lot about severance with NO PAY! There are two things I would recommend: (1) Top priority! Get on a plane to ICCF6. You have the money and you need to be there to get charged up. I don't have the money, but I *will* be there thanks to my magic charge card. (By the way so should Scott Little. I cannot understand how someone who claims to have tried so hard to replicate CF experiments has NEVER been seen at a CF conference. What say you to that, Scott? Not a money issue, I trust.) (2) Almost as top: Write me a no holds barred story for Infinite Energy about your experiences within GPU -- tell all. Tell how a dumb dinosaur of a company missed the boat on new energy. Give direct quotes , dates, and times of all the nonsense you had to go through to talk some sense into these people. Their connection with Three Mile Island would not hurt the "sex appeal" of the story. You might become a media star and have gorgeous(?) groupies following you, much as Chris Tinsley is alleged to have! (3) Help us out here at our Bow Technologies Center, lab. We'll soon be testing and publicly demonstrating various O/U devices like the Hydrosonic Pump and and some CF cells that are soon to be on the market -- supposed to be far cheaper than CETI's and will also have no strings attached, they say. The place is 1800 ft2. Has a sleeper couch and BR. Will add a kitchenette for you and you can stay there, if you like. Best, Gene From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 07:03:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28804; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:00:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:00:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 09:57:39 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Some calorimetry in Miley paper Message-ID: <961004135739_72240.1256_EHB136-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"jvlNO.0.y17.YXHLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1367 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Chris wrote: "This isn't a calorimetry paper. It's on transmutations in the cathode." That's true, but there is some calorimetry. As I reported here over the 10 months, they use flow calorimetry, input is about 0.06 watts, and output ranges from 0.5 watts to 4 watts. Miley writes: . . . with flow rates of ~11 ml/minute . . . Inlet-outlet thermocouples provide a measure of the temperature increase of the flowing electrolyte typical values ranged from 0.1 to 4 deg C, corresponding to about 0.1 to 4 W output, depending on the films used. "About" is right: at 11 ml/minute a 4 deg C temperature indicates 3 watts, not 4 . . . . As I said in my review, and as Miley said on many occasions, in this experiment calorimetry has been sacrificed to preserve cleanliness to improve the search for transmutations. The important things to remember are: 1. *Any* measurable temperature rise indicates excess heat. You could not even detect the 60 milliwatt input with this instrument. Miley is using ordinary thermocouples, not McKubre-style Platinum Resistance Temperature Devices (RTD) good to microdegrees. 2. Excess heat was observed in all experiments. I know of no experiments in which transmutations occurred without excess heat. (Except maybe K. Wolf . . . I'm not sure if he did any calorimetry.) The heavy-element transmutations support the hypothesis that the unexplained fluctuations in excess heat may be caused by a combination of exothermic and endothermic nuclear reactions, but they do not support the idea that you can get transmutations with no heat at all. I made the tongue-in-cheek suggestion that if we could cause only endothermic reactions, we could use CF devices as miniature refrigerators, but I suppose this is impossible because you must have massively concentrated energy come from the exothermic reactions to drive the endothermic ones. You could not have a perfect balance; some of the energy will ble lost in destruction of the lattice and waste heat. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 07:08:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28771; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 09:57:28 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Disappearing heat with bulk Ni Message-ID: <961004135728_72240.1256_EHB136-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"djJmS.0.O17.UXHLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1366 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Scott Little writes: "His calorimetry works by measuring the delta-T (probe in the electrolyte) . . . Nothing wrong with that method. It is nice to back it up with measurements of the cell wall temperature. "You're right that he's sorta not counting the recombiner heat...but he's folded that loss into his calibration coefficient. His method has compounded corrections built into it and therein may lie the problem." Yikes! Sorta not counting?!? I presume "folding the loss" means the calibration constant is established with electrolysis rather than joule heating, with the built-in assumption there will be no recombination. Before you try to replicate his experiment you should check his arithmetic. I cannot judge from such a brief description, but this sounds like an error caused by overly complicated methodology. However, other cases of "disappearing heat" are seen with better calorimetry, and they remain a mystery, I think. I presume the claim is that total heat does not exceed I*V. Right? Or is the calorimetry so complicated you cannot even sort that out? (Yes, I have seen that much confusion in other experiments.) - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 07:17:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA00460; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:06:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:02:01 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199610041502.QAA26747@sunny.bahnhof.se> X-Sender: grappo@bahnhof.se (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov From: gudmund rapp Subject: Vortex energy Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"RJ07J3.0.s6.6dHLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1368 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Larry Warton I have read your post on vortex-l with great interest. I have done a lot of experiments with water vortex generators over the last years. The experiments have been mostly aimed at finding out if the vortex is suitable for separation purposes. Having read a lot about Schaubergers experiments, however, the energy production in a vortex has naturally also been of great interest to me. The closest I have come to this field is that some of my friends who are handy with a divining-rod have told me that there is a very strong field of some sort around the vortex stretching out to about 1 m and another even stronger field above the funnel of the vortex spreading out upwards. Schauberger also mentions in one of his texts that if you hold an evacuated glass bulb ov er the vortex it will light up. I have not been able to perform that experiment. Perhaps someone on the list could try that. In view of the above I would be very grateful to receive a copy of your paper. Alternatively, would you please send me the adress to that journal. Best regards Gudmund Rapp PS I live outside stockholm in Sweden From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 08:18:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17361; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 08:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 08:08:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:13:53 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: The Project Resent-Message-ID: <"1P1ig2.0.AF4.xXILo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1369 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Folks, > [snip] >In >order to aide in the support of the cause, a global >television channel would be created originating from the >center to report on activities within. There will be no >secret agenda's. Science for humanity will be the mission >statement. All finding would become public domain. > >Anyone interested in working with me? > >Robert This is a wonderful idea, one of the best I've ever seen. I would like to help but don't have the education, money, or political clout to do anything, but I have lots of crazy ideas and no reputation to worry about. I have some ideas primarily about the commmunications. I think the ideas would be good in the west also, but would take FCC approval, allocation of bandwidth, etc. Maybe it would be easier to accomplish on a global basis. The idea is to broadcast newsgroup updates on a small dish satellite band. Postings could continue via ordinary phone system based networks. This permits massively parallel processing of the resource hogging part of the many-to-one communication process. It puts control of the resource cost back into the hands of the user for those users that must pay by the character transmitted, because the bulk of the tranmission cost is then free. It also should increase communications reliability and speed infrastructure establishment by permittting self contained news server drones to be manufactured. Now, here's another idea - translation service. The idea is to transmit and store the news in a meaning based pseudo-language. This way automatic language translators could translate from the pseudo language into the target language of the individual newsreader. Also, by providing free access to the news server for translators, it may be possible to obtain donated translation time from students and others interrested in donating their talents to progress in science for peace. However, translators need not know how to translate into the target languages, only the meaning based pseudo language, where each contexted based meaning of a word has it's own pseudo-word (essentially a number which acts as a key to a meaning database.). In fact, the posters could act as their own pseudo-language translators, that way they could avoid complex structures that are difficult to translate. This would bring collaboration into a world wide context. Much use there - espacially in fast ecological data acquisition. Here's another idea - a simple drawing protocol (SDP). The idea is that draw programs would tanslate simple drawings into text based information for posting/transmitting simple line drawings with text annotation. Another idea, one that could probably be done fairly quickly - student exchange, at the HS, college, and post-grad levels. Another idea - a world knowledge base. Would of course be best if translated into pseudo-language. Donation network/database - specifying needs, reason for needs, location, means of shipping, etc. This would avoid duplication of effort and provide some visibility for unmet needs. Massive database processor - I have various ideas for computer achitectures for handling massivly parallel database transactions that eliminate locking problems and various other database problems. BTW, I have a business license under the name TerraServe. I thought maybe tradmarks like TerraServer and TerraBase might be good. Probably no need for that in a public domain environment though. I would be happy to see anyone implement these ideas in public domain for the purposes of world peace through science exchange. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 08:23:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17934; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 08:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 08:11:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 07:16:30 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: The Project Resent-Message-ID: <"ZpjTo3.0.8O4.FaILo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1370 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Dear Folks, > [snip] > >Anyone interested in working with me? > >Robert BTW - I just noticed that this was posted on 10/1/96. I received it this morning 10/4/96. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 10:04:13 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA07977; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 09:28:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 09:28:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <325421EF.2781E494@math.ucla.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:01:58 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"sup1l3.0.Yy1.LiJLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1371 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To reply to some of the questions on my paper >> I have submitted my latest paper entitled: >> >> "Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" >> >> for publication in Physics of Fluids. I don't anticipate any serious >Uh, Larry, don't you think you should include such a thing >for the sake of scientific advancement? Seems like a major point. >Barry Merriman I will be making the argument for revision of the second law of thermodynamics in a later paper. It is know that Boltzmann's H Theorem gives results that disagree with the second law and the standard response made in the field is that the H theorem is wrong. So if I made that argument now, a reviewer would just say that it is known that the H theorem is invalid and it cannot be used for this application. A necessary first step is to establish the validity of the H theorem. In my paper I derive my conservation of H density equation directly from Boltzmann's equation and then I show that it may be obtained from adding together the accepted second order equations (from Grad's thirteen moment technique) of fluid dynamics. So my equation cannot be doubted without doubting the accepted higher order equations of fluid dynamics. A lot of work remains to be done before this thing can be fully justified. One important step is to work out a valid second order set of fluid dynamics with the inclusion of turbulence. There was a well respected theoretician in Meteorology by the name of B. J. Mason ( not sure of the name) who argued for such a thing in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society many years ago. I don't know any of the references. I was told this by an investigator who remembered the controversy. And of course, his ideas were not accepted. Even though he was highly regarded in the field he came up with a new concept and it met with the standard response. I cannot release the paper before publication. If anyone is interested they might try to find the Mason references and read them and please let me know about them as I have not found them yet. It is only the second order terms that can violate the second law and only for the case of turbulent transport would these terms be significant. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 11:57:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA00690; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:47:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961004185410.00727df8@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 11:54:10 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Resent-Message-ID: <"6TGT22.0.iA.skLLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1377 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >"Hell's kitchen, NYC", or some small (<30,000) town in northern >Missisipi. Hummmmmm....So for the sake of your "family", you take >a job 1000 miles away from "home", and eventually your children hate you, >your wife (who is a nurse, and can be employed anywhere---so who's smarter, >you or her?) divorces you, and you join the 45-55 year old, rootless wonder >engineering group that is looking back and saying, "What happened to >my life." Now my recommendation to young people is: "Avoid engineering That certainly was an interesting and clearly put perspective. I would focus on why the women of this country put so little effort into being noble, and/or expect everything to just be handed to them. It is not normalcy in the rest of the world to be considered just a cash cow by the woman, sent to the slaughter the instant something challenging crops up. Adamantly her deal is you produce for me, and I don't lift a finger for *us*, or else. "Vows? What vows? Kids? Just a tool." The ultimate in utter unchecked vanity and self-indulgence, a selfish machine, the American woman. Never been stung by one of these critters myself, but virtually every male I know still has a scar to show for trusting one of them. Little do these women realize that their lack of character is an insidious erosion of their larger home--the country, that they just could find themselves without, at this rate of decay. Damned be the fact that they know finding another man is as easy as popping something in the microwave, and damned be those vile men who make it so. Now where are those anonymous remailers when I need one. Gary Hawkins From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 11:58:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA01107; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:48:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:48:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610041841.LAA00678@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Vortex energy To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 11:41:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: from "Scudder,Henry J" at Oct 3, 96 04:06:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GN3nZ3.0.8H.9mLLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1378 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Robert > Where within GE did Henry Wallace do his work? What Department? > Does GE hold the patents, or did he do this on his own? > To partially answer my own question I would guess it was the > Missle and Space Division, which is in Valley Forge, PA, near > Ardmore. I don't know what part of GE is on Long Island-Freeport > Maybe he retired there? > Hank Scudder Available biographical info about Henry Wallace: Worked at GE from late 1960s to mid 1970s. First at GE Aerospace in Valley Forge PA, and then at GE Re-entry Systems in Philadelphia (30th & Walnut Street). Unknown what he did after GE. Retired to Tampa FL area, and passed away in about 1993. Regards, Robert Stirniman (robert@skylink.net) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 12:33:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA13082; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L , Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Vortex energy Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:18:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"g-0Hi1.0.KC3.YDMLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1379 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry I would be interested in reading your paper when it becomes available. Are you going to post it in a homepage or something, or let john logajam do it? Hank Scudder ---------- From: Larry Wharton To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Vortex energy Date: Friday, October 04, 1996 9:01AM To reply to some of the questions on my paper >> I have submitted my latest paper entitled: >> >> "Thirteen Moment Analysis of Boltzmann's H Theorem" From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 12:55:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19338; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:44:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610041944.MAA12530@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 12:44:13 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: The Project Resent-Message-ID: <"S3IKJ1.0._j4.saMLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1381 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:07 AM 10/4/96 EDT, you wrote: >Robert, > >An excellent, excellent idea > >I would certainly be interested in working with you on this project, provided >that one of the major if not **THE** focus of activity of such a center be >specified to be exotic new energy processes, i.e. O/U devices, their >investigation and development (and, of course, antigravity, should that work pan >out). There is a former Russian engineer, now a recently graduated patent >have lots of experience doing this. What we don't have is -- you guessed it -- >money! We have a lab/publishing office that needs to be supported. That could be >the US-based site for interaction with the Russian group. > >Your turn, Robert... > > >Best, Gene > >Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D. Indeed it is an excellent idea. I suggest that you send you email to Dr Palms at russia@aa.net along with responses to your post. He can provide a lot of Russian contacts related to this. He has an amazing database. I know WHERE the money might highly probably come from to catalyze this sort of thing: SOROS Foundation out of new york. Soros loves this sort of thing. Perhaps a good touch down would be Eugene's shop for the East Coast, which could possibly get some grant assistance through the Soros group to be an East Coast touchdown for the project, which minimally would involve a couple of people working round the clock on the InterNet. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 12:55:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA19016; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 04 Oct 1996 12:43:12 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Two "tight" Cold Fusion reports... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/04/96 12:43:13 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"MBBg12.0.1f4.fZMLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1380 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Two "tight" Cold Fusion reports... - I would recommend, to the doubters/dubious/whining and cryers--- the following: - "Development of Advanced Concepts for Nuclear Processes in Deuterated Metals", Electric Power Research Inst., TR-104195, August '94 Contact Tom Passell at EPRI, Palo Alto CA - AND: - "Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Systems", by Melvin Miles, Ben Bursh, and Kendall B. Johnson, Naval Research Labs, China Lake, Report NAWCWPNS TP 8302 - Approved for public release. (Probably available NTIS) - I don't think either of these reports pulls any punches in saying that acheiving the right conditions to observe "excess heat" is easy. However, both reports give plent of data, information, and food for thought that the result is real---and worth study because of its implications. Tie them in with Mileys' soon to be widely available report and what have you got? - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 13:43:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA02835; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:31:37 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"QIJ872.0.8i.hGNLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1382 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > One important step is to work out a valid second order set of fluid >dynamics with the inclusion of turbulence. In my comments to Larry Wharton's post, I meant to make the tie-in between plasma and conventional fluids with: "Self-organized" plasma behavior under helicity quasi-conservation can look macroscopically a lot like a decrease of entropy. I don't know what happens to entropy when all the microscopic processes are included. However, this might tie in with what you are talking about. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 13:52:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04425; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:36:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 16:29:36 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: This just in from the Navy Message-ID: <961004202936_72240.1256_EHB75-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"-PUBm.0.-41.PLNLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1383 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I got an impressive 98 page book from the U.S. Navy. Here is a description of it, related with military thoroughness on the REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE, which I note conforms to ASCI Standard 239-18 (I mean the page conforms). Please note that field #1 says "AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)." I have duly left it blank and I expect all readers of this forum to follow procedures and leave this field blank on your screen. Further be it noted here that I have searched existing datasorceath [sic] in less than 1 hour. That will be all. Dis-missed! REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704 0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing datasorceath [sic] maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the colection [sic] of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202 4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE September 1996 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final, Jan 92-Sep 95 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Anomalous Effects in Deuterated Systems 6. AUTHORS Melvin H. Miles. Benjamin F. Bush. and Kendall B. Johnson 5. FUNDING NUMBERS PE 061153N Project R1306 R&T Project Code 313z001srp06 [sic] 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division China Lake. CA 93555-6100 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER NAWCWPNS TP 8302 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAMES(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) Office of Naval Research 800 North Quincy Arlington, VA 22207-5660 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12a DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT A Statement; public release; distribution unlimited. 12h DISTRIBUTION CODE 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) (U) Excess power was measured in 28 out of 94 electrochemical experiments conducted using palladium or palladium-alloy cathodes in heavy water. Reproducibility continues to be the major problem in this controversial research area. Based on our experiments, this lack of reproducibility stems from unknown variables in the palladium metal. The best reproducibility for excess power was obtained using palladium-boron materials supplied by the Naval Research Laboratory. Our basic isoperibolic calorimeters were capable of measuring excess power with a sensitivity of +/-1 % of the input power or +/- 20 mW, whichever was larger. Calorimeters that are capable of detecting excess power levels of 1 watt per cubic centimeter of palladium are essential for research in this field. Results from our laboratory indicate that helium-4 is the missing nuclear product accompanying the excess heat. Thirty out of 33 experiments showed a correlation between either excess power and helium production or no excess power and no excess helium. The collection of the electrolysis gases in both glass and metal flasks place the helium-4 production rate at 10^11 to 10^12 atoms per second per watt of excess power. This is the correct magnitude for typical deuteron fusion reactions that yield helium-4 as a product. Anomalous radiation was detect in some experiments by the use of X-ray films, Geiger-Mueller counters, and by the use of sodium iodide detectors. There was never any significant production of tritium in any of our experiments. 14. SUBJECT TERMS Calorimetry, Deuterium, Electrolysis, Excess Power, Helium-4, Radiation, Tritium 15. NUMBER OF PAGES 98 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF REPORT UNCLASSIFIED 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE UNCLASSIFIED 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT UNCLASSIFIED 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT UL NSN 7540 01-280 5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) Prescribed by ANSI Sld. 239-18 298-102 [End of File] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 13:55:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA04567; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 04 Oct 1996 13:35:13 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Two "tight" Cold Fusion reports... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/04/96 13:35:38 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"ZVaPP3.0.C71._LNLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1384 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/04/96 12:49 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Two "tight" Cold Fusion reports... Fast typing gives fits: PLENTY not just PLENT, and I believe achieve is better than acheive....I believe...please retrieve... can't relieve....MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 14:12:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA10555; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:01:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:59:45 -0400 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961004165735.29d7140e@world.std.com> X-Sender: mica@world.std.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mitchell Swartz Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"9jEZm3.0.ra2.OiNLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1385 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:44 PM 10/4/96 -0500, you wrote: >At 12:17 10/1/96 -0400, Mitchell wrote: > >> Given that you recognize issues of noise, statistics, and are aware of his >>data, >>do you have any serious reason or basis for putting his work down like this? > >I haven't put down his work. I am highly impressed with his work. I only >said that I thought his positive results were likely to be artifactual. If >that turns out to be true, it will not lower my high regard for McKubre's >experimental expertise. If that turns out to be false, it will simply be >another case in which my intuition is wrong. > >I apologize for making such a controversial statement without simultaneously >qualifying it as a "feeling" rather than something more concrete. > > > > > >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) > > thanks, Scott, for clarifying that. Mitchell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 14:43:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18038; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:26:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:24:46 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"30w7n1.0.lP4.a3OLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1386 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going on in biological systems. While the chicken and egg stuff is nice because we can study them, I think the case of the ancient, long extinct, metal loving bacteria is more interesting. George Miley has allegedly transmuted large quantities of metals and the question I have is - could these bacteria have been doing the same thing. It is generally accepted that iron ore deposits were caused by iron loving bacteria dying and forming a sedimentary layer. There is good evidence that other metal deposits like gold are caused by the appropriate metal loving bacteria. These bacteria are gone now (what a shame) so we don't see something like a pond with a layer of gold sediment on the bottom. We would have noticed something like that. The question I always had is why did these bacteria want so much of their favorite metal and how could they get so much of it? And then why are they all gone now? Modern bacteria can lay down sediments but there is not any significant metal concentrations in them. One theory could be that the bacteria actually lived on CF energy and the associated metal deposit was actually a nuclear metabolic waste product or the nuclear ash. The bacteria would then die when they had consumed their feed elements. This would reduce the concentration of the feed elements and increase the concentration of the waste elements. If we knew the starting concentration in the earth and the effect of differential settling of the heavy elements then we could compare to the present concentration to find out which elements make good nuclear food. The good food elements should be reduced in concentration and should be the best candidates for CF reactions. Making an unscientific estimate of this I took the concentration of the elements in stony and iron meteorites, from the Scheffield University element web page, and added them (not knowing what weight to use). Then I divided by the observed concentration in the Earth's crust. So then large numbers, larger than expected from the differential settling effect, should indicate good CF reactants. The result in no particular order (except for some of the larger values first) is: Element Ratio (meteor/earth) rhodium 21650 ruthenium 11900 iridium 1210000 osmium 83700 rhenium 2250 platinum 20100 palladium 7733 silver 1.7 gold 1654 tungsten 8.2 mercury 2.6 cadmium .73 molybdenum 5.9 indium .285 thallium .005 lead 4.3 niobium .015 tantalum .043 tin .94 nickel 1025 halfnium .045 aluminum .122 titanium .13 cobalt 350 iron 28 bismuth 10.6 antomony 2.2 copper 8 zinc 1.1 vanadium .43 chromium 36.5 calcium .30 zirconium .094 uranium .006 The first seven elements on this list would be good candidates. A noticeable standout is nickel with a relatively light weight and a ratio of 1025. Where did all the nickel go? It seems too light to have all but one part in 1000 gone to the center of the earth. Maybe something ate it or maybe it was transmuted through geological CF. And that iridium ratio, 1.2 million, is an amazing number. I would believe that number if there only was molecular diffusion in the Earth's core but the eddy diffusion would totally overwhelm the molecular diffusion. The number should be closer to 10 than a million. I think that somehow the vast majority of the Earth's iridium was transmuted. Iridium is likely the most reactive CF element, but of course it is very expensive. Rhodium is up there too and last I checked it was $5,000 a Troy Oz. For a cheap reactant metal nothing beats nickel, but I guess we already knew that. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 16:04:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA09921; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 15:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 15:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry@math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <325595C5.1CFBAE39@math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 15:55:01 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Project References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5bBmI.0.xQ2.lNPLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1387 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >In > >order to aide in the support of the cause, a global > >television channel would be created originating from the > >center to report on activities within. Knock, knock? Anybody home? TV channels are pass'e---they are fundamentally limited to few -> many broadcast, and you not one of the few. The Web is the broadcast medium for such a venture, since it is many -> many. The Web already offers a virtually unlimited number of channels (literaly!) there for the taking, with a total startup cost of ~ $3000 (if you don't have a computer; if you do, its more like ~$100). So, get to it. > >There will be no > >secret agenda's. Science for humanity will be the mission > >statement. All finding would become public domain. > > This doesn't sound so novel to me---certainly most scientists I know put most of their findings into the public domain. Those that don't start a company instead, which probably gets the end result into the hands of the public even sooner. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Internet email: barry@math.ucla.edu web homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 16:41:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA15402; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:19:18 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 19:18:16 -0400 Message-ID: <961004191815_118690550@emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: gene thanks..I'll do it. Resent-Message-ID: <"ym6Qt2.0.Vm3.qjPLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1388 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene..money is not my problem. My investment income last year was $60,000. My total income was $120,000. I'm not concerned about where my next lunch comes from. What is the problem is that I been associated with one form of organization or another since kintergarten. It started in kintergarten, elementary school, high school college, a job and the army both. I didn't even want the army..they drafted me kicking and screaming all the way.. I had to much to do for to many years . Then on to another job. Stuck in the army resereves on the weekends. No days free. Job in the day night school at night, I got a business degree. Then two relocations to Alabama and New Jersey. Working in the day and teaching at the local Vo-tech at night. Starting a business, writing papers, working overtime, and testing the Yusmar. Then all at once nothing..no job...papers already published...night school done I graduated..Yusmar testing winding up....It feels like falling into a black hole. This never happened before...The army, from who I couldn't escape, will not even take me now! I'm regrouping and would like to come out and see you once I am free. The local community college may extend me an offer to teach industrial controls...I't doesn't pay much. I'll try it. Thank you Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 16:46:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16164; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:21:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:21:36 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 19:19:41 -0400 Message-ID: <961004191940_325351273@emout04.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Good Bye note Resent-Message-ID: <"hMags1.0.Sy3.zlPLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1389 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another of my Utility friends at EPRI get the boot. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: tmckee@csw.com To: fznidarsic@aol.com Date: 96-10-04 09:11:49 EDT From: Tim McKee 318-673-3875 Internet Address: TMCKEE@CSW.COM Dept: Plant Support - Southeast Location: SWEPCO, Arsenal Hill Subject: Good Bye note : fznidarsic@aol.com Frank, there are a lot of people being caught up in the world of downsizing, rightsizing, re-engineering, etc, ad nauzeum. I am being caught up in the same thing though indirectly. I was forced to resign from my company due to a move in my wife's department. Fortunately I was able to find a job in the area where we will be moving. I have enjoyed the information that you have provided on EPRI and may try to keep in contact later through the internet. Right now I do not have an Internet connection but plan to get one after the move. This note is being sent through a PROF's (office vision) set up at our company. Good luck in your future endeavers! I will probably try to get in touch later after I move and get an internet connection. . . Tim From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 16:51:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA16441; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:22:32 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry@math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <32559C1B.3F54BC7E@math.ucla.edu> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 16:22:03 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Avcat2.0.n04.smPLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1390 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Larry Wharton wrote: > > Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild > conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going > on in biological systems. While the chicken and egg stuff is nice because > we can study them, Uh, Larry, didn't you used to be skeptical of Cold fusion? Now you're talking about chickens transmuting Si to Ca as if it were a reasonable possibility. Having looked at Kervran's book recently, I can say his evidence presented there is plenty weak. >I think the case of the ancient, long extinct, metal > loving bacteria is more interesting. George Miley has allegedly transmuted > large quantities of metals and the question I have is - could these > bacteria have been doing the same thing. > It is generally accepted that iron ore deposits were caused by iron loving > bacteria dying and forming a sedimentary layer. There is good evidence > that other metal deposits like gold are caused by the appropriate metal > loving bacteria. Really, this is all news to me. Living in California, I was recently reading about the geological origins of the Ca gold deposits, and gold loving bacteria never even cam up. Do you have a reference for any of this? The biggest conceptual problem I see for biological transmutation--- if we assumed for the amount chemical transmutation is possible---is that you necessarily get a smorgasboard of reaction products that are unwanted. If chickens transmute Silicates -> Ca to get Ca, they would get equal amounts of other unwanted stuff too. Seems easier just to scratch around for something to eat with some Ca in it, like, say, your old egg shells.... -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Internet email: barry@math.ucla.edu web homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 16:54:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA19353; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 16:31:58 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 19:29:52 -0400 Message-ID: <961004192951_118699037@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Gone Resent-Message-ID: <"Q101D.0.Dk4.ivPLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1391 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: My friends at EPRI say good by. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: TPeterson@PaloAlto.EPRI.com (Terry M. Peterson) To: fznidarsic@aol.com ('Znidarsic, Frank - SMTP') Date: 96-10-04 18:26:20 EDT >Author: UA4K436@epri.epri.com (Frank Znidarsic, GPU Generation, Inc.) >Date: October 03, 1996 > >I made a typo. It's hard to keep a clear head on a day like today. My home >page is at: > >http://members.aol.com/fznidarsic/index.html > >Good by...and good luck to all of you. > >Frank Znidarsic 481 Boyer St. Johmstown Pa. 15906 Yes, Frank, I know what you mean. I was laid off at Chevron about 10 years ago, and the memory still smarts somewhat. I'm sorry to hear about your layoff, and I wish your alternative energy ventures every success. Regards, Terry Peterson, EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94304 voice: (415)855-2594 FAX: (415)855-8501 Internet: TPeterson@PaloAlto.EPRI.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 17:23:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA29591; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:10:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:09:34 -0400 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199610050009.UAA01919@spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-reply-to: (message from Larry Wharton on Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:24:46 -0400) Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"o7kEb3.0.BE7.dTQLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1392 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry Wharton (wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov): > Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild > conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going > on in biological systems. While the chicken and egg stuff is nice because > we can study them, I think the case of the ancient, long extinct, metal > loving bacteria is more interesting. George Miley has allegedly transmuted > large quantities of metals and the question I have is - could these > bacteria have been doing the same thing... Clue! Beautiful clue. And right before our faces. (Or is it? Counterarguments later.) The key is of course that most of the Ni has been mined from meteor strikes. Subtract them (and the iridium layer at the C-T boundary) and the elements at the top of your list literally don't exist on earth. The next step of course is to grab lunar data and do the same comparison. If lunar rocks are enriched in these elements, it is a beautiful confirmation. If it doesn't there are two possibilities: 1) See theories of lunar creation. Apollo knocked out some, but in others some or all of the lunar surface is ejecta deposited during LHB (late heavy bombardment) a lot of it from earth. 2) Planets with molten iron cores concentrate all the siderophilic (is that the right word: iron-loving) elements in the core. But notice that iron is "only" enriched in the meteorites by a factor of 28. Martian rocks, in particular the recently discovered meteorites, should provide another test. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 17:45:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA25102; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:35:49 -0400 From: Ron Peterson Message-Id: <199610041735.NAA03992@dvcorp.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: New Energy Chip Advertisement Resent-Message-ID: <"7v3lG.0.u76.8nKLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1372 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Their technical description is rather vague, but what it sounds like they've done is apply heat from a usually unusable source (due to low temperature) to one side of a thermoelectric generator and applied some sort of refridgerator to the other side (a Peltier device?) to get a usable delta-T for creating electricity. This might be a feasable way of extracting some energy from a low temperature heat source but it means that the cold side requires some power input, which would make the amount of power recovered low, I would think. Hard to believe they could get a factor of two improvement in output, let alone a factor of ten. It's incredible how everybody who has something revolutionary doesn't proofread their press announcements. They even spelled their own name wrong. Ron From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 18:23:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA25913; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:44:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:44:11 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610041744.MAA19663@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Scott Little on Michael McKubre Resent-Message-ID: <"zl9Zq.0.mK6.NqKLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1373 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:17 10/1/96 -0400, Mitchell wrote: > Given that you recognize issues of noise, statistics, and are aware of his >data, >do you have any serious reason or basis for putting his work down like this? I haven't put down his work. I am highly impressed with his work. I only said that I thought his positive results were likely to be artifactual. If that turns out to be true, it will not lower my high regard for McKubre's experimental expertise. If that turns out to be false, it will simply be another case in which my intuition is wrong. I apologize for making such a controversial statement without simultaneously qualifying it as a "feeling" rather than something more concrete. 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-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 18:24:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA11624; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:51:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:50:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610050050.UAA03299@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"Q5vIh3.0.Sr2.J4RLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1393 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: With the oscilliscope face 16 inches from the PAGD tube there was no glow on the scope during PAGD operation. Jeff >On Mon, 30 Sep 1996 10:01:17 -0400 (EDT), John Schnurer wrote: > >> >> >> Dear Jeff, >> >> In a darkened room, with your rig shrouded to prevent light from >>escaping IT use a CRT from a scope which is off to see if you are >>generating X rays. Other phosphors work as well. One is from X ray >>film cassettes, a used one from when they upgrade. Have to talk to >>radiologist. A nice one will give you a cassette .... those wiht high JQ >>[jerk quotient] do not usually do so. >> >> JHS >> >> >Wouldn't a simple flourescent tube work too? >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* >Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on >temperature. >Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, >Learns all his life, >And leaves knowing nothing. >-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 18:27:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA13966; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 18:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 18:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:59:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610050059.UAA05606@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"QVYFJ.0.1Q3.aCRLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1394 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I disassembled the PAGD tube today to get a closer look at the pits on the cathode. >I examined the pitting with a hand held microscope containing a reticle scale graduated in .002 in. increments. Features down to .001 are easily visible. The individual pits seem to have no regular or distinguishable features. However. the pits are grouped in highly irregular patches on the surface. The patches occupy 25% of the surface area. There are also pit patches on the anode occupying 2% of the anode area. The individual pits appear to be more pronounced on the anode. > >Perhaps I am only getting vacuum arc discharges although the discharge events I am witnessing look like the picture on the cover of IE. > >I duplicated the Correa's fig. 9 circuit this evening with proportionately smaller capacitors. When I turned it on there was no glow, the current on the AC line was near zero, and the scope showed no activity. after a few minutes the current began to rise slowly. As I reached for the switch to shut it down C5 blew. It was rated at 450 volts. The voltage across the tube was around 600v at the time. Upon reexamining the diagram in fig. 9 it seems that the manner in which C7 a and b are installed would put more stress on C5 than C3. Throughout the duration of this test the 5600mf 350v capacitor I use in place of the charge pack read zero volts. If I had a wiring error I still can't identify it. > > >Jeff Fink > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 18:34:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA26101; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:45:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:45:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 12:44:13 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610041744.MAA19670@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: sound of Yusmar.,.better today Resent-Message-ID: <"67X7V2.0.hN6.ArKLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1374 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:33 10/4/96 EDT, Gene wrote: >(By the way so should Scott Little. I cannot understand >how someone who claims to have tried so hard to replicate CF experiments has >NEVER been seen at a CF conference. What say you to that, Scott? Not a money >issue, I trust.) I was at ICCF1 in Santa Fe, NM in 1989. My main problem after that has been finding the time. I have always been only 1/2 time at EarthTech. The other 1/2 is a demanding engineering job that is difficult to leave. I guess I just don't feel like the actual meeting is that important. True you get a lot of unofficial hints and rumors at those things but the written papers should contain the real meat...no? So, this year again, I am relying on you guys to bring back detailed reports of all the good things that were presented. 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-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 20:37:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA22986; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 11:37:58 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: sound of Yusmar.,.better today Message-ID: <961004153757_100433.1541_BHG120-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"X0__I1.0.4d5.BRTLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1395 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene, > gorgeous(?) groupies following you, much as Chris Tinsley is > alleged to have! I hasten (for my life's sake) to assure all concerned that the said gorgeous person is strictly singular - and usually armed to the teeth. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 20:54:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25546; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:46:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 10:41:46 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: censorship Message-ID: <961004144145_100433.1541_BHG36-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"qEUQt2.0.4F6.-dTLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1396 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mitchell, > FYI, my posts have finally this AM issued - albeit 4 days after > the posts - and even more astonishing, after other posts which > weer posted later preceeded them, going right through and even > beating their arrival. No FIFO there. > > So much for expectation that the internet is a linear > time-invariant system. ;-)X A glitch this week in Compuserve has meant that I have been (at last) receiving short emails sent three days ago. And certainly no FIFO! Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 20:57:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA26672; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:54:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:54:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: 04 Oct 96 08:42:39 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Got slammed...now fired... Message-ID: <961004124238_100433.1541_BHG65-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"oYaJF3.0.dW6.xlTLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1397 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark, > PS, my warnings also apply to people getting "higher level" > degrees in the sciences. (PHd's in Phys, chem, etc.) Although I > think a lot of people have caught on as to the unemployability of > some "advanced" degrees in the last 20 years, at least from what I > hear about grad school numbers, and that is GOOD!!!!) - Input > anyone? Well, we over here seem to be a few years ahead of you in this respect. None of the bright kids (or damn few) study physical sciences or engineering here these days. Even the best universities are desperately trawling for any kids who can count above ten without removing their shoes, to get them onto their science and engineering courses. This now apples to more ordinary degree courses at national universities as much as to PhDs and such-like. The kids are not stupid. Also, it is perhaps more true here than over the Pond that mass employment is largely a thing of the past. Small companies are formed, often one-man affairs, and people move into the oddest of fields - like engineers who move into antiquarian books or whatever was formerly a hobby. Or open small shops. Redundancy (being laid-off) is no stigma any more, and nobody expects a life career in one field, let alone with one employer. Napoleon said we were a nation of shopkeepers, and this is becoming true. I see it as an historical trend. A century or more ago, this country had almost its entire population working in agriculture - and it could not feed itself. Now we have maybe 1% working in that area, and we are a net exporter of food and we have to keep large areas of land 'set aside' to prevent food gluts. All this despite a much larger (in both senses of the word) population. Now the same is happening in engineering and manufacture and science. There just is not the need for the people to work in these fields any more. Those who do are increasingly on short-term contracts, or work from home to take advantage of the comms revolution. As we pointed out there was no need for Jed and I to be even on the same *continent* as Gene Mallove to be able to help him get the latest IE out on time. I suppose that the greater size (and therefore inertia) of US industry - and its greater wealth - has meant that this huge social upheaval has come a little later. Almost everyone I know here is (with varying financial success) 'doing their own thing'. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 22:15:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA11400; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 22:13:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 22:13:30 -0700 (PDT) From: JEChampion@aol.com Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 01:12:48 -0400 Message-ID: <961005011246_118932786@emout11.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: It's been fun........ Resent-Message-ID: <"1QH6F2.0.-n2.uvULo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1398 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Due to time requirements within my new life, I must respectfully resign from the Vortex-l group. Some people are interested in new science, while others attemt to prove that new science doesn't exist. I fought in one of these wars, but my family now prevails on my physical abilities. You see, they want 120 acres of prime mountain real estate near Phoenix. To accomplish such requires the production of ~180kg of Au. (we are talking about a serious mountain) So with respect to all, I no longer fight in the war between who's right and who's wrong. I just retired to the fact if you want Au you either have to buy it, mine it, or make it......... I took the path of least resistance......... I shall return Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com BTW -- all information regarding transmutation on my WEB site will be history on the nineth of this month. So if you want anything now is the time! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 23:01:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA28195; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:54:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 10:54:19 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Vortex energy Resent-Message-ID: <"a1Qx12.0.Pu6.EzKLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1375 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry Wharton wrote [snip] > In my paper I derive my conservation of H density equation directly from >Boltzmann's equation and then I show that it may be obtained from adding >together the accepted second order equations (from Grad's thirteen moment >technique) of fluid dynamics. So my equation cannot be doubted without >doubting the accepted higher order equations of fluid dynamics. A lot of >work remains to be done before this thing can be fully justified. > One important step is to work out a valid second order set of fluid >dynamics with the inclusion of turbulence. There was a well respected [snip] There is a rather well established body of experimental, theoretical and numerical literature for the resistive magnetohydrodynamic generation of "relaxed" or "self organized" or "turbulent dynamo sustained" macroscopic plasma configurations out of turbulence. The key theoretical idea that explained the (previously inexplicable) experimental data was given by J.B. Taylor, Phys. Rev. Letters 33 (1974) 1139. The key idea is that in a resistive plasma the "magnetic helicity" -- the volume integral of (curl A).A -- is dissipated much more slowly than the energy; therefore, the plasma finds a state of minimum energy consistent with its total helicity content. In some plasmas the outcome is surprising and counterintuitive: self reversal of magnetic field --> reversed field pinch; magnetic vortex-like structure --> spheromak. Perhaps there is something similar in turbulent fluid dynamics. I know a few people looked at a velocity helicity (curl v).v, but I don't know how far this was taken. [In general, any scalar of the form (curl V).V, where V is a vector field, is called helicity.] Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 4 23:25:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA02734; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 23:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 23:21:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32559B3B.509B@introtech.com> Date: Fri, 04 Oct 1996 23:18:19 +0000 From: Henry Reply-To: henry@introtech.com Organization: introtech X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Macintosh; I; PPC) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: List protocol References: <961004144145_100433.1541_BHG36-1@CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"rcQqD3.0.eg.VvVLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1399 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Would someone who knows please provide an UNSUBSCRIBE protocol? Thanks... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 02:21:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA24121; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 02:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 02:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: 05 Oct 96 05:17:24 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Message-ID: <961005091724_100433.1541_BHG69-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Cw4tR1.0.pu5.QWYLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1400 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Larry, > Where did all the nickel go? It seems too light to have all but > one part in 1000 gone to the center of the earth. Maybe something > ate it or maybe it was transmuted through geological CF. And that > iridium ratio, 1.2 million, is an amazing number. I would believe > that number if there only was molecular diffusion in the Earth's > core but the eddy diffusion would totally overwhelm the molecular > diffusion. The number should be closer to 10 than a million. I > think that somehow the vast majority of the Earth's iridium was > transmuted. Iridium is likely the most reactive CF element, but > of course it is very expensive. Rhodium is up there too and last > I checked it was $5,000 a Troy Oz. For a cheap reactant metal > nothing beats nickel, but I guess we already knew that. What a fascinating and delightful speculation! Usually I dislike speculations, especially untestable ones, but that is great fun! Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 04:25:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA16861; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 04:22:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 04:22:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 21:21:44 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: It's been fun........ In-Reply-To: <961005011246_118932786@emout11.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"IhwDo.0.N74.MJaLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1401 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 5 Oct 1996 JEChampion@aol.com wrote: > Due to time requirements within my new life, I must respectfully resign from > the Vortex-l group. > Before you go, can you tell us what the outcome was of your August investigation from the 12 wise people? Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 05:00:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA21051; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 04:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 04:58:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 04:57:29 -0700 Message-Id: <199610051157.EAA25590@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: censorship To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Hdk0Z2.0.n85.JraLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1402 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oct 5, 1996 Saturday Dear Chris, You wrote to Mitchell on the vortex: > >A glitch this week in Compuserve has meant that I have been (at last) >receiving short emails sent three days ago. And certainly no FIFO! Shortly after you responded to my e-mail subject, "Collaborate?", I sent you some information on our thoughts to date. I wonder if the above information applies to the absense of your replies. Sincerely, Akira Kawasaki From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 05:42:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA25295; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 05:41:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 05:41:27 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Reason for withdrawal of Podkletnov paper (fwd) Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 12:40:52 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3254f52d.5223543@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"IlTFT.0.9B6.sTbLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1403 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 1 Oct 1996 07:19:32 -0700 (PDT), William Beaty wrote: [snip] >And just because "going secret" has been the kiss of death for any = number >of overunity inventions in the past, I fear that there is something = about >working alone in secret which breeds a behavior which assures failure.=20 >The Muses notice your greed and abandon you? [snip] I suspect rather, that reason is that very few people are capable of doing everything themselves, or even covering all angles on their own. By "going secret" one cuts oneself of from other approaches to the problems, and other lines of thought. One is as it were divorced from the "brain-storming session". The synergy is gone, and the invention dies a natural death as a consequence. =46urthermore most people are just about conceited enough to think that they really can handle everything on their own, so "going secret" seems at the time, a logical step. Hopefully this message will serve as a warning to some. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 07:16:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04172; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 07:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 07:14:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: 05 Oct 96 10:11:23 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: censorship Message-ID: <961005141122_100433.1541_BHG91-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"QVpyK2.0.211.ArcLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1404 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Akira, > Shortly after you responded to my e-mail subject, "Collaborate?", > I sent you some information on our thoughts to date. I wonder if > the above information applies to the absense of your replies. Indeed it does. I have seen no further message on that subject! Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 07:50:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA07853; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 07:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 07:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 06:53:13 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"-hpyo.0.dw1.GKdLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1405 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 5:24 PM 10/4/96, Larry Wharton wrote: > Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild >conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going >on in biological systems. [snip] >So then large >numbers, larger than expected from the differential settling effect, should >indicate good CF reactants. The result in no particular order (except for >some of the larger values first) is: > >Element Ratio (meteor/earth) >rhodium 21650 >ruthenium 11900 >iridium 1210000 >osmium 83700 >rhenium 2250 >platinum 20100 >palladium 7733 >silver 1.7 >gold 1654 >tungsten 8.2 >mercury 2.6 >cadmium .73 >molybdenum 5.9 >indium .285 >thallium .005 >lead 4.3 >niobium .015 >tantalum .043 >tin .94 >nickel 1025 >halfnium .045 >aluminum .122 >titanium .13 >cobalt 350 >iron 28 >bismuth 10.6 >antomony 2.2 >copper 8 >zinc 1.1 >vanadium .43 >chromium 36.5 >calcium .30 >zirconium .094 >uranium .006 > >The first seven elements on this list would be good candidates. A >noticeable standout is nickel with a relatively light weight and a ratio of >1025. Where did all the nickel go? [snip] >Lawrence E. Wharton Very interresting analysis in light of recent developments. Is there some significance to the fact the above table seems to be in 2 columns? I take it elements below 1 would be the presumed transmutation products. I see halfnium is there at .045, but one the most striking is uranuium at .006. What to make of elements missing from the above list entirely, like thorium? Does this imply they are 100 percent created from transmutation? The presence of uranium in this list seems to indicate transmutation involving the fusion of two or more heavies. Another hypothesis, not necessarily a complete alternative, is that elements in meteors, in their history as small unshielded rocks in space, were continually transmuted by bombardment with mostly H and He from the sun, but also heavies from the sun, electrons, xrays, and cosmic rays. This would have the effect of reversing the significance of the ratios above, at least to some extent. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 08:55:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA18354; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 08:53:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 08:53:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 10:53:31 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610051553.KAA24769@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Miley's data Resent-Message-ID: <"LWyXK3.0.iU4.9IeLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1406 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks, Chris, for the excerpts. I am particularly interested in Miley's method of determining whether the key elements Ag, Cu, & V were present in the fresh elecrolyte in sufficient quantity to explain their later concentration in the beads. In particular, I have noticed in my own Patterson-style cells that the "electrolysis action" is limited largely to the top two layers of beads...i.e. the beads closest to the anode. Does Miley mention this? If so, how does he sample the highly heterogeneous bed of beads for analysis? 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-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 09:41:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA25821; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:39:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32569048.42AF@pacbell.net> Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 09:43:52 -0700 From: Hank Scudder Reply-To: hjscudde@pacbell.net Organization: Rocketdyne X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD References: <199610050050.UAA03299@ns1.ptd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"e0gJj.0.NJ6.EzeLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1407 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeff Fink wrote: > > With the oscilliscope face 16 inches from the PAGD tube there was no glow on > the scope during PAGD operation. > > Jeff Jeff It is unlikely that any X-rays are getting through the Al or acrillic tube, because the max energy is about 600ev or so. You need about 20Kev to get through almost any material. Hank -- 1¾ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 09:43:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA26073; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:41:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325670F6.6AB8@spots.ab.ca> Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 07:30:14 -0700 From: Robert Polley Reply-To: rpolley@spots.ab.ca X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: It's been fun........ References: <961005011246_118932786@emout11.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"n1a5H2.0.EN6.3_eLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1408 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: JEChampion@aol.com wrote: > > Due to time requirements within my new life, I must respectfully resign from > the Vortex-l group. > > Joe Champion > > discpub@netzone.com > > BTW -- all information regarding transmutation on my WEB site will be history > on the nineth of this month. So if you want anything now is the time! Please post the URL of your Web site From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 09:55:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA28000; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 09:52:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3256933A.345C@pacbell.net> Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 09:56:26 -0700 From: Hank Scudder Reply-To: hjscudde@pacbell.net Organization: Rocketdyne X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD References: <199610050059.UAA05606@ns1.ptd.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MfFVJ3.0.Qr6.x8fLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1409 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeff Fink wrote: > > >I disassembled the PAGD tube today to get a closer look at the pits on the > cathode. >I examined the pitting with a hand held microscope containing a > reticle scale graduated in .002 in. increments. Features down to .001 are > easily visible. The individual pits seem to have no regular or > distinguishable features. However. the pits are grouped in highly irregular > patches on the surface. The patches occupy 25% of the surface area. There > are also pit patches on the anode occupying 2% of the anode area. The > individual pits appear to be more pronounced on the anode. > > > >Perhaps I am only getting vacuum arc discharges although the discharge > events I am witnessing look like the picture on the cover of IE. > > > >I duplicated the Correa's fig. 9 circuit this evening with proportionately > smaller capacitors. When I turned it on there was no glow, the current on > the AC line was near zero, and the scope showed no activity. after a few > minutes the current began to rise slowly. As I reached for the switch to > shut it down C5 blew. It was rated at 450 volts. The voltage across the > tube was around 600v at the time. Upon reexamining the diagram in fig. 9 it > seems that the manner in which C7 a and b are installed would put more > stress on C5 than C3. Throughout the duration of this test the 5600mf 350v > capacitor I use in place of the charge pack read zero volts. If I had a > wiring error I still can't identify it. > > > > > >Jeff Fink > > Jeff I think your problem is a combination of the fact that electrolitic capacitors don't particularly like short pulses, and that when the device switches on or off, instantaneously you have twice the voltage across the diodes and capacitors. C5 and C3 are balanced with respect to the C7a,b in the circuit. You might try parallelling smaller switching capaacitors across C3, C5, and the C7's. Try about 0.001 mfd with a 1Kv voltage rating, and about 0.1 mfd with 600V rating across your large capacitors. I would expect they would handle the really fast portion of the transient. For more information look at the design information available from the semiconductor manufacturers for switching power supplies, H-bridge servo amplifiers, and horizontal oscillators in TV sets. Hank Scudder -- 1¾ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 11:15:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA17928; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:13:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:13:32 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us Subject: Re: Unix shell account? In-Reply-To: <9610050758.AA07492@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"v58xI1.0.2O4.JLgLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1410 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >P.S. for subscribers on Unix shell accounts: I've finally set up my > >account to automatically store incoming mail from vortex-L in its own > >folder (the month's archive file, actually,) so I don't have to hand-sort > >the vortex-L incoming mail. This can be done with a .forward and a > >.procmailrc file placed in your top directory. Email me if you wantinfo > >on how to do this yourself. > > > How does one know if they are on a Unix shell account? Are you familiar with MSDOS on PCs? Unix is like that, but with different commands. You can list out directory contents, change directories, textedit files, run programs by typing their name, etc. If you can type "ls -l" (lower case L's), and if the screen gives you a list of filenames like this: total 445 -rw------- 1 billb 1818 Oct 5 11:04 #pico09907# drwx------ 2 billb 512 Sep 9 1994 Mail drwx------ 3 billb 512 Aug 2 13:20 News -rw------- 1 billb 2679 Jan 29 1995 Paul-O -rw------- 1 billb 3684 Jul 11 18:16 RES.TXT -rw------- 1 billb 389 Aug 12 11:52 TEMP.TXT -rw------- 1 billb 1198 Apr 13 02:26 TEMP2 -rw------- 1 billb 387 Apr 8 1995 aapt.email -rw------- 1 billb 1609 Jul 22 08:38 ad.txt -rw------- 1 billb 876 Oct 1 1995 amateur -rw-r--r-- 1 billb 3547 Sep 27 1994 astc1.txt ... that's Unix When you log on, are you on some kind of text menu system? If so, you'll have to find out from your internet provider how to break out into the operating system (which might be unix, but might not.) What kind of email program are you using? If it's called "pine," you are on unix. Or, are you using sockets and Netscape, Eudora, Explorer, etc? If so, you'll have to talk to your provider about learning how to "telnet" into the system, and whether unix shell is offered, etc. If you are on Compuserve, AOL, etc., you're out of luck, I'm sure they don't allow access to their operating system. Also, many email programs allow automatic sorting of incoming messages into folders. First find out whether your email software can do this. Using the email software is probably alot easier than debugging unix shell scripts if they don't work the first time! .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 11:16:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA18101; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:14:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:15:42 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"_Film3.0.jQ4.IMgLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1411 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeff Fink wrote: ..... >>I duplicated the Correa's fig. 9 circuit this evening with proportionately >smaller capacitors. When I turned it on there was no glow, the current on >the AC line was near zero, and the scope showed no activity. after a few >minutes the current began to rise slowly. As I reached for the switch to >shut it down C5 blew. It was rated at 450 volts. The voltage across the >tube was around 600v at the time. Upon reexamining the diagram in fig. 9 it >seems that the manner in which C7 a and b are installed would put more >stress on C5 than C3. Throughout the duration of this test the 5600mf 350v >capacitor I use in place of the charge pack read zero volts. I don't have either of the IEs that deal with the Correa work with me at the moment. However, I remember thinking when I read it that is an error in Fig. 9, and indeed Mike Carrell's article in IE#9 shows a different circuit. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 11:38:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA22809; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:36:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:36:17 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 11:35:32 -0700 Message-Id: <199610051835.LAA06653@dfw-ix6.ix.netcom.com> X-Sender: atech@popd.ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dennis C. Lee" Subject: Re: It's been fun........ Resent-Message-ID: <"vPFQj2.0.Fa5.WggLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1412 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You asked people on the Whitegold list to send samples to a lab for chemical analysis. You promised to post the results. Did the lab receive the samples? Are you reneging on your promise to post the results? At 01:12 AM 10/5/96 -0400, you wrote: >Due to time requirements within my new life, I must respectfully resign from >the Vortex-l group. > >Some people are interested in new science, while others attemt to prove that >new science doesn't exist. I fought in one of these wars, but my family now >prevails on my physical abilities. > >You see, they want 120 acres of prime mountain real estate near Phoenix. To >accomplish such requires the production of ~180kg of Au. (we are talking >about a serious mountain) > >So with respect to all, I no longer fight in the war between who's right and >who's wrong. I just retired to the fact if you want Au you either have to >buy it, mine it, or make it......... > >I took the path of least resistance......... > >I shall return > > >Joe Champion > > >discpub@netzone.com > >BTW -- all information regarding transmutation on my WEB site will be history >on the nineth of this month. So if you want anything now is the time! > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 13:38:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA13908; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 13:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 13:34:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3256C5BE.1A25@cais.com> Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 16:31:58 -0400 From: Danny Hamilton Reply-To: hamltndt@cais.cais.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0b6Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: It's been fun........ References: <961005011246_118932786@emout11.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"RSh_a.0.6P3.OPiLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1413 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sorry to see you leave, but understand totally. Good Luck. Danny Hamilton From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 14:47:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA24376; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 14:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 14:43:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 14:41:51 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: List protocol In-Reply-To: <32559B3B.509B@introtech.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BlknZ3.0.iy5.ZPjLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1414 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 4 Oct 1996, Henry wrote: > Would someone who knows please provide an UNSUBSCRIBE protocol? > > Thanks... Hi Henry! I manually unsubscribed you (hope that's what you wanted! ) The subscribe/unsubscribe instructions are on the vortex-L website at http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html Note that they are changed, the new software wants the command in the subject header instead of message body. I just discovered that when I changed the instructions for my lists, somehow I missed the vortex-L instructions, and the old instructions for Listproc were still on the webpage. It's the constant mental commands those MIBs are sending me via their mind control beams, its starting to make me forgetful. My aluminum foil brain-shield keeps riding up. Don'cha just hate that? To unsubscribe, send a *blank* message to vortex-L-request@eskimo.com with the single word "unsubscribe" in the subject line of the header. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 19:13:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA25609; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 18:51:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 18:51:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 21:51:07 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610060151.VAA07034@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"JZYTS3.0.3G6.Y2nLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1415 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I don't have either of the IEs that deal with the Correa work with me at >the moment. However, I remember thinking when I read it that is an error >in Fig. 9, and indeed Mike Carrell's article in IE#9 shows a different >circuit. > >Michael J. Schaffer > Sorry to report that I did have a wiring error of my own. I had diode D7 in backwards. I must make time to do this wok in the morning when I can think instead of in a semi-comatose state at night. It would also be much safer. Jeff Fink From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 19:16:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA25739; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 18:52:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 18:52:18 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961006015948.006ffc64@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 18:59:48 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Resent-Message-ID: <"D3GRO3.0.5I6.H3nLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1416 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame is applied to metal. The answer is yes (although small). Yesterday, we applied the flame to nickel, titanium, tungsten, gold, and steel to obtain a few observations. The tube to the torch is clear plastic, so one lead from an analog ammeter was attached to the torch itself (brass), the other to the metal sample (the postive lead). During this, I forgot to touch the metal sample to the torch without the flame involved, in case it is a simple result from dissimilar metals. I would hope that the one who suggested this be tried post here what reason he had for suspecting there would be current. The current was electrons to the torch through the gas, from the metal. When the Brown's Gas flame from one of Brown's BN-200 units was applied to a metal sample, about 2 microamps occurred. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 19:39:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA28447; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 19:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 19:05:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 19:03:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610060203.TAA10467@norway.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells- fwd Resent-Message-ID: <"kPJqn.0.Oy6.IFnLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1417 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: - ----- Beginning of forwarded mail ----- - At 07:45 PM 10/5/96 -0700, John Kent wrote to me: >Dear Mike > During the week that I have been on the net, I have heard a lot >about Browns Gas but have deliberately tried to ignore it until I get the >Meyer effect out of my system. I am afraid that Chuck may have jumped the >gun on me. Of the people who contacted me about my origional posting, >only two had built the system. We all produce lots of gas but are unable >to calculate the efficiency yet, for the Meyer system. > One problem is that none of us are experts in this field. My own >background is electronics, avionics, simulation etc.. When I started >looking at the Meyer effect, six months ago, I decided to reference the >efficiency of the Meyer system against that for conventional >electrolysis. So, I first had to establish experimentally the efficiency >of Meyer cells, run in the conventional electrolysis mode. This when I >ran into problems concerning thermoneutral voltages. I work and study >alone and until a week ago, I had never discussed my work with anyone. I >had assumed that if I knew something, then it would be common knowledge. >It wasn't until I got onto internet I realised that internet itself only >had four references to the term and they all concerned cows !. I am going >to have to check on this but I think my origional refence was "Fuel from >Water" by Micheal Peavey 1995 ISBN 0-945516-04-5. Basically, what Michael >is saying is that at 25 degrees C, for voltages above 1.47 volts the >reaction gives off heat and for voltages between 1.23 to 1.47 volts the >reaction ABSORBS heat. If this, and his figures are true, then it can >cause considerable errors. In the example given he states that; > "The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of >water is 65.3 Wh at 25 degrees C. When Hydrogen and oxygen are recombined >into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more >energy is released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to >split water. The excess must be absorbed from the surrounding media in >the form of heat during electrolysis". My first thought was to make a >provocative statement in news:sci.energy.hydrogen group to that effect >and see if anyone corrected it. Although I received a lot of replies and >questions from real scientists, not one person did question it in email. >Nor did anyone ask, under what conditions did I consider the statement to >be true. Until it is proven wrong, I have to give it due consideration in >setting up experiments. It certainly explains away some overunity results >noted by some people. For the rest of this posting I shall assume the >above to be true. > A gentleman in Canada pointed out patent 4,394,230 (1983) by >Henry Puharich for splitting water at overunity rates, which he claims >arise from the absorbtion of heat, from the ambient atmosphere. He >actually fitted heat fins to his device to act as collectors. > Did I ignite the gas mix. Yes and no. For experimental purposes I >built two cells. Both were modular and can contain 2 - 6 stainless steel >capacitor plates. In the large cell I used flat plates in a +-+- >arrangement. The small cell can contain beteen 1 and 6 coaxial >capacitors. All cell produce gas in the electrolysis mode. At 1 mA gas >streams are visible. At 1 amp gas pours off and the small cell will reach >a pressure of 10 PSI in about two minutes. Gas production is an almost >straight line from a previously ungassed cell. All cells produce gas in >the Meyer mode with a 34 volt pk to pk, 5kHz 50/50 unmodulated pulse >traininto the driver transformer. On the top of each cell is a manifold, >much like Stans, containing a pressure gauge, pressure transducer takeoff >and a 0.6mm burner nozzle. Actually there are two 0.6 nozzles in series, >one at either end of the manifold, to stop flame flash back into the >cell!. The gas taps I ordered for the project proved to be far too coarse >in operation and continually blew out the match held in a rather nervous >hand. In the end I coninvinced myself that it could not be anything else >except a hydrogen/oxygen gas mix and made a note to replace the taps with >needle types at a later date. Yes I have vented the gas into an upturned >container and frightened the life out of myself with a match !. It "pops" >the way you would expect. I suppose you are refering to the reported low >flame temperature of the Browns gas generators. I will try and obtain a >needle valve and attempt to measure flame temperature. I suppose thats >one way to test my flame arrestor!!. > There is obviously a lot more to report but I do not want to bore >you. If you want to post any of this please do. Please include my address >so that I can receive feedback. I have the feeling I am at the bottom of >a very steep learning curve :-). I also have an EV brewing on the side >but unlike you I am looking at onboard gas generation into a Bacon type >fuel cell/electric motor, British law insists that it has to have pedals >as well !. > >regards johnkent > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 5 23:11:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA28050; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 23:08:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 5 Oct 1996 22:13:32 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Resent-Message-ID: <"mWBf01.0.Cs6.DpqLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1419 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on >whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame >is applied to metal. > >The answer is yes (although small). > [snip] > >When the Brown's Gas flame from one of Brown's BN-200 units was >applied to a metal sample, about 2 microamps occurred. > >Gary Hawkins Interresting report. I'd like to suggest the current may be due to locally induced AC being rectified by the hot target material acting like a hot cathode and the torch acting as a cold plate in a diode tube. I didn't suggest the flame would generate a current, but that a current may assist with various BG effects. I don't know if that is what you are thinking about. Following are various snippets: 6/28/96 at 9:08 AM Thread: Re: BG induced transmutations (was Brown "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." Only to correct it at 10:32 AM 6/29/96 to "... 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*."" Following which 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. And I replied 7:16 AM 6/30/96: "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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 00:42:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA09785; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 00:38:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 00:38:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 00:38:31 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation In-Reply-To: <32559C1B.3F54BC7E@math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xdE9l3.0.pO2.x7sLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1420 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 4 Oct 1996, Barry Merriman wrote: > Larry Wharton wrote: > > > > Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild > > conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going > > on in biological systems. While the chicken and egg stuff is nice because > > we can study them, > > Uh, Larry, didn't you used to be skeptical of Cold fusion? Now > you're talking about chickens transmuting Si to Ca as if it were a > reasonable possibility. Having looked at Kervran's book > recently, I can say his evidence presented there is plenty weak. Pardon me for injecting a little fringeophile propaganda, but suppose transumation does exist, and suppose Kervran did not. In that case I think it would be immensely difficult to even *hold* brainstorming sessions about these possibilities. Wouldn't the requirement to maintain skeptical objectivity act to prevent the world from discovering the fact of transmutation? If everyone is confident that biological transmutation is a concept that indicates insanity on the part of those who propose it, if asking such questions brings about crys of "there's no good evidence for it," then I see no obvious way to ever *get* good evidence for it. I'm convinced that science would be much better served by reserving some significant funding somewhere for far-flung, brainstorming-style explorations without the danger of drawing down distain from collegues. Check your skepticism at the door. Abandon your confidence that widely-known facts are correct, and consider the possibility that they are widely-held assumptions in disguise. Follow up anomaly reports regardless of what current theory says about their existence. Assume that low-energy transmutation reports are reasonable simply because a few reports exist. Then go out and verify their accuracy. Go out and look for holes in the mainstream worldview, for flaws in supposedly perfected theory. Are such things as checking out the possibility of biological transmu- tation really such a waste of time and money? I think not, because sometimes tiny, safe bets on "sure things" lead to stagnation in science, and it would be wise to reserve some of our stake for occasional bets on longshots with huge rates of return. So the internet finally gives a safe place for indulging in crazy speculations. Now we just need an equivalent safe place in the funding structure for the testing of the speculations. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 01:15:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA14530; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 01:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 01:13:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 01:13:18 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: gene thanks..I'll do it. In-Reply-To: <961004191815_118690550@emout03.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"lBcMq.0.yY3.aesLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1421 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 4 Oct 1996 FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > night, I got a business degree. Then two relocations to Alabama and New > Jersey. Working in the day and teaching at the local Vo-tech at night. > Starting a business, writing papers, working overtime, and testing the > Yusmar. > > Then all at once nothing..no job...papers already published...night school > done I graduated..Yusmar testing winding up....It feels like falling into a > black hole. This never happened before...The army, from who I couldn't > escape, will not even take me now! Hi Frank! Jeeze, this unfortunately sounds familiar. I went through exactly this stuff after I bailed out of a sick business in 1993. A supportive wife, a bunch of computer classes, temporary grunt work repairing busted terminals, and huge amounts of time in the library saved my butt. But they were not enough to hold off a nasty bout of depression. I'd always thought that "unemployment depression" was caused by the victim's situation, but after going through it I'm convinced that it's very much like drug withdrawl. After all, I had been getting a "fix" of high-level mental concentration every day for decades, and when it vanished, strange and unpleasant biochemical effects ensued. *Extremely* unpleasant. I initially followed my normal response to illness: holing up in bed until I felt better. But I found that unlike the flu, fever, etc., this *immensely* amplified the symptoms. Getting out of the house, doing volunteer work, taking low-skill temp work, etc., was the effective cure. Heavy exercize worked also, but I hate exercize, and when depressed I was not in a situation where I could force myself to do it enough to make a difference. In hindsight I see that I should have maintained a large collection of dreams & ideas to pursue if ever I should have free time, because when unemployment struck, my mind went totally blank, and I didn't even have interesting hobbies to rely upon. Unfortunately my finances were also at a low ebb (because of that screwed up company) so I couldn't fund anything interesting for myself to do. Do you have files of major experiments which you have not yet tried? Anything which requires that you tear down all your equipment and build a new set? You need to recreate the ongoing daily heavy stimulation of fulltime employment. Going cold-turkey into retirement can kill you through depression-induced illnesses, even suicide. No joke. I didn't get anywhere near that point, but I could see the danger. And I suddenly was in the hospital for hernia problems after a lifetime of nearly perfect health. Best of luck, and hope you avoid any need for my above advice! .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 02:18:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA21904; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 02:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 02:15:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: 06 Oct 96 05:13:18 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Miley's data Message-ID: <961006091318_100060.173_JHB77-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"9DTAW.0.6M5._YtLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1422 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, >> In particular, I have noticed in my own Patterson-style cells that the "electrolysis action" is limited largely to the top two layers of beads...i.e. the beads closest to the anode. << If I may butt-in here - Yonks ago I suggested that better, or at least more efficient use of the beads, would result from the use of a shallow bed rather than a deep one. It seemed logical to have most of them in contact with the electrode so that they actually formed the pseudo-surface of the cathode, and thus presented maximum area for reaction. I realize that this gives a pancake shape to the assembly, but so what? Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 04:29:42 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA00263; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 04:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 04:28:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 21:27:59 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley's data In-Reply-To: <961006091318_100060.173_JHB77-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Mb75d.0.14.DVvLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1423 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, thanks for posting selected quotes. It certainly wets my appetite for the full paper. Thanks Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 10:24:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA09319; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 10:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 10:22:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:21:51 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610061721.MAA17700@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Miley's data Resent-Message-ID: <"wI-8n1.0.TH2.zg-Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1424 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:13 AM 10/6/96 EDT, Norman wrote: >...I suggested that better, or at least more >efficient use of the beads, would result from the use of a shallow bed rather >than a deep one. Seems right to me, too...but, as far as I can tell from the photos and descriptions of Cravens' cells, he typically uses a bed that is about 2-3 cm in dia and 1 cm thick. So that's what I used, too. In my experience, only about 1/5 of the beads in such a bed are actively involved in the electrolysis. - 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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 10:42:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA10432; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 10:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 10:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 13:27:57 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"IRijz3.0.wY2.En-Lo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1425 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: William Beaty > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation > Date: Sunday, October 06, 1996 3:38 AM > (snip) > So the internet finally gives a safe place for indulging in crazy > speculations. Now we just need an equivalent safe place in the funding > structure for the testing of the speculations. I agree, Bill - how about from the bank account and the TIME ACCOUNT of the crazy speculator? This worked for me with my crazy ball-lightning speculations! A crazy speculator has some dues to pay to his crazy peers. He can spend some of his own time coming up with a good argument for his peers to go off and spend their time/money "bank account" on his crazy idea. Or, he can just DO IT. For the sake of all our sanities, I hope that REALITY works on a FINITE number of basic principles. Without a doubt, there are an INFINITE number of crazy speculations that could be proposed. It is not sane (nor productive) for all of us to check out too many wild speculations at a time! If we go past some critical "diffusion of effort" point, we will wind up REDUCING the number of validations of productive speculations. I would also agree, however, that biological transmutation should not be crossed off the list - not in light of the under-sea, volcanic vent life forms that have been discovered. Trying not to spread his paint or himself too thin, Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 12:40:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA05451; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:26:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:26:37 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961006193332.007331d8@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 12:33:32 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"dlaBp2.0.4L1.iV0Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1426 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:38 AM 10/6/96 -0700, Bill wrote: >I'm convinced that science would be much better served by reserving some >significant funding somewhere for far-flung, brainstorming-style >explorations without the danger of drawing down distain from collegues. >Check your skepticism at the door. Abandon your confidence that >widely-known facts are correct, and consider the possibility that they are >widely-held assumptions in disguise. That is in tune with Bill's coining of a term, something along the lines of: "Provisional Skepticism", where one is willing to tread into the unknown with full knowledge that it may or may not pay. For many of us, it is easy to see the folly of the hook-line-sinker skeptics, who would quickly step up to trounce new possibilities, offering nothing in their place, and easy to see their true motivation for doing so -- a desire to be on the side of right-- a fear of being wrong. They take what they think is the safer bet, an easy path with almost no risk, and by default no effort needed. But for those who see little value in the status quo, who hunger for improvement of the mundane, for those adventurers into the unknown, having the sheer audacity to suggest that there are vast realms left undiscovered, if I might, with your indulgence be permitted a brief outburst in continuance of the line of thought quoted above: WHERE THE HELL ARE THE INVESTORS!!?? Eh-hem. Scuse me. But there appears to be large gap between potential in fringe science, and resources available to it. There are stories in the newspaper about millions being given to various existing organizations by philanthropists, to universities, other schools, and whatever, all well and good. We hear of the billionaire who donates 50 million to help people immigrate to the U.S., okay, fine. Though I hesitate to single out Bill Gates in this, at a net worth of 18 billion, I believe he just turned 40, so that figures to around $50,000 per hour of his life. In fairness, he says he intends to give most of it away, after being sure that the company is on very solid footing for the future, and also in fairness to him, when I wrote to him once, sending a photograph of a 10 foot Tesla Coil with a red glow above it, he took the time to write back saying thanks, and that he would welcome being kept up-to-date on the goings on. Paul Allen had his arm twisted and is somewhat begrudgingly agreeing to buy the Seahawks for maybe $200 million to keep them in Seattle. There are billions floating around in sports. One might wonder what those players plan to do with 5 or 10 million year, or 35 million a year for Michael Jordan. The many star millionaires out there are not drones, but represent a cross-section where some would find an interest in these things, and are unaware of it, as there is no liason. Charleton Heston has hosted an array of programs bravely investigating and even promoting radical changes of common viewpoints on history and so on. Make no mistake. There is a large and growing interest in the unusual. Art Bell's program is the number one nighttime radio show in the country. He routinely covers UFO's, psychic phenomena, etc, that is, anything farout, and people love it. Gone are the naysayers who used to be able to float the "laughter curtain" and douse any open-mindedness. They are now seen as shallow and inane non-thinkers as the laughter has returned upon them instead. One might argue wrongly that the individuals on this list are merely lone wolf dreamers engaging in idle speculations. To the contrary, if they would only look into it, they would find that a large percentage have a set of accomplishments to their credit, and have come across many aspects of unusual phenomena that they know could lead to worthwhile results, but lack the resources to pursue them to the degree the effects deserve. Risking a poly anna christening, I would wonder why there are not by now several bright wealthy individuals lurking in the wings on this list, and jumping at the chance to be first in line to deliver one of these high tech babies to the world. As Jed posted, the Navy has acknowledged the o/u of cold fusion [it's on my website Jed--let me know if you don't want your name on it]. A glimmer of dawning light beams forth on this otherwise sleeping realm that has not yet had its day. Jumping into the speculation zone, I would say that the ideas tossed about here are merely the tip of the iceberg, and that most of you have several projects that could be done--where it is not timely to display them for bantering around here as yet--and could certainly use some funding. We do know that Gene Mallove is willing to take a look at papers on such things for publishing them. That sort of connection with at least *some* of the rest of the world is the type of thing that could begin to bridge the funding grand gulch for that unknown and dimly lit but incredibly interesting and beneficial little town of fringe science on the other side. "In the end times, the truth will out." Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 13:58:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA26594; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 13:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 13:51:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 12:56:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Miley's data Resent-Message-ID: <"832Jo1.0.SV6.Zl1Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1427 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 05:13 AM 10/6/96 EDT, Norman wrote: > >>...I suggested that better, or at least more >>efficient use of the beads, would result from the use of a shallow bed rather >>than a deep one. > >Seems right to me, too...but, as far as I can tell from the photos and >descriptions of Cravens' cells, he typically uses a bed that is about 2-3 cm >in dia and 1 cm thick. So that's what I used, too. In my experience, only >about 1/5 of the beads in such a bed are actively involved in the electrolysis. > > - Scott Little Possibly it's notable that Patterson spells out thin layers of beads in his patent 5,318,675. The "experimental embodiment", FIG. 2, shows 6 layers of beads, but the other embodiments show less layers. FIG 4 shows 3-4 layers, and FIG.5 to FIG 7 show a single layer embodiment. Reading between the lines I felt maybe the "wrapped" demo Cravens built for Powergen was concealing another embodiment - a single layer verison where the beads were affixed to a flexible cathode that could be wrapped around a central anode to create a cylindrical configuration, or conversly around a central post to create a central cathode surrounded by an anode. Since, in production, the big bucks are in the Pt anode, I like the former idea better. If that's not what it was it's still a good idea anyway. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 16:30:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA06003; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 16:23:32 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 23:22:40 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <32598357.6104365@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <199610050050.UAA03299@ns1.ptd.net> In-Reply-To: <199610050050.UAA03299@ns1.ptd.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"Wr0zV.0.iT1.mz3Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1429 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 4 Oct 1996 20:50:11 -0400 (EDT), Jeff Fink wrote: >With the oscilliscope face 16 inches from the PAGD tube there was no = glow on >the scope during PAGD operation. [snip] Try half an inch. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 16:30:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA05986; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 16:23:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 16:23:29 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Date: Sun, 06 Oct 1996 23:22:35 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3258805b.5340264@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"IvzCQ.0.JT1.jz3Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1428 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:24:46 -0400, Larry Wharton wrote: [snip] >Element Ratio (meteor/earth) >rhodium 21650 >ruthenium 11900 >iridium 1210000 >osmium 83700 >rhenium 2250 >platinum 20100 >palladium 7733 [snip] >The first seven elements on this list would be good candidates. A >noticeable standout is nickel with a relatively light weight and a ratio= of >1025. Where did all the nickel go? It seems too light to have all but = one >part in 1000 gone to the center of the earth. Maybe something ate it or >maybe it was transmuted through geological CF. And that iridium ratio, = 1.2 >million, is an amazing number. =20 [snip] Actually, the list above closely matches David Hudson's list of elements that he claims frequently exist in the monatomic form, and are not detected by normal assay procedures. If he is right, then this may be an alternative explanation of the ratios. I.e. the elements are here, and do exist, it's just that they weren't detected by the people who drew up the statistics you used. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 19:33:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA06440; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 19:15:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 19:15:35 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:12:17 -0400 Message-ID: <961006221215_203791962@emout13.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, 101544.702@compuserve.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, jseese@gpu.com Subject: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"ZKT3y.0.Va1.zU6Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1430 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Russ Chapman of Galtek Corp told me to send him a resume, he may have something for me. His neodynium magnet moter is now putting out more power than ever. It's operating at 6 to 1 C.O.P. and running itself. 2 KW of excess electrical energy are being produced. Russ has just obtained $10,000,000 to begin a marketing program which will start in 90 days. Magizine editor Kelly Betty is carrying the story. Miley writes about my "Yusmar improvements". He believes I have hit the nail on the head and wants to talk with me after his return from Japan. He has sent me a copy of his paper. Yury needs letters from organizations requesting that the embassy allow him to return to the US with a complete Yusmar system. Please help. Send letters to me at Frank Znidarsic 481 Boyer st. Johnstown Pa. 15906 I will forward to Yury. He Returns to Moldov on Sunday. His Visa has run out. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 20:33:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA07152; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 20:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 20:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: 06 Oct 96 23:30:27 EDT From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Message-ID: <961007033027_76570.2270_FHU50-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HbOPA2.0.fl1.lc7Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1431 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank, This is fantastic news about Galtek. I have independent sources that add substantially to the credibility of your report. Within a short time -- probably only several days, I will be able to provide additional details based on this other connection (can't say what this connection is right now). The motor is a microprocessor-controlled brushless DC motor/generator configuration, with unusual magnet arrangement and magnetic bearings. Furthermore, I too spoke to Galtek's Russ Chapman some time ago and he assured me that they *did* have an over-unity motor, but at that time I heard nothing about 6/1 -- he told me it was "at least 50%" O/U. I had the feeling he was understating it. But he did describe the motor as a "power source." Unless the CEO of a semiconductor company has flipped out and is dealing in pure fantasy, I am inclined to beleive that they have what they say they have -- mainly because several other credible entities have produced concrete evieence of O/U in magnetic motors. It's going to be FUN! I happen to know Kelly Beaty personally, so I will call him tomorrow. He's very conservative, with a conventional physics background. If *he* says it is real based on his *personal observation*, I will consider the matter essentially proved. Gene Mallove From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 21:48:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA28591; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 21:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 21:40:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961007124126.24f70018@po.pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8@po.pacific.net.sg X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mpower Subject: Re: The Hooper Effect Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:39:17 +0800 Resent-Message-ID: <"LcrOY2.0.Z-6.pc8Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1432 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You folks talking about the Hooper effect mention a 'hairpin' coil. What is it ? I would like to wind a coil to test this - I have some FeCu stuff from last year's project and I think this might be good opportunity to either use it or lose it.... Thanx pa From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 22:38:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA12611; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:34:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:33:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610070533.WAA21643@iberia.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"2vj9w2.0.z43.MP9Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1433 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 10:12 PM 10/6/96 -0400, you wrote: >Russ Chapman of Galtek Corp told me to send him a resume, he may have >something for me. His neodynium magnet moter is now putting out more power >than ever. It's operating at 6 to 1 C.O.P. and running itself. 2 KW of >excess electrical energy are being produced. Russ has just obtained >$10,000,000 to begin a marketing program which will start in 90 days. Great News! When can I buy one? Any estimated price? Thanks Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 23:16:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA18639; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:12:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:12:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 22:18:08 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"GWAX62.0.4Z4.bz9Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1434 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What an exciting time to be alive! I have often thought I was born too late, and occasionally too soon, but I thank God I'm living in this time. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 6 23:28:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA24178 for billb@eskimo.com; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:28:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:28:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: jorgen@healey.com.au Sun Oct 6 23:28:32 1996 Received: from sydney.healey.com.au (root@sydney.healey.com.au [203.10.124.2]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id XAA24152 for ; Sun, 6 Oct 1996 23:28:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from dialup189-syd.healey.com.au (dialup189-syd.healey.com.au [203.10.124.189]) by sydney.healey.com.au (8.7.5/8.7.5) with SMTP id QAA25302 for ; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:28:36 +1000 Message-ID: <325991A6.565E@healey.com.au> Old-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 16:26:30 -0700 From: jorgen X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Horizon Technology -- GRAVITY BREAKTHROUGH X-URL: http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/gravity.htm Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------6AB4601644B3" X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------6AB4601644B3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit hi, re : http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/gravity.htm do you have any additiaonal information on expirements and results ? i have had a good look on net and found every where saying the same thing, but nothing new... thanks jorgen --------------6AB4601644B3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="gravity.htm" Horizon Technology -- GRAVITY BREAKTHROUGH



Date: 01 Sep 96 11:26:42 EDT
From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com>
Subject: Tampere 'antigravity'
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

BREAKTHROUGH AS SCIENTISTS BEAT GRAVITY.
by Robert Matthews and Ian Sample

SCIENTISTS in Finland are about to reveal details of the world's first anti-gravity device. Measuring about 12in across, the device is said to reduce significantly the weight of anything suspended over it.

The claim -- which has been rigorously examined by scientists, and is due to appear in a physics journal next month -- could spark a technological revolution. By combatting gravity, the most ubiquitous force in the universe, everything from transport to power generation could be transformed.

The Sunday Telegraph has learned that Nasa, the American space agency, is taking the claims seriously, and is funding research into how the anti-gravity effect could be turned into a means of flight.

The researchers at the Tampere University of Technology in Finland, who discovered the effect, say it could form the heart of a new power source, in which it is used to drive fluids past electricity-generating turbines.

Other uses seem limited only by the imagination: Lifts in buildings could be replaced by devices built into the ground. People wanting to go up would simply activate the anti-gravity device -- making themselves weightless -- and with a gentle push ascend to the floor they want.

Space-travel would bitcome routine, as all the expense and danger of rocket technology is geared towards combatting the Earth's gravitation pull. By using the devices to raise fluids against gravity, and then conventional gravity to pull them back to earth against electricity-generating turbines, the devices could also revolutionise power generation.

According to Dr Eugene Podkletnov, who led the research, the discovery was accidental. It emerged during routine work on so-called "superconductivity", the ability of some materials to lose their electrical resistance at very low temperatures. The team was carrying out tests on a rapidly spinning disc of superconducting ceramic suspended in the magnetic field of three electric coils, all enclosed in a low-temperature vessel called a cryostat.

"One of my friends came in and he was smoking his pipe," Dr Podkletnov said. "He put some smoke over the cryostat and we saw that the smoke was going to the ceiling all the time. It was amazing -- we couldn't explain it." Tests showed a small drop in the weight of objects placed over the device, as if it were shielding the object from the effects of gravity - an effect deemed impossible by most scientists. "We thought it might be a mistake," Dr Podkletnov said, "but we have taken every precaution." Yet the bizarre effects persisted. The team found that even the air pressure vertically above the device dropped slightly, with the effect detectable directly above the device on every floor of the laboratory. In recent years, many so-called "anti-gravity" devices have been put forward by both amateur and professional scientists, and all have been scorned by the establishment. What makes this latest claim different is that it has survived intense scrutiny by sceptical, independent experts, and has been accepted for publication by the Journal of Physics-D: Applied Physics, published by Britain's Institute of Physics.

Even so, most scientists will not feel comfortable with the idea of anti-gravity until other teams repeat the experiments. Some scientists suspect the anti-gravity effect is a long-sought side-effect of Einstein's general theory of relativity, by which spinning objects can distort gravity. Until now it was thought the effect would be far too small to measure in the laboratory. However, Dr Ning Li, a senior research scientist at the University of Alabama, said that the atoms inside superconductors may magnify the effect enormously. Her research is funded by Nasa's Marshall Space Flight centre at Huntsville, Alabama, and Whitt Brantley, the chief of Advanced Concepts Office there, said: "We're taking a look at it, because if we don't, we'll never know." The Finnish team is already expanding its programme, to see if it can amplify the anti-gravity effect. In its latest experiments, the team has measured a two per cent drop in the weight of objects suspended over the device -and double that if one device is suspended over another. If the team can increase the effect substantially, the commercial implications are enormous.

Another article, down the page there.

More info at the Journal of Ideas

ghawk@eskimo.com

--------------6AB4601644B3-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 00:28:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA04535; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:22:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610070722.AAA29337@iberia.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"aw4ji.0.n61.V_AMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1435 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:18 PM 10/6/96 -0800, you wrote: >What an exciting time to be alive! I have often thought I was born too >late, and occasionally too soon, but I thank God I'm living in this time. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > Good thought! I also believe life is a miracle of love and I try to treat each day and moment as such. Peace on Earth, Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 00:44:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA06597; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 00:36:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: 07 Oct 96 03:34:24 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Message-ID: <961007073424_100060.173_JHB37-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"G_Ch02.0._c1.HCBMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1436 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gary, >> WHERE THE HELL ARE THE INVESTORS!!?? << Having been on both sides of that fence I think I can offer some explanation of the apparent lack of enthusiasm from potential investors. Most people with real money are constantly inundated with requests for every kind of project - most of which are crazy. This is additional to the flow of straight begging requests. Those with really big $$$ have set up an office whose only duty is to deal with this flood of requests. Occasionally something catches their interest, often this has not a little to do with PR or the personal whim of the chief honcho, and they get the bucks. I have the feeling that its the old story - its not what you know but who you know that counts. Alternatively get a good PR spin-doctor to create an image attractive to potential givers so that the project might improve the image of the $$$ guy. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 02:09:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA16208; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 01:56:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 01:56:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: 07 Oct 96 04:55:12 EDT From: Nene Goose <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Message-ID: <961007085512_76216.2421_HHB42-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"muJpt.0.Az3.NNCMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1437 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace wrote: >>> "What an exciting time to be alive!" Yes it is. And I would sure love to see a real live Gizmo for once, instead of *just* intriguing stories on my computer screen or on the pages of Infinite Energy. I'm very interested in any details on the reasons why we might believe "this is the one". - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 04:23:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA03650; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 04:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 04:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 03:15:41 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"TxqTo1.0.tu.HKEMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1438 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Horace wrote: >I'm very interested in any details on the reasons why we might believe "this is >the one". > >- Rick Monteverde It is not any one thing. It is the continual outpouring of developments on almost a daily basis. In my case alone, I have been at it less than 2 years but now have a list of 34 projects/ideas to pursue or in progress - probably more than a lifetime's work. However, it appears most everything will be overrun, made moot, by developments. Things are starting to happen so fast it is becoming difficult to keep up with developments, and ICCF6 is only about to start! I hope the Galtek job or some equally fantastic opportunity in the energy field works out for Frank Z. There is nothing better than doing what you love for your work. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 07:11:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA08785; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 07 Oct 1996 07:04:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Job at Galtek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/07/96 07:04:22 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"CmO4.0.B92._uGMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1439 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/06/96 20:32 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Job at Galtek I would like to add a bit of "reality base" to the O/U motor claims. I think that it is hard to imagine pully energy out of the air...I have a gut reaction about it! HOWEVER, let us for the moment say that Miley's transformation results are real...THEN PERHAPS the "O/U" motors are working by causing nuclear transformations in their internals, and directly translating this into electrical power...That means that EVENTUALLY they will "run out", but what the heck....If I get one for $10,000 and it supplies 5KW continuous for 30 years, what do I care? - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 07:48:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA14421; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:34:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 07:34:02 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Job at Galtek In-Reply-To: <199610070533.WAA21643@iberia.it.earthlink.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-ZbxJ2.0.AX3.XJHMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1440 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 6 Oct 1996, Michael Randall wrote: > >Russ Chapman of Galtek Corp told me to send him a resume, he may have > >something for me. His neodynium magnet moter is now putting out more power > >than ever. It's operating at 6 to 1 C.O.P. and running itself. 2 KW of > >excess electrical energy are being produced. Russ has just obtained > >$10,000,000 to begin a marketing program which will start in 90 days. > > Great News! > When can I buy one? Any estimated price? Yeah! And who is "Galtek"? Altavista only shows a trademark for teflon labware under that name. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 08:42:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA28000; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:31:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:31:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Vortex-L Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:31:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KEvR93.0.Pr6.H9IMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1441 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- From: hheffner@anc.ak.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Date: Saturday, October 05, 1996 7:53AM At 5:24 PM 10/4/96, Larry Wharton wrote: > Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild >conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going >on in biological systems. [snip] >So then large >numbers, larger than expected from the differential settling effect, should >indicate good CF reactants. The result in no particular order (except for >some of the larger values first) is: > >Element Ratio (meteor/earth) >rhodium 21650 >ruthenium 11900 >iridium 1210000 >osmium 83700 >rhenium 2250 >platinum 20100 >palladium 7733 >silver 1.7 >gold 1654 >tungsten 8.2 >mercury 2.6 >cadmium .73 >molybdenum 5.9 >indium .285 >thallium .005 >lead 4.3 >niobium .015 >tantalum .043 >tin .94 >nickel 1025 >halfnium .045 >aluminum .122 >titanium .13 >cobalt 350 >iron 28 >bismuth 10.6 >antomony 2.2 >copper 8 >zinc 1.1 >vanadium .43 >chromium 36.5 >calcium .30 >zirconium .094 >uranium .006 > >The first seven elements on this list would be good candidates. A >noticeable standout is nickel with a relatively light weight and a ratio of >1025. Where did all the nickel go? [snip] >Lawrence E. Wharton Very interresting analysis in light of recent developments. Is there some significance to the fact the above table seems to be in 2 columns? I take it elements below 1 would be the presumed transmutation products. I see halfnium is there at .045, but one the most striking is uranuium at .006. What to make of elements missing from the above list entirely, like thorium? Does this imply they are 100 percent created from transmutation? The presence of uranium in this list seems to indicate transmutation involving the fusion of two or more heavies. Another hypothesis, not necessarily a complete alternative, is that elements in meteors, in their history as small unshielded rocks in space, were continually transmuted by bombardment with mostly H and He from the sun, but also heavies from the sun, electrons, xrays, and cosmic rays. This would have the effect of reversing the significance of the ratios above, at least to some extent. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 09:22:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA04983; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 08:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:00:05 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells- fwd Resent-Message-ID: <"lV9KJ1.0.hD1.IZIMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1442 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re John Kent's post, forwarded to Vortex-L by Michael Randall [snip] >> "The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of >>water is 65.3 Wh at 25 degrees C. When Hydrogen and oxygen are recombined >>into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more >>energy is released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to >>split water. The excess must be absorbed from the surrounding media in >>the form of heat during electrolysis". I think these two energy numbers are just the free energy and the enthalpy of the reaction, respectively. They are two different, but related, thermodynamic quantities. Do any chemists out there care to confirm? Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 09:34:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA07944; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:08:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:08:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:07:32 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Resent-Message-ID: <"bqr5a1.0.1y1.xhIMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1443 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Gary Hawkins wrote: >Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on >whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame >is applied to metal. > >The answer is yes (although small). > >Yesterday, we applied the flame to nickel, titanium, tungsten, >gold, and steel to obtain a few observations. > >The tube to the torch is clear plastic, so one lead from an >analog ammeter was attached to the torch itself (brass), >the other to the metal sample (the postive lead). > >During this, I forgot to touch the metal sample to the torch >without the flame involved, in case it is a simple result from >dissimilar metals. > >I would hope that the one who suggested this be tried post here >what reason he had for suspecting there would be current. > >The current was electrons to the torch through the gas, from the metal. The direction of current flow is consistent with electrons emitted thermionically by the hot metal sample. Thermoelectric potentials generated by the large temperature gradients are a classical phenomenon able to drive small currents in this situation. Flames usually contain a small fraction of ions that renders them modestly conducting. I suggest you do a control experiment using the flame from normally produced hydrogen and oxygen. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 09:53:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA11579; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:21:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:22:02 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"XceeX.0.nq2.YuIMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1444 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Re Jeff Fink's Correa PAGD experiment: >... I must make time to do this wok in the morning when I can think >instead of in a semi-comatose state at night. It would also be much safer. Yes, your experiment could be lethal. At a minimum, use ground sticks religiously. First discharge all capacitors with a ground stick that has a hefty (physically large) resistor (say between 10 and 100 Ohm) in series; the resistor limits the discharge current, avoiding big sparks, bangs, and damage to equipment. Go through this proceedure at least twice, because discharging one capacitor in a circuit containing multiple capacitors can transfer some charge to the other capacitors. Finally, discharge all capacitors using a ground stick with no resistor--just a hefty wire to ground. When you are sure that all capacitors are discharged, short their terminals, or ground all terminals. (Remember that capacitors can recover charge slowly even after being discharged--a dielectric hysteresis effect). Also be sure to short your power supply terminals. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 10:35:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA20163; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 09:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:53:41 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-2g8S.0.vw4.ZNJMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1445 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank! This sounds too good to be true - but I hope it IS! Please keep us informed on your progress ---- GO FOR IT! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 11:35:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06583; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 10:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 10:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:01:16 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VEmu1.0.mc1.gIKMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1446 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Michael J. Schaffer > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report > Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 1:07 PM > > Gary Hawkins wrote: > > >Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on > >whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame > >is applied to metal. > > > >The answer is yes (although small). > I suggest you do a control experiment using the flame from normally > produced hydrogen and oxygen. > > Michael J. Schaffer Good idea Michael! How about a control experiment using a plumber's propane torch? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 12:02:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA20719; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 11:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 11:48:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Job at Galtek To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:47:35 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Horace Heffner" at Oct 7, 96 03:15:41 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wdVU22.0.f35.m1LMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1448 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Horace wrote: > >the reasons why we might believe "this is the one". > >- Rick Monteverde > > It is not any one thing. It is the continual outpouring of developments on > almost a daily basis. You've obviously never been to a liar's club. :-) When talk is cheap, one can expect a good deal of inflation. And remember, the most successful con men succeed because some people really want to believe. To protect your wallet, a little skepticism is a healthy thing. Which reminds me, I'm thinking of turning the Brooklyn Bridge into a toll bridge and making a financial killing. Here's your chance to buy shares early and get in on the ground floor. It's a sure thing. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 12:22:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA19014; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 11:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 11:42:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961007184923.006fdb8c@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 11:49:23 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Tesla Coil glow Resent-Message-ID: <"uwHRJ1.0._e4.yxKMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1447 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > The direction of current flow is consistent with electrons emitted >thermionically by the hot metal sample. Thermoelectric potentials >generated by the large temperature gradients are a classical phenomenon >able to drive small currents in this situation. Flames usually contain a >small fraction of ions that renders them modestly conducting. This reminds me of something. Placing a candle on top of a relatively small Tesla Coil, with a wire set to direct the arc into the candle flame, there was a bluish glow above the flame. Have to shield the light of the candle and arc to be able to see it. Similar to the red glow seen on photograph above a different 10 foot Tesla Coil run normally with shutter open for quite awhile. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 12:39:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA26079; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:11:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:07:17 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Resent-Message-ID: <"Bsnf_2.0.GN6.rNLMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1449 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Gary Hawkins wrote: >> >> >Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on >> >whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame >> >is applied to metal. >> > >> >The answer is yes (although small). >> I suggest you do a control experiment using the flame from normally >> produced hydrogen and oxygen. >> >> Michael J. Schaffer > >Good idea Michael! How about a control experiment using a plumber's >propane >torch? > >Frank Stenger Propane introduces at least three new variables: (1) chemistry other than H2 + O2, (2) different temperature, (3) different flame resistivity. Therefore, it's not a good control. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 12:46:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA27868; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 12:18:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: "Vortex-l" Subject: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:18:16 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"FPfpH3.0.Lp6.SULMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1450 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In the spirit of the water-filled "clink tube", I offer another demo-type project for science groups. With modern semiconductor technology, high voltage thermoelectric junctions are in wide use. However, I offer a low-tech way to demonstrate thermoelectric effects that has high visual impact using the following equipment: 1. A few 1-ft lengths of solid copper wire, say 14 gage and 22 gage. 2. A common propane torch (A pencil-flame type is best.) 3. A high-impedence multi-meter (A digital one is great!) 4. A cutter for small wire and a small vice or locking pliers to clamp the wires. Clean up the ends of the 14 gage wire and clamp it near one end so that the rest sticks out over the edge of your work surface in a roughly horizontal position. Connect one multimeter lead to the "cool" end of the wire past the heat-sink effect of its clamp. Clean the ends of the 22 gage wire, connect the second multimeter lead to one end, and weight or clamp the wire to the work surface edge near the 22 gage wire. The idea here is to lay the clean 22 gage wire end ACROSS the top of the 14 gage wire so they make about a 90 degree angle with each other. This forms a very small contact junction where the cylindrical wires touch. Bend and form the small wire so its contact with the large wire is firm and positive. Set the meter for DC volts at range to show 1 volt well. Crank up the torch and heat the crossing wires to bright red - but try not to melt. During the 5 or 10 second heating, separate the wires a bit so they will oxidize over their contact point. I assume we are thus forming a COPPER-COPPER OXIDE- COPPER thermoelectric junction when we let the wires contact again. Now, with the oxidized wires again in contact, try to play the flame on the 22 gage wire so it alone gets red AS NEAR TO THE CONTACT JUNCTION AS YOU CAN. The idea here is to get one wire red hot where it touches the other, relatively cool wire. You can also separate the wires and heat the large wire red hot - then let the thin wire contact it again. The output voltage will take several seconds to decay to zero as a very visual display of the temperature-difference parameter. This junction is very transient and goes through rapid "quality" changes, so a lot of tinkering is called for. I tried this junction just a while ago and saw a maximum voltage of about 0.41 volts. If you have a couple of groups working on this, they can connect the junctions to strip-chart recorders and have contests to see who can get the highest voltage from their junction. Again, much fun and learning can go on! Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 13:25:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA09658; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:01:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:01:04 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"eak0P.0.mM2.d6MMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1451 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Michael J. Schaffer wrote: > Gary Hawkins wrote: > > >Some time ago, someone asked an experiment to be done, on > >whether electrical flow is generated when a Brown's Gas flame > >is applied to metal. > > The direction of current flow is consistent with electrons emitted > thermionically by the hot metal sample. Thermoelectric potentials > generated by the large temperature gradients are a classical phenomenon > able to drive small currents in this situation. Flames usually contain a > small fraction of ions that renders them modestly conducting. Ionized, yes, so the flame may also be serving as an electrolyte, and the contact potentials with the two typse of metal (steel plate and brass welder nozzle) might be forming an electrochemical cell. If the metals were reversed (steel nozzle, brass plate) would the direction of current be reversed? Or, if both thermionic potentials and half-cell potentials are important, does reversing the metals change (but not reverse) the measured current? My idea might not apply if the flame front does not make contact with the brass nozzle. Yet it must, or there would be no current path for ANY effect, electrochemical OR thermionic. Regardless of the source, the current should increase considerably if the nozzle had some sort of conductive extension which reaches out to make better contact with the flame. Another experiment: if a microamp is generated, that should be enough to drive a voltmeter, and so it would be interesting to connect a voltmeter between the nozzle and the plate. What voltage would be expected? About 2v to 3v max for electrochemical reactions? If the output was over 10v, that would be very interesting. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 13:35:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA12185; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:12:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:12:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:09:13 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: Vortex-l Subject: Re: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"AL7-G2.0.F-2.UGMMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1452 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From an OLD Pop' 'Tronics. take aluminum building wire, and iron baling wire. make 22 series junctions .... heat hot ends w/propane torch, cold ends in air ... make wire pairs at least 12 to 14 inches long ..... this will usually run small [older] five transistor 9 volt AM radio. We used to use # 14 wire. This was a standard Boy Scout ....radio project This is fun. J On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > In the spirit of the water-filled "clink tube", I offer another demo-type > project for > science groups. > > With modern semiconductor technology, high voltage thermoelectric junctions > are > in wide use. However, I offer a low-tech way to demonstrate thermoelectric > effects > that has high visual impact using the following equipment: > > 1. A few 1-ft lengths of solid copper wire, say 14 gage and 22 gage. > > 2. A common propane torch (A pencil-flame type is best.) > > 3. A high-impedence multi-meter (A digital one is great!) > > 4. A cutter for small wire and a small vice or locking pliers to clamp the > wires. > > Clean up the ends of the 14 gage wire and clamp it near one end so that the > rest > sticks out over the edge of your work surface in a roughly horizontal > position. > > Connect one multimeter lead to the "cool" end of the wire past the > heat-sink effect > of its clamp. Clean the ends of the 22 gage wire, connect the second > multimeter > lead to one end, and weight or clamp the wire to the work surface edge near > the > 22 gage wire. The idea here is to lay the clean 22 gage wire end ACROSS > the > top of the 14 gage wire so they make about a 90 degree angle with each > other. > This forms a very small contact junction where the cylindrical wires touch. > Bend and form the small wire so its contact with the large wire is firm and > positive. > > Set the meter for DC volts at range to show 1 volt well. > > Crank up the torch and heat the crossing wires to bright red - but try not > to melt. > During the 5 or 10 second heating, separate the wires a bit so they will > oxidize > over their contact point. I assume we are thus forming a COPPER-COPPER > OXIDE- > COPPER thermoelectric junction when we let the wires contact again. > > Now, with the oxidized wires again in contact, try to play the flame on the > 22 gage > wire so it alone gets red AS NEAR TO THE CONTACT JUNCTION AS YOU CAN. > The idea here is to get one wire red hot where it touches the other, > relatively cool > wire. You can also separate the wires and heat the large wire red hot - > then let > the thin wire contact it again. The output voltage will take several > seconds to decay > to zero as a very visual display of the temperature-difference parameter. > > This junction is very transient and goes through rapid "quality" changes, > so a lot of > tinkering is called for. I tried this junction just a while ago and saw a > maximum voltage of about 0.41 volts. If you have a couple of groups > working on > this, they can connect the junctions to strip-chart recorders and have > contests to > see who can get the highest voltage from their junction. Again, much fun > and > learning can go on! > > Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 14:04:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA18772; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 13:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Brown's Gas, electrical flow report Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:38:43 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"zcVtN.0.Cb4.bfMMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1453 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Michael J. Schaffer > >Good idea Michael! How about a control experiment using a plumber's > >propane > >torch? > > > >Frank Stenger > > Propane introduces at least three new variables: (1) chemistry other > than H2 + O2, (2) different temperature, (3) different flame resistivity. > Therefore, it's not a good control. > > Michael J. Schaffer Of course, you're right, Michael. It's just that I tried this using a propane torch and a heated nickel strip, and it looked like I was getting just under 1 microamp from this rather arbitrary combination. If my rough test is valid ( it was very crude!), it just seems a bit ho-hum that other flames do the same thing. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 16:00:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA07441; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:01:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "MHUGO@EPRI" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 14:58:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AT2KV.0.7q1.KsNMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1454 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Mark, Vortexans What about the possibility that the energy is coming from the reduction of the stored permanent magnetic energy. in the pole pieces and armature? Has anyone run the numbers? I suspect that there is not anywhere enough energy in the permanant magnet to show o/u for any length of time, but I don't have access to the data here at work? Hank Scudder ---------- From: MHUGO@EPRI To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 7:04AM *** Reply to note of 10/06/96 20:32 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Job at Galtek I would like to add a bit of "reality base" to the O/U motor claims. I think that it is hard to imagine pully energy out of the air...I have a gut reaction about it! HOWEVER, let us for the moment say that Miley's transformation results are real...THEN PERHAPS the "O/U" motors are working by causing nuclear transformations in their internals, and directly translating this into electrical power...That means that EVENTUALLY they will "run out", but what the heck....If I get one for $10,000 and it supplies 5KW continuous for 30 years, what do I care? - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 17:03:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA19770; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 15:58:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 07 Oct 1996 13:00:13 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/07/96 13:00:26 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"n6KP42.0.pq4.BiOMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1455 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? - Well I got it! A copy of the Miley paper. I'm really not anxious to A. Send out copies, or B. Even give precise details of Miley's address, etc. until Thursday/Friday of this week. Then George Miley will have presented his paper at both the Bockris conf. and ICCF6, and I will consider it "public domain". Let's just say the level of the work is stunning. I'm sure some people will want to go over it with a "fine tooth comb", but it looks like most of the basis are covered. I think one of the more stunning pieces of data are the two figures 3a Before and 3a After...SIMS scans of the microspheres. There are 19 isotope peaks in the "before" scan. There are 86 isotope peaks in the "after" SIMS. Now I know the "whine" is that the SIMS is not distinguishing "hydrides". Frankly, I think that is nonsense. But I leave it up to others to heuristically look at the result and figure out why...! (A subtle challange there.) - Speaking of subtle challenges, as Chris from England notes, Miley essentially throws out the gauntlet and says, "HEY, this is simple stuff to duplicate! If you don't believe it, do it yourself..." (A little paraphrase there.) - I might add that the "experiment" is simple enough. However, not everyone can get EDAX, SIMS, Neutron Activation Analysis and other analysis techiques done on these experiments as readily as a person in George's position. - We'll see what happens when Oriani comes back from Japan. I do believe we've got similar facilities at the U. of MN, and we might be able to get a confirmation from Dr. Richard Oriani... - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 17:16:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA26220; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:28:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:28:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:26:47 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610072326.TAA26122@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: Re: PAGD Resent-Message-ID: <"xXVuR2.0.ZP6.q8PMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1456 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks for the warning. I do have permanent grounding resistors on both of my 5600mf power supply capacitors wired through a normally closed relay. When the power is shut off the relay puts a 5 watt 5k resistor across each capacitor. It takes nearly a minute to drop the voltage below 100v and the resistors get very warm. I keep a volt meter across these caps permanently and I don't touch anything until it gets down to 50v. I have been cultivating the habit of working one handed. Yes, your experiment could be lethal. > > At a minimum, use ground sticks religiously. First discharge all >capacitors with a ground stick that has a hefty (physically large) resistor >(say between 10 and 100 Ohm) in series; the resistor limits the discharge >current, avoiding big sparks, bangs, and damage to equipment. Go through >this proceedure at least twice, because discharging one capacitor in a >circuit containing multiple capacitors can transfer some charge to the >other capacitors. Finally, discharge all capacitors using a ground stick >with no resistor--just a hefty wire to ground. When you are sure that all >capacitors are discharged, short their terminals, or ground all terminals. >(Remember that capacitors can recover charge slowly even after being >discharged--a dielectric hysteresis effect). Also be sure to short your >power supply terminals. > >Michael J. Schaffer >General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA >Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 17:25:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA26975; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 16:32:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:29:36 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2RlV12.0.Mb6.8CPMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1457 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: John Schnurer > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Cc: Vortex-l > Subject: Re: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG > Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 4:09 PM > > > > From an OLD Pop' 'Tronics. > > take aluminum building wire, and iron baling wire. make 22 > series junctions .... heat hot ends w/propane torch, cold ends in air ... > make wire pairs at least 12 to 14 inches long ..... this will usually run > small [older] five transistor 9 volt AM radio. We used to use # 14 wire. > This was a standard Boy Scout ....radio project > > This is fun. OK, John. I just made an Al-mild steel (welding rod) thermo-junction and fired it up with a propane torch. The voltage maxed out at a bit over 0.004 volt. Does this look right? Estimate delta-T at about 600 deg F. Just used a twisted + hammered junction. Twenty-two of these in series would do only about 0.09 volts. The single copper-copper oxide junction will do at least 0.400 volts -- about 100 times more! With 22 Cu-CuO junctions in series we could get 8.8 volts. Maybe Bill B. is right -- maybe the Cu-CuO junction is acting like an electrochemical cell with CuO acting as a solid electrolyte? Anyone have input? Solid-state once - now a body of jelly, Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 17:46:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA04299; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:08:08 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 20:04:07 -0400 Message-ID: <961007200406_1345854857@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil Subject: magnets/plasmas/evanscence/fermi Resent-Message-ID: <"RaEJS3.0.j21.xiPMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1458 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I believe the the "new fusion" zero point interactions are a result of the breaking of symmetry at energy levels below the Fermi level. .............................................................................. ...................................... COLD FUSION In cold fusion, a dense plasma formed by a sea of disolved hydrogen atoms causes sub-Fermi energy levels to evanscence. The effect is the same one that absorbes the radio waves transmitted by space capsules during reentry. The "electrode effect" differs from the "reentry blackout" in that that the "cold fusion effect" occurs at much shorter wavelengths. The short wavelength is a result of the very high density of the plasma within cold fusion electrodes. The only way to reach this level of plasma density is to force hydrogen into a metal. (>10 x 27 -e/mm) .............................................................................. .................................. MAGNETIC MOTORS A magnetic shock wave interupts the sub-Fermi energy levels in magnetic overunity motors. The effect is similar to the breaking of the superconductive state at high flux densities. The Fermi level can no longer exclude flux lines once a certain magnetic density is reached. The only way to reach this high level of flux density on an atomic level is with a magnetic shock wave. .............................................................................. ................................... Both of these effects allow non-paired electrons to drop to sub-Fermi energy levels. At this lowered energy state modified electron capture reactions take place. .............................................................................. ..................... Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 18:17:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA15096; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 17:53:21 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: Vortex-L cc: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Job at Galtek In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"jIeyO2.0.mh3._QQMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1459 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: > Mark, Vortexans > What about the possibility that the energy is coming > from the reduction of the stored permanent magnetic energy. > in the pole pieces and armature? Has anyone run the numbers? Here's a though-experiment for getting an intuitive feel for the amount of energy involved: imagine slicing one of the magnets through the pole. This converts it into two adjacent magnets with like poles repelling. As a result, one or both of the magnets will rorate until unlike poles are adjacent. This vastly reduces the net field outside the magnets, and if the magnets were attached to pulleys and belts, the momentary rotation could be used breifly as a power source. With a strong NIB magnet, maybe you could flash a flashlight bulb for a few seconds. It is possible to cut the half-magnets in half again and again, but the work extracted by the rotation is far less than that first big rotation. This suggests that a small magnet, even if extremely strong, is a flea-power energy storage device. A tiny battery trounces it. .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 19:15:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA29820; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 18:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 18:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:54:22 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"3Ezsn.0.qH7.xIRMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1460 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I will go dig out the old mag .... or go to library and do so.... might have been copper and iron .... but I though it was aluminum and iron. If I made you hammer a bunch of stuff, my bad. I do, however, clearly remember the photo with the article showing the propane torch and radio. FJS 'fallible John Schnurer On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > > > ---------- > > From: John Schnurer > > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Cc: Vortex-l > > Subject: Re: Stenger's low-tech , high voltage, TEG > > Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 4:09 PM > > > > > > > > From an OLD Pop' 'Tronics. > > > > take aluminum building wire, and iron baling wire. make 22 > > series junctions .... heat hot ends w/propane torch, cold ends in air ... > > > make wire pairs at least 12 to 14 inches long ..... this will usually run > > > small [older] five transistor 9 volt AM radio. We used to use # 14 > wire. > > This was a standard Boy Scout ....radio project > > > > This is fun. > > OK, John. I just made an Al-mild steel (welding rod) thermo-junction and > fired it up > with a propane torch. The voltage maxed out at a bit over 0.004 volt. > Does this > look right? Estimate delta-T at about 600 deg F. Just used a twisted + > hammered > junction. Twenty-two of these in series would do only about 0.09 volts. > The > single copper-copper oxide junction will do at least 0.400 volts -- about > 100 times > more! With 22 Cu-CuO junctions in series we could get 8.8 volts. > > Maybe Bill B. is right -- maybe the Cu-CuO junction is acting like an > electrochemical > cell with CuO acting as a solid electrolyte? Anyone have input? > > Solid-state once - now a body of jelly, Frank Stenger > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 19:20:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA03661; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:11:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: 07 Oct 96 22:06:35 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: E. Kennel's ICCF6 preview Message-ID: <961008020635_72240.1256_EHB267-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"9MJ7P3.0.yu.QXRMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1462 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Elliot Kennel (kennel@nhelab.iae.or.jp) sent me this "early read on ICCF6." I don't suppose he would mind my sharing it with the readers of this forum. I did not get a copy of the abstracts. I could have used them, it would be good to get a headstart writing up the conference. Kennel did not mention two things that I am looking forward to: McKubre's report on his CETI cell, and the Tom Passell's report on E-Quest. - Jed ----------------------------- FWIW, based on the abstracts for ICCF-6, I've made notes on some papers that appear especially interesting: a. Lonchampt et al. The French Atomic Energy Commission has a program to duplicate P&F, and claim up to 150% excess heat. This is important mainly due to the comparatively high degree of respectability of the French Atomic Energy Commission, as the results themselves are not new. b. Dufour et al. report the ability to measure excess energy per atom of hydrogen and deuterium. They report 8 keV per hydrogen, 16 keV per deuterium. This is from the Laboratoire des Science Nucleaires Conservatoire National des Arts et Metier, France, another well-respected institution. c. Zhang Qingfu et al. (Institute of Atomic and Molecular Science, Chengdu) report on x-ray diffraction analysis indicating that the crystal structure of the Ti-D system changes from hexagonal to face-centered cubic TiD2 when excess heat is observed. d. Oyama et al (Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology) report that sulfur additives result in prolonged heat after death. e. Hagans et al (NRL) report impurity studies using SPS, GDMS and ICP, correlating impurities and composition. NRL being one of the most prestigious research institutes in the world, their findings may be important. f. Ochiai et al (Osaka U) observed anomalous high energy protons, similar to Kasagi's results. g. Wang et al (Institute of Modern Physics, Lanzhou China) used 1-18 keV hydrogen bombardment on Pd and Ti, finding anomalous x-rays, and neutrons of 8 x 10^4 n/sec; and also observed high energy protons. Thus there are three groups claiming high energy protons. h. Itoh et al (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries) report having done experiments with excellent nuclear detection capability. I have clashed with this group previously on the validity of their results, so it will be interesting to see what they present (the abstract alludes to new data but does not specify what it is). i. Chen et al (Institute of Nuclear Physics, Beijing) report x-ray emission during gas discharge loading; at about 26 keV. j. Savvatimova et al. (Luch) report transmutation and radioactive isotope generation in Pd cathodes using glow discharge loading. Pd-109 and 107 are claimed. Since these isotopes persist and allow half-lives to be measured, this may be significant. k. Zhang et al. (Institute of Applied Physics, Beijing) report x-ray generation; however, the steps they may have taken to guard against electromagnetic noise are not clear. l. Yamada et al (Iwate University) report occasional large neutron bursts of up to 2700 counts in 5 seconds in a gas loaded discharge system. m. Miley et al. (U of Illinois) reports substantial transmutations from thin film deuterium and hydrogen systems, in broad agreement with observations of Mizuno et al., and Savvatimova et al and others.20 n. Claytor et al. (Los Alamos) also have performed the Miley experiment and suggest that they have positive results, but these are not specified in the abstract. o. Kozima et al (Shizuoka University) also report transmutation results similar to Miley. p. Mizuno et al. report very strong evidence of transmutation and anomalous isotope production. q. Ohmori et al. report similar results in other electrode systems, expanding the Mizuno effect (note: because there are about ten groups world wide now claiming to produce transmutations via electrolysis, I think that this should be taken seriously). r. Notoya et al (Hokkaido University) report other isotope transmutations. However, in the past, Notoya has not been very communicative on how she obtains her results.20 s. Vysotskii et al. report on controlling the nuclear decay constants of different radionuclides by restricting the modes of Mossbauer nuclei. A very interesting paper. t. A second paper by Vysotskii et al. claims the production of isotopically pure Fe-57, which does not exist in nature. u. Bertalot et al (EURATOM-ENEA) summarizes their activities. They continue to report positive results on excess heat and helium. v. Claytor et al. (Los Alamos), report excess tritium results from glow discharge experiments. w. Yuki et al. (Tohoku University) report enhanced reaction rates from low energy deuteron bombardment of metals. [End of File] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 19:21:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01536; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:02:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 19:02:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:59:42 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: PAGD In-Reply-To: <199610072326.TAA26122@ns1.ptd.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rYaaM.0.wN.vORMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1461 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vo. Good warning. I have two permanent 'blots', the distance EXACTLY the spacing of the terminals on a 10 uF 600 VAC motor start cap ..... had about 20 in parallel. On my left hand. Hurt some. I was lucky. Don't let it happen to you! On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Jeff Fink wrote: > Thanks for the warning. I do have permanent grounding resistors on both of > my 5600mf power supply capacitors wired through a normally closed relay. > When the power is shut off the relay puts a 5 watt 5k resistor across each > capacitor. It takes nearly a minute to drop the voltage below 100v and the > resistors get very warm. I keep a volt meter across these caps permanently > and I don't touch anything until it gets down to 50v. I have been > cultivating the habit of working one handed. > > > > Yes, your experiment could be lethal. > > > > At a minimum, use ground sticks religiously. First discharge all > >capacitors with a ground stick that has a hefty (physically large) resistor > >(say between 10 and 100 Ohm) in series; the resistor limits the discharge > >current, avoiding big sparks, bangs, and damage to equipment. Go through > >this proceedure at least twice, because discharging one capacitor in a > >circuit containing multiple capacitors can transfer some charge to the > >other capacitors. Finally, discharge all capacitors using a ground stick > >with no resistor--just a hefty wire to ground. When you are sure that all > >capacitors are discharged, short their terminals, or ground all terminals. > >(Remember that capacitors can recover charge slowly even after being > >discharged--a dielectric hysteresis effect). Also be sure to short your > >power supply terminals. > > > >Michael J. Schaffer > >General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA > >Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > > > >i > > > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 20:27:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA21359; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 20:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 20:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961008112106.24c7f43a@po.pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8@po.pacific.net.sg X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mpower Subject: Re: PAGD Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:18:52 +0800 Resent-Message-ID: <"B1_i1.0.eD5.8XSMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1463 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 21:59 1996.10.07 -0400, John Schnurer wrote: > > > Vo. > > Good warning. I have two permanent 'blots', the distance EXACTLY >the spacing of the terminals on a 10 uF 600 VAC motor start cap ..... had >about 20 in parallel. On my left hand. Hurt some. I was lucky. > > Don't let it happen to you! > Curious: Was it a recent event ? If so: 1) did you check for locally transmuted elements/isotopes ? (metal may have been electro-deposited subcutaneously) 2) if wearing any metal (jewelry/watches, etc), were there any electrolytic metal deposits at these locations ? 2) any anamolous tissue growth ? 3) were there any metabolism side-effects (hand/arm/mental changes) ? What kind of monetary incentive could persuade you to re-enact this for the further benefit of medical science ? thanx pa From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 21:34:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA04665; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:17:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:17:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610080413.VAA19844@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 21:16:51 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"oWFy82.0.c81.bNTMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1464 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:58 PM 10/7/96 -0700, you wrote: >Mark, Vortexans > What about the possibility that the energy is coming >from the reduction of the stored permanent magnetic energy. >in the pole pieces and armature? Has anyone run the numbers? > I suspect that there is not anywhere enough energy in the > permanant magnet to show o/u for any length of time, but I don't have > access to the data here at work? >Hank Scudder > ---------- HANK: Inevitably there will be some entropy in the magnets. Muller estimates about 5% per year. I don't know how good his numbers are on this score. >From: MHUGO@EPRI >To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >Subject: Re: Job at Galtek >Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 7:04AM > >*** Reply to note of 10/06/96 20:32 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: Job at Galtek >I would like to add a bit of "reality base" to the O/U motor claims. I >think >that it is hard to imagine pully energy out of the air...I have a gut >reaction about it! HOWEVER, let us for the moment say that Miley's >transformation results are real...THEN PERHAPS the "O/U" motors are >working by causing nuclear transformations in their internals, and >directly translating this into electrical power...That means that >EVENTUALLY they will "run out", but what the heck....If I get one for >$10,000 and it supplies 5KW continuous for 30 years, what do I care? > - >MDH > > No transmutations in the material. Takes more than magnetic flux. Requires some electrochemical transport as well. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 21:47:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA07687; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 21:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3259D98F.3ADE@pacbell.net> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 1996 21:33:19 -0700 From: Hank Scudder Reply-To: hjscudde@pacbell.net Organization: Rocketdyne X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Job at Galtek References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"p_Oh13.0.0u1.wZTMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1465 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: William Beaty wrote: > > On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: > > > Mark, Vortexans > > What about the possibility that the energy is coming > > from the reduction of the stored permanent magnetic energy. > > in the pole pieces and armature? Has anyone run the numbers? > > This suggests that a small magnet, even if extremely strong, is a > flea-power energy storage device. A tiny battery trounces it. > > .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. > William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 > EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ > Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page Bill One of the methods which has been used to mechanically actuate low cost artillery shells has been the impact destruction of a ceramic magnet wrapped by a large number of turns of thin wire, which generates a high enough voltage to detonate the explosive in the shell. Very reliable, simple, cheap. Hank Scudder -- 1¾ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 7 22:31:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA16343; Mon, 7 Oct 1996 22:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 7 Oct 1996 22:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells- fwd To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 00:01:42 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Michael J. Schaffer" at Oct 7, 96 09:00:05 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1SzWX2.0.H_3.X3UMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1466 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >> "The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of > >>water is 65.3 Wh at 25 degrees C. When Hydrogen and oxygen are recombined > >>into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more > >>energy is released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to > >>split water. My charts say 79.3 Wh both ways. But in reality, nobody splits a mole of H2O with electrolysis with just 79.3 Wh, because the process is so darn inefficient -- 25-50% at best. Most of the power is wasted heating up the electrolyte due to resistive losses. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 00:22:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA17427; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 00:19:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 00:19:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 02:18:48 -0500 Message-Id: <9610080718.AA16224@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? Resent-Message-ID: <"hWUCK1.0.DG4._1WMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1467 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Mark, At 01:00 PM 10/7/96 PDT, you wrote: >I do believe >we've got similar facilities at the U. of MN, and we might be able to >get a confirmation from Dr. Richard Oriani... The labs at 3M in St. Paul have all the test equipment needed (several of each, when I was there). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 07:53:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA16457; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 07:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 07:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 08 Oct 1996 07:38:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/08/96 07:38:28 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"Byufd2.0.-04.MVcMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1468 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/08/96 00:20 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? The 3M labs MIGHT well have the equipment. But will they have the will or desire to use them for this purpose...Unless you have a very dynamic thinker working there, who has the political power and position, I can assure you--- nothing will be done. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 09:41:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA13967; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:29:43 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"JTXbh3.0.9Q3.t4eMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1469 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A >On Mon, 7 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: >> What about the possibility that the energy is coming >> from the reduction of the stored permanent magnetic energy. >> in the pole pieces and armature? Has anyone run the numbers? > Beaty replied... >Here's a though-experiment for getting an intuitive feel for the amount of >energy involved: imagine slicing one of the magnets through the pole. >This converts it into two adjacent magnets with like poles repelling.... No, the adjacent poles are opposite and attracting. Answer to Scudder's question about energy ion a permanent magnet is---no more than about 100 kjoule/m^3, or 0.1 j/cm^3. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 10:06:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA17270; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:41:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 09:41:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:41:05 -0400 Message-ID: <961008124102_205080696@emout05.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Resent-Message-ID: <"hgK163.0.mD4.IHeMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1470 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank says: " His neodynium magnet moter is now putting out more power than ever. It's operating at 6 to 1 C.O.P. and running itself. 2 KW of excess electrical energy are being produced." How solid is this claim? Are data sheets available? Will he permit independent testing, like at the EarthTech calorimeter lab? If true, a breakthru of cosmic proportions. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 10:54:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA00344; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 10:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325A71C3.703@spots.ab.ca> Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 08:22:43 -0700 From: Robert Polley Reply-To: rpolley@spots.ab.ca X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: It's been fun........ References: <961005011246_118932786@emout11.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xitJo2.0.H5.q3fMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1471 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Would anyone who has the URL to the Web site referred to below please post it or send it to me personally. Thanks, Rob JEChampion@aol.com wrote: > > Due to time requirements within my new life, I must respectfully resign from > the Vortex-l group. > > Some people are interested in new science, while others attemt to prove that > new science doesn't exist. I fought in one of these wars, but my family now > prevails on my physical abilities. > > You see, they want 120 acres of prime mountain real estate near Phoenix. To > accomplish such requires the production of ~180kg of Au. (we are talking > about a serious mountain) > > So with respect to all, I no longer fight in the war between who's right and > who's wrong. I just retired to the fact if you want Au you either have to > buy it, mine it, or make it......... > > I took the path of least resistance......... > > I shall return > > Joe Champion > > discpub@netzone.com > > BTW -- all information regarding transmutation on my WEB site will be history > on the nineth of this month. So if you want anything now is the time! From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 11:34:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA09241; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:09:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:09:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 08 Oct 1996 11:06:11 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/08/96 11:06:05 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"3V8kk2.0.FG2.gZfMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1472 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/08/96 09:04 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? I've run this by one of my company's chemists. Although he sees some interest, he immediately complained about "near detection limit" numbers, and shifting effects from the inside of the polystyrene beads to the outside. I guess I'd like to see a clear cut analysis of the source beads for trace elements before use...and I have to study the absolute numbers to see how significant they are. - Mind you, I think there is something here. I'm concerned about making the case air tight. Another thought is: LARGER SAMPLE SIZES...! Like running a large "pancake" cell as someone suggested (thinking the electrolysis is only going on in a couple layers of beads.) - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 11:36:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA09317; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:10:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 11:10:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610081806.LAA08960@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 11:06:36 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells- fwd Resent-Message-ID: <"osR0G.0.SH2.vZfMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1473 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:01 AM 10/8/96 -0500, you wrote: >> >> "The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of >> >>water is 65.3 Wh at 25 degrees C. When Hydrogen and oxygen are recombined >> >>into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more >> >>energy is released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to >> >>split water. > >My charts say 79.3 Wh both ways. But in reality, nobody splits a mole >of H2O with electrolysis with just 79.3 Wh, because the process is so >darn inefficient -- 25-50% at best. Most of the power is wasted heating >up the electrolyte due to resistive losses. > > sure nuf is very true - much wasted in heat, getting rid of same prevents using cheap plastics for the process. the idea of much more efficient electrolysis is what attracted me to Myer for a brief moment - and anybody who can create a "cool" electrolysis process is eventually going to make a little money with it. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 12:37:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA22651; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:09:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: 08 Oct 96 15:06:53 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Job at Galtek Message-ID: <961008190653_100433.1541_BHG144-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"0XCHU.0.hX5.3SgMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1474 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Here's a though-experiment for getting an intuitive feel for the > amount of >energy involved: imagine slicing one of the magnets > through the pole. >This converts it into two adjacent magnets with > like poles repelling.... > No, the adjacent poles are opposite and attracting. But he said "through the pole", implying that the cutting was along the magnetic axis. Yes, the energy in any permanent magnet is tiny. Actually, I have this idea that it is negative - doesn't a magnet emit heat as it cools through its Curie point? Can't remember. Isn't senility awful? Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 12:45:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA26243; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:23:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Slicing magnets? Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 15:22:55 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"YwN8Z.0.zP6.SegMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1475 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: Michael J. Schaffer > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Job at Galtek > Date: Tuesday, October 08, 1996 1:29 PM > : imagine slicing one of the magnets through the pole. > >This converts it into two adjacent magnets with like poles repelling.... > > No, the adjacent poles are opposite and attracting. > > Answer to Scudder's question about energy ion a permanent magnet is---no > more than about 100 kjoule/m^3, or 0.1 j/cm^3. > > Michael J. Schaffer > Michael, I think Bill B. meant to slice the magnet LENGTHWISE - along (not across) the N-S axis. Would you not then wind up with two adjacent bar magnets with like poles adjacent? Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 13:00:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA03015; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:50:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 12:50:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 15:49:44 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Joe Champion www page Resent-Message-ID: <"p87yk2.0.-k.l1hMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1476 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The last chance to view Joe Champion's home page is approching. It is at: http://www.netzone.com/~discpub It has some new information posted within the last few months. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 17:42:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA01453; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:09:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:09:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610090001.RAA12292@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 17:03:57 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"SvmyQ1.0.aM.MqkMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1477 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:17 AM 10/5/96 EDT, you wrote: >Larry, > > > Where did all the nickel go? It seems too light to have all but > > one part in 1000 gone to the center of the earth. Maybe something > > ate it or maybe it was transmuted through geological CF. And that > > iridium ratio, 1.2 million, is an amazing number. I would believe > > that number if there only was molecular diffusion in the Earth's > > core but the eddy diffusion would totally overwhelm the molecular > > diffusion. The number should be closer to 10 than a million. I > > think that somehow the vast majority of the Earth's iridium was > > transmuted. Iridium is likely the most reactive CF element, but > > of course it is very expensive. Rhodium is up there too and last > > I checked it was $5,000 a Troy Oz. For a cheap reactant metal > > nothing beats nickel, but I guess we already knew that. > >What a fascinating and delightful speculation! Usually I dislike >speculations, especially untestable ones, but that is great fun! > >Chris > > I think you guys are really on to something here in this chain of posts. This is great fun! ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 17:50:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA08260; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 17:03:26 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Slicing magnets? Resent-Message-ID: <"pwmN62.0.z02.hFlMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1479 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> imagine slicing one of the magnets through the pole. >>This converts it into two adjacent magnets with like poles repelling... >> >> No, the adjacent poles are opposite and attracting.... >> >> Michael J. Schaffer > >Michael, I think Bill B. meant to slice the magnet LENGTHWISE - along >(not across) the N-S axis. Would you not then wind up with two >adjacent bar magnets with like poles adjacent? > >Frank Stenger Sorry, I didn't read carefully and gave an answer for slicing the magnet crosswise BETWEEN the poles. Chris Tinsley caught me on this one, too. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 20:30:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA17591; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:08:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 08 Oct 1996 20:06:20 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/08/96 20:06:40 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"SV2AW1.0.nI4.OSnMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1480 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... - OK Vortexians----on of the big points about Miley's work is the (seemingly) HUGE variations in natural isotope ratios which are observed with SIMS. - So some questions -- - Does SIMS have any built in errors? - What are typical variations in nature. (CRC lists things to like 4 decimal places at times) - Does SIMS have trouble with hydrides, or is that a non-sequitor? - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 21:03:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25897; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:42:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:42:39 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961009034446.0070dbb4@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 20:44:46 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"jlF3N2.0.VK6.jynMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1482 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If CRC is cyclical redundancy check than what is SIMS ? At 08:06 PM 10/8/96 PDT, you wrote: >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... >- >OK Vortexians----on of the big points about Miley's work is the (seemingly) >HUGE variations in natural isotope ratios which are observed with SIMS. >- >So some questions -- >- >Does SIMS have any built in errors? >- >What are typical variations in nature. (CRC lists things to like 4 decimal >places at times) >- >Does SIMS have trouble with hydrides, or is that a non-sequitor? >- >MDH > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 21:05:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA26786; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:47:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:46:23 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"XeALo1.0.OY6.F1oMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1483 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 8 Oct 1996, Mark Hugo, Northern wrote: > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... > - > OK Vortexians----on of the big points about Miley's work is the (seemingly) > HUGE variations in natural isotope ratios which are observed with SIMS. > - > So some questions -- > - > Does SIMS have any built in errors? > - > What are typical variations in nature. (CRC lists things to like 4 decimal > places at times) > - > Does SIMS have trouble with hydrides, or is that a non-sequitor? > - Sure. Palladium Hydride could easily be mistaken for Silver. Was there Palladium in the runs where Silver was detected? But why do play 20 questions when all we need is the paper? Once the paper becomes available we can all pick it apart. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 21:12:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25600; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:41:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 20:41:26 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961009034258.006eb4a8@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 08 Oct 1996 20:42:58 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Slicing magnets? X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"B16pA3.0.wF6.ZxnMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1481 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: According to Stefan Marinov if you slice a cylindrical magnet that way (so it rotates by itself) and put it in a in a pool of mercury with a copper ring around it will form a contraption called Siberian Soliu. According to him if you let current of several amperes pass through it the copper ring will rotate violating conventional physics. Putting a load on this rotating copper ring does DECREASES the suplly current instead increasing it like in conventional motors. Quite O/U if true. I would appreciate if we could put Marinov's Siberian Coilu on trial here, to test its validity. P.S For detailed description of this contraption look in Nature, March 28, 1996. You can also find references to it at: http://www.padrak.com/ine/MARINOV1.html At 05:03 PM 10/8/96 -0800, you wrote: >>> imagine slicing one of the magnets through the pole. >>>This converts it into two adjacent magnets with like poles repelling... >>> >>> No, the adjacent poles are opposite and attracting.... >>> >>> Michael J. Schaffer >> >>Michael, I think Bill B. meant to slice the magnet LENGTHWISE - along >>(not across) the N-S axis. Would you not then wind up with two >>adjacent bar magnets with like poles adjacent? >> >>Frank Stenger > >Sorry, I didn't read carefully and gave an answer for slicing the magnet >crosswise BETWEEN the poles. Chris Tinsley caught me on this one, too. > >Michael J. Schaffer >General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA >Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 22:14:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA14085; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 22:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 22:10:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 00:10:19 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610090510.AAA17723@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundance.... Resent-Message-ID: <"-bCNC3.0.tR3.IFpMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1484 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:06 PM 10/8/96 PDT, Mark wrote: >Does SIMS have any built in errors? If Secondary Ion Mass Spectrometry is anything like X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry, there will be host of potential errors that must be avoided by skillful operation of the equipment, proper interpretation of the results, and a constant vigil against drift, ghosts, artifacts, etc. Remember the really strange isotopic ratios that Jed's Japanese group got on the two Champion samples? One of those samples was untreated ore and thus should have had natural isotopic ratios but the reported ratios were VERY far off for some of the elements. ?????????? - 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-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 8 23:40:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA28332; Tue, 8 Oct 1996 23:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 8 Oct 1996 23:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 08:26:04 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <325b4582.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: Pick it apart? Resent-Message-ID: <"LTiJG2.0.bw6.BXqMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1485 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Vortex: Martin Sevior wrote re. the Miley paper: "Once the paper is available we can all pick it apart". This expression is not exactly clear for me but I suppose that it refers to the possible errors of interpretation of the SIMS results. "Pick it apart" can be both a process of very thorough analysis and a process of destruction of something what is by definition erroneous. Both signify that the critic is more clever and knowledgeable in matters of mass spectroscopy than Miley's group. I wouldn't participate and please let me to consider that not such analyses are the reason of existence of the Vortex group. I would better focus on the interpretation of the results and on finding an explanation of the LENR, I was informed today that Francesco Celani's group in Italy has also obtained new elements on the surface of his filamentous cathodes working with pulsed, strong currents. Let's be serious, that's focused on the important problems. 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 00:28:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA03286; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 00:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 00:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 17:21:59 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Pick it apart? In-Reply-To: <325b4582.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"E-apd3.0.Gp.aArMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1486 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, Peter Glueck wrote: > To Vortex: > Martin Sevior wrote re. the Miley paper: > > "Once the paper is available we can all pick it apart". > > This expression is not exactly clear for me but I suppose that > it refers to the possible errors of interpretation of the SIMS > results. "Pick it apart" can be both a process of very thorough > analysis and a process of destruction of something what is > by definition erroneous. Both signify that the critic is more > clever and knowledgeable in matters of mass spectroscopy than > Miley's group. > The expression is open to interpretation I agree. What I meant was to thoroughly and critically read it and to try identify possible sources of error, inconsistancies, weak points, whatever. It is a vital part of the Scientific process to critically review the liturature. This is clearly a very very important paper. It deserves a thorough review. Regarding the relative cleverness of the individual is immaterial. If there are questions that need to be asked after reading a paper, they should be asked and hopefully answered, maybe by other group members - just as Mark Hugo asked. I'm sure Miley and many other people know more about lots of things than I do. The only way I'll cure my ignorance is to ask questions. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 03:57:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA21311; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:54:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 12:44:51 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <325b8227.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Subject: Errors, not possible errors Resent-Message-ID: <"gEbHQ1.0.vC5.EHuMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1487 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To Vortex: Martin has politely answered my message re. the process of picking Miley's paper apart. He urges us to "try to identify possible sources of error". This is not a difficult process given that you have imagination and the facts are not taken as obstacles for getting new and new POSSIBLE errors. In my opinion we have to identify the errors, as such, and this can be accomplished by consulting with the genuine mass spectroscopy specialists. If we do not have access to such persons the best is to wait. Obviously, I could also ask about the possible errors due to PdO or NiO or ions with 2e or 3e, but it is more reasonable to suppose that Miley and the other ten groups which have found new elements on the surface of the cathodes have avoided elementary blunders. Searching for POSSIBLE errors can lead to such illogical and antitechnical conclusions like denying completely the validity of flow-through calorimetry. i think that just by asking questions we (the Vortex group) cannot contribute to the progress of this scientific field. I have just read a lot of monstrous phantasies and hypotheses re. cold fusion on the DejaNews. It is not difficult to make evil things in the name of good principles. However, at least it is fine that it was accepted to ask only after you read the original source, this being bad for the creativity in questioning. Puts serious limits. Very interesting news are coming in the next days, let us enjoy them! 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 03:59:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA21542; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 03:56:59 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Damn! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"_qVae2.0.SG5.-JuMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1488 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I'm doing industrial sensor design work full time, but it's less than challenging, and I've been looking for something else for the past three years. I've limited my search to the Seattle area, but the main tie keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) So, is anyone interested in an EE with high creativity, unusual problem- solving methods, visual thinker, experience in software, physics? .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 07:16:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA22966; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 09 Oct 1996 07:11:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundanc To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/09/96 07:11:16 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"QSSps1.0.jc5.sAxMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1489 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/08/96 21:03 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Use of SIMS and variations in natural isotopic abundanc Martin: I agree about the Pd hydride being mistaken for silver, however, we still have an important discovery then. As the cells are at the LEAST scavinging Pd from something...As the orginal sputter layer in MILEY'S cells is pure Ni. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 07:44:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA29925; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Damn! Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 10:38:39 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MvvCU.0.VJ7.6axMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1490 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A ---------- > From: William Beaty > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Damn! > Date: Wednesday, October 09, 1996 6:56 AM > > > I'm doing industrial sensor design work full time, but it's less than > challenging, and I've been looking for something else for the past three > years. I've limited my search to the Seattle area, but the main tie > keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) > This sounds like a serious loss, Bill! I hope things work out OK. Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 07:53:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA00756; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 07:41:48 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Damn! Double damn. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"hVkLQ.0.gB.rcxMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1491 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, William Beaty wrote: > I've limited my search to the Seattle area, but the main tie > keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) Don't stay up stewing all night, then write emails at 5AM! Sorry, a good friend just died. ( Thanks Mark. 7040 22nd Ave NW, Seattle, WA 98117 ) .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 08:45:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA10349; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 08:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 08:22:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 08:19:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610091519.IAA16202@germany.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Condolences Resent-Message-ID: <"5eDAK.0.WX2.UCyMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1492 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 07:41 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Wed, 9 Oct 1996, William Beaty wrote: > >> I've limited my search to the Seattle area, but the main tie >> keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) > >Don't stay up stewing all night, then write emails at 5AM! Sorry, >a good friend just died. > > >( Thanks Mark. 7040 22nd Ave NW, Seattle, WA 98117 ) > Sorry to hear the sad news. We all love you William and give condolences to you and loved ones. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 09:41:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA23607; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:18:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:18:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610091543.IAA24865@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 08:43:27 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Damn! Resent-Message-ID: <"Ev6VF3.0.km5.p0zMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1493 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 03:56 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you wrote: > >I'm doing industrial sensor design work full time, but it's less than >challenging, and I've been looking for something else for the past three >years. I've limited my search to the Seattle area, but the main tie >keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) > >So, is anyone interested in an EE with high creativity, unusual problem- >solving methods, visual thinker, experience in software, physics? > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 >EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ >Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page > > > I am very sorry to hear of your loss. May I be of some help in some way? ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 09:57:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA26234; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 09:28:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 96 12:07:15 From: dacha@shentel.net Subject: RE: Damn! To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-PRIORITY: 3 (Normal) X-Mailer: Chameleon 5.0, TCP/IP for Windows, NetManage Inc. Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"lAtfQ1.0.fP6.IAzMo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1494 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A My thoughts go out to you. Don't do anything in a hurry, let things settle a bit. I feel you have made many friends here, and friends are really what much of life is all about. Drop me a line about what you would like to do, and I will keep my eyes and ears open. Robert ------------------------------------- Name: dacha E-mail: dacha@visor.com Date: 10/9/96 Time: 12:07:15 PM No matter where you go, there you are. http://www.visor.com/ ------------------------------------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 11:58:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA29724; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 11:40:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: 09 Oct 96 14:38:25 EDT From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: The Galtek Motor is Real Message-ID: <961009183825_76570.2270_FHU50-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"AwOIC3.0.MG7.g6_Mo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1496 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians: Just before I fly off to Japan for ICCF6 and get IE#9 mailed out today and tommorrow, I will leave you with this pleasant news -- "cosmic news," Hal Puthoff would say. Extensive information about the Galtek motor has come into my possession. I should have even more soon. I have no doubt at all now that this motor/generator is real. I have enough concrete evidence to convince me. Seven doubting electrical engineers who came to the company to make their own measurements are now stockholders. It will not be neceasry, Hal, to test it elsewhere. Their instruments are good enough, but bring yoru own. Just call up Russ Chapman and ask for a site visit. Then take out your checkbook and invest! Commercial products will be available within the next two years. They have been working on this for 4-years. The people behind this motor are solid technical people who know what they are doing. They have brought this to near perfection and are moving rapidly forward. They will start by selling motors that will extend the range of EV's to say 400 miles -- merely by replacing existing electric motors. Then they will follow up with a stand-alone system that will power the vehicles indefinitely. They estimate that magnet performance will drop off only about 1% per year. So, short of replacing the magnets, no energy will be added from any source to propel vehicles. There will be a battery for starting purposes, but it will always remain charged. It will prabably wear out before the magentic motor bearings do. They will also develop their "carousel motor generator" to power homes. The applications are unlimited. Call the source of energy what you will, but as for me, I suggest the only possible explanation is "space energy" -- "ZPE" -- however that source acts in and among magnets to bring this miracle of nature about. They are using 45 MGOe magnets. The motor/generator will probably work much better with the Takahashi magnets, which are way over 100 MGOe. We will have a major story on the Galtek developments in IE#10, which I hope to accelerate into production so you can have the full story by mid to late December. Best, Gene Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D. Editor-in-Chief and Publisher INFINITE ENERGY Magazine Cold Fusion Technology P.O. Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 Phone:603-228-4516 Fax: 603-224-5975 76570.2270@compuserve.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 13:25:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA20122; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "FZNIDARSIC@aol.com" , Vortex-L Subject: RE: magnets/plasmas/evanscence/fermi Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:08:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"b0aTZ2.0.Kw4.CS0No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1497 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Have you got any information about this Galtek company? Phone number, e-mail address, homepage, etc? Hank Scudder ---------- From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; GeorgeHM@aol.com; zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil Subject: magnets/plasmas/evanscence/fermi Date: Monday, October 07, 1996 5:04PM I believe the the "new fusion" zero point interactions are a result of the breaking of symmetry at energy levels below the Fermi level. ........................................................................ ...... ...................................... COLD FUSION In cold fusion, a dense plasma formed by a sea of disolved hydrogen atoms causes sub-Fermi energy levels to evanscence. The effect is the same one that absorbes the radio waves transmitted by space capsules during reentry. The "electrode effect" differs from the "reentry blackout" in that that the "cold fusion effect" occurs at much shorter wavelengths. The short wavelength is a result of the very high density of the plasma within cold fusion electrodes. The only way to reach this level of plasma density is to force hydrogen into a metal. (>10 x 27 -e/mm) ........................................................................ ...... .................................. MAGNETIC MOTORS A magnetic shock wave interupts the sub-Fermi energy levels in magnetic overunity motors. The effect is similar to the breaking of the superconductive state at high flux densities. The Fermi level can no longer exclude flux lines once a certain magnetic density is reached. The only way to reach this high level of flux density on an atomic level is with a magnetic shock wave. ........................................................................ ...... ................................... Both of these effects allow non-paired electrons to drop to sub-Fermi energy levels. At this lowered energy state modified electron capture reactions take place. ........................................................................ ...... ..................... Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 13:38:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA20656; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:15:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:15:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610092014.NAA18304@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 13:14:27 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Resent-Message-ID: <"ThmdW3.0.V25.7V0No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1498 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:38 PM 10/9/96 EDT, you wrote: >Dear Vortexians: > >Just before I fly off to Japan for ICCF6 and get IE#9 mailed out today and >tommorrow, I will leave you with this pleasant news -- "cosmic news," Hal >Puthoff would say. > >Extensive information about the Galtek motor has come into my possession. I >should have even more soon. I have no doubt at all now that this motor/generator >is real. I have enough concrete evidence to convince me. Seven doubting >electrical engineers who came to the company to make their own measurements are >We will have a major story on the Galtek developments in IE#10, which I hope to >accelerate into production so you can have the full story by mid to late >December. > >Best, > >Gene > >Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D. Gene, is there any possibility that you can spend a couple of days on the U.S. West Coast on your way back from Japan - to take a look at the Muller Dynamo. It also works, damn well. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 13:39:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA21492; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 13:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Sender: barry@math.ucla.edu Message-Id: <325C088F.167EB0E7@math.ucla.edu> Date: Wed, 09 Oct 1996 13:18:23 -0700 From: Barry Merriman Organization: UCLA Dept. of Mathematics X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4m) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real References: <961009183825_76570.2270_FHU50-1@CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vQbDV.0.kF5.UY0No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1499 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Eugene Mallove wrote: > > Extensive information about the Galtek motor has come into my possession. I > should have even more soon. I have no doubt at all now that this motor/generator > is real. I have enough concrete evidence to convince me. Seven doubting > electrical engineers who came to the company to make their own measurements are > now stockholders. Well, one might take a lesson from history, though. Over-unity motors are a relatively old phenomena in the free energy biz, and there have been prior examples where various EE's have testified to the reality of the effect---e.g., Joe Newman always had a stable of engineer backers. But, the bottom line is no functioning product has ever come from this, which I take to be a strong sign that it simply doesn't work. So what if seven EE's signed on. Maybe these same seven also believe in dowsing to find water, etc... I'm temped to take some bets on whether this comapny ever produces a product within the next 2 years, but I'll let it slide. The track history of CF in this regard is sufficient to demonstrate that point. -- Barry Merriman Research Scientist, UCSD Fusion Energy Research Program Asst. Prof., UCLA Dept. of Math Internet email: barry@math.ucla.edu web homepage: http://www.math.ucla.edu/~barry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 15:51:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA14937; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:06:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 17:59:04 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: siberian soliu Slicing magnets? Sib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"qEfW_.0.Hf3.A72No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1500 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., This seems very interesting. Some of the description is un clear, can we put it clear by asking S. Marinov? > From: epitaxy@localaccess.com > > > According to Stefan Marinov if you slice a cylindrical magnet that way (so > it rotates by itself) What is rotating by itself? And if something is rotating by it self why do you need any of the rest? and put it in a in a pool of mercury with a copper > ring Is the copper ring immersed in mercury? around it will form a contraption called Siberian Soliu. According to > him if you let current of several amperes pass through it Which-what it? Several amperse through the mercury? The copper? The magnet? the copper ring > will rotate violating conventional physics. How is it rotating? End for end? As a hoop or bicycle wheel would? Putting a load on this rotating > copper ring does DECREASES the suplly current instead increasing it like in > conventional motors. Quite O/U if true. Load of ring decreases how? What? > > I would appreciate if we could put Marinov's Siberian Coilu on trial here, > to test its validity. > > P.S > For detailed description of this contraption look in Nature, March 28, > 1996. You can also find references to it at: > http://www.padrak.com/ine/MARINOV1.html > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 16:11:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA18436; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:24:29 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:20:17 -0400 Message-ID: <961009182016_1212004536@emout16.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, reed@indirect.com Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Resent-Message-ID: <"zRFqR1.0.wV4.QO2No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1503 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jeff Jolett of the Az dept of energy sent the police down to Galteck and accused Russ Chapmann of fraud. Russ didn't like the whole affiar. Jeff is friends with one of our members Reed Huish. Reed you have been quiet lately. What is up? Russ Chapmann of Galtek expressed an interest in calling you. Did he call? What happened? What is the latest from Jeff Jolette? Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 16:11:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA17451; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:18:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 15:18:20 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:00:05 -0400 Message-ID: <961009180003_1580340550@emout12.mail.aol.com> To: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: DD&AJH(Surface Tention Capillary tube?) Resent-Message-ID: <"8eQMr.0.TG4.gI2No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1502 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David I don't know why you got the results you did. Does anyone else know? Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 18:49:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA03868; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 20:05:02 -0500 Message-Id: <9610100105.AA29911@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Resent-Message-ID: <"Vec_Q3.0.Hy.m25No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1506 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Gene, At 02:38 PM 10/9/96 EDT, you wrote: >Then they will follow up with a stand-alone system that will >power the vehicles indefinitely. They estimate that magnet performance will drop >off only about 1% per year. So, short of replacing the magnets, no energy will >be added from any source to propel vehicles. Hmm. I wonder what Takahashi's magnets in the Galtek motors would do. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 19:11:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA03286; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:23:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 18:23:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 20:05:00 -0500 Message-Id: <9610100105.AA29907@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: Damn! Resent-Message-ID: <"QLAD5.0.Gp.E05No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1505 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 03:56 AM 10/9/96 -0700, you wrote: >the main tie >keeping me here just evaporated. Car accident. (Not family) I hope it wasn't someone emotionally close to you. OTOH, I sure would like to see you (and other creative or productive people) move east of the Rockies for whatever reason. Short of hiring you, is there anything we can do to help? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 20:13:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA17881; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 19:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 19:27:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 09 Oct 1996 16:23:16 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/09/96 16:23:56 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"UQY7Y2.0.FN4.Fy5No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1507 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/09/96 16:00 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real This is actually a very positive development. Frank, please don't put any emotional involvement in Russ Chapmann, at least for the moment. The claims that have been made, frankly, despite being "wild" are "put up or shut up". At this point, considering that $$$ have been solicited on the basis of these claims, one CAN make a case for fraud. So far, except for your own solicitation on behalf of Potapov (which has been done under the cover of "development", whi ch is legitimate as far as I know), and the Correa's solicitations, done under the claim of development, this is the first solicitation for PRODUCTION. I think there is a subtle, but IMPORTANT difference here. Whether or not one beli eves the results to be true, ANYONE can solicit money for "development". I had an associate, a fellow church choir member, and engineer with a bio-med back ground who worked for 2 years on a microwave sterilization device. It was a product development. Some local Doctors put roughly $500,000 into the developme nt work. It never got off the ground! After 2 years, my associate was given a $5000 check, a thanks for the good work and he was off finding another project. The Doctors who put in the 1/2 million never got anything back. But there were no lawsuits, no recriminations, nothing negative about this. It happens! (In this case, strangely enough, there have been some developments and the last I heard there ARE microwave sterilization devices now available.) BUT, had this group worked on "half baked" data (excuse the bad pun in this case!) and solicited money saying, "We HAVE a dynamite product here, we'll have it on the market in the next year, and here is the estimated market share...." And THEN it turned out not to WORK, and things folded, I think there WOULD have been lawsuits. So it's all in the matter of presentation. If Russ C. is NOT aware of the difference, and if he is soliciting for a REAL product, and if he CAN'T deliver, then there should be a jail cell awaiting somewhere, or at least the ability of the "state" (as odious as that may seem to the Libertarians out there) to "collect" for damages through both the criminal law and tort processe s. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 21:00:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA09421; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 20:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 20:52:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 22:52:35 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "MHUGO@EPRI" at Oct 9, 96 04:23:16 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"GQy781.0.-I2.NC7No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1508 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo wrote: > of the difference, and if he is soliciting for a REAL product, and if he > CAN'T deliver, then there should be a jail cell awaiting somewhere, or at > least the ability of the "state" (as odious as that may seem to the > Libertarians out there) to "collect" for damages through both the > criminal law and tort processe Don't want to wax political on this forum, but Libertarians *do* allow for the prosecution of fraud. As Frankenstein might say, "Aggression, bad. Fraud, bad." -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 21:28:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA15914; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 21:18:31 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Damn! Double damn. In-Reply-To: <961009180326_1446754393@emout05.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"l6W_d2.0.au3.ha7No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1510 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Wed, 9 Oct 1996 FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > Bill We cannot afford to loose you and the valuable Vortex network that you > have set up. What can we do? > No problem, vortex-L is a permanent feature, it can be operated from anywhere in the world with no changes. If I end up moving in the future, I might eventually move vortex-L off eskimo, especially if I find a low-price, faster ISP. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 9 22:45:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA02858; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 22:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 22:36:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 22:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610100535.WAA24020@spain.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Dan Davidson Paper Resent-Message-ID: <"Cq6as.0.Ui.3j8No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1511 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Has anyone seen or read Dan Davidson's new paper titled "On the Production of Aether Stress Waves using Sound Vibration / Sonic Stimulation of the Aether"? A fellow researcher in England said it was on the Keelynet. I checked at Jerry Deckers BBS and it wasn't on file there. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 00:55:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA11025; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:42:21 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <325ca8e3.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: HENR vs LENR paradigm. Resent-Message-ID: <"z7XgJ1.0.Bi2.CkANo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1513 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortex Fellows, Actually I am able to feel a lot of empathy toward Martin's problem. The existing high energy nuclear reactions paradigm is not compatible with the new phenomena and we do not have yet an alternative, a LENR paradigm. On Sept 25, 1996 Martin wrote (quoting from memory): -The miracles occuring in a transmuting cell: a) The reaction rate is much too fast, with many orders of magnitude; b) There is no ionizing radiation; c) No radioactive nuclei appear (Note: anyway stable isotopes are dominant in almost all experiments-- exceptions Savvatimova et al, Wolf.) The situation really seems impossible and Martin, as well as other inquiring minds are perfectly justified to get a solution; ERROR is the most easiest and handy. However experimental data are accumulating and both branches of the dilemma are now equally impossible- in the frame of the HENR paradigm. Because I am working in an institute specialized in isotopes, I am very motivated to find a solution. Because my other speciality is management of technology and I am very familiar with the problems of creativity I will try an inter (trans)- disciplinar approach to the problem. ................................................................. (For those interested in a holistic view of the field perhaps the following paper will be of great use: "Isotopicity, Implications and Applications" by Alexander A. Berezin Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 1992, vol 17,no 1 pp 74-80 BTW, if somebody knows Prof. Berezin or , an authority and expert in isotopes it would interesting to ask his opinion. In 1989 Berezin has published a paper (abstract?) re CF but later has not been active, as far as I am informed. ) ................................................................... A Change of Paradigm is Necessary. You get good advises for such an action in the book: "PARADIGMS-the business of discovering the future" by Joel Arthur Barker. For managers, in order to get positive change, you have to pick out which obviously unchangeable step could improve your business. When it is identified you have to change it; it was only seemingly impossible. If we try to find such a fixation in Martin's list we get the word-- REACTION. As long as HENR, hot fusion, hot fission reactions take place, the nuclei are indestructible and the results obtained HAVE to be erroneous. We have to find an other class of nuclear reactions. In the limits of linear logic, the solution offered by me is unique. Using metaphors. The use of metaphors for creativity is well known, at least in theory. .................................................................. One of my favorite works illustrating this method is Hannu Vanharanta's Dr. Thesis "Hyperknowledge and Continuous Strategy in Executive Support Systems", Abo Univ, Finland 1995. The functions of the metaphors are cleverly applied in order to start the process of transformation on the line: metaphor-analogy-model-theory. Metaphors can perform four separate but related functions: - they are expressive, throwing new light on the target domain; - they are exegetic, trying to describe and interpret complexity; - they are explanatory, explaining and predicting; - they are exploratory, suggesting research directions and activities. ........................................................................ Actually, we (vortexan cold fusionists) have a wonderful metaphor here, it is Tinsley's idea that: Cold Fusion is for Hot Fusion what Biochemistry is for Chemistry. (Chris, please give a more elegant formulation, thanks!) If we consider only essential processes as photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation, which are not reproducible with "human" technologies, we see that these processes are incredibly complex. I am systematically reading all the papers on these and related subjects in Chemical Engineering News, Physical Chemistry, Nature, Science, New Scientist as an exercise of complexity and humility. Our knowledge is very primitive, we are just crawling out from the Middle Age. Anyway, the Tinsley Metaphor suggests that we have to pay a high price, that of complexity, for attaining low energy nuclear reactions. The message of the metaphor is: do not try to find simple explanations/models/theories. And: the solution is far from what you know now! The House Metaphor. We know from the HENR paradigm that the nuclei of the stable isotopes are solid, strong edifices and we need high energies to break them. You need great heavy rocks, bombs, or steel balls to destroy a house ( have seen a lot in the Ceausescu era when family houses have been systematically demolished and people forced to go in great concrete block buildings where control by the secret police was easier). Now, little pebbles are not efficient they would not make much damage, metaphorically thinking the HENR people are right, THOSE reactions will not work. I think the OTHER reactions are analogous to something eating out the mortar between the bricks, a much slower destructive process.. a real one. I had to solve one case in the frame of my consulting practice, when a dreadful sort of mildew (Merulius Lacrymans) coming from infested wood used for the new parquet began to penetrate the walls; I had to use a complex mixture of fungicides to kill the beast. For the nuclei, the metaphor suggests a NEUTRON EXTRACTION process. Some entities are "attacking" the nuclei and capturing the neutrons. It is well known that the number of neutrons per number of protons ratio is steadily increasing as the atomic number is increasing; the nuclei will be thus destabilized and fragmented. What entities can do such a job? I think the best candidates are energy deficient protons and deuterons, strongly associated with their electrons. "Hungry" p's and d's! Honi soit qui mal y pense! The most remote (far from the present paradigm) is the Neal Gleeson process, by a special type of electrolysis, thorium is fissioned in mercury and neon, tungsten can be fissioned symmetrically in two atoms of rubidium or unsymmetrically in cadmium and iron, in these cases 12-15 neutrons remain in excess and have to be "consumed". In other cases, probably the cluster structure of the nuclei add a degree of complexity. The fragments thus obtained are all stable as such or after recombination; the daughter nuclei are both smaller and greater than the mother nuclei. Perhaps these are multi-body reactions with a complex mechanism, working step-wise and much slower than the HENR processes. The active hydrogen isotopes are coming from or interacting with the energetical vacuum, they work in packs and create an energy deficient environment in which only stable nuclei are created. Using Mitch Swartz's terminology, it has yet to be established how are de novo nucleosynthesis and excess enthalpy correlated; I think there is no causal relationship between them. As I have shown in all my papers, these processes are local and catalytic. I am convinced that my "House Metaphor" is a part of the truth. After getting the complete data from LENR2 and ICCF-6 I will try to work out a theory. 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-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 01:15:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA14439; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: 10 Oct 96 04:10:10 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: John Schnurer's experiment Message-ID: <961010081009_76216.2421_HHB38-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HgR_C.0.RX3.P_ANo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1514 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John - Is it still too early for an update on your progress in attempting to duplicate the effect seen with superconductors as reported by Podkletnov? I'm sure many of us on this list would love to hear how that's going. Reports from the Business Week area on AOL (?) are that you got a preliminary indication that it's real. Any details you could release would be most welcome. If you aren't yet able to release any apparatus details, could you tell us anything new about the nature of the effect itself? One of the big questions is if it's really a shield or more of a field generator. I thought that perhaps simply tilting the apparatus a little bit when it's working would help distinguish which it is. And, if the beam tilts when the SC is tilted, then obviously it can be focused with multiple units, right?! Have you tried tilting the apparatus? How about the fringe or border areas, do they repel objects entering the zone? Or have you tried using smoke, or a pan of water to observe the effect? Supposedly water would have a slight bulge on its surface over a region of lesser gravitation, and reflections of a screen or grid lines like graph paper might help make such an effect more visible. I hope you're at a point where you can tell us something about this. Thanks, - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 01:33:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA17042; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:32:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:32:00 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961010083442.0071337c@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:34:42 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: THE PERPETUUM MOBILE SIBERIAN COLIU X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"BmlY3.0.CA4._HBNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1515 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Ok, since I was quoting from memory previously here is the description from the referenced URL. The Siberian Coilu seems to be the inspiration for Self accelerating plasma tube on Bill Beaty's NYACP. (WWW page) excerpt from http://www.padrak.com/ine/MARINOV1.html THE PERPETUUM MOBILE SIBERIAN COLIU. ...Swhit is produced by the first term in (2) and for a complete circuit is null. For this reason Swhit can be observed only at interrupted circuits (see item 9). However Smar can be different from zero also for a complete circuit. Why then has nobody observed it? Because all people have worked with cylindrical or quasi-cylindrical magnets for which Smar = 0. Who has cut a cylindrical magnet in two pieces rotating the one half up-down? - NOBODY! The first man who has done this is called Gennadi Nicolaev and lives in Tomsk in Siberia. For this reason I called this magnet the SIBERIAN COLIU magnet and the perpetuum mobile which I constructed with it the SIBERIAN COLIU machine. The machine shown in the photograph is a SIBERIAN COLIU machine. It will work as a perpetuum mobile if the "driving" torque produced by the current induced in the ring when it will be set in rotation with a certain velocity will be larger than the friction torque. I constructed the machine in the photograph in 1993 and the last three years I did "nothing else" than to try to increase its driving torque and decrease its friction torque, noting that all B-currents induced in the rotor generated additional friction torque. The driving torque was produced only by the S (i.e., Smar) currents. Smar is very strong near the cutting plane, from the one side positive, from the other negative. The "dozens" of my SIBERIAN COLIU machines are presented with photographs in DEUTSCHE PHYSIK (Austria)... ..."A cylindrical magnet is cut along one of its axial planes and the one half is turned up-down (the magnetic forces themselves do the rotation). Around this magnet, there is a trough filled with mercury in which the copper ring which can be seen at right swims (the children take salt solution and suspend the ring on threads). After sending a current of some tens of amperes from the battery at left, which is regulated by the rheostat, the ring begins to rotate. That's all!" Circuit: Cylinder magnet in center Copper ring rotates clockwise \ __---__/ _/ __ __ \_ / / | \ \ ---->---->---| | N | S | |--->---->---- | \_ \__|__/ _/ | | \__ __/ | | --- | | | | | | | ----<----<-------| | | |-------<----<---- | | Battery According to his theories, you can do the reverse. Rotate the copper ring clockwise and it will generate power in the same direction of current flow. Yes I said the same direction. Marinov has demonstrated and proved this in his devices. What this means, and as he explains, is that working as a motor or a generator, there is no opposing torque to the direction of rotation and hence the device becomes "Self Accellerating" and as long as you draw power from it, it will power itself. There is one barrier when constructing this as a mechanical device and that is friction. Due to the low torques generated, friction halts the self accellerating process but its seems that Marinov has overcome this and implies that he has a SIBERIAN COLIU working as a PERPETUUM MOBILE and will soon present this at a press conference... At 05:59 PM 10/9/96 -0400, you wrote: > > > Dear Vo., > > This seems very interesting. Some of the description is un clear, >can we put it clear by asking S. Marinov? > > >> From: epitaxy@localaccess.com >> >> >> According to Stefan Marinov if you slice a cylindrical magnet that way (so >> it rotates by itself) > > What is rotating by itself? And if something is rotating by it >self why do you need any of the rest? > > > > and put it in a in a pool of mercury with a copper >> ring > > Is the copper ring immersed in mercury? > > around it will form a contraption called Siberian Soliu. According to >> him if you let current of several amperes pass through it > > Which-what it? Several amperse through the mercury? The >copper? The magnet? > > > the copper ring >> will rotate violating conventional physics. > > How is it rotating? End for end? As a hoop or bicycle wheel would? > > Putting a load on this rotating >> copper ring does DECREASES the suplly current instead increasing it like in >> conventional motors. Quite O/U if true. > > Load of ring decreases how? What? > > > >> >> I would appreciate if we could put Marinov's Siberian Coilu on trial here, >> to test its validity. >> >> P.S >> For detailed description of this contraption look in Nature, March 28, >> 1996. You can also find references to it at: >> http://www.padrak.com/ine/MARINOV1.html >> >> >> >> > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 01:37:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA15289; Wed, 9 Oct 1996 17:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 17:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Oct 1996 19:49:38 -0500 Message-Id: <9610100049.AA29627@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: Miley's paper, and can you hold your horses? Resent-Message-ID: <"t3klr1.0.kk3.aY4No"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1504 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Mark, At 07:38 AM 10/8/96 PDT, you wrote: >The 3M labs MIGHT well have the equipment. But will they have the will or >desire to use them for this purpose...Unless you have a very dynamic thinker >working there, who has the political power and position, I can assure you--- >nothing will be done. MDH I saw some analysis of rather unorthodox materials while I was there. Unofficially, there's a good chance of getting some kinds of analysis done (depends on the work load and mood of the people involved). Officially, there's effectively no chance that 3M will admit to having knowledge of any analysis (that might get done) at present. (3M does a huge amount of analysis of their and their competitor's products -- takes them apart almost molecule-by-molecule. I'd bet their labs are better than 10 times the size and capability of UofM's labs. Unfortunately, almost every scrap of research they do is kept within the company for competitive reasons.) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 02:00:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA21193; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:58:06 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: THE PERPETUUM MOBILE SIBERIAN COLIU In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961010083442.0071337c@mail.localaccess.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9CL5M2.0.3B5.XgBNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1516 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 10 Oct 1996 epitaxy@localaccess.com wrote: > Circuit: > > Cylinder magnet in center Copper ring rotates clockwise > \ __---__/ > _/ __ __ \_ > / / | \ \ > ---->---->---| | N | S | |--->---->---- > | \_ \__|__/ _/ | > | \__ __/ | > | --- | > | | > | | | | > ----<----<-------| | | |-------<----<---- > | | > Battery So, replacing the battery with a short circuit and giving the ring a spin would in theory cause self-acceleration, but in practice the frictional decelleration wins? Unless you know Marinov's secret, whatever it may be. Maybe add more poles to the magnet? Make the device in the shape of a ring rather than a cylinder? Incorporate the shorting connection into the main body? The result sounds like Searle's device, a magnetic disk which self-accelerates once a particular RPM is reached. A thought: if the plasma or vacuum-arc version is tried, maybe it should be operated behind a heavy shield. If it "works," it might work too well. Searle claims that his early self-accelerating disks caromed about the room until finding a glass window. I'd imagine that the self-acceleration rate of a plasma device would be a bit higher than that of a big iron assembly, and might attain dangerous output levels with little warning. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 02:35:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA26357; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:33:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:33:42 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: dan davidson paper URL Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"2kJ_C.0.lR6.xBCNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1517 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Linkname: FREE ENERGY, GRAVITY, AND THE AETHER. URL: http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm .....................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-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 02:42:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA26938; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 02:39:44 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: hooper url Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"BEjfn3.0.la6.aHCNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1518 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A A Hooper article on Elektromagnum page. http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/elektromagnum/web/physics/HOOPREV.TXT From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 06:39:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA28196; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 06:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 06:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 05:39:56 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: THE PERPETUUM MOBILE SIBERIAN COLIU Resent-Message-ID: <"PycpK1.0.Uu6.ejFNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1519 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: As a historical note there was some discussion of this last April or so (see included post of mine on the subject from last April.) Without an experiment that actually demostrates ou behavior it seems to me that there is a good explanation for what is observed. As to generation of current upon reversal of the process it seems a good explanation is that the process is symmetrical thus reversable. It appears to be a much more interresting experiment done in a plasma environment, but, to some extent, the ring motion could still be induced from friction from MHD propelled plasma. Here is the post: [snip] > You take a cylindrical magnet and then cut it along its axes. You then >flip one of the sections and let the two stick together. The magnetic >force will be attractive so they will hold together on their own. >this magnet is then placed in a mecury filled container, axis pointing up. >A copper ring is constructed that will just fit over the magnet. This >ring is placed over the magnet and allowed to float on the mecury. Then >two electrodes are placed in the container at right angles to the plane of >the magnet cut. Then a current on the order of tens of amperes is passed >through the electrodes and the ring rotates. [snip] > >Lawrence E. Wharton If I visualize this correctly: I suspect that if you replace the copper ring with an insulated (but similarly dense) ring, it will still rotate. That is because the surface mercury itself should rotate around the magnet due to MHD type forces. If the negative pole is on the north side of the core, then four vortices (how appropriate) should be created, one on the north side and one on the south side of the magnet bar, one at each magnet boundary. For opposing vortices, their main axis is colinear through the magnet bar purpendicular to the axis of the bar, but they rotate in opposite directions. If the negative pole is opposite the N pole of the bar, there will be an upwelling as the electrons move through the field to the right of the N pole, and a downwelling as they move to the left of the N pole. As the transition into the returning field lines in the neighborhood of the S pole the fluid motion is reversed. There is a downwelling on the right (as seen from the N pole direction) and an upwelling on the left. This means, as seen from the N pole side, the N pole vortex rotates conterclockwise, and the S pole vortex clockwise. The (secondary) vortecies at the magnet boundaries rotate in a manner that opposes the surface motion of the N and S pole vertices. Their motion is weak because it is not directly driven by MHD forces, because the electrons in the vicinity are flowing much more purpendicular to the magnetic field lines. Their motion is mainly an indirect result of the motion of the primary vortices. The larger the container the assembly is placed in, you would expect the less the secondary vortex motion, and the less continuity in flow direction within them. The net rotation of the surface mercury is therefore clockwise when the - electrode is opposite the N pole. Reversing the current, so the + terminal is at the N pole side of the bar should reverse all the rotational directions. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 07:25:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06606; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 10 Oct 1996 07:17:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/10/96 07:17:32 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"72FVf.0.7d1.MMGNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1520 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/10/96 01:50 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Barry M. Can I hasten to point out that Cold Fusion, the claims of Pons and Flieschmann, EVEN the concepts bear NO relation to ZPE, "over unity" devices, etc.? ! I personally want to make it very clear that I have NO truck with these claims, no belief in them, and not feelings of sympathy for those promoting them. Please, please do not lump those of us who have been working diligently in the field of "Cold Fusion" in with the "over unity" group. M. Hugo From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 10:13:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA12594; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:51:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:51:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 12:50:21 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Resent-Message-ID: <"fZE6Y3.0.f43.bcINo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1521 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The problem with an ou motor like this is that the proof of the conservation of energy is very exact and does not allow it to work as claimed. I don't see any problem with the conservation of energy even with the inclusion of the zpe. The zpe effects are included in the quantum field theory equations and there is a conservation of energy proof that is derived from these equations. Pick up any text book on QED and you will find a section on the conservation of energy. You will not find a section on something like "the non-conservation of energy in the presence of zpe". That is because it is included in the theory and the theory conserves energy. All magnetic, electric and quantum mechanical effects are included in the theory and energy is still conserved. I am just looking at the nearest text on my book shelf - QED by G. Kallen, Springer-Verlag, 1972. Yup there is the section on conservation of energy and nowhere is the section on the zpe non-conservation. The only problem is that the conservation equations give the canonical stress energy tensor which is not gauge invariant. There is a bias in QED theory against non-gauge invariant quantities bacause they can not be measured. This is only a problem in the minds of the theoreticans. The conservation equations exist and their validity is not dependent on everyone approving of the form of the stress tensor. There is no problem with conserving energy in the presence of zpe. There may be some complaints that the conservations equations are not gauge invariant but I don't think it makes any difference. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 13:16:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA24988; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 13:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: 10 Oct 96 15:59:33 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real Message-ID: <961010195933_100433.1541_BHG115-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"qUeIz2.0.G66.AQLNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1522 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > The problem with an ou motor like this is that the proof of the > conservation of energy is very exact and does not allow it to work > as claimed. I believe that, technically, CofE is a 'Principle' and not subject to 'proof'. That does not mean that the *demonstrations* of the accuracy of the Principle are wrong, of course. However, sceptical as I am of these claims, I shall await the experimental evidence rather than rely on disproofs. > The zpe effects are included in the quantum field theory > equations and there is a conservation of energy proof that is > derived from these equations. The essential difficulty with which is that all laws and theories of physics *assume* the Principle. As Puthoff puts it, "There is no o/u available from Ohm's Law." > All magnetic, electric and quantum mechanical effects are > included in the theory and energy is still conserved. And each and every one of them presume CofE. There is no question but that any small discrepancy discovered in the *measurements* of Cof E will always be put down to experimental error, and no further investigation will be done. I myself would be very interested indeed in a fundamental re-examination of *all* the assumptions of science. It is precisely correct that Helmholtz's original statement of CofE (denied publication in Annalen Physik for being too speculative) was based on the non-existence of any perpetual motion machine, and is now cited to prove that no such machine can exist. That may be correct argument, backed by pretty good experimental evidence, but without doubt it is circular argument. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 15:26:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA23821; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:17:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:17:08 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:16:22 -0400 Message-ID: <961010181603_207332951@emout13.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: DD&AJH(Surface Tention Capillary tube?) Resent-Message-ID: <"Es9Vf.0.7q5.YNNNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1523 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David..This is not a secret! Surface tension effects caviation. Your experments to measure surface tension require interpretation. Please post them. We will talk about the results, try to get the students involved, and maybe even get them published. Frank Z --------------------- Forwarded message: From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: 96-10-10 02:34:28 EDT Dear Frank Z, I do not feel qualified to post my results on vortex-l@eskimo.com. I am not a scientist just a observer and organizer of science projects for students. So no one but you recieved my piliminary results. You confidentually intrusted to me a science project. I feel that the results are yours to share not mine. >David I don't know why you got the results you did. Does anyone else know? >Frank Z ************************************ * David Doty * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * home 503 266 3969 * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ************************************ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 15:34:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA26458; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 15:28:29 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:25:37 -0400 Message-ID: <961010182536_330755355@emout17.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, manty@ctc.com, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, zap@dnai.com Subject: Miley's paper Resent-Message-ID: <"NnvMl.0.FT6.BYNNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1524 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Abstract, Introduction, and Conclusion of Miley's report. Scanned it. Body was left out as it was to long. .............................................................................. ............... Preprint prepared for 2nd Intematlonai Conference on Low Energy Nudear Reactions, Texas A & M, College Station Texas, September 13-14, 1996. NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONS IN THIN-FILM NICKEL COATINGS UNDERGOING ELECTROLYSIS George H. Miley, Fusion Studies Laboratory, U. of Illinois 103 S. Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801-2984 Ph. 217-333-3772, Fax 217-333-2906 E-mail: g-miley@uiuc.edu James A. Patterson Clean Energy Technology, Inc. Dallas, TX 75240 ABSTRACT Experiments using 1-mm plastic and glass microspheres coated with single and multilayers of thin films of various metals such as palladium and nickel, used in a packed-bed electrolytic cell (Patterson Power Cell Tm Configuration), have apparently produced a variety of nuclear reaction products. The analysis of a run with 650-A film of Ni is presented here. Following a two-week electrolytic run, the Ni film was found to contain Fe, Ag, Cu, Mg, and Cr, in concentrations exceeding 2 atom % each, plus a number of additional trace elements. These elements were at the most, only present in the initial film and the electrolyte plus other accessible cell components in much smaller amounts. That fact, combined with other data, such as deviations from natural isotope abundances, seemingly eliminates the alternate explanation of impurities concentrating in the film. A 1-molar lithium sulfate solution in light water was employed for the electrolyte. A small excess heat of approximately 0.5 +- 0.4 watts was recorded throughout the run. Reaction products were analyzed using a combination of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), Auger electron spectrometry (AES), energy dispersive x-ray (EDX) analysis, and neutron activation analysis (NAA). Results showing a broad array of products such as found here have also been obtained with thin film coatings of other materials, e.g., Pd and multi-layers of Pd and Ni. The yields of the major elements contributing depend on the film material, however. Some of that work is still being analyzed and will be presented at ICCF-6 (Miley and Patterson, 1996a). The array of products found in these experiments is consistent with recent studies of solid Pd and Au electrodes by Mizuno et al. 1996 and Ohmori and Enyo, 1996, respectively. A distinct advantage of thin electrode construction used here, however, is that the reaction zone becomes well defined, enabling quantitative measurements of the amounts of various products. To explain the observation of products with atomic numbers both well above and below Ni, a reaction model is being developed that involves proton-induced excited complexes, followed in some cases by a fission of the unstable compound nucleus. INTRODUCTION Various nuclear transmutation products generated during electrolytic cell operation, typically employing Pd and heavy or light water with various electrolytes such as Na2 CO3 and LI(OH), have previously been reported, e.g., see the proceedings of the first conference in this series (Bochris and Lin, 1996). Most of these reports have dealt with impurity level quantities of specific elements, such as Sr, Rb or tritium, although some workers, such as Mizuno et al., 1996, Ohmorl and Enyo, 1996, and Karabut et al., 1991 and 1992 report a wide variety of isotopes occurring at impurity levels. Several investigators, e.g., Miles and Bush, 1994, have concentrated on 4He, which they view as a logical reaction product for nuclear reactions in solids. While the occurrence of this number of independent observations strongly implies that chemically assisted nuclear reactions in solids are possible, the quantification and the credibility of the results have suffered from low, impurity-level yields and non-reproducibility. In sharp contrast, the thin (<2000A) films used in present work result in transmutation of a significant percentage of the metal in the thin-film cathode due to the "small" number of host atoms. (While, as stressed later, impurity contributions can not be completely ruled out, the term "transmutation products" is used here due to the overwhelming evidence in favor of this identification.) Over a dozen experiments with various types of thin-film coatings have been carried out in different cells (Miley and Patterson, 1996a). Thin-film coatings on 1 mm-diameter plastic/glass microspheres, ranging from 500-A-thick single layers of Pd or Ni to multiple Ni/Pd layers, were used in a flowing packed-bed-type electrolytic cell with a 1 -molar Li2 SO4 light water electrolyte. Nuclear reaction products were obtained in all cases, with several runs resulting in over 40 atomic % of the original coating materials being transmuted to reaction products such as Fe, Si, Mg, Cu, Cr, Zn, and Ag. The present paper deals with the specific case of a single nickel thin film, since it has been analyzed most thoroughly to date and appears to be representative of the behavior observed in the other runs. The "normal" Patterson Power Ceil Tm employs electrolytically coated layers of Ni and Pd on microspheres, and this composition has been extensively studied for power production (Patterson 1996a). The Ni-coated thin film microspheres described here were developed explicitly for reaction product studies, although power production with "conventional" thick Ni electrodes in light water cells has been widely studied (e.g., see 1. Myers et al. 1996 and references therein). The use of thin-film coatings originates from the "swimming electron layer" (SEL) theory proposed eariier (Hora, Miley, et al., 1993; Miley et al, 1993; Miley et al., 1994), which suggests that nuclear reactions are assisted by the use of multilayer thin films with alternating metals that have large differences in Fermi energy levels. The resulting increase in electron density at the film interface is shown to "squeeze" excess electrons between ions, greatly reducing the Coulambic barrier, thus enhancing nuclear reactions. This theory was first studied using thin- film Pd/Ti coatings sputtered onto a large stainless steel substrate electrode (Miley et al., 1994). Those experiments were terminated due to flaking of the films off of the electrode soon after loading and heating occurred. However the results were very encouraging, since high excess heat (estimated to be kW/cm3 at the interface regions) was observed for minutes prior to the disintegration of the thin films. Subsequently, J. Patterson (1 996a) developed a unique electrode configuration using electrochemical deposition of relatively thick (mm) coatings of Ni/Pd layers on millimeter diameter cross-linked polymer microspheres. These microspheres were then employed in a flowing packed-bed-type electrolytic cell (Patterson Power Cell Tm). The coatings, while thicker than the earlier thin-film studies, were found to be quite stable in this configuration, so experiments with thin films (300- to 2000-A thick) on such microspheres were undertaken in the present work. The thin films were laid down using a special sputtering process (Miley, Name, et al., 1996), where the microspheres are suspended in a fluidized state during the spraying process. The metallurgy of the films themselves has been studied before and after electrolysis, using both Auger electron probe techniques and electron microscopic surface analysis. Reaction product measurements have utilized a combination of secondary ion mass spectrometry (SIMS), Energy Dispersive x-ray (EDX) analysis, Auger Electron Spectroscopy (AES), and neutron activation analysis (NAA). SIMS is used to obtain a broad view of both high and low concentration isotopes present and their isotopic ratios, while NAA provides a quantitative measure of the masses of key elements. EDX provides confirmatory data for elements having high concentrations, while AES is used for depth-profiling of high concentration elements. NAA can obtain total quantities of elements in a sample typically containing 10 microspheres, while the other techniques are restricted to probing a local area on single microspheres. Due to variations among microspheres due to location in the packed bed and other effects, this difference in samples becomes very important in present work. The analysis techniques and the nuclear reaction products observed are described further in following sections. ELECTROLYTIC CELL DESCRIPTION AND OPERATION The general configuration of the Pafterson-type electrolytic cell employed is shown in Fig. la. About 1000 microspheres (-O.5 cm3 volume) were used in the packed-bed cell. Titanium electrodes were employed in the present Ni run and in most other runs, except for a few cases where Pt electrodes were used for comparison purposes. .............................................................................. ............... products are produced by +Q reactions via fission of compound nuclei. This model will be presented in detail in a future publication. CONCLUSIONS The results presented here defy conventional views in many ways. First, chemically-assisted nuclear reactions are not widely accepted by the scientific community. The present results not only confront that disbelief, but add a new dimension to the issue by reporting copious light and heavy element reaction products that seem to imply multi-body reactions due to the formation of heavier elements such as Cu and Ag from Ni. Further, a reaction which does not emit intense high-energy gammas is required by the experimental results. All of these features are difficult to comprehend and at first glance seem to point to impurities. However, as stressed, an extensive effort to find an impurity source has not uncovered one. Also, there is other strong evidence (such as isotope shifts, the different products occurring when the coating material is changed, and the similarity in yield trends with results from other workers), which supports the conclusion that the elements observed are reaction products. Fortunately, cell experiments of this type are relatively straightforward and inexpensive. Thus far, reaction products, such as reported here, have been detected by the authors in all dozen experiments of this type performed, using a variety of metallic films. In this sense, the phenomenon seems highly reproducible. The use of thin films as developed here offers a way to simplify the analysis since a large fraction of the film contains the new elements and their localization in the film allows a qualitative determination. Hopefully, open-minded scientists will attempt to replicate the experiments to convince themselves. If verified, the thin-film approach to chemically assisted nuclear reactions opens the way to a whole new field of science. REFERENCES Bockris, J.O'M and G.H. Lin (organizers), 1996. Proceedings of the 1996 Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conference, J. New Energy, 1, 1, 11 1-1 18. Cravens, Dennis, 1995, "Flowing Electrolyte Calorimetry," Proc. 5th Intem. Conf on Cold Fusion, Valbonne, France, IMRA Europe, 79-86. Crouch-Baker, S., M.C.H. McKubre, F.L. Tanzelia, 1995, "Some Thermodynamic Properties of the H(D)-Pd System," Proc. 5th intern. Conf on Cold Fusion, Valbonne, France, IMRA Europe, 431 @. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 16:46:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA10056; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:31:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:31:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610102331.TAA06613@ns1.ptd.net> X-Sender: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: revtec@postoffice.ptd.net (Jeff Fink) Subject: need chemical advice Resent-Message-ID: <"nOymT2.0.1T2.TTONo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1525 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? Thanks, Jeff Fink From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 17:02:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA14555; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:53:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 16:54:41 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: need chemical advice Resent-Message-ID: <"ERwVW1.0.9Z3.5oONo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1526 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the >surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? > > >Thanks, > >Jeff Fink Maybe muriatic acid (HCL). It's sold for pH adjustment of swimming pools, so it's easy to buy. Use care--it comes fully concentrated. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 17:48:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA23250; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 17:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: 10 Oct 96 20:32:13 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: need chemical advice Message-ID: <961011003213_100433.1541_BHG74-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Htbax1.0.Ch5.COPNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1527 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum > vapors from the surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? > Would NaOH work? Dunno. There's one rather nasty little trick which most definitely will do this - but you will have to be careful and provide most thorough ventilation. Preferably out of doors. Simply rub a little mercury (Hg) into the surface. Once it has broken through the oxide layer, it will amalgamate with the aluminium, dissolve it such that it cannot form a passivating oxide film. The end result will be a surface with nothing but a few blobs of Hg and some feathery Al2O3 crystals. AND a lot of toxic Hg vapour in the atmosphere. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 18:47:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA08250; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:40:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:40:31 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 21:39:51 -0400 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199610110139.VAA14919@spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-reply-to: <961011003213_100433.1541_BHG74-1@CompuServe.COM> (message from Chris Tinsley on 10 Oct 96 20:32:13 EDT) Subject: Re: need chemical advice Resent-Message-ID: <"kaRRf2.0.l02.DMQNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1528 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum > vapors from the surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? > Would NaOH work? Depends on your definition of "work". Aluminum plus lye plus water is known as the Draino reaction. (I always thought it funny how they could charge so much for a can of lye and a few bits of aluminum foil.) I would try a weak solution in a well ventilated hood or out of doors. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:06:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA14216 for billb@eskimo.com; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:06:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:06:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: daved@nimbus.anu.edu.au Thu Oct 10 19:06:01 1996 Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id TAA14146 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:05:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daved@localhost) by nimbus.anu.edu.au (8.8.0/8.8.0) id MAA03211 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 12:04:10 +1000 (EST) Old-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 12:04:10 +1000 (EST) From: Dave DAVIES Message-Id: <199610110204.MAA03211@nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: > From: Larry Wharton .... > ... > The problem with an ou motor like this is that the proof of the > conservation of energy is very exact and does not allow it to work as > claimed. There is, and never can be, a proof of conservation of energy. It is an idea based on experience that gets modified and re-defined as we change our conceptual models. dave From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:16:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA13115; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:00:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:00:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 21:57:47 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: need chemical advice In-Reply-To: <199610110139.VAA14919@spectre.mitre.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Fefkv.0.qC3.JfQNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1530 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo, I like Roberts' method best. Also; Jeff, are you as a side line handing us a simple metal sputtering technique? One persons 'dirt' [the aluminum] .... is anothers' coating! J On Thu, 10 Oct 1996, Robert I. Eachus wrote: > > > Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum > > vapors from the surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? > > Would NaOH work? > > Depends on your definition of "work". Aluminum plus lye plus > water is known as the Draino reaction. (I always thought it funny how > they could charge so much for a can of lye and a few bits of aluminum > foil.) I would try a weak solution in a well ventilated hood or out > of doors. > > > Robert I. Eachus > > with Standard_Disclaimer; > use Standard_Disclaimer; > function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:17:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA12481; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 18:56:06 -0700 Message-Id: <199610110156.SAA00387@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Re: need chemical advice To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Lu3Gb.0.u23.jcQNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1529 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: You wrote: > >Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the >surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? Those NaOH crystals they sell to unclog the sewer line contains some aluminum shavings to 'furthur activate' the uncloggoing action. So I would imagine a hot concentrated solution of Drano crystals should work on the aluminum pretty good. No guarantees. And watch out for that concentrated stuff. If you ever read the Lye cans, it tells you NEVER to dissolve the crystans in an aluminum utensil. You will have a bottomless utensil with the solution working on your feet. And except for a heat too high warping the acrylic, there propably will be no harm to the plastic. Again no guarantees -- read the label and talk to a plumber. -AK- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:18:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA14337; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961011100710.21ef3c9a@po.pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8@po.pacific.net.sg X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mpower Subject: ?(chem): chlorine Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:04:53 +0800 Resent-Message-ID: <"QR-j02.0.uV3.ikQNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1531 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: One of my rigs is generating hefty quantities of chlorine gas. Has anyone got any suggestions about what I might do with this stuff ? My thinking is that I should build an H2O separator and try to mix the H2 and Cl (to HCl) so that I can handle it (my facilities are inadequate for handling gasses). But perhaps someone else might have a better clue ? operational description: supersaturated H20 with NaCl; electrolysis thanks for any help... pa From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:34:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA17640; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:20:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:20:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: need chemical advice Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:19:06 +0000 Message-ID: <19961011021904.AAA1270@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"M4Q2k2.0.OJ4.HxQNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1532 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:31 PM 10/10/96 +0000, you wrote: >Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the >surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? > > >Thanks, > >Jeff Fink > As already suggested by others, dilute sodium hydroxide or hydrochloric acid will react with the aluminum. Hydrogen is evolved in both instances. Keep the temperature low (less than 30 deg C.), since acrylic polymers may also react with the reagents. Keep the time as short as possible. Use test samples first. Wash the acrylic thoroughly with plenty of water. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 19:50:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA22624; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 19:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 12:42:56 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper In-Reply-To: <961010182536_330755355@emout17.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ihCXQ.0.QX5.DHRNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1533 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 10 Oct 1996 FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > Abstract, Introduction, and Conclusion of Miley's report. Scanned it. > Body was left out as it was to long. > Frank can you put the whole thing on your web site including all the figures? Thanks, Martin From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 20:47:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA00743; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 20:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 20:20:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:19:17 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, manty@ctc.com, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, zap@dnai.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper In-Reply-To: <961010182536_330755355@emout17.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"poW5X.0.RB.PqRNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1534 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Frank, Some questions; please; 1] What was the total amount of fluid used? 2] What is the source and purity of; a] the water b] the metal salts 3] What is the rough cumulative flow and rate through the material 4] Do we read correctly the total volume of 'beads' to be 0.5 cc? 5] So how much fluid was re circulated through the 0.5 cc of beads? Cross check; 1A] take same fluid amount and salts and re circulate through plain styrene beads for same length of time 2A] evaporate water under reduced pressure 3A] column chromatograph [separately] fluid [aqueous] and 'blank' beads [solvent ie, MEK, acetone] 1B] repeat cross check with current applied. Use same type of pumps, tubing, fittings, etc.... but not the same ones used in run for paper. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 10 22:21:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA23731; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:14:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 22:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610110513.WAA28761@serbia.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: dan davidson paper URL Resent-Message-ID: <"C0L-33.0.io5.SUTNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1535 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:33 AM 10/10/96 -0700, you wrote: > > Linkname: FREE ENERGY, GRAVITY, AND THE AETHER. > URL: http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm > > >.....................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 > Thanks, Dans resent paper is also at Keelynet Linkname: On the Production of Aetheric Stress Waves Utilizing Sound Vibration" or "Sonic Stimulation of the Aether" http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/sound1.htm Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 00:00:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA15365; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9610110654.AA14822@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:07:39 -0500 To: g-miley@uiuc.edu From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) Subject: RE: Miley's paper Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, manty@ctc.com, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, zap@dnai.com Resent-Message-ID: <"dvqss1.0._l3.2-UNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1536 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Response to paper by George H. Miley, How could I put a thin film of Pd on a 1 mm. thick by 2cm. by 10 cm. nickel electrods? What procedure and matterials do I need to get? >Preprint prepared for 2nd Intematlonai Conference on Low Energy Nudear >Reactions, >Texas A & M, College Station Texas, September 13-14, 1996. > > > NUCLEAR TRANSMUTATIONS IN THIN-FILM NICKEL COATINGS > UNDERGOING ELECTROLYSIS > > >Fusion Studies Laboratory, U. of Illinois >103 S. Goodwin Avenue, Urbana, IL 61801-2984 >Ph. 217-333-3772, Fax 217-333-2906 >E-mail: g-miley@uiuc.edu > > ************************************ * David Doty * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * home 503 266 3969 * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ************************************ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 00:09:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA16237; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:04:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:04:04 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Miley's paper In-Reply-To: <9610110654.AA14822@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"aazy53.0.dz3.p5VNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1537 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, David Doty wrote: > Response to paper by George H. Miley, > > How could I put a thin film of Pd on a 1 mm. thick by 2cm. by 10 cm. > nickel electrods? > What procedure and matterials do I need to get? > By far the easiest would be to go to your Yellow pages and look up electroplaters in your neighbourhood. I guess people who plate Jewelry would be the best. Ask a few if they've had any experience etc etc. My guess is that it would cost less than $100.00 Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 02:03:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA00190; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:02:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961011091120.006f2a70@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 02:11:20 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: need chemical advice Resent-Message-ID: <"PYihH2.0.u2.cqWNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1539 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:31 PM 10/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the >surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? > > >Thanks, > >Jeff Fink > > Next to the Draino, you should be able to find "Red Devil Lye". It is 100% Lye (NaOH). It will not harm acrylic, but will eat away at polycarbonate (bullet-proof glass), so you want to be sure it is acrylic. Hopefully goes without saying, but NaOH is hell on skin. The warnings on the can are not strong enough. They should have pictures of what it does to skin. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 02:43:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA18901; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:28:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9610110726.AA15004@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 00:39:27 -0500 To: herman@college.antioch.edu From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) Subject: Re: Surface tension Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"4RGKV.0.Bd4.9SVNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1538 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear John Schnurer, I ran a pretest on deionized water in the set of Capillary tubes. The inner diameters are (.5mm, 1.0mm, 1.25mm, 1.5mm) about 3 inches long. The 0.5 mm tube had a 16 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.1 mm tube had a 10 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.25 mm tube had a 22 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.5 mm tube had a 6 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. Can you explain why the 1.25 mm tube had the highest rise? I thought the smaller the tube the higher the deionized water would rise in the Capillary tube. Maybe the Moleculare bonds in the deionized water stop it from going higher in the 0.5 mm tube. The surface tention I think should be (the inner diamiter times pi times the rise). If this is so the surface tention mm squared is: The 0.5 mm tube had 25 mm squared. The 1.1 mm tube had 34.5 mm squared. The 1.25 mm tube had 86.4 mm squared. The 1.5 mm tube had 28.3 mm squared. > 3 main forces control curvature of meniscus in 10 mm tube; > > Capillary tries to draw water up sides > Air pressure pushes down > > ***** Surface tension *** is the "skin" which will try to balance >these forces. > > > Have you folks ever made a camera obscura? > no > > We could probably easily project image of meniscus on wall, >ceiling or slide projector screen in semi-darkened room. > Then the effect would be easily seen and photographed. > This type of highly visible demonstration in in my opinion very >useful and important in class room. > > JHS > > Will run more tests next week and post results when I get some students involved in it. >> > water >> > water and vinegar >> > water and baking soda >> > water and soap >> > water and rubbing alcohol >> > water and antifreeze (Ask Doty for help with this one) >> > water and sugar >> > water and ammonia (windex) >> > water and wiskey..If you dad says OK. >> > water and dirt >> > water and windshiield washer fluid >> > ************************************ * David Doty * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * home 503 266 3969 * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ************************************ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 04:13:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA00967; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:11:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:11:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: ?(chem): chlorine Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 11:11:10 +0000 Message-ID: <19961011111108.AAA15544@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"aeEf12.0.1F.ZjYNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1540 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 02:04 AM 10/11/96 +0000, you wrote: >One of my rigs is generating hefty quantities of chlorine gas. >Has anyone got any suggestions about what I might do with this stuff ? >My thinking is that I should build an H2O separator and try to mix the H2 >and Cl (to HCl) so that I can handle it (my facilities are inadequate for >handling gasses). But perhaps someone else might have a better clue ? > >operational description: supersaturated H20 with NaCl; electrolysis > >thanks for any help... >pa > Pass the chlorine gas through a sodium hydroxide solution; this makes bleach, a material that is safer and better to cope with. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 04:22:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA01750; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 04:21:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: need chemical advice Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 11:21:07 +0000 Message-ID: <19961011112105.AAA18757@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"2LK9w3.0.GR.tsYNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1541 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 09:11 AM 10/11/96 +0000, you wrote: >At 07:31 PM 10/10/96 -0400, you wrote: >>Does anyone have an idea of how to remove condensed aluminum vapors from the >>surface of acrylic without damaging the surface? Would NaOH work? >> >> >>Thanks, >> >>Jeff Fink >> >> > >Next to the Draino, you should be able to find "Red Devil Lye". It is >100% Lye (NaOH). It will not harm acrylic, but will eat away at >polycarbonate (bullet-proof glass), so you want to be sure it is acrylic. > >Hopefully goes without saying, but NaOH is hell on skin. The warnings >on the can are not strong enough. They should have pictures of what it >does to skin. > This a strange world we live in. One can buy these hazards at your local hardware store but you cannot buy much safer or innocuous chemicals from a chemical supply house because you have a "residential" address. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 08:32:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA13646; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 08:20:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 11:20:15 -0400 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199610111520.LAA16196@spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-reply-to: <2.2.16.19961011100710.21ef3c9a@po.pacific.net.sg> (message from Mpower on Fri, 11 Oct 1996 10:04:53 +0800) Subject: Re: ?(chem): chlorine Resent-Message-ID: <"aE0xE1.0.2L3.6NcNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1542 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mpower (mpowers8@po.pacific.net.sg) asked: > One of my rigs is generating hefty quantities of chlorine gas. > Has anyone got any suggestions about what I might do with this stuff? > My thinking is that I should build an H2O separator and try to mix the H2 > and Cl (to HCl) so that I can handle it (my facilities are inadequate for > handling gasses). But perhaps someone else might have a better clue ? > operational description: supersaturated H20 with NaCl; electrolysis > thanks for any help... Bubble through either dilute NaOH or stronger Na2CO3. For something like this there is actually no problem using NaHCO3, it is just more expensive. (Of course all three are damned cheap and can be bought at most grocery stores as lye, Bicarbonate of Soda, or Baking Soda.) You can afford to use a copper or stainless steel grid in the bubbler to break up the bubbles, but it shouldn't be an issue. However, in any case, even with lye you will get some carbonate (from CO2 pulled from the air) and therefore some CO2 generated, so you will need some venting, but not very much. Also, a note if you really mean that "hefty quantities." Get a Ph test kit--good ones are available from pet supply stores for testing aquariums--and try to keep the Ph in your solution above eight. (The "right" value depends on your setup, and how much Na2CO3 you have in your apparatus normally.) Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 13:15:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA25040; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 13:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 13:08:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 11 Oct 1996 13:07:13 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/11/96 13:07:10 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"cvuUO1.0.A76.magNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1543 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET - Vortexian's I'm going to try to get John L. to post Miley's paper. (We need to talk John!) This will probably take a couple days, even if everything works right. But I'd like everyone to have access. Any other comments? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 13:27:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA26124; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 13:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 13:13:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 11 Oct 1996 13:12:13 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/11/96 13:12:23 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"vY0fV1.0.-N6.MfgNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1544 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS - Dear Vortexians: This is somewhat off the topic, but I need some info from a broad base (primarily domestic on this one, sorry Chris, Martin, etc). For about the last 6 weeks I have suddenly be getting a high volume of "hang up" calls on my answering machine. I have talked to the phone company, and they are attributing it to "automatic dialing" and telemarketing. I don't think they are that sharp to automatically differentiate answering machines, and I am wondering why my name would suddenly show up on dozens and hundreds of lists? (A personal spam maybe, some sort of vendetta? I can't even imagine who that would be.) - So the question is: Are there any Vortexians who have an ans. machine on during the day (either singles or dual working parties) and have also noticed an upswing in hang up calls, or should I suspect that there is some single (alledg ed 'intelligent') entity behind these irritations? Thanks. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 14:37:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA08681; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: 11 Oct 96 17:03:38 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS Message-ID: <961011210337_100433.1541_BHG75-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"j0TAp3.0.X72.sThNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1545 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark, Why assume this is a purely national problem? These days vices spread accross boundaries as quickly as ... a very quick thing. We get these problems as well. Used to be it was usually burglars checking to see if you were at home before coming around to collect your belongings. I presume you have an equivalent to our '1471' code, which gives the day, time and caller number of the last caller and invites you to dial '3' to reurn the call? Or those little gadgies which log every call with the originator's number? Even with the former you can probably get one of the call originators. These things have, they tell me, spoiled a lot of beautiful friendships. And marriages. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 14:59:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14507; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:36:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:35:36 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Mark Hugo, Northern" at Oct 11, 96 01:12:13 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xP3we2.0.YY3.0thNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1546 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > the question is: Are there any Vortexians who have an ans. machine on during > the day (either singles or dual working parties) and have also noticed an > upswing in hang up calls, or should I suspect that there is some single > (alledged 'intelligent') entity behind these irritations? Thanks. MDH Get Caller-ID service. Turn on anonymous caller reject. See hang up calls reduced by 95%. Remainder are identifed on caller-id log, so you can call them up and scream at them. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 15:21:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18486; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 96 14:50:41 PDT From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <9610112150.AA14475@moebius.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS Resent-Message-ID: <"DrgBn3.0.fW4.p6iNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1548 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've been having trouble lately deciding whether to buy skim milk, or 2%. What do you Vortexians think? :-) Seriously, couldn't this mailing list be kept even remotely on topic? I get enough mail as it is without getting general blah blah on this list. Things discussed here should have at least some connection to energy, I would think....Mark, couldn;t you just take a survey of your coworkers on the phone thing? And, call me callous, but I don't really need to hear the ins and outs of the members personal lives either...take it as given that we all have lives and all the complexities that entails. Oh well, bottom line is its Bill's list, so whatever he wants is fine. I'm just putting in a vote for keeping posts here loosely focused on energy. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 15:23:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18335; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:52:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 14:52:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:50:54 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "Mark Hugo, Northern" at Oct 11, 96 01:07:13 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"2zM_K3.0.KU4.76iNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1547 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Vortexian's I'm going to try to get John L. to post Miley's paper. Three criteria to meet: 1.) Absolutely positively not without Miley's approval (and or copyright holder if different.) 2.) Must be relatively small bytewise (I only get 2M for my entire ISP budget and I'm already overdrawn.) 3.) Since I haven't read the excerpts, it can't be just a theory paper -- I've had to turn away too many CF theory papers because I have no independent way to evaluate them. The only time people get to "speak CF theory" on my my web site is if they have experimental apparatus to back it up. Links are relatively cheap, though. So most any tie-in to CF will warrant a link to that site. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 16:40:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA05283; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:13:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:13:14 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:01:52 -0400 Message-ID: <961011190151_1447006655@emout15.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper Resent-Message-ID: <"NnVkz.0.RI1.9IjNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1549 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I don't know if Miley would approve of this. Perhaps CETI will post it on there web site. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 17:02:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA10488; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 16:36:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:34:17 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"bx5i32.0.nZ2.BejNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1550 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On a purely technical level hand up calls can fall into many areas. Two of these areas are electronic: Fax junk mail Modem search for computer entry. If you hang a fax machine on your line you can find out if you are on a fax-junk list. If you find a good friendly hacker, they sometimes want to 'do battle'.... you can forward to him for a while. On 11 Oct 1996, Mark Hugo, Northern wrote: > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: VORTEXIAN SURVEY ON HANG UP CALLS > - > Dear Vortexians: This is somewhat off the topic, but I need some info > from a broad base (primarily domestic on this one, sorry Chris, Martin, > etc). For about the last 6 weeks I have suddenly be getting a high volume > of "hang up" calls on my answering machine. I have talked to the phone company, > and they are attributing it to "automatic dialing" and telemarketing. I don't > think they are that sharp to automatically differentiate answering machines, > and I am wondering why my name would suddenly show up on dozens and hundreds > of lists? (A personal spam maybe, some sort of vendetta? I can't even imagine > who that would be.) > - > So the question is: Are there any Vortexians who have an ans. machine on during > the day (either singles or dual working parties) and have also noticed an > upswing in hang up calls, or should I suspect that there is some single (alledg > ed 'intelligent') entity behind these irritations? Thanks. MDH > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 17:25:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA19095; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:14:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:14:17 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:12:53 -0400 Message-ID: <961011201252_1513489747@emout12.mail.aol.com> To: CldFusion@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, GeorgeHM@aol.com, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, Puthoff@aol.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, CentManGrp@aol.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, zap@dnai.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Yusmar tests Resent-Message-ID: <"FxaUh2.0.Fg4.NBkNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1551 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Yusmar Oct 11, 1996 The testing of the Yusmar was continued today. The testing process involved measuring the electrical input to the device and measuring the thermal output. The ratio of these two parameters was compared after the device came into thermal equilibrium. Various modifications were made to the system in an attempt to get it working. The first test indicated a COP of 1.05% The second test indicated a COP of 1.08% Many difficulties were encountered during testing. Changes in system water pressure effected the cooling water flow. Changes in system voltage effected the power into the system. A change in any parameter moved the temperature at which the system came into thermal equilibrium. This resulted in energy being added or subtracted from the large thermal mass of the system. The total cumulative result of all of the inaccuracies is difficult to determine. In my opinion the Yusmar did show a 5% anomalous energy, however, the anomalies may have been the result of instrument error. We are going to make efforts increase the COP to 200%. If we succeed, the results will be beyond doubt and the device will be commercial. We do know that, to date, commercial quantities of energy have not been produced. Frank Znidarsic  From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 17:32:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA20067; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:18:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 17:18:35 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:17:24 -0400 Message-ID: <961011201721_1379903720@emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, CldFusion@aol.com Subject: to doty Resent-Message-ID: <"pjvyl1.0.Nv4.PFkNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1552 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David one of the things we tried was to add glycol "antifreeze"to the Yusmar. The glycol did not work, infact, it make the Yusmar run much quieter. It some how effected the mechanical properties of the water and killed the cavitation effect. I am interested in your surface tension tests. What effect does glycol have on surface tension? Is there any substance that has the opposite effect? If there is, we will try it. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 19:28:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA15629; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 21:22:40 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610120222.VAA09017@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: Yusmar tests Resent-Message-ID: <"lHtYY2.0.7q3.t4mNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1553 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:12 PM 10/11/96 -0400, Frank wrote: > The testing of the Yusmar was continued today. > The first test indicated a COP of 1.05% > The second test indicated a COP of 1.08% > Many difficulties were encountered during testing. Changes... Frank, are you doing "snapshot" power balance measurements? By that I mean simultaneously reading Tin, Tout, flow rate, and input power...and then computing the COP for that "snapshot" of the Yusmar's performance? If so, then you are indeed at the mercy of changes...i.e. the degree to which the system is not steady-state. A better alternative is to do a time-integrated energy balance measurement. For this you need to let the Yusmar heat a known quantity of water up over a reasonable period of time (e.g. 10 minutes). During this time, you integrate the electrical power delivered to the Yusmar with a watthout meter. You measure the starting and ending temperature of the water and compute the average COP for the test period from that data plus the mass of water involved. You can choose an appropriate mass of water to heat so the delta-T over the test period is not too great but still accurately measureable. - 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-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 20:15:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA19501; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 19:46:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: , Subject: Re: DD&AJH(Surface Tention Capillary tube?) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:45:20 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BBB7C5.E1798B20" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"1QhKI.0.Wm4.dPmNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1554 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BBB7C5.E1798B20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- > From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com > To: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us; vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: DD&AJH(Surface Tention Capillary tube?) > Date: Wednesday, October 09, 1996 6:00 PM > > > David I don't know why you got the results you did. Does anyone else know? > > Frank Z > The trouble is probably cleanliness, Frank. Water makes about a zero contact angle with CLEAN glass. For consistant results, the capillary tubes should all be cleaned with something like sodium triphosphate. With this done, with clean water, the capillary head should be proportional to 1/D (where D = tube i.d.). Frank Stenger ------=_NextPart_000_01BBB7C5.E1798B20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



----------
> From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com
> To: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us; vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: DD&AJH(Surface Tention = Capillary tube?)
> Date: Wednesday, October 09, 1996 6:00 = PM
>
>
> David I don't know why you got the results = you did.  Does anyone else know?
>
> Frank Z
> =

The trouble is probably cleanliness, Frank.  Water makes = about a zero contact
angle with CLEAN glass.  For consistant = results, the capillary tubes should all be
cleaned with something = like sodium triphosphate.  With this done, with clean water,
the = capillary head should be proportional to 1/D (where D =3D tube = i.d.).

Frank Stenger

------=_NextPart_000_01BBB7C5.E1798B20-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 22:14:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA20458; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:13:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:12:59 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: D. Davidson exerpt Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"TshRu.0.a_4.aZoNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1556 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Here's an exerpt from danart1.asc, keelynet file, from Dan A. Davidson's book "A Breakthrough to New Free Energy Sources." I think we may have discussed this in the first month of vortex-L operation. As far as I know, no one has ever tried it. If any subscribers still have sonoluminescence parts laying around, it wouldn't be that hard to do a quick test. With an anonymous source, the whole thing might just be a rumor. But if a particular ultrasound freq affects water, then there might be a more direct way to extract energy than with vortex devices. .....................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 VERIFICATION OF FREQUENCY TO PRODUCE ETHERIC FORCE FROM WATER ? A recent (1965) possible verification of the frequency Keely used to dissociate water into etheric force was related to me by a scientist when we were discussing certain aspects of free energy. He wishes to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, but his name is on file. I have no other verification of this experiment, however I believe it merits telling. The scientist, I shall call him Dr. X, was doing experiments with ultrasonic sound in a column of water. The object of the experiments was to devise a means of separating various densities of materials by injecting them into a column of water which was subjected to an ultrasonic standing wave vibration. The experimental setup is sketched in Figure 3-3 (for BBS considerations a description follows). A Barium Titanate ultrasonic transducer was fixed to the bottom of a quartz tube which was closed at the bottom and open at the top. Pure water was poured into the tube and the water column was "tuned" so that a standing wave was produced at 40,000 CPS (cycles per second). The transducer was powered by a 700 Watt power amplifier which was driven by an ultrasonic frequency generator. Because of the large amount of power put into the column of water a certain amount of evaporation took place at a constant rate when the transducer was energized. Therefore, to maintain a standing wave in the water column a feedback device caused the frequency to be raised as the water evaporated and the temperature changed. As a test, Dr. X decided to run through the experiment with only water in the tube to insure that a standing wave was maintained as the water evaporated and the frequency rose higher and higher. When the experiment was started everything worked beautifully. Dr. X took periodic readings of his instrumentation and was assured that the standing wave was being maintained. Suddenly, with no warning whatever the water disappeared from the open quartz tube. He looked up thinking to see the water splashed on the ceiling when to his amazement a clean hole went right through the ceiling. The hole was the same size as the inside of the quartz tube. Further investigation showed the hole continued on through the roof also! Dr. X checked his notebook and found the last frequency entry to be 41,300 CPS. It was shortly after this that the water disappeared. Because of the time interval between the last reading and the disappearing water, the frequency sent to the transducer was higher than the last reading and Dr. X said it could well have been very close to 42,800 CPS, the Keely dissociation frequency. (11) This obviously dangerous event caused Dr. X to dismantle the equipment and try some other approach to his problem. This experiment points the way to the use of our modern technology in conjunction with Keely's laws of dissociation to change matter into energy without the use of radioactive materials or extremely expensive atomic accelerators. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 22:47:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA25820; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:45:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 22:44:36 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"HJWWy3.0.MJ6.D2pNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1557 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Another one. Same effect? .....................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 Newsgroups: alt.sci.physics.new-theories From: elf@menageri.demon.co.uk (Elf) Subject: micro-cavitation fusion Organization: ELF Services Reply-To: elf@menageri.demon.co.uk Date: Fri, 23 Sep 1994 00:19:10 +0000 Micro-cavitation fusion, or luke-warm fusion Nobody knows WHY cold nuclear fusion works, or even if it does. \conventional theroy does not cover it, and the ones invented to explain it do not work. O.k, fine, so heres one that does, maybe. I have a friend who does reaserch for the MOD, on subs etc. He showed me a paper on cavitation. It was also mentioned on Tomorrows world apperently. Cavitation is when you get bubbles forming in a violently stirred liquid, for those who don't know. This effect occurs around submarine propellors at depths of about 300ft or lower. Ie at pressures of 10atms. It can also me produced at1atms (up here at the surface), by pushing a ultrasound frequency into a sealed container of liquid. Water is best. This has been know for ages, since 1952. What is new is that these bubbles glow in the dark. Dimly blue. Each bubble is aprox 1 to 3 microns in diameter, it depends on the wavelength. What my friend was doing was studying the energy inside them, with a veiw to preventing it, (he didn't say why, MOD stuff). It turns out that the bubbles glow becuase the energys involved produce a plasma inside as they collapse. one that is at temp/pressures equal or greater to that at the core of the sun ! Reaserch into the experimental set-ups used in cold-fusion show that most used magnetic stirrers which produce small amounts of ultrasound, and some did not. I made a small set-up using a glass tube, and a ultrasound transducer. The end cap was positivly charged to attract free electrons. The inital run with plain water heated it no more than expected, ie slightly less energy out than in. The next using heavy water, plus dissolved deuterium gas was a little more dramatic. The equipment was activated in one second bursts, in case of radiation production. In aprox 1/10 of a second enough energy was liberated to vapourise the water, causing a large steam explostion. also sufficent light to blind me temporally. There was no detectable radiation. upon later thought I theroised that the oxygen atoms wheer acting as neutron absorbers, and the surrounding water coped with the gamma. Since I am currently in finacial dire striats, would anyone care to follow up on this. It is to important to be forgotten due to accident. I suggest a modified internal combustion engine would work. The air intake converted to a water intake, with the fuel injector acting as a gasious deuterium injector. The spark-plug would be replaced with an ultra-sound transducer (speaker). Basically a fusion powered steam engine. N.B, conventional gas plasma theories of fusion still apply, its how the plasma is created thats weird ! -- ############################################################################# # # _________ __ _________ # # Minds are like Parachutes: # | ______| | | | ______| # # # | |____ | | | |____ # # They must be OPEN # | ____| | | | ____| # # # | |______ | |____ | | # # to operate! # |_________| |_______| |__| # # # elf@menageri.demon.co.uk # ############################################################################# From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 23:06:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA29009; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:04:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 01:57:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610120557.BAA26864@mail.inforamp.net> X-Authentication-Warning: mail.inforamp.net: Host ts41-06.tor.iSTAR.ca [204.191.140.226] didn't use HELO protocol X-Sender: quinney@inforamp.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Resent-Message-ID: <"ZXgTJ.0.557.JJpNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1558 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > He > wishes to remain anonymous for obvious reasons, but his name is on > file. I have no other verification of this experiment, however I > believe it merits telling. Bill I may have talked to a witness to this experiment about 3 years ago. Don't recall his name or the group, but I remember the description of this device. He told the same story as an observer would. I believe he was a member of one of the ITS International Tesla Society chapters in California. If the inventor tried to patent something like that it'll be classified for sure. His best bet may be to post it himself, then sell kits. Maybe "JW" McGinnis over at ITS knows more about it... Colin From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 23:15:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA00983; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:14:13 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325F365D.5A9E@rt66.com> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:16:17 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: 547@rt66.com, Franklin@rt66.com, Avenue@rt66.com, Santa@rt66.com, Fe@rt66.com, NM@rt66.com, 87501@rt66.com, USA@rt66.com, 505-757-6145.@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com, rgeorge@hooked.net Subject: SIMS as CF reactor Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------7FA547B55DC2" Resent-Message-ID: <"3jqgw2.0.HF.qSpNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1559 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------7FA547B55DC2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Dr. Bockris, Thank you for your recent letter, which I read with great interest, along with today's post, which expresses a natural skepticism that isotopic anomalies in SIMS testing would have been overlooked since 1972. I'm going to look up your 1995 paper in Infinite Energy on the relationship of typical impurities to surface CF reactions. I spent eight hours today at Los Alamos National Laboratory, searching through Chemical Abstracts for reports on "Explosions-Wire-Electrical". It's a field that started about 1920, and languished from 1928 (The Great Depression?) to 1956, and then there were conferences every few years on the topic. The last 20 years, remarkably little work- the method is being used as a light source and for depositing metal coatings. Recent research is very mathematical. The typical wire explosion paper in recent decades measures products in terms of their mass, velocity, and angular distribution, not their chemistry. So how can they tell H3 from He3, or C13 from CH? I'm looking into that literature, and will soon inspect the voluminous gas and spark discharge literature to see if I can find the same anomalies involving unexpected nuclear reactions that J.J. Thomson found in 1913 in his positive ion gas discharge work, according to my reading of his reports. The bias against seeing these anomalies and interpreting them as unexpected nuclear events is enormous! So, so far, to me it's plausible that they would have been overlooked. It's possible to explain away and disregard just about anything, since most experiments are almost unmanageably complex and subtle. I hope some of these odd tidbits of anomaly reports pop up in your memory. Let me know immediately. I will do my best to check them out. How many times did researches notice fogging of wrapped photographic plates before 1896? It seems every week, I hear about a CF experiment involving gas discharges, ion beam bombardment, high temperatures, or sparks. For instance, Sept.,1996 Fusion Technology has "Spark-Induced Radiation from Hydrogen or Deuterium-Loaded Palladium," by Ernest D. Klema and Gerald W. Iseler of Tufts University. They commented, "It is of interest that Rout et al.,["Copious Low Energy Emissions from Palladium Loaded wtih Hydrogen or Deuterium,", Indian J. Technol., 29, p. 571 (1991)] have observed 'low energy, low intensity radiation from palladium samples loaded with deuterium and hydrogen using plasma focus and other loading techniques.'" Well, that's just what SIMS is! I bet the designers and operators have been dealing with unwelcome and mysterious anomalies for 4 decades, and have learned how to stay in the parameters where nuclear reactions are only occasional glitches. Why did Miley's SIMS get those skyhigh Na23 readings, and Mizuno the same for C and O? Peter Glucks' missive is wonderful, and I think he's pointing us in the right way, in that we really have to extend our imaginations to enjoy these new nuclear realities. It reminded me of your ideas in your letter of Sept. 25: "If one looks at the whole galaxy of phenomena which have been produced since 1989, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that an interfacial electric field (around 10E7 volts cm-1) acting on protons and electrons in the presence of metals produces nuclear reactions and excess nuclear heat in acceptable and practical amounts." Without a clear theoretical justifiction, I keep picturing that crowding a lot of electrons into a lattice will help protons momentarily turn into neutrons that can immediately sneak into into innocent nuclei, fattening them up for imminent nuclear harvests. I believe Elio Conte wrote up a similar scenario this spring [conte@teseo.it]. Rich Murray --------------7FA547B55DC2 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Received: from mail.eskimo.com (smartlst@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id BAA22052 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 01:52:51 -0600 (MDT) Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA11025; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 00:53:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 09:42:21 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <325ca8e3.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: "vortex" Cc: "Peter Glueck" Subject: HENR vs LENR paradigm. Resent-Message-ID: <"z7XgJ1.0.Bi2.CkANo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1513 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Dear Vortex Fellows, Actually I am able to feel a lot of empathy toward Martin's problem. The existing high energy nuclear reactions paradigm is not compatible with the new phenomena and we do not have yet an alternative, a LENR paradigm. On Sept 25, 1996 Martin wrote (quoting from memory): -The miracles occuring in a transmuting cell: a) The reaction rate is much too fast, with many orders of magnitude; b) There is no ionizing radiation; c) No radioactive nuclei appear (Note: anyway stable isotopes are dominant in almost all experiments-- exceptions Savvatimova et al, Wolf.) The situation really seems impossible and Martin, as well as other inquiring minds are perfectly justified to get a solution; ERROR is the most easiest and handy. However experimental data are accumulating and both branches of the dilemma are now equally impossible- in the frame of the HENR paradigm. Because I am working in an institute specialized in isotopes, I am very motivated to find a solution. Because my other speciality is management of technology and I am very familiar with the problems of creativity I will try an inter (trans)- disciplinar approach to the problem. ................................................................. (For those interested in a holistic view of the field perhaps the following paper will be of great use: "Isotopicity, Implications and Applications" by Alexander A. Berezin Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 1992, vol 17,no 1 pp 74-80 BTW, if somebody knows Prof. Berezin or , an authority and expert in isotopes it would interesting to ask his opinion. In 1989 Berezin has published a paper (abstract?) re CF but later has not been active, as far as I am informed. ) ................................................................... A Change of Paradigm is Necessary. You get good advises for such an action in the book: "PARADIGMS-the business of discovering the future" by Joel Arthur Barker. For managers, in order to get positive change, you have to pick out which obviously unchangeable step could improve your business. When it is identified you have to change it; it was only seemingly impossible. If we try to find such a fixation in Martin's list we get the word-- REACTION. As long as HENR, hot fusion, hot fission reactions take place, the nuclei are indestructible and the results obtained HAVE to be erroneous. We have to find an other class of nuclear reactions. In the limits of linear logic, the solution offered by me is unique. Using metaphors. The use of metaphors for creativity is well known, at least in theory. .................................................................. One of my favorite works illustrating this method is Hannu Vanharanta's Dr. Thesis "Hyperknowledge and Continuous Strategy in Executive Support Systems", Abo Univ, Finland 1995. The functions of the metaphors are cleverly applied in order to start the process of transformation on the line: metaphor-analogy-model-theory. Metaphors can perform four separate but related functions: - they are expressive, throwing new light on the target domain; - they are exegetic, trying to describe and interpret complexity; - they are explanatory, explaining and predicting; - they are exploratory, suggesting research directions and activities. ........................................................................ Actually, we (vortexan cold fusionists) have a wonderful metaphor here, it is Tinsley's idea that: Cold Fusion is for Hot Fusion what Biochemistry is for Chemistry. (Chris, please give a more elegant formulation, thanks!) If we consider only essential processes as photosynthesis and nitrogen fixation, which are not reproducible with "human" technologies, we see that these processes are incredibly complex. I am systematically reading all the papers on these and related subjects in Chemical Engineering News, Physical Chemistry, Nature, Science, New Scientist as an exercise of complexity and humility. Our knowledge is very primitive, we are just crawling out from the Middle Age. Anyway, the Tinsley Metaphor suggests that we have to pay a high price, that of complexity, for attaining low energy nuclear reactions. The message of the metaphor is: do not try to find simple explanations/models/theories. And: the solution is far from what you know now! The House Metaphor. We know from the HENR paradigm that the nuclei of the stable isotopes are solid, strong edifices and we need high energies to break them. You need great heavy rocks, bombs, or steel balls to destroy a house ( have seen a lot in the Ceausescu era when family houses have been systematically demolished and people forced to go in great concrete block buildings where control by the secret police was easier). Now, little pebbles are not efficient they would not make much damage, metaphorically thinking the HENR people are right, THOSE reactions will not work. I think the OTHER reactions are analogous to something eating out the mortar between the bricks, a much slower destructive process.. a real one. I had to solve one case in the frame of my consulting practice, when a dreadful sort of mildew (Merulius Lacrymans) coming from infested wood used for the new parquet began to penetrate the walls; I had to use a complex mixture of fungicides to kill the beast. For the nuclei, the metaphor suggests a NEUTRON EXTRACTION process. Some entities are "attacking" the nuclei and capturing the neutrons. It is well known that the number of neutrons per number of protons ratio is steadily increasing as the atomic number is increasing; the nuclei will be thus destabilized and fragmented. What entities can do such a job? I think the best candidates are energy deficient protons and deuterons, strongly associated with their electrons. "Hungry" p's and d's! Honi soit qui mal y pense! The most remote (far from the present paradigm) is the Neal Gleeson process, by a special type of electrolysis, thorium is fissioned in mercury and neon, tungsten can be fissioned symmetrically in two atoms of rubidium or unsymmetrically in cadmium and iron, in these cases 12-15 neutrons remain in excess and have to be "consumed". In other cases, probably the cluster structure of the nuclei add a degree of complexity. The fragments thus obtained are all stable as such or after recombination; the daughter nuclei are both smaller and greater than the mother nuclei. Perhaps these are multi-body reactions with a complex mechanism, working step-wise and much slower than the HENR processes. The active hydrogen isotopes are coming from or interacting with the energetical vacuum, they work in packs and create an energy deficient environment in which only stable nuclei are created. Using Mitch Swartz's terminology, it has yet to be established how are de novo nucleosynthesis and excess enthalpy correlated; I think there is no causal relationship between them. As I have shown in all my papers, these processes are local and catalytic. I am convinced that my "House Metaphor" is a part of the truth. After getting the complete data from LENR2 and ICCF-6 I will try to work out a theory. 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 --------------7FA547B55DC2-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 23:37:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA04123; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:36:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:36:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610120636.XAA08134@germany.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Resent-Message-ID: <"JgOaF1.0.L01.dnpNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1560 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:12 PM 10/11/96 -0700, you wrote: > >Here's an exerpt from danart1.asc, keelynet file, from Dan A. Davidson's >book "A Breakthrough to New Free Energy Sources." I think we may have >discussed this in the first month of vortex-L operation. As far as I >know, no one has ever tried it. If any subscribers still have >sonoluminescence parts laying around, it wouldn't be that hard to do a >quick test. With an anonymous source, the whole thing might just be a >rumor. But if a particular ultrasound freq affects water, then there >might be a more direct way to extract energy than with vortex devices. > >.....................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 > [snip] I ordered the book from ITS today to check this experiment out for parts and more details. It seems that someone else might have reproduced it lately using modern lab equipment? Also related, as reported in New Energy News newsletter, April 1996, Donald Walton worked on this and with scalar waves within a cell. For those interested in Donald's work can reach him at: Donald P.Walton Electronics Engineer 12, Chatsworth Road Bournemouth England BH8 8SW Tel: 44 202 302213 According to Dan's idea on Keely's theory's on tapping the aether for o/u, gravity control, ect. (see, Linkname: FREE ENERGY, GRAVITY, AND THE AETHER. URL: http://www.keelynet.com/davidson/npap1.htm) could occur if you can get a grad E and resonance across the mass by syncronization of the nuclei with the aether. This can be achieved by two main methods; rotation or movement and sonically. It seems that when Townsend Brown started to rotate his gravitators levitation occured. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 11 23:58:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA06516; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325F4198.35EB@rt66.com> Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:58:32 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: 547@rt66.com, Franklin@rt66.com, Avenue@rt66.com, Santa@rt66.com, Fe@rt66.com, NM@rt66.com, 87501@rt66.com, USA@rt66.com, 505-757-6145.@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rgeorge@hooked.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, rmcarrell@aol.com, bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu Subject: Correa, SIMS Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------E67314B7A89" Resent-Message-ID: <"4OVC02.0.kb1.14qNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1561 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------E67314B7A89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, Russ, Could you post on vortex-l details about your gas discharge experiments that sometimes made the cathodes red-hot and eroded them badly? Would it be easy to replicate? A report should be put out. If you still have access to that fine SIMS instrument, why not try to induce CF in various films, Pd, Ni, Ti, Pt, by progressively increasing voltage and current, expanding and contracting the ion beam focus spot, trying different ions. How many variables could you run in a day? Would the SIMS manufacturer be interested in this possibly vast expansion in the market for their product? Rich Murray --------------E67314B7A89 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: rgeorge@mail.hooked.net Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA09958 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:04:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from tuna.hooked.net (webe-17.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.9.17]) by mom.hooked.net (8.8.Beta.1/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA18377; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199609241605.JAA18377@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: Richard Thomas Murray Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:10:52 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Review of Correa device Reply-to: rgeorge@hooked.net CC: rmcarrell@aol.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Richard, ( and Mr. Carrell) I read your review based on RM Carrells assessment of the Correa device. I am interested in this but haven't followed it closely. In my own work I became interested in the glow discharge methods for CF when working at Los Alamos with Tom Claytor monkey wrenching his glow discharge experiments. I subsequently set up several GD experiments of my own and have seen some odd effects. I a mostly interested in measuring the tritium production rates. I use an AC system in a deuterium gas GD experiment. At times I have observed the Pd electrodes cycle through a regular process of heating to a bright red heat and then precipitously cooling back to a silver color. In the process the Pd electrode becomes quite damaged sputtering away considerable matieral. While I've been enegaged in using time of flight SIMS analysis to examine other materials for isotopic anomalies I've not yet had the funds to expand that work to these GD electrodes. Does Correa have any material the he is interested in conducting isotopic analysis on. I thought pehaps one of you had some contact with him and might pose this query. In my current work I am using the most advance time of flight SIMS instrument in the world and have the operators pretty well tuned in to this work. Unfortunately it is rather expensive to operate about running about $2500 per day. Little can be accomplished with less than a full day but two days does a lot. Russ George E-Quest --------------E67314B7A89-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 00:20:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA09638; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 00:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 00:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <325F46E2.55C@rt66.com> Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 00:21:06 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: 547@rt66.com, Franklin@rt66.com, Avenue@rt66.com, Santa@rt66.com, Fe@rt66.com, NM@rt66.com, 87501@rt66.com, USA@rt66.com, 505-757-6145.@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rgeorge@hooked.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu, mwm@aa.net Subject: SIMS is nuclear reactor Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------63AB1FF97E4D" Resent-Message-ID: <"Gff_81.0.RM2.7PqNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1562 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------63AB1FF97E4D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Russ, I'm very interested to be informed about the foibles of SIMS measurements. Somehow, I thought it was nearly perfect, you know, picking up the fatal arsenic in Napoleon's hair and stuff like that. Maybe you could post to us at Vortex-L@eskimo.com some more information about SIMS, in regard to Miley's data: How might SIMS have come up with over 4,000 counts for Na23 on fresh beads? Is there any significance to the missing lines for Ni61 (abundance 1.1 %) and Ni64 (0.9 %)? How much significance can we safely abscribe to counts in the range 1 to 10? What are typical ion bean intensities and size of spot? How much film is vaporized in how much time? Is there a molten zone, and how big and long-lived is it? Is the ion beam likely to have any other components, like H+ or H2+? Can SIMS distinguish at low resolutions C(12)H from C(13)? How many different attempts to deliberately induce CF could you make in a day? How long does it take to put in a new sample? How many different ion beams are available? Much appreciated! Rich Murray --------------63AB1FF97E4D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: rgeorge@mail.hooked.net Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA25696 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:19:33 -0600 (MDT) Received: from tuna.hooked.net (fish-60.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.10.60]) by mom.hooked.net (8.8.0/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA16604 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610101420.HAA16604@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: rmforall@rt66.com Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:26:15 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Miley, Mizuno data: SIMS makes nuclear reactions Reply-to: rgeorge@hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Before you get too excited about SIMS work I'd look into the technique. The sensitivity of SIMS is different for each atom. Hence things like sodium show up with big signals because the machine can see sodium easily. Xenon and other inert gases cannot be seen at all in SIMS at least not in any of the methods used in this field including Mizuno. Sure 2 12C's make mass 24 and indeed mass 24 is seen however it is in fact a double ion of 12C. Only a very high resolution instrument can see the difference between 2 12C's and 24Mg, not the instrument Miley used in the manner it was used. Also recall that SIMS has been used for a long time now for examining surface materials like layers of various metals deposited by various processes. No isotope anomalies have been reported in the literature and indeed SIMS is a established tool for measuring isotope ratios. All this is not to say the Miley's report is all wrong but there are some ragged edges. --------------63AB1FF97E4D-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 00:21:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25048; Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:09:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 20:09:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:07:34 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: Miley's paper (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OPFiD1.0.I76.jlmNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1555 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:19:17 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, manty@ctc.com, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, zap@dnai.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper Dear Frank, Some questions; please; 1] What was the total amount of fluid used? 2] What is the source and purity of; a] the water b] the metal salts 3] What is the rough cumulative flow and rate through the material 4] Do we read correctly the total volume of 'beads' to be 0.5 cc? 5] So how much fluid was re circulated through the 0.5 cc of beads? Cross check; 1A] take same fluid amount and salts and re circulate through plain styrene beads for same length of time 2A] evaporate water under reduced pressure 3A] column chromatograph [separately] fluid [aqueous] and 'blank' beads [solvent ie, MEK, acetone] 1B] repeat cross check with current applied. Use same type of pumps, tubing, fittings, etc.... but not the same ones used in run for paper. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 08:43:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA25669; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:39:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:39:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: HANG UP CALLS, vortex-L philosophy In-Reply-To: <9610112150.AA14475@moebius.math.ucla.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"oisKN3.0._G6.gkxNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1563 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Barry Merriman wrote: > I've been having trouble lately deciding whether to buy > skim milk, or 2%. What do you Vortexians think? > > :-) > > > Seriously, couldn't this mailing list be kept even remotely > on topic? I get enough mail as it is without getting general > blah blah on this list. Things discussed here should have > at least some connection to energy, I would think... Actually, the main topic (other than the official "water vortex" one) is more like the pursuit of physics anomalies and the opening of fields of research which are currently "taboo." > Mark, > couldn;t you just take a survey of your coworkers on the > phone thing? Barry does have a good point. Discussion groups are always in danger of being overwhelmed by off-topic conversations, or simply by overly large traffic in on-topic conversations. I've been on newsgroups with 200 messages per day. They're useless. It's OK to send off-topic messages, but please people, make it a habit to take the conversation immediately to private mail. Mark's survey was OK, but in the future, this type of message should say "please reply directly to me, don't fill vortex-L." And even if it doesn't, please try to remember to answer privately if the rest of vortex-L doesn't need to see your message. > And, call me callous, but I don't really need > to hear the ins and outs of the members personal lives either...take > it as given that we all have lives and all the complexities that > entails. Barry has a misconception, I think. Vortex-L is one of those strange and wonderful things called an Online Community. Without the personal messages it would die, and become more like a UPS news feed. Think of it more like like a physics conference than like a physics journal. A physics conference with a chairman who keeps the fistfights to a minimum. Also, vortex-L is what it is. It is ( slightly ) controlled by the rules, but it really is an evolving organism created by its participants. Even if I had lots of strictly-enforced rules, it would still be unmoderated. Then I guess it would be a "bonzai" version of an online community? .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 09:38:45 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA08282; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 09:33:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 09:33:41 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 12:21:58 -0400 Message-ID: <961012122158_124981484@emout14.mail.aol.com> To: VORTEX-L@eskimo.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, RVargo1062@aol.com, zap@dnai.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, Puthoff@aol.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, CldFusion@aol.com Subject: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Resent-Message-ID: <"MzDdQ.0.G12.ZXyNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1564 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Yusmar test with Magnetite addition October 96 time min temp in F temp out F flow GPM power out KW KW in 0 60 60 0.78 0.00 4.8 15 60 78 0.76 2.00 4.8 30 60 89 0.77 3.26 4.6 45 60 96 0.735 3.86 4.6 60 60 101 0.75 4.49 4.5 75 60 102 0.735 4.51 4.7 90 60 103 0.76 4.77 4.6 105 60 104 0.75 4.82 4.7 120 60 104 0.74 4.75 4.7 COP 0 0.42 0.71 0.84 1.00 0.96 1.04 1.03 1.01 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 11:09:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA24460; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:06:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961012181549.006be820@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:15:49 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com (by way of Gary Hawkins ) Subject: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Resent-Message-ID: <"ePbEE.0.6-5.auzNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1565 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: (Reformatted) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION OCTOBER 96 Time Temp In Temp Out Flow Power In Power Out COP (Min) (F) (F) (GPM) (KW) (KW) ________________________________________________________________ 0 60 60 0.78 4.8 0.00 0 15 60 78 0.76 4.8 2.00 0.42 30 60 89 0.77 4.6 3.26 0.71 45 60 96 0.735 4.6 3.86 0.84 60 60 101 0.75 4.5 4.49 1.00 75 60 102 0.735 4.7 4.51 0.96 90 60 103 0.76 4.6 4.77 1.04 105 60 104 0.75 4.7 4.82 1.03 120 60 104 0.74 4.7 4.75 1.01 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 11:13:45 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA25271; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:11:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 13:11:19 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: <961012122158_124981484@emout14.mail.aol.com> from "FZNIDARSIC@aol.com" at Oct 12, 96 12:21:58 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"ZYaG8.0.mA6.IzzNo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1566 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Z. wrote: > min temp in F temp out F flow GPM power out KW KW in COP > 0 60 60 0.78 0.00 4.8 0 > 15 60 78 0.76 2.00 4.8 0.42 > 30 60 89 0.77 3.26 4.6 0.71 > 45 60 96 0.735 3.86 4.6 0.84 > 60 60 101 0.75 4.49 4.5 1.00 > 75 60 102 0.735 4.51 4.7 0.96 > 90 60 103 0.76 4.77 4.6 1.04 > 10 60 104 0.75 4.82 4.7 1.03 > 12 60 104 0.74 4.75 4.7 1.01 ----- ---- ---- Cumulative 32.46 42.0 0.77 -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 16:55:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA18977; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 16:52:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 19:51:42 -0400 Message-ID: <961012195142_125209631@emout19.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... Resent-Message-ID: <"wovuN1.0.Qe4.uy2Oo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1567 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: From: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu (Marcello Truzzi) Reply-to: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu To: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu (AAAAA), esper@california.com (Auerbach, Loyd (2)), BlndgsCast@aol.com (Dan Cohen), dzuck@inforamp.net (Daniel Zuckerbrot), fivemtn@ilhawaii.net (Dennis Stillings), puthoff@aol.com (Hal Puthoff), jrc@inforamp.net (john robert colombo), michaelkurland@mindspring.com (Kurland, Michael), polidoro@aznet.it (Massimo Polidoro), MaxMaven@aol.com (MaxMaven@aol.com), hermeticpress@worldnet.att.net (Minch, Stephen), patrick@cloud9.net (Patrick Huyghe), PLAMONT@afb1.ssc.ed.ac.uk (Peter Lamont), R.Wiseman@herts.ac.uk (Richard Wiseman), ronwestrum@aol.com (Ron Westrum), schwartz@jsasoc.com (Schwartz, Stephan A.), skrippner@igc.apc.org (skrippner@igc.apc.org), 75717.3247@CompuServe.COM (T.A. Waters (1)), thomasb@mindspring.com (Thomas Burgin), 2228@msn.com (Wilhelm, John) Date: 96-10-12 14:13:06 EDT Oct. 3, 1996 14:08 EDT, from an AP news report: NEW DELHI India - An Indian villager who claimed he could turn water into gasoline is a fraud, scientists have determined. Last month Ramar Pillai demonstrated at a government lab how boiling a mixture of leaves, lemon juice and salt, a few drops of gasoline, and a test tube of undisclosed chemicals could yield fuel. Scientists this week reported a hollow stirrer Pillai used during his demonstration contained fuel which he slipped into the boiling concoction, giving it gasoline-like properties. The stirrer was filled with kerosene or gasoline; its tip was plugged with wax, which when heated inside the boiling water, melted, releasing the fuel into the mixture, V. Ramamurthy, the top scientist in the Department of Science and Technology,said. Analysis showed that the mixture also contained lead and other chemicals that are added to gasoline when it is processed. Pillai, a 34-year-old high school dropout, had said his fuel was herbal and derived from the leaves of a plant he had found 18 years ago near his village of Idayankulam, 1,200 miles south of New Delh. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 20:47:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA11636; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:44:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:44:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:43:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610130343.UAA15856@norway.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: JATO Power Calc Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"DpXIY1.0.fr2.AM6Oo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1568 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A From: http://www.eifs.com/aftrhour.htm and gif location Note from Bob T.: The following story is supposedly true. It was on the AP wire in 1995. This story has been nominated for 1996 "Darwin Award", a "real" award (albeit humorous) given to the person who contributes most to the world's gene pool by killing themself in the stupidest way. Example: last year some (deceased) jerk got the award by trying to "jimmy" a soda can out of a Coke Cola machine by tipping it. The machine fell over and killed him! When I first read the article below, I laughed so hard my sides started aching. UNBELIEVABLE. Also, FYI, a JATO unit is a one-shot power source. It has no throttle. Once it's on, it keeps putting out until it runs out of fuel - like a bottle rocket. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded into the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The wreckage resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car was unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it was and what had happened. It seems that a guy had somehow gotten hold of a JATO unit (Jet Assisted Take Off - actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight stretch of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got up some speed and fired off the JATO! The facts as best as could be determined are that the operator of the 1967 Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the crash site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted asphalt at that location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have reached maximum thrust within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds well in excess of 350 mph and continuing at full power for an additional 20-25 seconds. The driver, soon to be pilot, most likely would have experienced G-forces usually reserved for dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, basically causing him to become insignificant for the remainder of the event. However, the automobile remained on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20) seconds before the driver applied and completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving thick rubber marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4 miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a blackened crater 3 feet deep in the rock. Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small fragments of bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and bone shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the steering wheel. From herman@college.antioch.edu Sat Oct 12 21:09:50 1996 Received: from college.antioch.edu (college.antioch.edu [192.131.123.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA15854; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:09:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by college.antioch.edu (SMI-8.6/1.63) id AAA12059; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:08:19 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:08:19 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex , William Beaty Subject: Community Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., Bill Beatty's letter about community touched a nerve. Several have asked about gravity research at Antioch. I had planned on waiting until the 'official' word was passed by the administration that Antioch College wanted to be involved. The students I have spoken to want to be involved. The "community" of Vortex wants to be involved. I am going to write here a little background, and then post some information. I have been exposed to the work of Eugene E. Podklentnov for only a short period of time. I have been communicating with several people theorizing in the field. Some of what I will be writing is opinion, some is information I have recieved, some is information I have personally experienced first hand. A society has been formed we call "The Gravity Society". We are registering the domain gravity.org. when I say "we", I mean a very few people, we do not even yet have an adminisrator for the society. The domain registration has only just started. There will soon be 'official' and I hope fairly regular reports of work in the field. I will editorialize from time to time, and start now; This whole work is very new and 'raw'. I personally say, opinion, I do not havea clue as to what, exactly, this is. Do not take what I say as gospel. I week from now I may well say "I was wrong". One thing I can say is I only know what I know now, and it will change. So, after I close this letter, I will post some material. It will be re posted in a more complete and polished form by the society. These postings are for the 'community'. JHS From herman@college.antioch.edu Sat Oct 12 21:12:02 1996 Received: from college.antioch.edu (college.antioch.edu [192.131.123.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA16192; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by college.antioch.edu (SMI-8.6/1.63) id AAA12104; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:10:28 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:10:27 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: full BW update Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: BUSINESS WEEK ONLINE NEWS FLASH! September 25, 1996 ONE STEP CLOSER TO AN ANTIGRAVITY MACHINE Is it possible to create a device the reduces the effects of gravity? Business Week reported in its Sept. 30 issue that it might be (see "An Antigravitiy Machine? Take That, Issac Newton"). Now, preliminary results from initial attempts to confirm the possibility of an antigravity machine appear to have turned out positively. John H. Schnurer, a researcher at Antioch College in Ohio, conducted two trials over the Sept. 21-22 weekend, and both seem to have caused a small weight loss in objects suspended over a superconducting disk. Schnurer cautions that his experimental setup is "still very crude, so don't hang your hat on it yet." But if Schnurer's initial results hold up as he refines his techniques, the 2% weight loss reported by Eugene E. Podkletnov, the Russian scientist who discovered the anomaly while doing research on high-temperature superconducting materials in Finland, might even turn out to be conservative. "This is a new field of investigation, so nothing is cast in stone," says Schnurer. Although a small weight-loss effect was observed, he adds, the cause is still a mystery. It could end up not being a "gravity shield" but some other phenomenon. Schnurer used a disk furnished by Superconductive Components Inc. in Columbus, Ohio. He is working on several refinements of Podkletov's techniques he believes may be patentable. Indeed, a patent lawyer witnessed one of Schnurer's experiments. Copyright 1996 The McGraw-Hill Companies All rights reserved. [JS note: the BW article from the issue dated Sept. 30 is available on America Online; keyword: BW.] From herman@college.antioch.edu Sat Oct 12 21:18:45 1996 Received: from college.antioch.edu (college.antioch.edu [192.131.123.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA00642; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:18:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by college.antioch.edu (SMI-8.6/1.63) id AAA12230; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:17:15 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:17:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: Paper by Giovanni Modanese Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: This is a technical theory paper by G.M. If one of you can make it into ASCII, this would be good. I do not have the tools to do so. It is an important paper because it has a good description of E.E. Podklentnov's experimental apparatus in two different embodiments. \documentstyle[12pt]{article} \textwidth 170mm \textheight 235mm \topmargin -36pt \oddsidemargin -0.2cm \evensidemargin -0.5cm \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.5} \begin{document} \thispagestyle{empty} \hfill \parbox{45mm}{{UTF-367/96} \par Jan 1996 \par supr-con/9601001} \vspace*{15mm} \begin{center} {\LARGE Updating the Theoretical Analysis of the} \smallskip {\LARGE Weak Gravitational Shielding Experiment.} \vspace{22mm} {\large Giovanni Modanese}% \medskip \end{center} \vspace*{10mm} \begin{abstract} The most recent data about the weak gravitational shielding produced recently through a levitating and rotating HTC superconducting disk show a very weak dependence of the shielding value ($\sim 1 \%$) on the height above the disk. We show that whilst this behaviour is incompatible with an intuitive vectorial picture of the shielding, it is consistently explained by our theoretical model. The small expulsive force observed at the border of the shielded zone is due to energy conservation. \medskip \noindent 74.72.-h High-$T_c$ cuprates. \noindent 04.60.-m Quantum gravity. \bigskip \end{abstract} The measurements of Podkletnov et al.\ of a possible weak gravitational shielding effect \cite{p1,p2} have been repeated several times and under different conditions by that group, with good reproducibility, including results in the vacuum. In the forthcoming months other groups will hopefully be able to confirm the effect independently. While the Tampere group was mainly concerned with obtaining larger values for the shielding, studying its dependence on numerous experimental parameters and testing new materials for the disk, in the future measurements it will be important to obtain more exact data, including detailed spatial field maps. The theoretical model suggested by us \cite{m1} is still evolving, although at a fundamental level; a more detailed account appears elsewhere \cite{m2}. Let us recall in short the main features of the experiment. A HTC superconducting disk or toroid with diameter between 15 and 30 $cm$, made of $YBa_2 Cu_3 O_{7-x}$, is refrigerated by liquid helium in a stainless steel cryostat at a temperature below $70 \ K$. The microscopic structure of the material, which plays an important role in determining the levitation properties and the amount of the effect, is described in details in the cited works. The disk levitates above an electromagnet operated by high-frequency AC currents and rotates by the action of lateral alternating e.m. fields. Samples of different weight and composition are placed over the disk, at a distance which can vary from a few $cm$ to 1 $m$ or more (see below). A weight reduction of about 0.05\% is observed when the disk is levitating but not rotating; the weight loss reaches values about 0.5\% when the disk rotates at a frequency of ca.\ 5000 $rpm$. If at this point the rotating fields are switched off, the sample weight remains decreased till the rotation frequency of the disk decreases. On the other hand, if the rotation frequency is decreased from 5000 to 3500 $rpm$ using the solenoids as braking tools, the shielding effect reaches maximum values from 1.9 to 2.1\%, depending on the position of the sample with respect to the outer edge of the disk. This effect, if confirmed, would represent a very new and spectacular phenomenon in gravity; namely, as well known, there has never been observed any conventional gravitational shielding up till now, up to an accuracy of one part in $10^{10}$, and General Relativity and perturbative Quantum Gravity exclude any measurable shielding \cite{m1,unni}. Our tentative theoretical explanation is based on some properties of non-perturbative quantum gravity. We have shown that the density field $|\phi_0|^2$ of the Cooper pairs inside the superconductor may act as localized positive contribution to the small negative effective gravitational cosmological constant $\Lambda$; if the sum turns out to be positive in a certain four-dimensional region, a local gravitational singularity arises there, affecting the gravitational propagators and thus the interaction potential (between the Earth and the samples, in this case). To sketch our model -- although not rigorously -- we could say that there is an "anomalous coupling" between the mentioned density $|\phi_0|^2$ and the gravitational field, and that the net result is to partly "absorb" the field. We expect that only in some regions of the superconductor the density $|\phi_0|^2$ will be strong enough and that the inhomogeneities of the material and the pinning centers will be crucial in determining such regions. (It is known that the rapid motion of a type II superconductor in a magnetic field causes resistive effects in the superconductor.) Since the gravitational field is attractive, its "absorption" requires energy from the outside. This is provided in the experiment by the action of the levitating rf field. The dependence of the shielding effect on the height, at which the samples are placed above the superconducting disk, has been recently measured up to a height of ca.\ 3 $m$ \cite{p3}. No difference in the shielding value has been noted, with a precision of one part in $10^3$. It is also remarkable that during the measurement at 3 $m$ height the sample was placed in the room which lies above the main laboratory, on the next floor; in this way the effect of air flows on the measurements was greatly reduced. For the used 500 $g$ sample the weight loss was ca. 2.5 $g$. Such an extremely weak height dependence of the shielding is in sharp contrast with the intuitive picture, according to which the gravitational field of the Earth is the vectorial sum of the fields produced by each single "portion" of Earth. In the absence of any shielding, the sum results in a field which is equivalent to the field of a pointlike mass placed in the center of the Earth; this can be checked elementarily by direct integration or invoking Gauss' theorem and the spherical symmetry. But if we admit that the superconducting disk produces a weak shielding, the part of the Earth which is shielded lies behind the projection of the disk as seen from the sample, i.e., within an angle $\theta$ about the vertical direction, such that $\ \tan \theta = h$, where $h$ is the sample height over the disk measured in units of the disk radius. (For simplicity we suppose now the sample to be centered above the disk.) In order to obtain the shielding effect as a function of $h$, taking into account this geometrical factor, one must integrate the Newtonian contribution $\cos \phi /R^2$ over the intersection between the Earth and the cone defined by $\phi<\theta$. We have done this for the values $h=1,2,3,4,6,8,10$, through a Montecarlo algorithm. We took into account the higher density of the Earth's core ($\rho_{core} \sim 2 \rho_{mantle}$; $r_{core} \sim (1/2) r_{Earth}$; it is straightforward to insert more accurate values, but the final results change very little); we also computed analytically the contribution of the tip of the cone, from the Earth's surface to the Earth's core, in order to reduce the fluctuations in the Montecarlo samplings for small $R$. \footnote{For the detailed algorithm and figures please ask the author at the e-mail address above.} The resulting values were the following: \begin{verbatim} h shielding/maximum-shielding ================================= 1 0.62 +/- 0.02 2 0.34 +/- 0.01 3 0.18 +/- 0.01 4 0.102 +/- 0.003 6 0.050 +/- 0.002 8 0.029 +/- 0.001 10 0.018 +/- 0.001 \end{verbatim} This strong height dependence is clearly incompatible with the mentioned experimental data, which instead seem to indicate that in the shielding process all the mass of the Earth behaves effectively as if it would be concentrated in one point. On the basis of an analysis similar to ours, it was argued in \cite{unni} that Podkletnov's data are inconsistent with the hyotesis of a real gravitational shielding. In our theoretical model, however, the weak height dependence arises in a natural way. We employ a quantum formula which expresses the static gravitational interaction energy of two masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ in terms of an invariant vacuum expectation value, namely \cite{m3} \begin{eqnarray} E & = & \lim_{T \to \infty} - \frac{\hbar}{T} \log \frac{\int d[g] \, \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} \left[ S[g] + \sum_{i=1,2} m_i \int_{-\frac{T}{2}}^{\frac{T}{2}} dt \, \sqrt{g_{\mu \nu}[x_i(t)] \dot{x}_i^\mu(t) \dot{x}_i^\nu(t)} \right] \right\}}{\int d[g] \, \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} S[g] \right\} } \label{ciao} \\ & \equiv & \lim_{T \to \infty} - \frac{\hbar}{T} \log \left< \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} \sum_{i=1,2} m_i \int_{-\frac{T}{2}}^{\frac{T}{2}} ds_i \right\} \right>_S \label{bella} \end{eqnarray} where $g$ has Euclidean signature and $S$ is the gravitational action of general form \begin{equation} S[g] = \int d^4x \, \sqrt{g} \left( \lambda - kR + \frac{1}{4} a R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} R^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} \right) . \label{azione} \end{equation} The constants $k$ and $\lambda$ are related -- in general as ``bare quantities'' -- to the Newton constant $G$ and to the cosmological constant $\Lambda$: $k$ corresponds to $1/8\pi G$ and $\lambda$ to $\Lambda/8\pi G$. The trajectories $x_i(t)$ of $m_1$ and $m_2$ are parallel with respect to the metric $g$; let $R$ be their distance. In the weak-field approximation, eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) reproduces to lowest order the Newton potential and can be used to find its higher order quantum corrections \cite{muz}, or implemented on a Regge lattice to investigate the non-perturbative behaviour of the potential at small distances \cite{h}. The addition to the gravitational action (\ref{azione}) of a term which represents a localized {\it external} Bose condensate \footnote{This means that the density of the condensate is not included into the functional integration variables.} mimics a shielding effect which is absent from the classical theory and which we take as our candidate model for the observed shielding. The feature of eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) which is of interest here is that if the two masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ are not pointlike, the trajectories $x_1(t)$ and $x_2(t)$ must be those of their centers of mass. (This also makes irrelevant the question -- actually ill-defined in general relativity -- whether they are pointlike or not.) Thus, when applying eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) to the Earth and the sample, we only need to consider the centers of mass of those bodies. In this way we reproduce the observed behaviour for the shielding as well as for the regular interaction. The ensuing apparent failure in the "local transmission" of the gravitational interaction does not contrast with any known property of gravity (compare \cite{m3,j}, and references about the problem of the local energy density in General Relativity and \cite{m3} about the non-localization of virtual gravitons. One should also keep in mind that (\ref{ciao}) holds only in the static case.) Finally, if we describe the shielding effect as a slight diminution of the effective value of the gravitational acceleration $g$, and remember that the gravitational potential energy $U=-\frac{G m_{Earth} }{r_{Earth} }=-g r_{Earth}$ is negative, it follows that the energy of a sample inside the shielded zone is larger than its energy outside. This means in turn that the sample must feel an expulsive force at the border of the shielded region. Such a force has been indeed observed \cite{p3}, although precise data are not available yet. From the theoretical point of view it is however not trivial to do any prevision about the intensity of the force. In fact, the shielding process absorbs energy from the experimental apparatus and thus any transient stage is expected to be highly non-linear, especially for heavy samples. I would like to thank C.S.\ Unnikrishnan for useful discussions. \begin{thebibliography}{99} \bibitem{p1} E.\ Podkletnov and R.\ Nieminen, Physica {\bf C 203} (1992) 441. \bibitem{p2} E.\ Podkletnov and A.D.\ Levit, {\it Gravitational shielding properties of composite bulk $YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-x}$ superconductor below 70 K under electro-magnetic field}, Tampere University of Technology report MSU-95 chem, January 1995. \bibitem{m1} G.\ Modanese, {\it Theoretical analysis of a reported weak gravitational shielding effect}, report MPI-PhT/95-44, hep-th/9505094, May 1995; to appear in Europhys.\ Lett. \bibitem{m2} G.\ Modanese, {\it Role of a "local" cosmological constant in Euclidean quantum gravity}, report UTF-368/96, hep-th@xxx.lanl.gov/9601160; to appear in Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D}. \bibitem{p3} E.\ Podkletnov, private communication, October 1995. \bibitem{m3} G.\ Modanese, Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B 325} (1994) 354; Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B 434} (1995) 697; Riv.\ Nuovo Cim.\ {\bf 17}, n.\ 8 (1994). \bibitem{unni} C.S.\ Unnikrishnan, {\it Does a superconductor shield gravity?}, to appear in Physica {\bf C}. \bibitem{muz} I.J.\ Muzinich and S.\ Vokos, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D 52} (1995) 3472. \bibitem{j} D.\ Bak, D.\ Cangemi, R.\ Jackiw, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D 49} (1994) 5173. \bibitem{h} H.W.\ Hamber and R.M. Williams, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B 435} (1995) 361. \end{thebibliography} \end{document} From herman@college.antioch.edu Sat Oct 12 21:38:25 1996 Received: from college.antioch.edu (college.antioch.edu [192.131.123.11]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id VAA02912; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:38:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by college.antioch.edu (SMI-8.6/1.63) id AAA12480; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:37:03 -0400 Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:37:02 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: Gravity Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., We continue work at this task. Opinion: Anyone who would wish to follow the work should become educated in certain matters so as to be effective. Anyone wishing to engage in the work is encouraged. And, be aware also this is a non trivial effort. The work does not have to cost mega bucks if you have reasonable access to some equipment and supplies but it is not cheap and easy. Some of the areas to learn about include but are not limited to the following. In learning about this is is also suggested to learn not only theory and mathmatics but also the actual hands on practical applied techniques. Even if you never see or work with materials and equipment in the discipline of cryogenics, a different, wonderful and often contrary field of endeavor, knowledge of the 'hardball nuts and bolts belt and suspenders engineering' aspects will, or should, give you an appreciation of those who do. My personal opinion almost always is the judge by doing. If you think "this is bogus and does not work", then this is just that, thinking. But try it yourself first. Then report. Do not fear failure. If a toaster does not work, and fails to toast toast, report it. Report all conditions, in so far as you can. Then, if Bill Beatty or someone suggests "plug it in first" .... and it works, then we all win. It is very hard to find a bad experiment or quest, or question. And Bill, thank you, for the community. Gravity Society From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 12 21:49:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA04000; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:47:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:46:08 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"nTBBS2.0.Q-.qH7Oo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1573 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Dear Vo., In D. D. exerpt the term "N.B." is used at the end of the text, in a similar fashion to the US PS, which means Post Script. Can anyone elucidate the N.B.? JHS From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 01:13:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA01046; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 01:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 01:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 01:11:24 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: JATO Power Calc Experiment In-Reply-To: <199610130343.UAA15856@norway.it.earthlink.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"1XPlw3.0.CG.rGAOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1574 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Michael Randall wrote: > From: http://www.eifs.com/aftrhour.htm and gif location > > Note from Bob T.: > > The following story is supposedly true. It was on the AP wire in 1995. > > This story has been nominated for 1996 "Darwin Award", a "real" award > (albeit humorous) given to the person who contributes most to the world's > gene pool by killing themself in the stupidest way. Unfortunately there was an article on one of the Urban Legends newsgroups saying that someone had gone looking for the source of this story and found nothing. Too good to be true? Just another "UL"? .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 03:08:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA04880; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 03:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 03:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:05:01 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" Message-ID: <3260b0c0.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Resent-Message-ID: <"9YFC31.0.AC1.yyBOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1575 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:47:49 -0700 (PDT), vortex-l@eskimo.com wrote: > > > Dear Vo., > > In D. D. exerpt the term "N.B." is used at the end of the text, > in a similar fashion to the US PS, which means Post Script. Can anyone > elucidate the N.B.? > > JHS I think it has to be "NOTA BENE" that is 'note well', the conclusion or the essential part of the message. 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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 03:25:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA00686; Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:18:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:17:15 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: Paper by Giovanni Modanese Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"NWtvC.0.eA.hs6Oo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1571 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a technical theory paper by G.M. If one of you can make it into ASCII, this would be good. I do not have the tools to do so. It is an important paper because it has a good description of E.E. Podklentnov's experimental apparatus in two different embodiments. \documentstyle[12pt]{article} \textwidth 170mm \textheight 235mm \topmargin -36pt \oddsidemargin -0.2cm \evensidemargin -0.5cm \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.5} \begin{document} \thispagestyle{empty} \hfill \parbox{45mm}{{UTF-367/96} \par Jan 1996 \par supr-con/9601001} \vspace*{15mm} \begin{center} {\LARGE Updating the Theoretical Analysis of the} \smallskip {\LARGE Weak Gravitational Shielding Experiment.} \vspace{22mm} {\large Giovanni Modanese}% \medskip \end{center} \vspace*{10mm} \begin{abstract} The most recent data about the weak gravitational shielding produced recently through a levitating and rotating HTC superconducting disk show a very weak dependence of the shielding value ($\sim 1 \%$) on the height above the disk. We show that whilst this behaviour is incompatible with an intuitive vectorial picture of the shielding, it is consistently explained by our theoretical model. The small expulsive force observed at the border of the shielded zone is due to energy conservation. \medskip \noindent 74.72.-h High-$T_c$ cuprates. \noindent 04.60.-m Quantum gravity. \bigskip \end{abstract} The measurements of Podkletnov et al.\ of a possible weak gravitational shielding effect \cite{p1,p2} have been repeated several times and under different conditions by that group, with good reproducibility, including results in the vacuum. In the forthcoming months other groups will hopefully be able to confirm the effect independently. While the Tampere group was mainly concerned with obtaining larger values for the shielding, studying its dependence on numerous experimental parameters and testing new materials for the disk, in the future measurements it will be important to obtain more exact data, including detailed spatial field maps. The theoretical model suggested by us \cite{m1} is still evolving, although at a fundamental level; a more detailed account appears elsewhere \cite{m2}. Let us recall in short the main features of the experiment. A HTC superconducting disk or toroid with diameter between 15 and 30 $cm$, made of $YBa_2 Cu_3 O_{7-x}$, is refrigerated by liquid helium in a stainless steel cryostat at a temperature below $70 \ K$. The microscopic structure of the material, which plays an important role in determining the levitation properties and the amount of the effect, is described in details in the cited works. The disk levitates above an electromagnet operated by high-frequency AC currents and rotates by the action of lateral alternating e.m. fields. Samples of different weight and composition are placed over the disk, at a distance which can vary from a few $cm$ to 1 $m$ or more (see below). A weight reduction of about 0.05\% is observed when the disk is levitating but not rotating; the weight loss reaches values about 0.5\% when the disk rotates at a frequency of ca.\ 5000 $rpm$. If at this point the rotating fields are switched off, the sample weight remains decreased till the rotation frequency of the disk decreases. On the other hand, if the rotation frequency is decreased from 5000 to 3500 $rpm$ using the solenoids as braking tools, the shielding effect reaches maximum values from 1.9 to 2.1\%, depending on the position of the sample with respect to the outer edge of the disk. This effect, if confirmed, would represent a very new and spectacular phenomenon in gravity; namely, as well known, there has never been observed any conventional gravitational shielding up till now, up to an accuracy of one part in $10^{10}$, and General Relativity and perturbative Quantum Gravity exclude any measurable shielding \cite{m1,unni}. Our tentative theoretical explanation is based on some properties of non-perturbative quantum gravity. We have shown that the density field $|\phi_0|^2$ of the Cooper pairs inside the superconductor may act as localized positive contribution to the small negative effective gravitational cosmological constant $\Lambda$; if the sum turns out to be positive in a certain four-dimensional region, a local gravitational singularity arises there, affecting the gravitational propagators and thus the interaction potential (between the Earth and the samples, in this case). To sketch our model -- although not rigorously -- we could say that there is an "anomalous coupling" between the mentioned density $|\phi_0|^2$ and the gravitational field, and that the net result is to partly "absorb" the field. We expect that only in some regions of the superconductor the density $|\phi_0|^2$ will be strong enough and that the inhomogeneities of the material and the pinning centers will be crucial in determining such regions. (It is known that the rapid motion of a type II superconductor in a magnetic field causes resistive effects in the superconductor.) Since the gravitational field is attractive, its "absorption" requires energy from the outside. This is provided in the experiment by the action of the levitating rf field. The dependence of the shielding effect on the height, at which the samples are placed above the superconducting disk, has been recently measured up to a height of ca.\ 3 $m$ \cite{p3}. No difference in the shielding value has been noted, with a precision of one part in $10^3$. It is also remarkable that during the measurement at 3 $m$ height the sample was placed in the room which lies above the main laboratory, on the next floor; in this way the effect of air flows on the measurements was greatly reduced. For the used 500 $g$ sample the weight loss was ca. 2.5 $g$. Such an extremely weak height dependence of the shielding is in sharp contrast with the intuitive picture, according to which the gravitational field of the Earth is the vectorial sum of the fields produced by each single "portion" of Earth. In the absence of any shielding, the sum results in a field which is equivalent to the field of a pointlike mass placed in the center of the Earth; this can be checked elementarily by direct integration or invoking Gauss' theorem and the spherical symmetry. But if we admit that the superconducting disk produces a weak shielding, the part of the Earth which is shielded lies behind the projection of the disk as seen from the sample, i.e., within an angle $\theta$ about the vertical direction, such that $\ \tan \theta = h$, where $h$ is the sample height over the disk measured in units of the disk radius. (For simplicity we suppose now the sample to be centered above the disk.) In order to obtain the shielding effect as a function of $h$, taking into account this geometrical factor, one must integrate the Newtonian contribution $\cos \phi /R^2$ over the intersection between the Earth and the cone defined by $\phi<\theta$. We have done this for the values $h=1,2,3,4,6,8,10$, through a Montecarlo algorithm. We took into account the higher density of the Earth's core ($\rho_{core} \sim 2 \rho_{mantle}$; $r_{core} \sim (1/2) r_{Earth}$; it is straightforward to insert more accurate values, but the final results change very little); we also computed analytically the contribution of the tip of the cone, from the Earth's surface to the Earth's core, in order to reduce the fluctuations in the Montecarlo samplings for small $R$. \footnote{For the detailed algorithm and figures please ask the author at the e-mail address above.} The resulting values were the following: \begin{verbatim} h shielding/maximum-shielding ================================= 1 0.62 +/- 0.02 2 0.34 +/- 0.01 3 0.18 +/- 0.01 4 0.102 +/- 0.003 6 0.050 +/- 0.002 8 0.029 +/- 0.001 10 0.018 +/- 0.001 \end{verbatim} This strong height dependence is clearly incompatible with the mentioned experimental data, which instead seem to indicate that in the shielding process all the mass of the Earth behaves effectively as if it would be concentrated in one point. On the basis of an analysis similar to ours, it was argued in \cite{unni} that Podkletnov's data are inconsistent with the hyotesis of a real gravitational shielding. In our theoretical model, however, the weak height dependence arises in a natural way. We employ a quantum formula which expresses the static gravitational interaction energy of two masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ in terms of an invariant vacuum expectation value, namely \cite{m3} \begin{eqnarray} E & = & \lim_{T \to \infty} - \frac{\hbar}{T} \log \frac{\int d[g] \, \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} \left[ S[g] + \sum_{i=1,2} m_i \int_{-\frac{T}{2}}^{\frac{T}{2}} dt \, \sqrt{g_{\mu \nu}[x_i(t)] \dot{x}_i^\mu(t) \dot{x}_i^\nu(t)} \right] \right\}}{\int d[g] \, \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} S[g] \right\} } \label{ciao} \\ & \equiv & \lim_{T \to \infty} - \frac{\hbar}{T} \log \left< \exp \left\{ - \hbar^{-1} \sum_{i=1,2} m_i \int_{-\frac{T}{2}}^{\frac{T}{2}} ds_i \right\} \right>_S \label{bella} \end{eqnarray} where $g$ has Euclidean signature and $S$ is the gravitational action of general form \begin{equation} S[g] = \int d^4x \, \sqrt{g} \left( \lambda - kR + \frac{1}{4} a R_{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} R^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma} \right) . \label{azione} \end{equation} The constants $k$ and $\lambda$ are related -- in general as ``bare quantities'' -- to the Newton constant $G$ and to the cosmological constant $\Lambda$: $k$ corresponds to $1/8\pi G$ and $\lambda$ to $\Lambda/8\pi G$. The trajectories $x_i(t)$ of $m_1$ and $m_2$ are parallel with respect to the metric $g$; let $R$ be their distance. In the weak-field approximation, eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) reproduces to lowest order the Newton potential and can be used to find its higher order quantum corrections \cite{muz}, or implemented on a Regge lattice to investigate the non-perturbative behaviour of the potential at small distances \cite{h}. The addition to the gravitational action (\ref{azione}) of a term which represents a localized {\it external} Bose condensate \footnote{This means that the density of the condensate is not included into the functional integration variables.} mimics a shielding effect which is absent from the classical theory and which we take as our candidate model for the observed shielding. The feature of eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) which is of interest here is that if the two masses $m_1$ and $m_2$ are not pointlike, the trajectories $x_1(t)$ and $x_2(t)$ must be those of their centers of mass. (This also makes irrelevant the question -- actually ill-defined in general relativity -- whether they are pointlike or not.) Thus, when applying eq.\ (\ref{ciao}) to the Earth and the sample, we only need to consider the centers of mass of those bodies. In this way we reproduce the observed behaviour for the shielding as well as for the regular interaction. The ensuing apparent failure in the "local transmission" of the gravitational interaction does not contrast with any known property of gravity (compare \cite{m3,j}, and references about the problem of the local energy density in General Relativity and \cite{m3} about the non-localization of virtual gravitons. One should also keep in mind that (\ref{ciao}) holds only in the static case.) Finally, if we describe the shielding effect as a slight diminution of the effective value of the gravitational acceleration $g$, and remember that the gravitational potential energy $U=-\frac{G m_{Earth} }{r_{Earth} }=-g r_{Earth}$ is negative, it follows that the energy of a sample inside the shielded zone is larger than its energy outside. This means in turn that the sample must feel an expulsive force at the border of the shielded region. Such a force has been indeed observed \cite{p3}, although precise data are not available yet. From the theoretical point of view it is however not trivial to do any prevision about the intensity of the force. In fact, the shielding process absorbs energy from the experimental apparatus and thus any transient stage is expected to be highly non-linear, especially for heavy samples. I would like to thank C.S.\ Unnikrishnan for useful discussions. \begin{thebibliography}{99} \bibitem{p1} E.\ Podkletnov and R.\ Nieminen, Physica {\bf C 203} (1992) 441. \bibitem{p2} E.\ Podkletnov and A.D.\ Levit, {\it Gravitational shielding properties of composite bulk $YBa_2Cu_3O_{7-x}$ superconductor below 70 K under electro-magnetic field}, Tampere University of Technology report MSU-95 chem, January 1995. \bibitem{m1} G.\ Modanese, {\it Theoretical analysis of a reported weak gravitational shielding effect}, report MPI-PhT/95-44, hep-th/9505094, May 1995; to appear in Europhys.\ Lett. \bibitem{m2} G.\ Modanese, {\it Role of a "local" cosmological constant in Euclidean quantum gravity}, report UTF-368/96, hep-th@xxx.lanl.gov/9601160; to appear in Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D}. \bibitem{p3} E.\ Podkletnov, private communication, October 1995. \bibitem{m3} G.\ Modanese, Phys.\ Lett.\ {\bf B 325} (1994) 354; Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B 434} (1995) 697; Riv.\ Nuovo Cim.\ {\bf 17}, n.\ 8 (1994). \bibitem{unni} C.S.\ Unnikrishnan, {\it Does a superconductor shield gravity?}, to appear in Physica {\bf C}. \bibitem{muz} I.J.\ Muzinich and S.\ Vokos, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D 52} (1995) 3472. \bibitem{j} D.\ Bak, D.\ Cangemi, R.\ Jackiw, Phys.\ Rev.\ {\bf D 49} (1994) 5173. \bibitem{h} H.W.\ Hamber and R.M. Williams, Nucl.\ Phys.\ {\bf B 435} (1995) 361. \end{thebibliography} \end{document} From vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 03:25:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA06364; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 03:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 03:25:50 -0700 (PDT) From: vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com Message-Id: <199610131025.DAA06364@mail.eskimo.com> Subject: vortex-digest Digest V96 #83 X-Loop: vortex-digest@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/volume96/83 Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/digest; boundary="----------------------------" To: vortex-digest@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ------------------------------ Content-Type: text/plain vortex-digest Digest Volume 96 : Issue 83 Today's Topics: Correa, SIMS SIMS is nuclear reactor Re: Miley's paper (fwd) Re: HANG UP CALLS, vortex-L philosophy RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Re: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... JATO Power Calc Experiment Community Gravity Re: D. Davidson exerpt full BW update Re: JATO Power Calc Experiment Re: D. Davidson exerpt ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:58:32 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray To: rgeorge@hooked.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, rmcarrell@aol.com, bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu Subject: Correa, SIMS Message-ID: <325F4198.35EB@rt66.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------E67314B7A89" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------E67314B7A89 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thanks, Russ, Could you post on vortex-l details about your gas discharge experiments that sometimes made the cathodes red-hot and eroded them badly? Would it be easy to replicate? A report should be put out. If you still have access to that fine SIMS instrument, why not try to induce CF in various films, Pd, Ni, Ti, Pt, by progressively increasing voltage and current, expanding and contracting the ion beam focus spot, trying different ions. How many variables could you run in a day? Would the SIMS manufacturer be interested in this possibly vast expansion in the market for their product? Rich Murray --------------E67314B7A89 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: rgeorge@mail.hooked.net Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA09958 for ; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 10:04:30 -0600 (MDT) Received: from tuna.hooked.net (webe-17.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.9.17]) by mom.hooked.net (8.8.Beta.1/8.7.3) with SMTP id JAA18377; Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199609241605.JAA18377@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: Richard Thomas Murray Date: Tue, 24 Sep 1996 09:10:52 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Review of Correa device Reply-to: rgeorge@hooked.net CC: rmcarrell@aol.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Richard, ( and Mr. Carrell) I read your review based on RM Carrells assessment of the Correa device. I am interested in this but haven't followed it closely. In my own work I became interested in the glow discharge methods for CF when working at Los Alamos with Tom Claytor monkey wrenching his glow discharge experiments. I subsequently set up several GD experiments of my own and have seen some odd effects. I a mostly interested in measuring the tritium production rates. I use an AC system in a deuterium gas GD experiment. At times I have observed the Pd electrodes cycle through a regular process of heating to a bright red heat and then precipitously cooling back to a silver color. In the process the Pd electrode becomes quite damaged sputtering away considerable matieral. While I've been enegaged in using time of flight SIMS analysis to examine other materials for isotopic anomalies I've not yet had the funds to expand that work to these GD electrodes. Does Correa have any material the he is interested in conducting isotopic analysis on. I thought pehaps one of you had some contact with him and might pose this query. In my current work I am using the most advance time of flight SIMS instrument in the world and have the operators pretty well tuned in to this work. Unfortunately it is rather expensive to operate about running about $2500 per day. Little can be accomplished with less than a full day but two days does a lot. Russ George E-Quest --------------E67314B7A89-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 00:21:06 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray To: rgeorge@hooked.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com, bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu, mwm@aa.net Subject: SIMS is nuclear reactor Message-ID: <325F46E2.55C@rt66.com> Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------63AB1FF97E4D" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------63AB1FF97E4D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Russ, I'm very interested to be informed about the foibles of SIMS measurements. Somehow, I thought it was nearly perfect, you know, picking up the fatal arsenic in Napoleon's hair and stuff like that. Maybe you could post to us at Vortex-L@eskimo.com some more information about SIMS, in regard to Miley's data: How might SIMS have come up with over 4,000 counts for Na23 on fresh beads? Is there any significance to the missing lines for Ni61 (abundance 1.1 %) and Ni64 (0.9 %)? How much significance can we safely abscribe to counts in the range 1 to 10? What are typical ion bean intensities and size of spot? How much film is vaporized in how much time? Is there a molten zone, and how big and long-lived is it? Is the ion beam likely to have any other components, like H+ or H2+? Can SIMS distinguish at low resolutions C(12)H from C(13)? How many different attempts to deliberately induce CF could you make in a day? How long does it take to put in a new sample? How many different ion beams are available? Much appreciated! Rich Murray --------------63AB1FF97E4D Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: rgeorge@mail.hooked.net Received: from mom.hooked.net (root@mom.hooked.net [206.80.6.10]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA25696 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 08:19:33 -0600 (MDT) Received: from tuna.hooked.net (fish-60.ppp.hooked.net [206.80.10.60]) by mom.hooked.net (8.8.0/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA16604 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610101420.HAA16604@mom.hooked.net> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Russ George" To: rmforall@rt66.com Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 07:26:15 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Miley, Mizuno data: SIMS makes nuclear reactions Reply-to: rgeorge@hooked.net Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Before you get too excited about SIMS work I'd look into the technique. The sensitivity of SIMS is different for each atom. Hence things like sodium show up with big signals because the machine can see sodium easily. Xenon and other inert gases cannot be seen at all in SIMS at least not in any of the methods used in this field including Mizuno. Sure 2 12C's make mass 24 and indeed mass 24 is seen however it is in fact a double ion of 12C. Only a very high resolution instrument can see the difference between 2 12C's and 24Mg, not the instrument Miley used in the manner it was used. Also recall that SIMS has been used for a long time now for examining surface materials like layers of various metals deposited by various processes. No isotope anomalies have been reported in the literature and indeed SIMS is a established tool for measuring isotope ratios. All this is not to say the Miley's report is all wrong but there are some ragged edges. --------------63AB1FF97E4D-- ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 11 Oct 1996 23:07:34 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: Re: Miley's paper (fwd) Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 10 Oct 1996 23:19:17 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, manty@ctc.com, CldFusion@aol.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, zap@dnai.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper Dear Frank, Some questions; please; 1] What was the total amount of fluid used? 2] What is the source and purity of; a] the water b] the metal salts 3] What is the rough cumulative flow and rate through the material 4] Do we read correctly the total volume of 'beads' to be 0.5 cc? 5] So how much fluid was re circulated through the 0.5 cc of beads? Cross check; 1A] take same fluid amount and salts and re circulate through plain styrene beads for same length of time 2A] evaporate water under reduced pressure 3A] column chromatograph [separately] fluid [aqueous] and 'blank' beads [solvent ie, MEK, acetone] 1B] repeat cross check with current applied. Use same type of pumps, tubing, fittings, etc.... but not the same ones used in run for paper. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 08:39:17 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: HANG UP CALLS, vortex-L philosophy Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Fri, 11 Oct 1996, Barry Merriman wrote: > I've been having trouble lately deciding whether to buy > skim milk, or 2%. What do you Vortexians think? > > :-) > > > Seriously, couldn't this mailing list be kept even remotely > on topic? I get enough mail as it is without getting general > blah blah on this list. Things discussed here should have > at least some connection to energy, I would think... Actually, the main topic (other than the official "water vortex" one) is more like the pursuit of physics anomalies and the opening of fields of research which are currently "taboo." > Mark, > couldn;t you just take a survey of your coworkers on the > phone thing? Barry does have a good point. Discussion groups are always in danger of being overwhelmed by off-topic conversations, or simply by overly large traffic in on-topic conversations. I've been on newsgroups with 200 messages per day. They're useless. It's OK to send off-topic messages, but please people, make it a habit to take the conversation immediately to private mail. Mark's survey was OK, but in the future, this type of message should say "please reply directly to me, don't fill vortex-L." And even if it doesn't, please try to remember to answer privately if the rest of vortex-L doesn't need to see your message. > And, call me callous, but I don't really need > to hear the ins and outs of the members personal lives either...take > it as given that we all have lives and all the complexities that > entails. Barry has a misconception, I think. Vortex-L is one of those strange and wonderful things called an Online Community. Without the personal messages it would die, and become more like a UPS news feed. Think of it more like like a physics conference than like a physics journal. A physics conference with a chairman who keeps the fistfights to a minimum. Also, vortex-L is what it is. It is ( slightly ) controlled by the rules, but it really is an evolving organism created by its participants. Even if I had lots of strictly-enforced rules, it would still be unmoderated. Then I guess it would be a "bonzai" version of an online community? .....................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 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 12:21:58 -0400 From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: VORTEX-L@eskimo.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, RVargo1062@aol.com, zap@dnai.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, Puthoff@aol.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, CldFusion@aol.com Subject: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Message-ID: <961012122158_124981484@emout14.mail.aol.com> Yusmar test with Magnetite addition October 96 time min temp in F temp out F flow GPM power out KW KW in 0 60 60 0.78 0.00 4.8 15 60 78 0.76 2.00 4.8 30 60 89 0.77 3.26 4.6 45 60 96 0.735 3.86 4.6 60 60 101 0.75 4.49 4.5 75 60 102 0.735 4.51 4.7 90 60 103 0.76 4.77 4.6 105 60 104 0.75 4.82 4.7 120 60 104 0.74 4.75 4.7 COP 0 0.42 0.71 0.84 1.00 0.96 1.04 1.03 1.01 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 11:15:49 -0700 From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com (by way of Gary Hawkins ) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961012181549.006be820@mail.eskimo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" (Reformatted) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION OCTOBER 96 Time Temp In Temp Out Flow Power In Power Out COP (Min) (F) (F) (GPM) (KW) (KW) ________________________________________________________________ 0 60 60 0.78 4.8 0.00 0 15 60 78 0.76 4.8 2.00 0.42 30 60 89 0.77 4.6 3.26 0.71 45 60 96 0.735 4.6 3.86 0.84 60 60 101 0.75 4.5 4.49 1.00 75 60 102 0.735 4.7 4.51 0.96 90 60 103 0.76 4.6 4.77 1.04 105 60 104 0.75 4.7 4.82 1.03 120 60 104 0.74 4.7 4.75 1.01 ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 13:11:19 -0500 (CDT) From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frank Z. wrote: > min temp in F temp out F flow GPM power out KW KW in COP > 0 60 60 0.78 0.00 4.8 0 > 15 60 78 0.76 2.00 4.8 0.42 > 30 60 89 0.77 3.26 4.6 0.71 > 45 60 96 0.735 3.86 4.6 0.84 > 60 60 101 0.75 4.49 4.5 1.00 > 75 60 102 0.735 4.51 4.7 0.96 > 90 60 103 0.76 4.77 4.6 1.04 > 10 60 104 0.75 4.82 4.7 1.03 > 12 60 104 0.74 4.75 4.7 1.01 ----- ---- ---- Cumulative 32.46 42.0 0.77 -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 19:51:42 -0400 From: Puthoff@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... Message-ID: <961012195142_125209631@emout19.mail.aol.com> --------------------- Forwarded message: From: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu (Marcello Truzzi) Reply-to: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu To: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu (AAAAA), esper@california.com (Auerbach, Loyd (2)), BlndgsCast@aol.com (Dan Cohen), dzuck@inforamp.net (Daniel Zuckerbrot), fivemtn@ilhawaii.net (Dennis Stillings), puthoff@aol.com (Hal Puthoff), jrc@inforamp.net (john robert colombo), michaelkurland@mindspring.com (Kurland, Michael), polidoro@aznet.it (Massimo Polidoro), MaxMaven@aol.com (MaxMaven@aol.com), hermeticpress@worldnet.att.net (Minch, Stephen), patrick@cloud9.net (Patrick Huyghe), PLAMONT@afb1.ssc.ed.ac.uk (Peter Lamont), R.Wiseman@herts.ac.uk (Richard Wiseman), ronwestrum@aol.com (Ron Westrum), schwartz@jsasoc.com (Schwartz, Stephan A.), skrippner@igc.apc.org (skrippner@igc.apc.org), 75717.3247@CompuServe.COM (T.A. Waters (1)), thomasb@mindspring.com (Thomas Burgin), 2228@msn.com (Wilhelm, John) Date: 96-10-12 14:13:06 EDT Oct. 3, 1996 14:08 EDT, from an AP news report: NEW DELHI India - An Indian villager who claimed he could turn water into gasoline is a fraud, scientists have determined. Last month Ramar Pillai demonstrated at a government lab how boiling a mixture of leaves, lemon juice and salt, a few drops of gasoline, and a test tube of undisclosed chemicals could yield fuel. Scientists this week reported a hollow stirrer Pillai used during his demonstration contained fuel which he slipped into the boiling concoction, giving it gasoline-like properties. The stirrer was filled with kerosene or gasoline; its tip was plugged with wax, which when heated inside the boiling water, melted, releasing the fuel into the mixture, V. Ramamurthy, the top scientist in the Department of Science and Technology,said. Analysis showed that the mixture also contained lead and other chemicals that are added to gasoline when it is processed. Pillai, a 34-year-old high school dropout, had said his fuel was herbal and derived from the leaves of a plant he had found 18 years ago near his village of Idayankulam, 1,200 miles south of New Delh. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 12 Oct 1996 20:43:17 -0700 (PDT) From: Michael Randall To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: JATO Power Calc Experiment Message-Id: <199610130343.UAA15856@norway.it.earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" From: http://www.eifs.com/aftrhour.htm and gif location Note from Bob T.: The following story is supposedly true. It was on the AP wire in 1995. This story has been nominated for 1996 "Darwin Award", a "real" award (albeit humorous) given to the person who contributes most to the world's gene pool by killing themself in the stupidest way. Example: last year some (deceased) jerk got the award by trying to "jimmy" a soda can out of a Coke Cola machine by tipping it. The machine fell over and killed him! When I first read the article below, I laughed so hard my sides started aching. UNBELIEVABLE. Also, FYI, a JATO unit is a one-shot power source. It has no throttle. Once it's on, it keeps putting out until it runs out of fuel - like a bottle rocket. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- The Arizona Highway Patrol came upon a pile of smoldering metal embedded into the side of a cliff rising above the road at the apex of a curve. The wreckage resembled the site of an airplane crash, but it was a car. The type of car was unidentifiable at the scene. The lab finally figured out what it was and what had happened. It seems that a guy had somehow gotten hold of a JATO unit (Jet Assisted Take Off - actually a solid fuel rocket) that is used to give heavy military transport planes an extra "push" for taking off from short airfields. He had driven his Chevy Impala out into the desert and found a long, straight stretch of road. Then he attached the JATO unit to his car, jumped in, got up some speed and fired off the JATO! The facts as best as could be determined are that the operator of the 1967 Impala hit JATO ignition at a distance of approximately 3.0 miles from the crash site. This was established by the prominent scorched and melted asphalt at that location. The JATO, if operating properly, would have reached maximum thrust within 5 seconds, causing the Chevy to reach speeds well in excess of 350 mph and continuing at full power for an additional 20-25 seconds. The driver, soon to be pilot, most likely would have experienced G-forces usually reserved for dog-fighting F-14 jocks under full afterburners, basically causing him to become insignificant for the remainder of the event. However, the automobile remained on the straight highway for about 2.5 miles (15-20) seconds before the driver applied and completely melted the brakes, blowing the tires and leaving thick rubber marks on the road surface, then becoming airborne for an additional 1.4 miles and impacting the cliff face at a height of 125 feet leaving a blackened crater 3 feet deep in the rock. Most of the driver's remains were not recoverable; however, small fragments of bone, teeth and hair were extracted from the crater and fingernail and bone shards were removed from a piece of debris believed to be a portion of the steering wheel. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:08:19 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex , William Beaty Subject: Community Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Vo., Bill Beatty's letter about community touched a nerve. Several have asked about gravity research at Antioch. I had planned on waiting until the 'official' word was passed by the administration that Antioch College wanted to be involved. The students I have spoken to want to be involved. The "community" of Vortex wants to be involved. I am going to write here a little background, and then post some information. I have been exposed to the work of Eugene E. Podklentnov for only a short period of time. I have been communicating with several people theorizing in the field. Some of what I will be writing is opinion, some is information I have recieved, some is information I have personally experienced first hand. A society has been formed we call "The Gravity Society". We are registering the domain gravity.org. when I say "we", I mean a very few people, we do not even yet have an adminisrator for the society. The domain registration has only just started. There will soon be 'official' and I hope fairly regular reports of work in the field. I will editorialize from time to time, and start now; This whole work is very new and 'raw'. I personally say, opinion, I do not havea clue as to what, exactly, this is. Do not take what I say as gospel. I week from now I may well say "I was wrong". One thing I can say is I only know what I know now, and it will change. So, after I close this letter, I will post some material. It will be re posted in a more complete and polished form by the society. These postings are for the 'community'. JHS ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:37:02 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: Gravity Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Vo., We continue work at this task. Opinion: Anyone who would wish to follow the work should become educated in certain matters so as to be effective. Anyone wishing to engage in the work is encouraged. And, be aware also this is a non trivial effort. The work does not have to cost mega bucks if you have reasonable access to some equipment and supplies but it is not cheap and easy. Some of the areas to learn about include but are not limited to the following. In learning about this is is also suggested to learn not only theory and mathmatics but also the actual hands on practical applied techniques. Even if you never see or work with materials and equipment in the discipline of cryogenics, a different, wonderful and often contrary field of endeavor, knowledge of the 'hardball nuts and bolts belt and suspenders engineering' aspects will, or should, give you an appreciation of those who do. My personal opinion almost always is the judge by doing. If you think "this is bogus and does not work", then this is just that, thinking. But try it yourself first. Then report. Do not fear failure. If a toaster does not work, and fails to toast toast, report it. Report all conditions, in so far as you can. Then, if Bill Beatty or someone suggests "plug it in first" .... and it works, then we all win. It is very hard to find a bad experiment or quest, or question. And Bill, thank you, for the community. Gravity Society ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:46:08 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Dear Vo., In D. D. exerpt the term "N.B." is used at the end of the text, in a similar fashion to the US PS, which means Post Script. Can anyone elucidate the N.B.? JHS ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:10:27 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex cc: William Beaty Subject: full BW update Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII BUSINESS WEEK ONLINE NEWS FLASH! September 25, 1996 ONE STEP CLOSER TO AN ANTIGRAVITY MACHINE Is it possible to create a device the reduces the effects of gravity? Business Week reported in its Sept. 30 issue that it might be (see "An Antigravitiy Machine? Take That, Issac Newton"). Now, preliminary results from initial attempts to confirm the possibility of an antigravity machine appear to have turned out positively. John H. Schnurer, a researcher at Antioch College in Ohio, conducted two trials over the Sept. 21-22 weekend, and both seem to have caused a small weight loss in objects suspended over a superconducting disk. Schnurer cautions that his experimental setup is "still very crude, so don't hang your hat on it yet." But if Schnurer's initial results hold up as he refines his techniques, the 2% weight loss reported by Eugene E. Podkletnov, the Russian scientist who discovered the anomaly while doing research on high-temperature superconducting materials in Finland, might even turn out to be conservative. "This is a new field of investigation, so nothing is cast in stone," says Schnurer. Although a small weight-loss effect was observed, he adds, the cause is still a mystery. It could end up not being a "gravity shield" but some other phenomenon. Schnurer used a disk furnished by Superconductive Components Inc. in Columbus, Ohio. He is working on several refinements of Podkletov's techniques he believes may be patentable. Indeed, a patent lawyer witnessed one of Schnurer's experiments. Copyright 1996 The McGraw-Hill Companies All rights reserved. [JS note: the BW article from the issue dated Sept. 30 is available on America Online; keyword: BW.] ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 01:11:24 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: JATO Power Calc Experiment Message-ID: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Michael Randall wrote: > From: http://www.eifs.com/aftrhour.htm and gif location > > Note from Bob T.: > > The following story is supposedly true. It was on the AP wire in 1995. > > This story has been nominated for 1996 "Darwin Award", a "real" award > (albeit humorous) given to the person who contributes most to the world's > gene pool by killing themself in the stupidest way. Unfortunately there was an article on one of the Urban Legends newsgroups saying that someone had gone looking for the source of this story and found nothing. Too good to be true? Just another "UL"? .....................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 ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:05:01 GMT From: "Peter Glueck" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Message-ID: <3260b0c0.itim@itim.org.soroscj.ro> On Sat, 12 Oct 1996 21:47:49 -0700 (PDT), vortex-l@eskimo.com wrote: > > > Dear Vo., > > In D. D. exerpt the term "N.B." is used at the end of the text, > in a similar fashion to the US PS, which means Post Script. Can anyone > elucidate the N.B.? > > JHS I think it has to be "NOTA BENE" that is 'note well', the conclusion or the essential part of the message. 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 -------------------------------- End of vortex-digest Digest V96 Issue #83 ***************************************** From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 08:08:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA27987; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:05:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:05:53 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 11:05:33 -0400 Message-ID: <961013110530_209462338@emout08.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Yusmar Resent-Message-ID: <"Ng3eK3.0.Dr6.HLGOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1576 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: From: billb@eskimo.com (William Beaty) To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: 96-10-13 10:49:18 EDT On Sun, 13 Oct 1996 FZNIDARSIC@aol.com wrote: > Yury is returning to Moldova today. He is going to send us a complete > system. Yay! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 08:13:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA28715; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:12:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 08:12:40 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: ANNOUNCE: digest mode now available Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"rlaUj3.0.Z07.gRGOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1577 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Welllllllll-p, digest mode is now available on vortex-L. If you unsubscribe from vortex-L and subscribe to vortex-digest instead, you will receive clumps of messages around 30K - 40K in size. The software collects messages until it passes the 40K limit, then transmits them as a single large message with all the separate messages appearing as attachment files. If you want digests, to avoid missing anything I suggest that you remain subscribed to vortex-L until a couple of digest messages have arrived. To subscribe to vortex-digest, send a BLANK MESSAGE to vortex-digest-request@eskimo.com, with the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the message header. No quotes around "subscribe", of course. To unsubscribe from vortex-L, send a BLANK MESSAGE to vortex-L-request@eskimo.com, with the single word "unsubscribe" in the subject line of the message header. No quotes around "unsubscribe", of course. Enjoy! .....................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-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 19:29:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA23134; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 19:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 19:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 13 Oct 1996 19:24:19 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/13/96 19:24:57 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"ykO5C3.0.Hf5.ZIQOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1578 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/12/96 03:16 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET Miley's paper is hardly theory John, it briefly mentions his pet theory. We'll see, I'll send him a note this week, which he probably won't see for a week. By that time the paper will be widely spread, so we'll see what the attitude is. No hurry on my part, but I think a lot of people out there would like to see this. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 20:46:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA10456; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 20:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:42:54 -0500 (CDT) In-Reply-To: from "MHUGO@EPRI" at Oct 13, 96 07:24:19 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"KmfiF3.0.IZ2.ARROo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1579 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo wrote: > Miley's paper is hardly theory John, it briefly mentions his pet > theory. As long as he has experimental results ... > We'll see, I'll send him a note this week, which he probably > won't see for a week. By that time the paper will be widely spread, > so we'll see what the attitude is. No hurry on my part, but I think > a lot of people out there would like to see this. MDH I don't want to be a wet blanket on this copyright thing, but these ISP service providers can and do cancel accounts based upon piracy and copyright violation. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 21:13:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA16578; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:11:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:09:37 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"sJtVK2.0.y24.krROo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1580 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Mark, I don't think I said anywhere the word 'theory', with regards to Miley's paper. If I did, then 'my bad', I have never thought, based on the portion I have seen, this is a theory paper. I looks like a comprehensive paper with application, theory, test, test results and so forth. In other words, a complete paper. On 13 Oct 1996, MHUGO@EPRI wrote: > *** Reply to note of 10/12/96 03:16 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET > Miley's paper is hardly theory John, it briefly mentions his pet > theory. We'll see, I'll send him a note this week, which he probably > won't see for a week. By that time the paper will be widely spread, > so we'll see what the attitude is. No hurry on my part, but I think > a lot of people out there would like to see this. MDH > > I too would like to see the whole paper. My main questions may well be answered in the complete paper. The few that are of immediate interest to me, due to direct personal background in having to grapple with real world stuff in the areas are: 1] was [is] there a reservoir of fluid [electrolyte] which was [is] being re circulated? 2] how big is the reservoir .... ie, hoe much fluid are we talking about ... and, for this question set, the intitial question set, I do not, per se, care about insulation, calorimetery, measurement of heat in-heat out or any of that. Background: I have personallyhad to do work with trying to identify VERY small amounts of compounds under difficult conditions. The compound of interest was organic and 'small', compared to an enzyme, which was 'large' and also present. We used dialysis membrane to exclude the enzyme. Why? Because the enzyme broke down the molecule we were looking for. So we had this molecule, and we had an enzyme breaking it down, and the whole was in and part of the 'as good as we could' prepared molecular soup. We ran gallons and gallons of water under the dialysis memebrane, hoping a few molecules of what we were looking for would diffuse through. Before the enzyme on the other side broke down too much of it. The molecule was of the EXACT same molecular weight as a similar molecule ... also present, and present in much much higher concentration, these were NOT L and R isomers .... the difference was a bond configuration, and it was a too-easy-happenstance for the bond to be reconfigured by heat, or reagent or a number of other factors. I could, and should anyone have interest, will go on and on about he wonderful and interesting and conditions. Some would maybe use the word "difficulties" .... they, this set of parameters and the situation,were not in my mind "difficulties' .... they were an exercise, they were what made the whole thing interesting, and publishable, BECAUSE it was tough .... and FUN! We had to be original and clever to get anywhere, we were counting 1 X 10 neg. 14 moles of the stuff. Or, NOT MUCH STUFF. As with much of my electronic signal processing work for NASA and USAF, noise [and in this case chemical artifact or contamination, the chemical equivalent of noise] was my friend, ally [job security], and constant companion, taskmaster, teacher and ego deflator. 3] what wasin the reservoir? 4] how much fluid went through the bed of beads? 5] how much beads were there present? J From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 21:19:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA17507; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:15:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:15:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:14:21 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex Subject: My bad Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"KtoAG2.0.QH4.ovROo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1581 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., I just posted a windy discussion [which still stands] in response to Marks 'it is hardly a theory, John' ..... well my name is John too. I thought you were talking about me, saying theory. BUT: I still have questions I did not say theory I still would like to see the paper I think posters sould say "John xxxx" .... for responses to persons with common names. Just a thought. JHS From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 21:58:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA25044; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:55:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 21:55:57 -0700 (PDT) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Community Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 04:55:57 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <3265c46a.10349187@mail.netspace.net.au> References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"DPBYN.0.A76.RVSOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1582 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:08:19 -0400 (EDT), John Schnurer wrote: [snip] > A society has been formed we call "The Gravity Society". We are=20 >registering the domain gravity.org. when I say "we", I mean a very few=20 >people, we do not even yet have an adminisrator for the society. The=20 >domain registration has only just started. There will soon be = 'official'=20 >and I hope fairly regular reports of work in the field. > > I will editorialize from time to time, and start now; > > This whole work is very new and 'raw'. I personally say,=20 >opinion, I do not havea clue as to what, exactly, this is. Do not take=20 >what I say as gospel. I week from now I may well say "I was wrong". > > One thing I can say is I only know what I know now, and it will >change.=20 > > So, after I close this letter, I will post some material. It=20 >will be re posted in a more complete and polished form by the society. =20 >These postings are for the 'community'. =20 > > > JHS > > John, Before you do too much, you might like to take a look at Project Omicron: http://www.cwo.com/~omicron/index.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 22:23:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA28603; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:15:14 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 01:13:48 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Community In-Reply-To: <3265c46a.10349187@mail.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"A963g1.0.r-6.XnSOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1583 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Robin, I do not have web. Can you give brief overview of omicron, please? J On Mon, 14 Oct 1996, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > On Sun, 13 Oct 1996 00:08:19 -0400 (EDT), John Schnurer wrote: > [snip] > > A society has been formed we call "The Gravity Society". We are > >registering the domain gravity.org. when I say "we", I mean a very few > >people, we do not even yet have an adminisrator for the society. The > >domain registration has only just started. There will soon be 'official' > >and I hope fairly regular reports of work in the field. > > > > I will editorialize from time to time, and start now; > > > > This whole work is very new and 'raw'. I personally say, > >opinion, I do not havea clue as to what, exactly, this is. Do not take > >what I say as gospel. I week from now I may well say "I was wrong". > > > > One thing I can say is I only know what I know now, and it will > >change. > > > > So, after I close this letter, I will post some material. It > >will be re posted in a more complete and polished form by the society. > >These postings are for the 'community'. > > > > > > JHS > > > > > John, > > Before you do too much, you might like to take a look at Project > Omicron: > > http://www.cwo.com/~omicron/index.html > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on > temperature. > Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, > Learns all his life, > And leaves knowing nothing. > -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 13 23:00:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA05609; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 22:58:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961014060823.006acfe4@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:08:23 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Community Resent-Message-ID: <"p1Yyv3.0.SN1.2QTOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1584 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >John, > >Before you do too much, you might like to take a look at Project >Omicron: > >http://www.cwo.com/~omicron/index.html > > >Regards, > >Robin van Spaandonk Omicron plans to spin a magnet at near the speed of light? Hopefully he knows that if spun on its own axis, the magnetic field itself does not spin. Omicron seems to place a lot of weight on a not-so-carefully-masked attempt to take credit for what occurred in Finland, which I find unsettling at best. Quoting: " MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH " " A Major University has confirmed PROJECT OMICRON Theories! " The Major University being referred to is Tampere. What I found interesting over there was the "Think About It" page, where comments are quoted from students who were asked a question about gravity. Engineering, Physics, and Math students wrote such absurd answers that it's worth a good laugh, though pitiful. Another interesting page, about geometry, and the Great Pyramid: http://www.cwo.com/~omicron/prop003.html The rest of the site has some nice graphics, but otherwise takes on an appearance by its content on the level of a sitcom, a spoof, a TA having some fun, probably consuming lots of beer, and hopefully scoring a few dates with it. I wish him luck, but experimentation and results always say a lot more than math, theories, or rhetoric. Tough view, yes, but realistic, yes. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 00:02:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA15490; Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 02:53:41 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199610140653.CAA25986@mail.inforamp.net> X-Authentication-Warning: mail.inforamp.net: Host ts25-13.tor.iSTAR.ca [204.191.139.113] didn't use HELO protocol X-Sender: quinney@inforamp.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Quinney Subject: Re: Community Resent-Message-ID: <"_BGdJ1.0.xn3.kJUOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1585 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Vortexians: I agree with Gary Hawkins. The Omicron site does not appear to be up to scratch. I enjoyed Bill Beaty and John Schnurers' ideas about Community. I also like John's ideas about also using this forum as an information exchange on the "Tampere" Gravity experiments and theories. I'm hoping that the Cold Fusioneers will not object.. there may actually be some over-unity concepts associated with the Podklentnov "anti-gravity" field.. This will mean that two very exciting, developing areas in science will be right here, on one mailing-list. Regards, Colin Quinney From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 00:29:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA18827; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 00:28:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 13 Oct 1996 23:34:21 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"mdphd2.0.5c4.dkUOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1586 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:08 PM 10/13/96, Gary Hawkins wrote: [snip] > >Omicron plans to spin a magnet at near the speed of light? >Hopefully he knows that if spun on its own axis, the magnetic >field itself does not spin. > [snip] >Gary Hawkins What evidence is there that the field does not spin with the magnet? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 02:11:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA28682; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 02:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 02:09:16 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961014091246.006fb944@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 02:12:46 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"bG4V41.0.307.xCWOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1587 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hey, isn't the Faraday's homopolar effect without the radial conductor (in the form of spinning cylindrical capacitor) an evidence that the magnetic field does rotate with the magnet ? At 11:34 PM 10/13/96 -0800, you wrote: >At 11:08 PM 10/13/96, Gary Hawkins wrote: >[snip] >> >>Omicron plans to spin a magnet at near the speed of light? >>Hopefully he knows that if spun on its own axis, the magnetic >>field itself does not spin. >> >[snip] >>Gary Hawkins > >What evidence is there that the field does not spin with the magnet? > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 05:11:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA11365; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 05:10:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 05:10:03 -0700 (PDT) From: LCatalf1@pseg.com Date: 14 OCT 96 07:52:44 EDT Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt To: vortex-l@eskimo.com MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 2.3.5 ZOOMIT X.400/SMTP Dual Stack X-Complete-Subject: Re: D. Davidson exerpt Message-ID: <0000ftflnnxn.0000eccmeqww@pseg.com> Resent-Message-ID: <"NGKY01.0.Rn2.PsYOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1588 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: N.B. stands for "Note' Bene" in Italian and is interpreted as "Note Well" in English. Lee Catalfomo ------------- Original Text >From C=US/A=INTERNET/DDA=ID/vortex-l(a)eskimo.com, on 10/13/96 12:48 AM: Dear Vo., In D. D. exerpt the term "N.B." is used at the end of the text, in a similar fashion to the US PS, which means Post Script. Can anyone elucidate the N.B.? JHS From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 07:31:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA29840; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:21:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:21:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610141421.HAA13299@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:21:01 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: JATO Power Calc Experiment Resent-Message-ID: <"h9PpD3.0.9I7.rnaOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1589 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 01:11 AM 10/13/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Sat, 12 Oct 1996, Michael Randall wrote: > >> From: http://www.eifs.com/aftrhour.htm and gif location >> >> Note from Bob T.: >> >> The following story is supposedly true. It was on the AP wire in 1995. >> >> This story has been nominated for 1996 "Darwin Award", a "real" award >> (albeit humorous) given to the person who contributes most to the world's >> gene pool by killing themself in the stupidest way. > >Unfortunately there was an article on one of the Urban Legends newsgroups >saying that someone had gone looking for the source of this story and >found nothing. Too good to be true? Just another "UL"? > >.....................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 > > If so, it is one of the better ones. I too laughed and laughed and laughed. Maybe this is a Road-Runner/Coyote tale. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 07:38:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA02413; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:26:31 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 14 Oct 1996 07:25:07 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/14/96 07:25:23 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"5suRb2.0.Yb.IsaOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1590 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/13/96 20:45 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET John, wouldn't you know that I'd leave all copies of the paper at home today. I'll write you tonight, but I don't think Miley put "copyright" on this one...(That might be intentional.) So with some feedback from the source, (i.e. a reply from Miley) we might have it. (Then again as was suggested elsewhere, CETI might just post it on their web. Then all you'd have to do is a link.) MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 07:53:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA07868; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:42:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:42:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610141435.HAA00205@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:35:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961014091246.006fb944@mail.localaccess.com> from "epitaxy@localaccess.com" at Oct 14, 96 02:12:46 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8Tx-K2.0.sw1.F5bOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1591 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A > > Hey, isn't the Faraday's homopolar effect without the radial conductor (in > the form of spinning cylindrical capacitor) an evidence that the magnetic > field does rotate with the magnet ? Here's four cases of homopolar generator configurations. What is the magnetic field anyway? 1.) Conductor rotates, magnet stationary. Output Generated. 2.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates. Output Generated. 3.) Conductor stationary, magnet rotates. No Output Generated. And here's the fourth not well known, blow my mind case, from a paper by Mueller. 4.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates, and complete magnetic circuit also rotates. No Output Generated. Go figure. Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 08:33:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17609; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 08:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961014233052.221f95b8@po.pacific.net.sg> X-Sender: mpowers8@po.pacific.net.sg X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Mpower Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:28:26 +0800 Resent-Message-ID: <"mH0jF3.0._I4.ombOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1592 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sir ! I don't speak for anyone but myself, but - my head is spinning ! Could you _PLEASE_ clarify what you mean by "rotating the magnet" as well as the phrase "rotating the conductor" ? I have this mental image of a hairpin coil rotating about a common center of gravity as the magnet twirls and tumbles in orbit around the power supply. Toss in a few litres of magnetic fluid. Are you rotating the magnet : 1) on the (longitudinal) axis of the magnetic field ? 2) on a line normal to the (longitudinal) axis ? 3) at random ? willy nilly ? WHAT ??? What kind of conductor are you describing ? How are you rotating the conductor ? When they both rotate, is their rotation about : 1) a common axis 2) two axes normal to each other, or, 3) some skewed tumbling motion ? Sorry to disturb you about all this, but I really would like to understand the geometry of what you are discussing. It's important. Thanks At 07:35 1996.10.14 -0700, you wrote: >> >> Hey, isn't the Faraday's homopolar effect without the radial conductor (in >> the form of spinning cylindrical capacitor) an evidence that the magnetic >> field does rotate with the magnet ? > >Here's four cases of homopolar generator configurations. >What is the magnetic field anyway? > >1.) Conductor rotates, magnet stationary. Output Generated. >2.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates. Output Generated. >3.) Conductor stationary, magnet rotates. No Output Generated. > >And here's the fourth not well known, blow my mind case, from >a paper by Mueller. > >4.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates, and > complete magnetic circuit also rotates. No Output Generated. > >Go figure. >Robert Stirniman > > pa ********************************************************** * http://home.pacific.net.sg/~mpowers8 ******** ********************************************************** From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 10:29:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA10445; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 10:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 10:10:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:07:42 -0500 Message-Id: <9610141707.AA04430@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsm7.dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... Resent-Message-ID: <"tqKX_.0.6Z2.WFdOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1593 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Hal, At 07:51 PM 10/12/96 -0400, you wrote: >Forwarded message: ... >From: soc_truzzi@emuvax.emich.edu (Marcello Truzzi) >Oct. 3, 1996 14:08 EDT, from an AP news report: > >NEW DELHI India - An Indian villager who claimed he could turn water into >gasoline is a fraud, scientists have determined. > >Scientists this week reported a hollow stirrer Pillai used during his >demonstration contained fuel which he slipped into the boiling concoction, >giving it gasoline-like properties. > >The stirrer was filled with kerosene or gasoline; its tip was plugged with >wax, which when heated inside the boiling water, melted, releasing the fuel >into the mixture, V. Ramamurthy, the top scientist in the Department of >Science and Technology,said. Analysis showed that the mixture also contained >lead and other chemicals that are added to gasoline when it is processed. I can't find the original message which reported this demonstration, but I was a little skeptical of the demo. However, I recall that something like 1/2 liter of hydrocarbon was produced in the demo (out of a total of 1 liter of liquid). I guess I'll have to be a little skeptical of the debunking explanation, too. A stirring rod that contains 1/2 liter of hydrocarbons would be a little too easy to spot, I would think. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 11:50:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA01008; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:30:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3262F5C0.E53@andover.co.uk> Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:24:00 -0700 From: johnkent X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I; 16bit) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Water Fuel Cells- fwd References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"VQYiW2.0.YF.4ReOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1594 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael J. Schaffer wrote: > > Re John Kent's post, forwarded to Vortex-L by Michael Randall > [snip] > >> "The smallest amount of energy needed to electrolyse one mole of > >>water is 65.3 Wh at 25 degrees C. When Hydrogen and oxygen are recombined > >>into water during combustion 79.3 Wh of energy is released. 14 Wh more > >>energy is released in burning hydrogen and oxygen than is required to > >>split water. The excess must be absorbed from the surrounding media in > >>the form of heat during electrolysis". > > I think these two energy numbers are just the free energy and the > enthalpy of the reaction, respectively. They are two different, but > related, thermodynamic quantities. Do any chemists out there care to > confirm? > > Michael J. Schaffer > General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA > Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 Same theme I am afraid. This time extract from "A textbook of Magnetohydrodynamics" by J.A.Shercliff, Professor of engineering science, University of Warick, Pergamon Press. "It should be noted that there are exceptions to the rule that the heat flow normal to a surface be continuous....... Another case is that where counter-diffusion of molecules and their dissociation products or of neutral atoms and electrons and ions gives rise to heat release or absorption at an interface where dissociation or recombination is occuring. ........ many of these phenomena are still being explored and it is not yet possible to give formulations of them as simple boundary conditions." Has anyone yet defined the conditions under which heat absorption takes place during electrolysis ?. regards johnkent From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 11:56:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03860; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:41:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:41:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610141834.LAA00573@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:34:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2.2.16.19961014233052.221f95b8@po.pacific.net.sg> from "Mpower" at Oct 14, 96 11:28:26 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"NRLhe3.0.Dy.ObeOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1596 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Sir ! > I don't speak for anyone but myself, but - my head is spinning ! > Could you _PLEASE_ clarify what you mean by "rotating the magnet" as well as > the phrase "rotating the conductor" ? Yes. Sorry. There are two main configurations for the conductor -- a disk, or a drum. Topologically the same. In the disk configuration, the magnetic field is axial (along the axis) of rotation of the conductor. In the drum configuration, the magnetic field is radial (perpendicular to the axis of conductor rotation). The magnet (permanent or electromagnet) in some designs rotates with the conductor, and in some cases does not rotate. When the magnet rotates, it is always with (attached) to the conductor. I know. It's still not clear. You could try the book, "The Homopolar Generator Handbook", by Tom Valone. Regards, Robert STirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 11:58:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA01376; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:31:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961014184145.006c7dbc@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:41:45 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"eVUVN2.0.JL.9SeOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1595 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:28 PM 10/14/96 +0800, you wrote: > >I have this mental image of a hairpin coil rotating >about a common center of gravity as the magnet twirls and tumbles in orbit >around the power supply. Toss in a few litres of magnetic fluid. > >Are you rotating the magnet : > 1) on the (longitudinal) axis of the magnetic field ? > 2) on a line normal to the (longitudinal) axis ? > 3) at random ? willy nilly ? WHAT ??? :> ! Take some shop parts and throw them in a blender... This diagram on Bill's site gives some idea of the arrangement, although not the more simple models that Faraday used: http://www.ibg.uu.se/~david/elektromagnum/web/physics/KeelyNet/diagrams/N_MA CH5.GIF In that one, current results between the two mercury pools, but would not result if the copper rotor were not rotating. Other diagrams can be found by removing the filename on that URL, leaving the trailing slash. A simple way to check this out is to spin a speaker magnet from a handdrill or other motor, placing the face of the magnet near a copper plate, observing no drag. The speaker magnet face is one of the poles. Reversing that, having the magnet stationary and spinning a disk of copper next to it, there will be drag, and lots of current generated in the copper. Thanks Robert Stirniman for your description of the effects. The goal with an N-Machine was to spin the two together and generate current without the drag (no back EMF). I have not seen anything to indicate a success with that, and DePalma seems to have gone silent. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 12:03:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA07315; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:54:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610141847.LAA00605@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 11:47:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19961014184145.006c7dbc@mail.eskimo.com> from "Gary Hawkins" at Oct 14, 96 11:41:45 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"fKc_p1.0.Do1.eneOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1597 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > The goal with an N-Machine was to spin the two together and generate > current without the drag (no back EMF). I have not seen anything to > indicate a success with that, and DePalma seems to have gone silent. > Gary Hawkins In my opinion, the HPG design to look at most seriously for O/U is Trombley. It was classified in the US Patent Office by Naval Intelligence, due to the "unique brush design". He has since gotten an international patent, of which there is a copy (very poor) in Valone's book. It's a neatly engineered design. Trombley, who is obviously no fool, claimed that the prototype operated at 250% efficiency. Trombley's HPG has a couple features that make it different than "conventional" designs. 1. Current is taken from the rotating disk in a completely symmetrical fashion. 2. The entire magnetic circuit rotates. 3. Current is taken from the rotating disk, through a gap in the rotating magnetic circuit. It would be interesting to build one of these, or talk with Trombley about it. But of course it's all been classified. National security don't you know. Due to brush design? Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 13:22:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA22512; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 12:49:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: 14 Oct 96 15:46:48 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Message-ID: <961014194647_100433.1541_BHG63-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"4HZQQ.0.aV5.BbfOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1598 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Robert, > Yes. Sorry. There are two main configurations for the conductor -- > a disk, or a drum. Topologically the same. I always see this stated as a fact, yet when I've tried it experimentally I keep getting almost null results from the drum, yet nice clear ones from the disc. Is it just me? Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 18:39:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA10875; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:14:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:14:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 17:18:09 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"9ZhW22.0.qf2.0MkOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1600 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >A simple way to check this out is to spin a speaker magnet from a >handdrill or other motor, placing the face of the magnet near a >copper plate, observing no drag. The speaker magnet face is one of the >poles. > >Reversing that, having the magnet stationary and spinning a disk of >copper next to it, there will be drag, and lots of current generated >in the copper. > [snip] >Gary Hawkins If the copper plate rotates about the same axis of rotation the magnet does in the first test, then the results should be indentical. The motion is *relative*, even though it is angular. Furthermore, a radial field gradient should be generated in the copper in both such cases. The gradient produces no current because there is no current loop available. On the other hand, if the copper sheet rotates off center, a current loop is available in the copper, so a strong braking effect is seen. A similar braking effect would be seen by inserting a shim in the drill in order to rotate the magnet off center for test one above. The field must rotate with the magnet since the field lines are composites of many field lines from many small domains. Domains on the outer rim of the magnet have both rotational and lateral motion relative to the copper conductor immediately opposite them at any point in time. The magnetic field lines must move with and be connected to the domain, i.e. the moving charged particles, of origin. Nothing else makes any sense. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 19:01:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA19966; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:51:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 18:51:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 21:50:33 -0400 Message-ID: <961014215033_210974443@emout13.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... Resent-Message-ID: <"qBjZt.0.rt4.GukOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1601 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dean Miller says (with regard to the debunking msg I forwarded on the Indian herbal water additive to make gasoline): "I guess I'll have to be a little skeptical of the debunking explanation, too. A stirring rod that contains 1/2 liter of hydrocarbons would be a little too easy to spot, I would think." You may be right. I forwarded this, not because I have any reason to believe the debunking either, but so that anyone who can find out more about it can let us know. I have certainly seen debunking messages in the past about anomalous phenomena themselves in need of debunking. Is this one? Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 19:29:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA26255; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:17:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:17:00 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 22:15:56 -0400 Message-ID: <961014221555_211003247@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"udvim2.0.4Q6.QGlOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1602 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirnman says: "1.) Conductor rotates, magnet stationary. Output Generated. 2.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates. Output Generated. 3.) Conductor stationary, magnet rotates. No Output Generated. And here's the fourth not well known, blow my mind case, from a paper by Mueller. 4.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates, and complete magnetic circuit also rotates. No Output Generated. Go figure. " How's this, which assumes magnetic field does rotate. In (1) conductor cuts stationary mag field - the usual case to generate output, no mystery. In (2) no relative motion between rotating magnetic field and rotating disk conductor, so no output generated here BUT rotating mag field cuts external circuit that is not rotating and generates output there. In (3) rotating mag field generates output in stationary disk conductor BUT generates cancelling emf in external circuit, so no net output. In (4), like (2), nothing generated in nonrelative motion of conducting disk and magnet AND since external circuit is also rotating, so no chance for rotating mag field to generate anything here by relative motion either, so no output. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 19:37:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA27397; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 19:20:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 22:19:37 -0400 Message-ID: <961014221935_211007233@emout07.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"GdLTt3.0._h6.uJlOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1603 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mpower asks: "Are you rotating the magnet : 1) on the (longitudinal) axis of the magnetic field ? 2) on a line normal to the (longitudinal) axis ? 3) at random ? willy nilly ? WHAT ???" Two cylinders or disks, end to end (as in one cylinder cut in two and separated slightly) with mag field longitudinal as in a cylindrical bar magnet. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 21:07:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA23506; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 16:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 16:59:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 16:54:15 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields In-Reply-To: <199610141435.HAA00205@shell.skylink.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"URvnw2.0.Cl5.-FjOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1599 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 14 Oct 1996, Robert Stirniman wrote: > And here's the fourth not well known, blow my mind case, from > a paper by Mueller. > > 4.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates, and > complete magnetic circuit also rotates. No Output Generated. > > Go figure. > Robert Stirniman Makes perfect sense to me, because the output voltage is developed between a rotor and a stator, where the stator is the external circuit. When I break the homopolar generator down in my mind to the flux-cutting level, I see a radial e-field created by the rotation of the rotor in relation to the magnet. If I spin either the magnet or the rotor, this field appears. If I instead look at the STATOR, the external circuit, this field appears if I either rotate the entire external circuit or I rotoate the magnet. But if I then put the rotor and stator together and connecte them to a load resistor, they will both see exactly the same e-field when I rotate the magnet, and hence there will be no current. It's like connecting two fully-charged D-cells together plus to plus and minus to minus: if they both have 1.50000 volts across them, there will be no current even though a voltage exists. If the magnet is held still and the rotor and stator are spun together, there is no current. If the magnet is spun, there is no current. Only when the magnet is there (rotating or not,) and the rotor is spun relative to the stator, is there a current. Now if you want weird, look into self-acting homopolar generators, where there is no magnet at all, just a rotor and a stator. In these devices, any microscopic preexisting current creates an exciting b-field which then causes an enlarged current when the parts are spun. After a short while, an enormous current appears. It's as if the self-acting HG pulls threads of flux out of space itself and weaves them into a coherent b-field around itself. These devices are the electromagnetic "dual" of the Wimshurst machine. The Wimshurst machine creates e-field from nothing and charges a capacitor. The self-acting homopolar generator creates b-field from nothing and produces a trapped "flywheel" current in an inductor. Weird-squared: the current in a superconducting self-acting homopolar generator will grow as long as the device is turned, and if you stop turning it, the current will remain forever, until you turn it backwards (or let the crank go, which allows the device to spin backwards as a motor!) Essentially what you've got is a "windup magnet"! I doubt that such a thing exists, since you'd have to have sliding superconductor brushes (zero-ohm sliding contact!) .....................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-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 14 23:11:45 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA21554; Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:07:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:07:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961015061351.006dad14@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 23:13:51 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"QaC-v2.0.eG5.9eoOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1604 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:18 PM 10/14/96 -0800, you wrote: >The field must rotate with the magnet since the field lines are composites >of many field lines from many small domains. Domains on the outer rim of >the magnet have both rotational and lateral motion relative to the copper >conductor immediately opposite them at any point in time. The magnetic >field lines must move with and be connected to the domain, i.e. the moving >charged particles, of origin. Nothing else makes any sense. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > Try it. One way of rigging it up would be to use a rubber stopper or "foot", put a 1/4" bolt through it, and tighten it down (with a nut) to fill the big hole in the middle of a speaker magnet. Be sure to stay out of the plane of rotation in case it flys apart. Or, if you have a motor with a shaft that fits a magnet hole just right, (or with rubber tubing as spacers) could just glue the magnet on there. Or, how about gluing a magnet onto your disk sander. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 15 12:10:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA09196; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:56:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:56:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610151754.KAA08764@mail.eskimo.com> Alternate-Recipient: prohibited Disclose-Recipients: prohibited Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 07:18:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Kirk L Shanahan Subject: Re: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 07:22:00 -0400 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal A1-Type: MAIL Hop-Count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"ycs303.0.aF2.C1zOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1607 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > >Dean Miller says (with regard to the debunking msg I forwarded on the Indian >herbal water additive to make gasoline): > >"I guess I'll have to be a little skeptical of the debunking explanation, >too. A stirring rod that contains 1/2 liter of hydrocarbons would be a >little too easy to spot, I would think." > >You may be right. I forwarded this, not because I have any reason to believe >the debunking either, but so that anyone who can find out more about it can >let us know. I have certainly seen debunking messages in the past about >anomalous phenomena themselves in need of debunking. Is this one? > >Hal Puthoff I saw another report on the 'net that said the Indian gentleman also used a wax bottom in his reactor (fuel underneath). That would probably explain it. Kirk Shanahan {{My opinions...noone else's}} From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 15 16:36:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA20585; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:10:22 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:10:22 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961015220836.0071a384@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 15:08:36 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"5jqhP2.0.Z15.Dl0Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Unidentified subject! Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1610 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A ...But, what about the case where the flux cutting radial conductor is eliminated and the electrical charge is collected in a cylindrical capacitor instead ? At 10:15 PM 10/14/96 -0400, you wrote: >>Robert Stirnman says: >> >>"1.) Conductor rotates, magnet stationary. Output Generated. >>2.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates. Output Generated. >>3.) Conductor stationary, magnet rotates. No Output Generated. >> >>And here's the fourth not well known, blow my mind case, from >>a paper by Mueller. >> >>4.) Conductor rotates, magnet rotates, and >> complete magnetic circuit also rotates. No Output Generated. >> >>Go figure. " >> >>How's this, which assumes magnetic field does rotate. In (1) conductor cuts >>stationary mag field - the usual case to generate output, no mystery. In (2) >>no relative motion between rotating magnetic field and rotating disk >>conductor, so no output generated here BUT rotating mag field cuts external >>circuit that is not rotating and generates output there. In (3) rotating mag >>field generates output in stationary disk conductor BUT generates cancelling >>emf in external circuit, so no net output. In (4), like (2), nothing >>generated in nonrelative motion of conducting disk and magnet AND since >>external circuit is also rotating, so no chance for rotating mag field to >>generate anything here by relative motion either, so no output. >> >>Hal Puthoff >> >> >> > > >. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 00:40:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA22067; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 00:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 00:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9610160731.AA20756@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 00:44:27 -0500 To: "Scudder,Henry J" From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) Subject: Surface tension Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"0nz1l3.0.cO5.q_8Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1614 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scudder,Henry J, I rinse it with tap water then deionized water. After my second set of data I found that the new capillary tubes were not as clean as I assumed on the first data reported. In Deionized water The first data was 0.5 mm tube raised 16 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 10 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 6 mm. The second data collected was 99 ml deionized water and 1 ml ethyl alcohol. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 34 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 21 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 8 mm. The next sample was 63 ml deionized water and 1 ml Amnonia. The recomened dilution for window wash was 1 Tsp/ Qt = 15 ml/950 ml = 1 ml/63ml ratio dilution. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 30 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 28 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 20 mm. The next sample run was Paulsen & Roles 64 to 1 Glass Cleaner (GC) containing isoprocal alcohol. I mixed 1ml GC /64 ml deionized H20. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 17 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 12 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 10 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 9 mm. I then tried to get a new base line on deionized water by its self 3 times rensing between measurments. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 38 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 20 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 19 mm. Same beaker new deionized water The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 37 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 19 mm. A new beaker with deionized water The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 31 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 19 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 24 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 17 mm. I think the science teacher runs the glass ware through the dish washer. When I did some internship at a waistwater lab they washed and rensed their glass ware with a acid rinse. Since this is a Junior High School lab I do not think I could go that intense in cleaning the glass ware. >David >How are you cleaning your capillary tubes before testing them? >I would expect that your tests would critically depend on this, and >somehow you need to have a uniform surface before testing them. >Hank Scudder ************************************ * David Doty * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * home 503 266 3969 * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ************************************ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 03:04:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA15162; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:03:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 02:08:51 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"7mbfv1.0.pi3.RBBPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1616 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: AI sent the following yesterday at 6:21 AM, but it didn't show up so I am sending it again. Note that the unsigned attachments below were my posts. >At 05:18 PM 10/14/96 -0800, you wrote: > >>The field must rotate with the magnet since the field lines are composites >>of many field lines from many small domains. Domains on the outer rim of >>the magnet have both rotational and lateral motion relative to the copper >>conductor immediately opposite them at any point in time. The magnetic >>field lines must move with and be connected to the domain, i.e. the moving >>charged particles, of origin. Nothing else makes any sense. >> >> >>Regards, >> PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >>Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 >> >> >> > >Try it. One way of rigging it up would be to use a rubber stopper or >"foot", put a 1/4" bolt through it, and tighten it down (with a nut) to >fill the big hole in the middle of a speaker magnet. Be sure to stay >out of the plane of rotation in case it flys apart. > >Or, if you have a motor with a shaft that fits a magnet hole just right, >(or with rubber tubing as spacers) could just glue the magnet on there. > >Or, how about gluing a magnet onto your disk sander. > >Gary Hawkins > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today > http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA Gary, I did a number of experiments regarding this last June using a large metal washer for the disk and magnetron magnet(s) all mounted on ball bearing shafts using Lego parts for mounting frame, shafts, and motor. This was in relation to discussions in the thread "Hering experiment" here on vortex, some of which I have included in this post below. I saw no evidence of significant drag on the metallic disk when no brushes were attached and the disk rotated. However, I made no effort to measure such because that was not the purpose of the experiment. I would point out to you that magnetic fields have been used to suspend rotating metal objects for various purposes - providing an almost perfect bearing. I just do not have time right now to reconstruct the gadget. I was recently doing high voltage electrolyis experiments when I destroyed some 20,000V diodes in a 0 - 7,500 V circuit which was only operating at 3,500 V. This is mind boggeling, unless there was something wrong with the diodes. The electrolysis cell was nothing but a capacitor in the HV circuit. Losing the power supply was a real loss. I have a number of experiments backed up waiting to free up the power supply. Also have other experiments going on right now. Here are some of the past discussions: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chris, OK, thinking about this some more, the current/conductor loop of the Faraday disk experiment is closed. Every flux loop is also closed. Therefore every flux loop will cut the conductor loop exactly zero times or some multiple of 2 times, typically 2 times assuming the wire has no kinks, each rotation. Each cut alternates going "into" (adding voltage) and "out" (subtracting voltage) of the loop so there is no net induced voltage on the loop from the magnet, regardless of the magnet/conductor relative velocity. Therefore there is no net rotational force on the magnet, only a torque on the poles of rotation due to the current induced in the loop, but this is resisted by the bearings. If the stator becomes an envelope instead of a wire, then even this polar torque is removed. The important factor in generating current is the relative angular velocity between the armature and the rest of the loop, the stator. It is interresting that the armature (disk) could be left stationary and the stator part of the loop could rotate instead, reversing roles. It is only the simple relative motion of the stator and armature that produces the voltage and current. The other part of effective use of the field is minimizing the number of times flux lines cross either the armature or stator both ways, as these flux line double crossings cancel their own effects. So, put another way, to the degree the magnet rotates relative to the stator, the stator becomes the armature to the exact same degree the effect of the armature is diminished. This is why the Faraday disk experiment is different from the Hering experiment, because in the Hering experiment there is no conductor being cut by flux. In the Faraday experiment the is always some conductor being cut by flux as long as there is armature/stator relative motion, it's just not immediately intuitively clear that the stator becomes the conductor being cut as the magnet begins to rotate. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Greetings guys; > >I read about this in a couple of books, but it was a long time ago. Could >you repeat the experimental observations please. I know that it is probably >back in your thread somewhere. > >I gather that the cases are; > >I assume that non rotating means that it is not rotating relative to the >laboratory, and earth solar and other rotations are ignored. Only three reference frames are important, the disk, the magnet, and the rest of the circuit (the stator). The earth's magnetic field and all other motion is ignored and could not be expected to have a measureable effect, especially in the time of Micahel Faraday. > >1 disk rotates, magnet is stationary. Take voltage from the center to the >outer perimeter. ??Does the device taking the power (LED or whatever) need >to rotate with disk, or be in a non rotating reference or either? Typically this is a microammeter.=and is in the stator frame of reference. > >2 disk rotates, magnet rotates with it. again how is voltage taken out Same way. Chris has suggested a variation of the Faraday experiment where the magnet is circular and the size of the disk and the disk axle goes through the magnet. The magnet is on bearings on the axle so it is free to rotate with the disk or to remain stationary. There is a brush on the axel so there is a current path (uncut) down the center of the magnetic field. There is a brush on the outside perimeter of the disk. The microammeter is in the circuit between the two brushes. In the orginal version of the experiment the disk rotation cuts the flux so induces a voltage from the axle across the disk to the peripheral area of the disk. The brushes close the loop to generate the current. > >3 disk is stationary, magnet rotates. is this a zero voltage situation? Yes. (I deduce.) > >So, what combinations have I missed, and what exactly must be done to bleed >power away? The area of interest here is whether current theory predicts the behavior (i.e. is there an anomaly here to be investigated for energy creating potential?) or whether the results are simply non-intuitive. Michael Schaffer's excellent analysis shows clearly "three ways from Sunday" the actual results agree with the results expected by theory in the case of the Hering experiment. Based on my comments in the prior post, I think all the stated observations in the case of the Faraday disk experiment are completely expected on a qualitative basis. Unless someone has some new data or theory, I personally see no anomalies, no excess energy potential, so therefore consider it case closed. (I have a very small workspace. Case closed to me means the stuff goes into a box and into the crawl space to make room for the next thing on my queue, which happens to be condensed charge. I am now in the process of zapping little sparks through xenon bulbs. Fun!) > >If the power circuit must be fixed, then this requires contacts or brushes >for DC power so doesn't the friction come into play? There has not been any energy balance experiment discussed. The implied interest here (at least for me) is just in turning over old rocks to look for the unexplained. The unexplained leads to experiments that show the unexpected, or vice versa, which leads to discovering a law that leads to engineering principles for an ou device which leads to an experiment, etc. This is pretty old stuff, so not much hope, but maybe the longitudinal force and exploding wire thing maybe could show some leads. > >In any case, I think this one would be very interesting to investigate from >a phased array point of view. I have a fairly good model for the electrons >motions in the magnets and for how that affects the surrounding nodal >structure of space according to my model. So I want to use the above >results to fine tune my model. > >Thanks. Ross Tessien I have an experimental angle. Maybe the longitudinal force problem could be investigated by looking at effects on wires or spring loaded segmented rods which are the center conductors of a large coaxial cable? The results could be compared for coaxials of outer conductor inner radius r and much larger outer conductor inner radius R, and if the results are the same then perhaps it can be concluded there is an "inner current only" related force affecting the inner conductor, possibly the micro-pinch phenomenon I suggested, or something similar. Comments anyone? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Horace asks: > >>The results concerning this brain teaser put into question >now the Farady >disk experiment in the case where the magnet >turns with the disk. I took >the queue for my answer from that >experiment. I don't see any significant >difference. How good >and clear are the results from that experiment? > >The experiment is good. When the magnet rotates with the disk, the voltage >is still generated in the disk. See nice clear exposition of the experiment >and its results under all conditions of relative movement of disk and magnet >by Gupta, Amer. Jour. of Phys., vol 31, p. 428 (1963). > >My favorite interpretation is that under the cemented-magnet condition, even >though there is no relative motion between the disk and the magnet, there is >relative motion between the rotating combination and the circuit in which the >voltage is picked off, and that's where the action is. I know this is >controversial, and Francisco Muller has published an article with other >interpretations in Galilean Electrodynamics, as well as in Marinov's >hard-to-find "Thorny Way of Truth" series. > >Hal Puthoff Not controverial with me! I just came to the same conclusion - see earlier post. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 03:19:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA16335; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:14:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:14:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 06:11:09 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: One of those days.... Message-ID: <961016101109_100433.1541_BHG64-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HV5hO1.0.9_3.8MBPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1617 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I realise that this is way off-topic, but I just could not resist sharing it all with you. I see that yesterday was another of those days. First James Mulahey of Florida became 'tired and emotional' and tried to enter the cockpit on a Virgin Airlines flight from there to Manchester. It took six passengers and a steward to handcuff him to his seat (I didn't know airliners carried handcuffs). In a fine example of deadpan reporting, the newspapers say that he succeeded in freeing himself "and suffered a broken nose while being restrained once more." He's up before the magistrates this morning... Meanwhile there was a bit of a problem at Rome airport, and the passengers had to get out and push their Brutish [sic] Airways jet out to the runway. Perhaps they got a partial refund for their trouble? I can just imagine the scene - lots of fat businessmen and little old ladies straining with their shoulders to the landing gear, while a huge BA official, moustachioed and stripped to the waist, wields his whip. And finally a cracking good scheme was dreamed up in Sweden, but unfortunately it didn't work. Huge quantities of synthetic wolf urine was sprayed onto roads in an effort to persuade elk and reindeer to stay off them. This brings to mind images of dour Swedish chemists, solemnly checking the noxious fluid to see where they went wrong. "Ah, Sven, I fear we have not precisely matched the timber wolf's fine bouquet." "Nils, I must disagree. It smells just perfect to me, we will get the Nobel prize after all." Meanwhile, and more boringly, I am locked in combat with my gas suppliers, whose billing techniques are headline news in the local press. Admittedly they haven't done to me what they've done to others, taking up to $1,600,000 (each) from their bank accounts and sueing for huge sums aged folk who have all-electric homes, but I keep getting different-sized bills (frequently by the same post) and endless correspondence and phone calls get me all kinds of promises - but no action. I gather that the 'deregulation' process is now hitting US utility companies - and you should all beware, because the first action of companies is to get rid of all the 'useless' clerks who actually sort all these problems out, leaving the customers to the tender mercies of some demented mainframe. Naturally, all technical staff get fired as well. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 03:24:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA17392; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 02:29:07 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"oNFTF.0.bF4.KUBPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1618 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 10:15 PM 10/14/96 -0400, Hal Puthoff wrote: > >>circuit that is not rotating and generates output there. In (3) rotating mag >>field generates output in stationary disk conductor BUT generates cancelling >>emf in external circuit, so no net output. > >If you compare the *area* being affected, the disk vs. a small area of wire, >the two will not match up to be able to cancel out. Nice try. :^) > >Gary Hawkins > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today > http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA Gary, The area is not directly related to the voltage. It is the voltage difference that decides if there will be current flow and if so, which direction. A single battery opposing 1000 same voltage batteries in parallel is a circuit where no current will flow. The voltage is determined by the rate of flux cutting the conductor, i.e. the number of lines of flux per second. If t is in seconds and phi is the net flux in webers then the voltage induced on a conductor (in volts) is V = (d phi)/ dt. If every line of flux cutting a conductor in one direction is opposed by a line of flux cutting the other direction then the net flux is zero so the net voltage induced is zero, regardless of the area of the conductor cross sections cut by the flux, assuming the flux density is uniform across the conductor so no "hole" in the voltage gradient is opened up for a backwards eddy current to form. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 03:36:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA18620; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 02:40:11 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnets Resent-Message-ID: <"-sqzY.0.oY4.ieBPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1619 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >...But, what about the case where the flux cutting radial conductor is >eliminated and the electrical charge is collected in a cylindrical capacitor >instead ? > > Could you be more specific about this geometry? If you are talking about a cylindrical homopolar motor/generator where the armature is two rotating cyliders forming the plates of a capacitor, then there is no difference between two plates or twenty stacked with insulating cylinders in between to make a capacitor because the same voltage is generated (induced) in each plate at each corresponding location, so no net charge is stored in the capacitor. The net effect, assuming the plates are connected together at the ends, is like using a thicker cross section conductor for the armature - which has no effect except to lower the armature resistance. If the plates are not connected together then there is no effect on the output at all. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 03:38:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA19104; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:36:51 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961016104010.00707148@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:40:10 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"kerJO1.0.Qg4.2hBPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1620 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Even if the external flux cutting conductor is ELIMINATED, the electric crrent will still flow and can charge a cylindrical cap. No relative motion between disk and external load circuit is required. (anybody wants references ?) At 02:29 AM 10/16/96 -0800, you wrote: >>At 10:15 PM 10/14/96 -0400, Hal Puthoff wrote: >> >>>circuit that is not rotating and generates output there. In (3) rotating mag >>>field generates output in stationary disk conductor BUT generates cancelling >>>emf in external circuit, so no net output. >> >>If you compare the *area* being affected, the disk vs. a small area of wire, >>the two will not match up to be able to cancel out. Nice try. :^) >> >>Gary Hawkins >> ------------------------------------------------------------- >> Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today >> http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA > >Gary, > >The area is not directly related to the voltage. It is the voltage >difference that decides if there will be current flow and if so, which >direction. A single battery opposing 1000 same voltage batteries in >parallel is a circuit where no current will flow. The voltage is >determined by the rate of flux cutting the conductor, i.e. the number of >lines of flux per second. If t is in seconds and phi is the net flux in >webers then the voltage induced on a conductor (in volts) is V = (d phi)/ >dt. If every line of flux cutting a conductor in one direction is opposed >by a line of flux cutting the other direction then the net flux is zero so >the net voltage induced is zero, regardless of the area of the conductor >cross sections cut by the flux, assuming the flux density is uniform across >the conductor so no "hole" in the voltage gradient is opened up for a >backwards eddy current to form. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 04:49:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA05693; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 04:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 04:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 07:45:44 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Flat wings will work just as well. Message-ID: <961016114543_100433.1541_BHG142-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Uc61I1.0.tO1.cjCPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1621 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This one seems to have got lost. Chris -- Forwarded Message -- 14201-2 [MAIL] 15-Oct-96 11:55 Sb: Flat wings will work just as well. Fm: Chris Tinsley 100433,1541 To: Vortex Internet:vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com I've had two long phone calls from Jed Rothwell, who is at the ICCF6 CF conference in Hokkaido. I'm rather reluctant to pass on too much of what is obviously second-hand information, so *please* take anything I say as being hearsay *only*. Jed will undoubtedly post a better report, maybe here, certainly in Infinite Energy. Two points stood out, though, as being worth passing on. One is that the NHE people (the funded researchers in Japan) do seem to be making a serious mess of things. The Ikegami paper published in Japan four years ago spelled out four essentials for reproducing the Fleischmann-Pons effect with bulk palladium. Two of these are the loading level of deuterium in the palladium metal, and the necessity for the experiment to be done at 70C or higher. It is well-known that loading is difficult to measure, but perhaps less well-known that this difficulty has led meany in Japan to run at lower, more easily measured loadings. Pity about that, because of course the experiment won't work. Now I hear that worker after worker got on his hind legs and reported null results with elaborate and highly precise flow calorimeters - much to the delight of Douglas Morrison. But they all were working at 20C!!! Apparently, frantic retro-fitment to allow flow calorimetry at elevated temperatures is no underway in more than one NHE lab. Ho, hum. Seems scarcely credible, eh? But reports from the French atomic energy research people (among othrs) have shown that when they actually *replicated precisely* the F&P 'boiloff' experiments, then they (usually) worked fine. Closer to home, Miley says that glass beads don't work worth a damn. I'm afraid we have been caught in the old trap, where "to assume makes an ass out of you and me". Replicating the Wrights with flat wings doesn't work, and neither do glass beads work in a Patterson cell. Apparently, my suggestion that the nickel be measured quantitatively after a run, using standard chemical measurement, has gone down well with all concerned. Whether they will try it or not is another matter. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 05:19:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA09281; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 05:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 05:18:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 05:17:56 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961015220836.0071a384@mail.localaccess.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"cPvsu2.0.uG2.s9DPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1622 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 15 Oct 1996 epitaxy@localaccess.com wrote: > ...But, what about the case where the flux cutting radial conductor is > eliminated and the electrical charge is collected in a cylindrical capacitor > instead ? Oooo, interesting! I never looked into this. The capacitor should charge to a small potential while the magnet is spinning, I think. Does the magnet do work upon the capacitor as it charges is? What if the capacitor dielectric is very lossy, will the heating induced by the charging current be reflected in increased torque requirements on the spinning magnet? And, if the magnet is spun "AC" instead of "DC", (I mean, wiggle the magnet rotationally, like torsion waves), will a lossy dielectric be heated by the presumed AC radial e-field? The answer might settle the question of whether the b-field rotates or not, since rotating the magnet back and forth should not change the b-field at all, but might (or might not) create an AC radial e-field. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 05:26:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA10248; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 05:25:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 05:25:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Heat from mixing D2O with H2O Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 12:24:30 +0000 Message-ID: <19961016122428.AAA16657@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"4C46-1.0.2W2.TGDPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1623 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:08 PM 10/15/96 +0000, you wrote: >I just received some heavy water from Isotech. On the material >safety data sheet that came with it, they indicate that if the D2O is >mixed with H2O, heat is produced, but they don't say how much >or why. Does anyone have any answers? Is it a chemical heat, or >a nuclear heat? (presumably its chemical, or we would have heard >more about it). Is this something I need to worry about? I have 300g >of D2O. >Help? >Hank Scudder > I mix D2O with water with total equanimity. D2O is more associated than H2O so on mixing D2O with H2O the energy associated with this higher association is released on mixing with H2O and the energy is manifested as an increase (slight) in temperature. It is not at all like mixing concentrated sulfuric acid with water where precautions are taken (adding sulfuric acid to water slowly and not vice versa). Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 07:22:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA02501; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 07:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 07:17:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610161417.HAA02459@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: 101256@wxvax9.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:16:24 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: D20 heat Resent-Message-ID: <"cnBau1.0.oc.HwEPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1624 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:08 PM 10/15/96 +0000, you wrote: >I just received some heavy water from Isotech. On the material >safety data sheet that came with it, they indicate that if the D2O is >mixed with H2O, heat is produced, but they don't say how much >or why. Does anyone have any answers?.................... >Hank Scudder I would be more concerned about how much tritium is in the D20. I hope they gave you a nanocurie per liter number or some other sort of specification. Otherwise, I would call them up before you use it too extensively. The tritium is not too much of a hazard (evacuate the room at 100 microcurie/meter cubed) but you would like to know exactly how deep you are in. Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n@lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 07:55:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA08384; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 07:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 07:44:26 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 06:50:07 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"yqiHE2.0.w22.7JFPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1625 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 3:40 AM 10/16/96, epitaxy@localaccess.com wrote: >Even if the external flux cutting conductor is ELIMINATED, the electric >crrent will still flow and can charge a cylindrical cap. > >No relative motion between disk and external load circuit is required. >(anybody wants references ?) > > [snip] It would be nice to have a more detailed description of the configuration you are talking about. I have the feeling I have the wrong picture of the device you are talking about. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 08:47:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA20388; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:37:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 11:31:53 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Blue speaks Message-ID: <961016153152_100433.1541_BHG114-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"7jn4L.0.R-4.55GPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1626 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: An alternative view of Miley, from Richard Blue. Chris -------------------------------------------------- I received a copy of the Miley preprint from Jed, have given it a preliminary reading, and expect to post a more careful analysis at some point. However, I can give you a preview of what I will likely have to say. The case for nuclear transmutations in the Miley data stands on two key claims that are not, I think, sufficiently well supported by the actual data provided. First the claim that there is no source of contamination that can account for the composition of the used beads is very, very weak. For example, the Paterson cell has glass walls; but, unless I missed it first time over, there is no discussion of the composition of that glass! Other things for which the composition may not be documented: temperature probes, seals, auxilliary heater, pump. As for where the nickel went, what's the big mystery? According to one source the nickel will simply disolve if you don't keep the cell biased. One estimate I have yet to make is just how many ions are potentially plated out on the cathode relative to what seems to accumulate there. I am no electrochemist, but as I understand it there is no guarantee that only hydrogen is deposited. I also speculate on such things as the manufacturing process by which the plastic tubing is formed. Is it perhaps extruded through a chrome plated die? We must be aware of the fact that some forms of analysis look only at the surface material while others sample the bulk. That being the case the plastic (or anything else) could have a surface layer that is not representative of the bulk. As long as all the elements found are common as dirt, the starting assumption has to be that they are dirt. Some of the things found, such as cadmium and zinc, just have to be taken as standard background contaminants until the experimenters prove that they can produce control samples that don't have them. That leaves the question as to whether these trace analyses show isotope ratios that are "not natural." First question I have is, "What defines the natural ratios, and how much variation occurs naturally?" I know that for some elements there are, indeed, significant variations depending on such things as the source of the ore used to produce the metal. Ultimately I suspect that the error level assigned to the analysis for isotopic ratios is just a bit too optimistic. Again I would expect to see some control analyses to demonstrate the claim level of certainty as to what constitutes the appropriate natural ratio. Interestingly enough the Miley result may hang entirely on the precision of the determined isotope ratios. Yet I don't see that there is very much by way of justification for the claimed precision. My eye-ball evaluation of the data for all the most abundant "reaction products" is that the final isotope ratios are pretty close to the natural values. In other words Miley has simply made an assertion that is not supported by his own data! Since the ratio of 63Cu to 65Cu is one that has received some attention, let me point out one potential defect in the Miley measurements based on neutron activation analysis. The ultimate signal is a gamma ray of a specific energy that is supposed to be uniquely associated with a single isotope. But suppose the gamma ray energy used to identify 63Cu is not, in fact, unique? Than any other source of that radiation will lead to a false estimate, on the high side, of the amount of 63Cu present. Let me just hint that 0.511 MeV gamma rays are not uniquely associated with anything! I think Miley may have to revise his conclusions regarding the copper isotopes. So when you sort through all this painstaking analysis, all the evidence supports an hypothesis that only chemical processes involving ion transport and deposition are required to account for the data. The lack of observed nuclear activity certainly supports that view. I would go even further to say that nuclear reactions without observed activity becomes more and more unreasonable as the complexity and variety of the reactions increases. If you are forming a little bit of everything, as claimed, just by accident something is going to end up being in the wrong place at the wrong time to form a stable nucleus in its ground state. CF advocates may find it perfectly OK to form the radioisotope, tritium, while the formation of any other radioisotope is strictly forbidden, but I am really waiting for Hagelstein to explain that one! -db-... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 08:49:42 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA21302; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:42:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com>, Vortex-L Subject: RE: One of those days.... Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:34:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yI1eV.0.mC5.99GPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1627 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris The closest I came to this was while I was returning from an experiment in underwater sound that GE performed in the Bahamas. We had 25 large boxes of expensive electronic computer gear and peripherals (this was 1973, before microprocessors). The equipment was trucked to the airport by the Navy, and left in the baggage area. The four engineers from GE joined the tourists, watched the Boeing 707 fly in, and saw two tiny (~130 lbs) freight handlers start loading the tourist baggage and our gear into the baggage compartment. The boxes each weighed about 100 lbs, and they were struggling. After a couple of moments, we realized if we were going to get to NY that day, we had to do something, so we took off our coats, hopped over the fence, and started loading our gear into the belly of the 707, to the grateful smiles of the baggage handlers. After we finished, we hopped back over the fence, put on our coats and enjoyed the stares of the tourists. Only time I ever saw the downstairs of an aircratt. Hank Scudder ---------- From: Chris Tinsley To: Vortex Subject: One of those days.... Date: Wednesday, October 16, 1996 3:11AM I realise that this is way off-topic, but I just could not resist sharing it all with you. Meanwhile there was a bit of a problem at Rome airport, and the passengers had to get out and push their Brutish [sic] Airways jet out to the runway. Perhaps they got a partial refund for their trouble? I can just imagine the scene - lots of fat businessmen and little old ladies straining with their shoulders to the landing gear, while a huge BA official, moustachioed and stripped to the waist, wields his whip. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 13:01:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA13564; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 12:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 12:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:16:43 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610161916.OAA17507@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Re: D20 heat Resent-Message-ID: <"YxA7p1.0.iJ3.eKJPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1628 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:16 10/16/96 -0600, Tom Claytor wrote: >I would be more concerned about how much tritium is in the D20.... >....(evacuate the room at 100 microcurie/meter cubed) Hi Tom, welcome to Vortex. Is a case of beer still prescribed for acute T exposure cases? 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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 13:19:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA16438; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 12:31:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 12:31:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 16 Oct 1996 12:30:12 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/16/96 12:30:09 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"g0Taq1.0.f04.XWJPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1629 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... - Send $12, and your address to: - INFINITE ENERGY Mag. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 - Probably won't get it until late next week or after as Gene M. will not be back from ICCF6. HOWEVER, Gene and Jed did (and Chris?) did manage to get permission and publish the WHOLE thing in IE #7 (I think I got that # right.) - GOOD WORK GUYS! - I now officially am not worrying about getting it on the Internet. I figure if you are interested, you can get a copy from "the (secondary) source". From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 13:42:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA23354; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:02:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: , "Vortex" Subject: Re: Blue speaks Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:02:28 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01BBBB73.0C512BE0" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"5drVo3.0.qi5.OzJPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1630 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_01BBBB73.0C512BE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ---------- > From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@CompuServe.COM> > To: Vortex > Subject: Blue speaks > Date: Wednesday, October 16, 1996 11:31 AM > > An alternative view of Miley, from Richard Blue. > > Chris > -------------------------------------------------- >(snip) Let > me just hint that 0.511 MeV gamma rays are not uniquely associated with > anything! Meaning that anything resulting in 0.511 MeV gammas could indicate electron- positron annihilation from any source? Frank Stenger ------=_NextPart_000_01BBBB73.0C512BE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



----------
> From: Chris = Tinsley <100433.1541@CompuServe.COM>
> To: Vortex <vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com>
> Subject: Blue speaks
> Date: = Wednesday, October 16, 1996 11:31 AM
>
> An alternative = view of Miley, from Richard Blue.
>
> Chris
> = --------------------------------------------------
>(snip) =
Let
> me just hint that 0.511 MeV gamma rays are not uniquely = associated with
> anything!  

Meaning that anything = resulting in 0.511 MeV gammas could indicate electron-
positron = annihilation from any source?

Frank Stenger

------=_NextPart_000_01BBBB73.0C512BE0-- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 14:48:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA10084; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 17:17:04 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... Message-ID: <961016211704_76016.2701_JHC134-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"iOu2Q1.0.QT2.f8LPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1632 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo writes: >>Send $12, and your address to: - INFINITE ENERGY Mag. PO Box 2816 Concord, NH 03302-2816 - Probably won't get it until late next week or after as Gene M. will not be back from ICCF6. HOWEVER, Gene and Jed did (and Chris?) did manage to get permission and publish the WHOLE thing in IE #7 (I think I got that # right.)<< You can get issue #9, which includes the Miley Paper from Infinite Energy for US$5.95 or C$7.95 plus postage. As a bonus, this issue also features a summary of the Antigravity experiments from our own homely brit, Mr. Tinsley. Issue #7 wasn't bad either. >>GOOD WORK GUYS!<< Amen! Regards, Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 14:55:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA08802; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 17:13:10 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... Message-ID: <961016211310_100433.1541_BHG115-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"QrnwK2.0.R92.33LPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1631 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark, The issue with the Miley paper in is actually #9. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 16:23:11 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA24215; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:29:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:29:45 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 18:27:37 -0400 Message-ID: <961016182736_128424038@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Yuck!!! Resent-Message-ID: <"z1t3-2.0.Fw5.O7MPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1633 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Yuck!!! Date: 96-10-16 18:25:56 EDT From: FZNIDARSIC To: RVargo1062 To: 101544.702@compuserve.com To: fstenger@interlaced.net To: tkepple@third-wave.com To: zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil,CldFusion To: jseese@gpu.com My movie gets the worst billing in very bad company. I am not happy with the company. Yuck!!! Not good for my reputation at all. see http://home.earthlink.net/~plutofilms/th02000.html Frank From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 18:13:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA17394; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:29:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:29:55 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 20:28:10 -0400 Message-ID: <961016202809_1778601144@emout11.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Surface tension Resent-Message-ID: <"CBMZV1.0.dF4.0uNPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1636 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David Doty Your data with deionized water ran all over the place. Do you know why? Did you try ethelene glycol...antifreeze...when tried in the Yusmar it killed the cavatation. I am trying to find out why. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 18:31:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA14462; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:15:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:15:32 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961017001426.006eda40@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:14:26 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"DKXbC2.0.sX3.9gNPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1635 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I could fax you the paper on these homo' experiments with pictures if you give me your fax#. At 06:50 AM 10/16/96 -0800, you wrote: >At 3:40 AM 10/16/96, epitaxy@localaccess.com wrote: >>Even if the external flux cutting conductor is ELIMINATED, the electric >>crrent will still flow and can charge a cylindrical cap. >> >>No relative motion between disk and external load circuit is required. >>(anybody wants references ?) >> >> >[snip] > > >It would be nice to have a more detailed description of the configuration >you are talking about. I have the feeling I have the wrong picture of the >device you are talking about. > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 18:44:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA14445; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:15:26 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961017001424.006ea85c@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 17:14:24 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Homo data X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"phHYz3.0.XX3.6gNPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1634 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I am too lazy to type in the whole experiment here + pictures. I can add that in addition to the elimination of the external conductor that cuts the field, the experimenter also tried different experiments where the magnetic field was routed away by iron cores so the external conducter wouldn't have a chance to cut it (yes there was EMF...), the experimenter also tried some linear setups (no rotation) with positive results. Give me your fax# and I will splurge on LD call to you. Maybe you can scan in the pictures for the other guys on your www page. At 05:17 AM 10/16/96 -0700, you wrote: >On Tue, 15 Oct 1996 epitaxy@localaccess.com wrote: > >> ...But, what about the case where the flux cutting radial conductor is >> eliminated and the electrical charge is collected in a cylindrical capacitor >> instead ? > >Oooo, interesting! I never looked into this. The capacitor should charge >to a small potential while the magnet is spinning, I think. Does the >magnet do work upon the capacitor as it charges is? > >What if the capacitor dielectric is very lossy, will the heating induced >by the charging current be reflected in increased torque requirements on >the spinning magnet? > >And, if the magnet is spun "AC" instead of "DC", (I mean, wiggle the >magnet rotationally, like torsion waves), will a lossy dielectric be >heated by the presumed AC radial e-field? The answer might settle the >question of whether the b-field rotates or not, since rotating the magnet >back and forth should not change the b-field at all, but might (or might >not) create an AC radial e-field. > >.....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 20:09:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA25250; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 19:18:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: 16 Oct 96 21:30:44 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... Message-ID: <961017013044_76216.2421_HHB42-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"nygtL3.0.SA6.WTPPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1637 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > You can get issue #9, which includes the Miley Paper from > Infinite Energy for US$5.95 or C$7.95 plus postage. As a > bonus, this issue also features a summary of the Antigravity > experiments from our own homely brit, Mr. Tinsley. Hey, good to see you on Vortex! Looking forward to the write-up on the g-experiments. Good thing we can read "English", huh? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 16 23:16:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA13551; Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:02:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 23:00:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610170600.XAA15344@norway.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Electron Field Generator Resent-Message-ID: <"gFwrY2.0.bJ3.CmSPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1638 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In the excellent new book (a must read book) about Patrick Flanagan's research titled, "Toward a New Alchemy", by Nick Begich, there are many novel and new devices that were discovered and one I found interesting for vortex-l was the Electron Cascade Generator, Registered. He patented this device 4,743,275, Electron Field Generator. Below is a small portion of what I read from the book. Flanagan discovered a strange phenomenon that had applications in levitation, air purification technologies, and maybe the renewable energy field. While studying the past works of researchers into anti-gravity, Sikorsky and Brown, he accidentially discovered a breakthrough in the creation of a force field. By combining the use of a Tesla coil and various capacitors Flanagan found the greatest force-field manifested itself at the moment the DC power was engaged dropping thereafter to a more regular level using a Keithly High-impedence Electrometer. From this observation Flanagan concluded that the effect could be more efficiently produced with alternating current. The new design worked, the force field increased dramatically, and he was ecstatic. After finishing his experiment using the electrometer, he reset the device and moved the device across the room, inadvertly leaving it turned on. Flanagan continued experimenting with his new force field generator by turning it off and on a couple of times when he noticed from the corner of his eyes a small movement of the needle on the electrometer bouncing out and down every time he switched the generator on and off. What was so strange was how the capacitor could be creating negative ions much less sending them across the room instantly. As he left his work place that evening he left both the coil-capacitor and electrometer operating. The next day Flanagan returned to his lab to continue his research when he noticed the usual odors which accompanied his experiments were gone and the room smelled like fresh mountain air. He noticed that the equipment had been left on and somehow worked as a powerful new kind of air purifier. Like many past inventors, this particular discovery was made while investigating other technologies. Out of these levitation experiments came a major step forward in air purification techology. After eight years of studying this effect Flanagan figured out why this technology worked along with his theory and applied for his first patent. Flanagan concluded that a new application of a dielectric field, energy could be stored there in what he calls a dielectric stress field. He could effect the dielectric we know as air in a way that caused a cascade of electrons. With 5kv (min.) and 25khz ac sent to a set of plates constructed of alternating plates of metal and nonconductive materials, the stress built up between the the metal plates caused increased levels of stress in the air surrounding the plates, causing the air to release electrons. These electrons do not dehave in the same manner as regular electricity because they travel slower, and are referred as "intermediate velocity". What happens is as these electrons are knocked loose they impact other atoms with sufficient speed to cause those atoms to shed their electons as well. These secondary freed electrons, although slower than the first, are moving with sufficient speeds to knock loose a third set of atoms causing additional releases of electrons. This cascade effect continues slower each time until they cannot cause any more electrons to be released and in the process eventually gets captured by positively charged atoms, pollutants and other surface areas of the room. The pollutants being positively charged, gains an electron becomes neutralizied and falls to the floor. This is what occurs naturally in rain storms and along the beach. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 01:52:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA09894; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:00:02 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "MHUGO@EPRI" , Vortex-L Subject: Heat from mixing D2O with H2O Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:08:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"QISMy1.0.RQ2.34zOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1608 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: O X-Status: I just received some heavy water from Isotech. On the material safety data sheet that came with it, they indicate that if the D2O is mixed with H2O, heat is produced, but they don't say how much or why. Does anyone have any answers? Is it a chemical heat, or a nuclear heat? (presumably its chemical, or we would have heard more about it). Is this something I need to worry about? I have 300g of D2O. Help? Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 02:11:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA06298; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 02:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 02:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961017091646.006df200@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 02:16:46 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"XtH4I3.0.IY1.7VVPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1639 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I just do not have time right now to reconstruct the gadget. I was >recently doing high voltage electrolyis experiments when I destroyed some >20,000V diodes in a 0 - 7,500 V circuit which was only operating at 3,500 >V. This is mind boggeling, unless there was something wrong with the >diodes. The electrolysis cell was nothing but a capacitor in the HV >circuit. Losing the power supply was a real loss. I have a number of Did the diodes die during a sudden discharge? Current too high. Need resistors in series to protect them. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 02:25:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA11657; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 19:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 19:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961016022203.006a28a8@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 19:22:03 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"uEP6l2.0.yr2.DL4Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1612 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 10:15 PM 10/14/96 -0400, Hal Puthoff wrote: >circuit that is not rotating and generates output there. In (3) rotating mag >field generates output in stationary disk conductor BUT generates cancelling >emf in external circuit, so no net output. If you compare the *area* being affected, the disk vs. a small area of wire, the two will not match up to be able to cancel out. Nice try. :^) Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------- Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 02:45:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA12068; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 02:43:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 02:43:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: 17 Oct 96 05:41:59 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Message-ID: <961017094159_76216.2421_HHB38-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"7OLV52.0.Uy2.8_VPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1640 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael Randall wrote: [snip] > Like many past inventors, this particular discovery was made > while investigating other technologies. Out of these levitation > experiments came a major step forward in air purification > techology. [snip] I'm not too sure about Flanagan's explanation of how his air freshener works, but there is an old precedent to that sort of thing. What kills the germs and eradicates the smell they leave is ozone. Tesla coils generate lots of ozone. This was one of the early practical uses of these coils, and small units were sold specifically for this purpose early in the century - 30's, or perhaps before. You'd close one up a smelly refrigerator and the thing would be fresh and clean after a few hours running time. The old machines are collector's items, but you can still find similar small tesla coils for air and surface purification in some plumbing catalogs, or so I've heard from the serious coil winders before the Tesla list went down for the count. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 03:17:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA16682; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 11:41:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610151601.JAA27489@helix.ucsd.edu> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Bart Simon" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:58:21 +0000 Subject: Re: Fwd: The old hollow stirring rod trick... Reply-to: bssimon@helix.ucsd.edu Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a) Resent-Message-ID: <"soAWd1.0.Y44.xgzOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1609 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 14 Oct 96 at 12:07, Dean Miller wrote: > I can't find the original message which reported this demonstration, but I > was a little skeptical of the demo. However, I recall that something like > 1/2 liter of hydrocarbon was produced in the demo (out of a total of 1 liter > of liquid). I've been following the story at, http://shell.ihug.co.nz/~ksathiah/Indian-Herbal-Petrol.HTM It will be interesting to see if this debunking can be successfully debunked. cheers, Bart Simon (bssimon@helix.ucsd.edu) ============================================ Bart Simon Dept. of Sociology/Science Studies-0533 University of California at San Diego (UCSD) 9500 Gilman Dr. La Jolla, CA, 92093-0533 phone: 619-534-0491/fax: 619-534-3388 =========================================== From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 07:15:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06376; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 07:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:09:54 -0400 From: "Robert I. Eachus" Message-Id: <199610171409.KAA06354@spectre.mitre.org> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-reply-to: <961017094159_76216.2421_HHB38-1@CompuServe.COM> (message from Rick Monteverde on 17 Oct 96 05:41:59 EDT) Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Resent-Message-ID: <"48_in1.0.YZ1.9vZPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1641 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde (76216.2421@CompuServe.COM) said: > I'm not too sure about Flanagan's explanation of how his air > freshener works, but there is an old precedent to that sort of > thing. What kills the germs and eradicates the smell they leave is > ozone. Tesla coils generate lots of ozone. This was one of the > early practical uses of these coils, and small units were sold > specifically for this purpose early in the century - 30's, or > perhaps before. You'd close one up a smelly refrigerator and the > thing would be fresh and clean after a few hours running time. The > old machines are collector's items, but you can still find similar > small tesla coils for air and surface purification in some plumbing > catalogs, or so I've heard from the serious coil winders before the > Tesla list went down for the count. The ozone helps, but what really does the work is the non-linear electric field. There is a second order effect which causes uncharged particles to be attracted to the discharge wires. The particles then get charged, repelled and stick to some grounded surface. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 08:30:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA21296; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 17 Oct 1996 08:19:08 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: A list of other checks for Miley to make... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/17/96 08:19:27 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"wWk7Z2.0.cC5.7xaPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1642 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: A list of other checks for Miley to make... - Rather than just whine and cry about what Miley "didn't do", how about we establish a complete list of items which "critics" are whining about. - I think, however, there should be an effort to quantify the whining? - I.e., after looking over Miley's paper---at what level would measurements have to be made to assure the results were not due to "contamination"? Does Miley need to measure PPM, or PPB in the glassware? Does he need to measure the PPM/PPB of elements in the tygon tubing? In a dissolved surface from the tubing ? Does he need to measure an impeller's contaminates if it doesn't touch the electrolyte? (The case of a peristalic pump.) Should he take samples of the electroyte during the run and profile the dissolved ion species on an ongoing basis? Should he take 1, 2, 3 or 4 or 5 measurements to establish a sigma? - Beyond what tally of trace elements and what sigma's do the results become convincing? - These are not trivial questions. And they can have numbers put to them. Since this experiment DOES seem to be repeatable, it would lead on to believe that it could be repeated often enough to full fill any list of requirements to establish the "formed in place" versus "shifted contamination" arguements. - MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 09:27:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA02189; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:12:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com>, "Robert I. Eachus" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 08:58:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9o7NF1.0.3Y.VhbPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1643 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick, Robert I bought one of these gadgets and put it in my office at GE. The office had metal walls. After a few days, the wall was black. I complained to facilities, that the air they were providing us was filthy. They complained to my manager that I was defacing company property, and I was told to take it down. I then gave it to a friend who worked for the state, and she put it up in her office, where she had smokers in the cubicals on each side of her. Same thing, she was made to take it down, as it was too depressing for the smokers to see what they were doing to their lungs. Go figure Hank Scudder ---------- From: Robert I. Eachus To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Thursday, October 17, 1996 7:09AM Rick Monteverde (76216.2421@CompuServe.COM) said: > I'm not too sure about Flanagan's explanation of how his air > freshener works, but there is an old precedent to that sort of > thing. What kills the germs and eradicates the smell they leave is > ozone. Tesla coils generate lots of ozone. This was one of the > early practical uses of these coils, and small units were sold > specifically for this purpose early in the century - 30's, or > perhaps before. You'd close one up a smelly refrigerator and the > thing would be fresh and clean after a few hours running time. The > old machines are collector's items, but you can still find similar > small tesla coils for air and surface purification in some plumbing > catalogs, or so I've heard from the serious coil winders before the > Tesla list went down for the count. The ozone helps, but what really does the work is the non-linear electric field. There is a second order effect which causes uncharged particles to be attracted to the discharge wires. The particles then get charged, repelled and stick to some grounded surface. Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is... From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 09:29:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA02345; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 09:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610171612.JAA02227@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: 101256@wxvax9.esa.lanl.gov X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.1.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:10:19 -0600 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Thomas N. Claytor" Subject: D20 heat Resent-Message-ID: <"5zqdo3.0.Ra.-hbPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1644 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Scott, At least a case, the half life in the body is about a week. Tom. Thomas N. Claytor Claytor_t_n@lanl.gov Los Alamos National Laboratory ESA-MT, MS C914 Los Alamos NM, 87545 505-667-6216 voice 505-665-7176 fax From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 10:59:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA16855; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:18:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: 17 Oct 96 13:16:45 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Message-ID: <961017171644_76216.2421_HHB55-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"K8Td9.0.G74.cfcPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1645 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Eachus wrote: > I bought one of these gadgets and put it in my office at GE. The > office had metal walls. After a few days, the wall was black. I > complained to facilities, that the air they were providing us > was filthy. They complained to my manager that I was defacing > company property, and I was told to take it down. Nothing in there was said about defacing company personnel, eh? =80 > Go figure Did. Good story. Confirms what I already thought of the general mentality in government or corporate organizations. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 11:25:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA25671; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:57:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 17 Oct 1996 10:56:10 PDT From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/17/96 10:56:23 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"NcTOl.0._G6.bEdPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1647 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/17/96 09:22 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator HANK, RICK, etc. What sort of gadget are you talking about? I'll get one and put it in my place of employ! Please detail. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 11:31:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA24926; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 10:54:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: 17 Oct 96 12:38:46 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... Message-ID: <961017163846_76016.2701_JHC75-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"6ULaL1.0.O56.XBdPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1646 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Montverde wrote: >>Hey, good to see you on Vortex!<< Thank you! This does seem to be a more humane place to discuss new science than the CIS Science Forum. I guess the sysop's warning keeps FERvid comments to a minimum. >>Looking forward to the write-up on the g-experiments.<< I thought I'd lurk a bit before making a total fool of myself. >>Good thing we can read "English", huh?<< Ah, yes. "Homely" means "a likeable person" in the UK. Terry "T'is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak up and remove all doubt." -A. Lincoln From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 13:25:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA20938; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:58:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: 17 Oct 96 15:54:19 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Message-ID: <961017195419_76216.2421_HHB46-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"MHLGh1.0.375.C_ePo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1649 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo wrote: > HANK, RICK, etc. What sort of gadget are you talking about? > I'll get one and put it in my place of employ! Please detail. > MDH Small tesla coil such as those used to purify air inside refrigerators and so forth. I think Edmund Scientific sells these small units, but quite a few people like to build them as a hobby. I really don't think these are the right tool for generally purifying air in closed spaces constantly occupied by people, primarily because they can generate so much ozone. Powerful charge buildup can damage computer equipment too. Electrostatic air cleaners and low-volume ion generators are better in that situation. Ozone is a poison in large concentrations - it's very reactive biologically and can damage your lungs and the rest of you as well. The small Tesla coils are typically used to eradicate bacteria and smell by confining them overnight in the area to be cleaned, but are not usually employed for the constant maintainence of environmental air quality. It's not good to breathe too much ozone. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 13:50:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA23824; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:13:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:13:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610172006.NAA00661@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 13:06:43 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <961014221555_211003247@emout01.mail.aol.com> from "Puthoff@aol.com" at Oct 14, 96 10:15:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6jg9y2.0.Aq5.4EfPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1650 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hal Puthoff writes: > In (4), like (2), nothing > generated in nonrelative motion of conducting disk and magnet AND since > external circuit is also rotating, so no chance for rotating mag field to > generate anything here by relative motion either, so no output. In Mullers experiment (which I've been spelling Mueller) he uses a rectangular, open-sided box magnetic shell, and makes connection to the conductor through the side of the box. There is NO flux linkage between external measuring circuit and the magnetic shell. He does not do full rotations -- but partial rotations, and watches for deflections in the potential meter. A crude measure of either: output, or no output. He finds output when the full magnetic circuit does not rotate, and finds that there is no output when the full magnetic circuit does rotate. In neither case is there any flux linkage with the external circuit. How does either the rotating conductor, or the external circuit, "know" and why do they "care" about what has happened with the un-linked external magnetic circuit? Still mind blown. Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 15:37:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA12080; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:39:31 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:39:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610172130.OAA00991@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 14:30:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <199610172006.NAA00661@shell.skylink.net> from "Robert Stirniman" at Oct 17, 96 01:06:43 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-6aqM1.0.cy2.kTgPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1651 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Oops. Please allow me to retract the gibberish, copied below, which I posted earlier today. After reveiw of the actual drawing of Mueller's experiment, rather than my memory of it. It is clear that the magnetic flux does link the external circuit -- as it must. It seems to be topologically impossible to build a homopolar generator in which the external circuti does not have flux linkage. Regards, Robert Stirniman > Hal Puthoff writes: > > In (4), like (2), nothing > > generated in nonrelative motion of conducting disk and magnet AND since > > external circuit is also rotating, so no chance for rotating mag field to > > generate anything here by relative motion either, so no output. > > In Mullers experiment (which I've been spelling Mueller) he uses > a rectangular, open-sided box magnetic shell, and makes connection > to the conductor through the side of the box. There is NO flux > linkage between external measuring circuit and the magnetic shell. > He does not do full rotations -- but partial rotations, and > watches for deflections in the potential meter. > A crude measure of either: output, or no output. > > He finds output when the full magnetic circuit does not rotate, > and finds that there is no output when the full magnetic circuit > does rotate. In neither case is there any flux linkage with the > external circuit. > > How does either the rotating conductor, or the external circuit, > "know" and why do they "care" about what has happened with the > un-linked external magnetic circuit? > > Still mind blown. > Robert Stirniman > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 15:49:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA18356; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:08:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: 17 Oct 96 17:35:57 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Message-ID: <961017213557_76016.2701_JHC114-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"iKQrW1.0.fU4.nvgPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1652 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde writes: >>Small tesla coil such as those used to purify air inside refrigerators and so forth. I think Edmund Scientific sells these small units, but quite a few people like to build them as a hobby.<< Yep, Edmund catalog # C70301, a 50,000 Volt Tesla coil sells for $199.00 plus shipping from: Edmund Scientific Co. 101 E. Gloucester Pike Barrington, NJ 08007-1380 ph. 609/573-6270 fx. 609/573-6295 Standard (UPS) shipping charge for this item is $14.25, two-day is $20.00, and over-nite is $29.50 (NJ residents must add 6% sales tax.) Street address required. All prices US$. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 15:59:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA18891; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:11:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 15:11:26 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 18:08:52 -0400 Message-ID: <961017180851_545444291@emout14.mail.aol.com> To: tlpst15+@pitt.edu, zap@dnai.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, 101544.702@compuserve.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, CldFusion@aol.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Subject: test Resent-Message-ID: <"qBlzf.0.1d4.9ygPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1653 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Test of an E-Mail with an embeded link. This is the first time I have tried HTML in an E-mail. See home page at Yusmar Tests Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 21:02:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA17213; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:40:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:40:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610171931.MAA00596@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 12:31:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961017001426.006eda40@mail.localaccess.com> from "epitaxy@localaccess.com" at Oct 16, 96 05:14:26 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"n9PY_3.0.jC4.5kePo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1648 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > I could fax you the paper on these homo' experiments with pictures if you > give me your fax#. > Yes. Thanks. Fax: 702-736-5035 Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 23:11:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA11143; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:41:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 21:41:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 15 Oct 96 23:38:27 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <2.2.16.19961015154502.48575052@mail.airmail.net> X-Sender: danyork@mail.airmail.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Dan York Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET Resent-Message-ID: <"SWrL-.0._j2.OT6Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1613 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:25 AM 10/14/96 PDT, you wrote: >*** Reply to note of 10/13/96 20:45 >From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. >Subject: Re: TRYING TO GET MILEY'S PAPER ON THE INTERNET >John, wouldn't you know that I'd leave all copies of the paper at home >today. I'll write you tonight, but I don't think Miley put "copyright" >on this one...(That might be intentional.) So with some feedback from >the source, (i.e. a reply from Miley) we might have it. (Then again >as was suggested elsewhere, CETI might just post it on their web. Then >all you'd have to do is a link.) MDH > There is not a copyright notice on Miley's paper but it does not matter. Years ago the law was that a work was put into public domain if it was published without a copyright notice. Copyright law was changed a long time ago and you can no longer determine anything by the lack of a formal copyright notice. A work is to be considered as copyrighted material unless the author expressly states that it is in the public domain. You do not have the right to post the paper on the internet without Miley's permission. Under current copyright law an original work is considered copyrighted at the moment it is fixed. Writing the words "copyright" on the original work is a good idea but not required. Since Miley gives Co-author status to James Patterson and states in the acknowledgments that the work was supported by a grant from CETI then I BELIEVE you need to get the permission of both Miley AND Patterson before you can proceed to re-publish their work. Dan York From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 17 23:24:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA29107; Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 17 Oct 1996 23:20:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610180620.XAA17537@andorra.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Electron Field Generator, Part 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"aFxr53.0.f67.e7oPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1654 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Some additional info from the book "Towards a New Alchemy", in reply to some of the vortex-l questions: Flanagan's, Electron Cascade Generator (Reg.) is totally different than the current state of the art in pollutant reducing systems, it seems to be a breakthrough. I do not know if you can purchase a unit, I'm checking with Flanagan to see if it is available. He has invented so many new devices with several being breakthroughs, like the Neurophone, that his time seems to be booked in R&D. In some of the current or early air purification technologies used a powerful ionizer (like a tesla coil) which applied 20 kv negative volts to an antenna-like needle which would attract positive ions and convert them to negative ions. The problem was that the negative charged particles are also attracted to the walls and drapes which are also positively charged which resulted in becoming plated with black soot over several months of operation. This problem is eliminated by this novel approach of a cascade electron generator. The device is simplicity itself being an emitter, of a sandwich of alternate dielectric and metal plates, driven by a high frequency (44 khz) high voltage source (24 kv). In Flanagan's second patent he found that the toroidal electric field, developed around the emitter, increased substantially by doping the insulator with non-dielectric materials like silicon carbide (75 mesh granules). At a distance of 10 cm from the emitter the following measurements were made with a Keithly Electrometer and an ion/electron probe: Pure Epoxy dielectric 2.98 x 10 to 11th electrons/cm2 Epoxy with silicon carbide 4.76 x 10 to 11th electrons/cm2 The dielectric slabs were circular being 80 mm in diameter and 15 mm thick. The plates were 63 mm in diameter. Another aspect of this negative electron generator is that the electrons will create the cascading effect even through solid walls and if the walls are made of a dielectric materials, the generator will create stresses and cascading effects on the other side of the wall. Flanagan's explaination for how the generator worked could also explain how energy is transfered in a thunderstorm and in a lighting bolt by this stress field. The air, as a non-conductor within a thunderstorm, builds a dielectric stress field which is impacted by a combination of a built-up electric charge and the falling rain to create a cascade of electrons. With these electrons out of their orbits, the air now acts like a conductor resulting in a flow of negative electricity from the cloud to the earth in the form of a lightning bolt. In storms without lighting, the same cascade effect occurs to a lesser extent. Another advantage of this design is that it eliminates electrostatic induction in the enviornment like computer rooms and electronic assembly areas where a static free enviornment is essential. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 00:16:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06676; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 10:45:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: 15 Oct 96 06:55:06 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@CompuServe.COM> To: Vortex Subject: Flat wings will work just as well. Message-ID: <961015105506_100433.1541_BHG98-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Mjxrh.0.5e1.PsyOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1606 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've had two long phone calls from Jed Rothwell, who is at the ICCF6 CF conference in Hokkaido. I'm rather reluctant to pass on too much of what is obviously second-hand information, so *please* take anything I say as being hearsay *only*. Jed will undoubtedly post a better report, maybe here, certainly in Infinite Energy. Two points stood out, though, as being worth passing on. One is that the NHE people (the funded researchers in Japan) do seem to be making a serious mess of things. The Ikegami paper published in Japan four years ago spelled out four essentials for reproducing the Fleischmann-Pons effect with bulk palladium. Two of these are the loading level of deuterium in the palladium metal, and the necessity for the experiment to be done at 70C or higher. It is well-known that loading is difficult to measure, but perhaps less well-known that this difficulty has led meany in Japan to run at lower, more easily measured loadings. Pity about that, because of course the experiment won't work. Now I hear that worker after worker got on his hind legs and reported null results with elaborate and highly precise flow calorimeters - much to the delight of Douglas Morrison. But they all were working at 20C!!! Apparently, frantic retro-fitment to allow flow calorimetry at elevated temperatures is no underway in more than one NHE lab. Ho, hum. Seems scarcely credible, eh? But reports from the French atomic energy research people (among othrs) have shown that when they actually *replicated precisely* the F&P 'boiloff' experiments, then they (usually) worked fine. Closer to home, Miley says that glass beads don't work worth a damn. I'm afraid we have been caught in the old trap, where "to assume makes an ass out of you and me". Replicating the Wrights with flat wings doesn't work, and neither do glass beads work in a Patterson cell. Apparently, my suggestion that the nickel be measured quantitatively after a run, using standard chemical measurement, has gone down well with all concerned. Whether they will try it or not is another matter. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 01:24:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA29540; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 01:19:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 01:19:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 00:24:46 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Checks on Miley using NMR Resent-Message-ID: <"BlANh2.0.UD7.yrpPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1655 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Eliminating contamination concerns is where I think NMR may be very useful, especially if the electrolysis is carried out using two thin film electrodes. All the variables except the total concentration of the specific nucleus of interest inside the electrodes prior to electrolysis can be eliminated if the entire cell is monitored dynamically in an NMR sample chamber throughout the electrolysis process. A candidate element for such monitoring may be 43Ca, which has a natural abundance of only 0.135 %. This would be feasible if 43Ca is generated in a nickel / potassium carbonate cell. It should be possible to build an NMR test chamber of 0.25 T using readily available permanent magnets. Such a chamber would provide a resonant frequency for the 43Ca nucleus of 717,200 Hz. By monitoring in situ all variables are controlled, except maybe 43Ca hidden in the electrode metallic film initially by the shielding effect of the electrode metallic films. A control for this can be obtained by using cells without applying electrolysis. Both the active and control cells would have acid or a strong base added at the test conclusion to dissolve any remaining electrode film. The acid or base would be kept within the the test chamber for the duration of the test, but kept isolated from the electolyte until the end of the test. Since NMR readily registers isotopes in either dielectrics like glass, or in solution, it is therefore possible to rule out contamination theories. Unfortunately 43Ca has a low sensitivity. Other isotopes afford much higher sensitivities, high enough that amateur built test equipment may be sufficient to register the transmutations clearly. The problem is finding a process and product istotope easily identifyable through NMR, and where the process also works in a strong magnetic field. The following is a list of high NMR sensitivity isotopes, their relative abundance in nature, and their NMR resonance frequency (MHZ) in a 1 T field: Isotope Abundance MHz at 1 T ------- --------- ---------- 1H 99.985 42.5764 2H 0.015 6.53573 (low sensitivity) 3H - 45.4137 7Li 92.5 16.5478 19F 100 40.0765 27Al 100 11.1028 45Sc 100 10.3588 51V 99.750 11.2130 53Mn 100 10.5760 59Co 100 10.077 65Cu 30.83 12.1027 71Ga 39.892 13.0204 87Rb 27.835 13.9807 93Nb 100 10.4520 99Tc - 9.63 113In 4.3 9.3652 115In 95.7 9.3854 121Sb 57.36 10.2549 141Pr 100 13.0355 143Pm - 11.6 151Eu 47.8 10.6854 165Ho 100 9.0881 180Ta 0.012 4.04 185Re 37.40 9.717 187Re 62.60 9.817 203Tl 29.524 24.7310 205Tl 70.476 24.9742 209Bi 100 6.9628 237Np - 9.57 Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 02:15:44 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA17464; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 02:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 01:19:28 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"ke9-F.0.nG4.2fqPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1656 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>I just do not have time right now to reconstruct the gadget. I was >>recently doing high voltage electrolyis experiments when I destroyed some >>20,000V diodes in a 0 - 7,500 V circuit which was only operating at 3,500 >>V. This is mind boggeling, unless there was something wrong with the >>diodes. The electrolysis cell was nothing but a capacitor in the HV >>circuit. Losing the power supply was a real loss. I have a number of > >Did the diodes die during a sudden discharge? Current too high. Need >resistors in series to protect them. The failure was slow. The only current through the diodes was through a 10 Mohm resistance ladder used to measure voltage by measuring the current through a leg off the ladder. There was no DC current to the electrolysis cells (a 300 mA meter was in that leg.) The diodes were rated at .1 A and 20,000 PIV. The diodes were cool to the touch after the failure, but the 2 W resisters in the ladder were hot, as expected. The input AC was increased gradually using a variac to drive the HV transformer. Everything worked normally up to about 2000 V, but there the voltage output was not in proportion to the input. It was as if the diodes started reverse conducting. Total failure occurred at about 3500 V, as measured by a microammeter in the resistance ladder, which showed the DC voltage (current) rapidly drop off to zero. I thought maybe the resistance ladder failed, but the diode reverse resistance as measured with a DMM was permanently altered from infinity to roughly the same as the forward resistance of the diode. I repeated the process after replacing the failed diode and it worked the same. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 03:06:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA16421; Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:59:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:59:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Surface tension Date: Tue, 15 Oct 1996 08:53:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"vA70q2.0.N04.CIxOo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1605 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: David How are you cleaning your capillary tubes before testing them? I would expect that your tests would critically depend on this, and somehow you need to have a uniform surface before testing them. Hank Scudder ---------- From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us To: herman@college.antioch.edu Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Surface tension Date: Thursday, October 10, 1996 10:39PM Dear John Schnurer, I ran a pretest on deionized water in the set of Capillary tubes. The inner diameters are (.5mm, 1.0mm, 1.25mm, 1.5mm) about 3 inches long. The 0.5 mm tube had a 16 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.1 mm tube had a 10 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.25 mm tube had a 22 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. The 1.5 mm tube had a 6 mm rise plus or minis 1mm. Can you explain why the 1.25 mm tube had the highest rise? I thought the smaller the tube the higher the deionized water would rise in the Capillary tube. Maybe the Moleculare bonds in the deionized water stop it from going higher in the 0.5 mm tube. The surface tention I think should be (the inner diamiter times pi times the rise). If this is so the surface tention mm squared is: The 0.5 mm tube had 25 mm squared. The 1.1 mm tube had 34.5 mm squared. The 1.25 mm tube had 86.4 mm squared. The 1.5 mm tube had 28.3 mm squared. > 3 main forces control curvature of meniscus in 10 mm tube; > > Capillary tries to draw water up sides > Air pressure pushes down > > ***** Surface tension *** is the "skin" which will try to balance >these forces. > > > Have you folks ever made a camera obscura? > no > > We could probably easily project image of meniscus on wall, >ceiling or slide projector screen in semi-darkened room. > Then the effect would be easily seen and photographed. > This type of highly visible demonstration in in my opinion very >useful and important in class room. > > JHS > > Will run more tests next week and post results when I get some students involved in it. >> > water >> > water and vinegar >> > water and baking soda >> > water and soap >> > water and rubbing alcohol >> > water and antifreeze (Ask Doty for help with this one) >> > water and sugar >> > water and ammonia (windex) >> > water and wiskey..If you dad says OK. >> > water and dirt >> > water and windshiield washer fluid >> > ************************************ * David Doty * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * home 503 266 3969 * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ************************************ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 07:21:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA18825; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:16:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:16:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199610172006.NAA00661@shell.skylink.net> References: <961014221555_211003247@emout01.mail.aol.com> from "Puthoff@aol.com" at Oct 14, 96 10:15:56 pm Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 10:16:14 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"UvlP8.0.1c4.65vPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1657 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There have been some questions as to why a HPG generates no voltage when the electric and magnetic circuit are both rotating. To answer this one needs to evaluate the curl of the electric field or curl E. When this term is zero the induced EMF around a closed circuit will be zero. The velocity will be given by v = w cross r or the cross product of the angular velocity vector, w, with the radius vector, r. Now the Lorentz force term from the rotation velocity gives an induced electric field of v cross B with B the magnetic field. The curl of this field is then curl(v cross B) = (div B)v+(B dot grad)v-(div v)B-(v dot grad)B since div B and div v are zero we have curl(v cross B) = (B dot grad)v-(v dot grad)B evaluating the first term on the LHS gives (B dot grad)v = w cross B So if only the electric circuit is rotating there will be a net EMF but when the magnet is rotating the vector potential, A, will be changing in time and there will be an additional term from the induced electric field -dA/dt with curl given by curl(-dA/dt) = - d(curl A)/dt = -dB/dt and the total curl is curl(v cross B-dA/dt) = w cross B-(v dot grad)B-dB/dt = w cross B-DB/Dt where DB/Dt denotes the convective derivitive. This last term is just the time derivitive of the magnetic field in the rotating frame and it is zero if the magnetic field and electric circuit is rotating together. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 07:23:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA19048; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:17:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:17:24 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: talk@sas.org cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: web space? How about a list? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"JmDgC3.0.Qf4.36vPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1658 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Thu, 17 Oct 1996, brian holton wrote: > hey, some museum exhibit folks want to have a web site where information > on vendors and construction on exhibit information is shared. OK, I created an email-list discussion group for discussing interactive science exhibits. To subscribe, send a BLANK email message to webhead-L-request@eskimo.com, with the single word "subscribe" in the subject line of the message header. No quotes around "subscribe." No traffic there as yet (too new!) so hop on board and introduce yourself, ask questions, etc., to get a conversation started. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 08:30:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA03466; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:11:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "hheffner@anc.ak.net" , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 08:04:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"timfA2.0.4s.luvPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1659 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace Call up an application engineer at the manufacturer, and tell him your experience. At least he will probably send you some free samples. If you send the failed diodes back to the manufacturer, they might examine them as to causes of failure, and send you a report. We have done this several times at Rocketdyne. Hank Scudder ---------- From: hheffner@anc.ak.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Date: Friday, October 18, 1996 2:19AM >>I just do not have time right now to reconstruct the gadget. I was >>recently doing high voltage electrolyis experiments when I destroyed some >>20,000V diodes in a 0 - 7,500 V circuit which was only operating at 3,500 >>V. This is mind boggeling, unless there was something wrong with the >>diodes. The electrolysis cell was nothing but a capacitor in the HV >>circuit. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 09:26:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA17572; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:09:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:09:06 -0700 (PDT) From: bpaddock@execpc.com (Bob Paddock) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 07:51:19 -0400 Reply-To: bpaddock@execpc.com Message-ID: <382ZyUQy8EPN092yn@execpc.com> In-Reply-To: Lines: 17 Resent-Message-ID: <"LdXqB2.0.RI4.TkwPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1660 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Rick, Robert > I bought one of these gadgets and put it in my office at GE. >The office had metal walls. After a few days, the wall was black. I can tell that you didn't read the book. ;-) As the book described that was the whole point of Dr. Flanagan's particularly device, that it would *NOT* leave the walls black, while cleaning the air. -- For information on any of the following check out my WEB site at: //www.execpc.com/~bpaddock/ or http://www.usachoice.net/bpaddock Chemical Free Air Conditioning/No CFC's, Chronic Pain Relief, Electromedicine, Electronics, Explore!, Free Energy, Full Disclosure, KeelyNet, Matric Limited, Neurophone, Oil City PA, Philadelphia Experiment. : From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 09:39:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA19079; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 09:16:24 -0700 (PDT) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 12:13:39 -0400 Message-ID: <961018121338_129347893@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Resent-Message-ID: <"gy4U-1.0.1g4.IrwPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1661 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What you are also talking about are negative-ion generators which you can buy to generate a local cloud of negative ions which are generally agreeable with animals and makes them feel good (positive ions tend to be depressing). These will also charge dirt particles in the air which then preciptate over everything nearby. I believe there are some models which provide a charged target on the device to attract the particles so it gets dirty instead of the nearby furniture. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 12:37:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA10953; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 12:28:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 12:28:52 -0700 (PDT) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:28:19 -0400 Message-ID: <961018152818_336747454@emout11.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Flat wings will work just as well. Resent-Message-ID: <"k_WSW2.0.-g2.ofzPo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1662 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In a message dated 96-10-18 03:16:35 EDT, Chris wrote: << Closer to home, Miley says that glass beads don't work worth a damn. I'm afraid we have been caught in the old trap, where "to assume makes an ass out of you and me". Replicating the Wrights with flat wings doesn't work, and neither do glass beads work in a Patterson cell. >> In his paper reprinted in IE #9, Miley's opening paragraph begins "Experiments using 1-mm plastic and glass microspheres...."; at the beginning of the last paragraph on that page, the second sentence again refers to glass microspheres; the last paragraph on p 27 also referes to glass microspheres. This could simply mean that plastic and glass micrspheres were both used in the experiments. I didn't find indications in the paper that glass doesn't work. Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 14:09:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA00758; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:45:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 13:45:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 18 Oct 1996 13:43:13 PDT From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: Miley's paper, To be glass beads or not to be glass beads, To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/18/96 13:43:46 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"36F1F3.0.jB.qn-Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1663 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Miley's paper, To be glass beads or not to be glass beads, That is the question... - I think this is one of those cases were there is so much info to be discussed, that not all of it gets put out. My take on this, Mike, from what I know is that Miley DID try glass beads with Ni, and got a nul result. There may even be a little hidden politics here as that info may come out later, as the "critics" heat up. I.e., a nul result with glass beads is somewhat of a control ... MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 15:27:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA19321; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:52:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:52:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610182142.OAA01116@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Homo data To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 14:42:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19961017001424.006ea85c@mail.localaccess.com> from "epitaxy@localaccess.com" at Oct 16, 96 05:14:24 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"-c3ZI1.0.bj4.1m_Po"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1664 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > > Give me your fax# and I will splurge on LD call to you. Maybe you can scan > in the pictures for the other guys on your www page. Yes thanks. Please send, I'm very interested in seeing this. Fax: 702-736-5035 Robert From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 15:54:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA29390; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 15:36:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: 18 Oct 96 18:35:16 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: MILEY'S PAPER, HOW TO GET IT... Message-ID: <961018223516_100433.1541_BHG56-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"WSdjS1.0.7B7.mP0Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1665 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry, > Thank you! This does seem to be a more humane place to discuss > new science than the CIS Science Forum. I guess the sysop's > warning keeps FERvid comments to a minimum. Which reminds me, I have an "absolutely fabulous" posting for him. He lurks here, you know - and he lurks the CIS Encounters forum under the name of Tsing (with two initials which I forget). > I thought I'd lurk a bit before making a total fool of myself. Don't be shy. You and Rick have some interesting ideas on the Podkletnov stuff. > Ah, yes. "Homely" means "a likeable person" in the UK. Not quite. I think I prefer its meaning in your own subset of the language. Chris (at least he'll see and welcome the implied insult) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 17:07:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA20249; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 16:56:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 16:56:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Miley's paper: Sodium based electrolyte Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:55:31 +0000 Message-ID: <19961018235529.AAA14504@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"rnGAM1.0.Jy4.aa1Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1666 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A little nugget of information revealed in Miley's paper (IE, vol 2, No 9, p. 30) was the comment that "unpublished results (J. Patterson, 1996b) indicate that operation with a Na-based electolyte (vs. Li) results in similar heating rates." Heretofore, Mills & Kneizys claimed that a sodium carbonate electrolyte did not give excess heat with a Ni electrode. He explained that "no electrolytic reaction of ~27.21 eV is possible for sodium, thus these experiments represent controls...." (R. L. Mills & S. T Kneizys, Fusion Technology, vol 20, Aug. 1991, p. 65). It appears that the shrinking hydrogen suborbital theory has bitten the dust. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 21:49:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA27935; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 21:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 21:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 23:39:15 -0500 Message-Id: <9610190439.AA20702@dsm7.dsmnet.com> X-Sender: dtmiller@dsmnet.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: "Dean T. Miller" Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Resent-Message-ID: <"5wSyM1.0.Pq6.bk5Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1667 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Rick Monteverde writes: >>Small tesla coil such as those used to purify air inside refrigerators and so forth. I think Edmund Scientific sells these small units, but quite a few people like to build them as a hobby.<< What you guys are really talking about is a negative ion generator. This is what ionizes the pollutants in the air and gives the 'fresh' smell of mountain or after-a-thunderstorm air. Generators are made in many varieties, and I have them as stand-alone, automotive and combined with a fan/filter. Most of them do work well, and the good ones generate negative ions and have a positive collector plate so the walls don't get too dirty. They generally cost in the range of $20 to $100 depending on size, number of electrodes that generate the ions, filters, etc. You can get them most anywhere (K-Mart, Target, Damark, etc.). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 18 22:51:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA22239; Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:47:09 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 18 Oct 1996 22:46:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Resent-Message-ID: <"k51r3.0.IR5.Qj6Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1668 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 12:13 PM 10/18/96 -0400, you wrote: [snip] I believe there are some models which provide a charged >target on the device to attract the particles so it gets dirty instead of the >nearby furniture. > >Mike Carrell Correct for current technology. Patrick Flanagan's device is different at the emitter. A simple but brilliant design. Check out my Part 2 info and the book (the patent is is the appendix). BTW I checked with Patrick and his Electron Cascade Generator (R) is not currently being manufactured. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 01:10:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA08222; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 01:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 01:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <9610190807.AA20240@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 01:20:36 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) Subject: Re: Surface tension HS Resent-Message-ID: <"3SrHM1.0.M02.Io8Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1669 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Hank Scudder said >How are you cleaning your capillary tubes before testing them? I was just run tap water through the tubes then deionized water. =46rank Stenger said =46or consistant results, the capillary tubes should all be cleaned with something like sodium triphosphate. With this done, with clean water, the capillary head should be proportional to 1/D (where D =3D tube i.d.). I will get some sodium triphosphate and develop a better cleaning procedures and rerun the test next week. Thanks for your help in developing better glass cleaning procedures. >Hank Scudder said >I would expect that your tests would critically depend on this, and >somehow you need to have a uniform surface before testing them. I agree the data below is not very consistant so something is happening to the surface of tubes. -------------------------------------------------- (repeat for those who have not read my data so far) In Deionized water The first data was 0.5 mm tube raised 16 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 10 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 6 mm. The second data collected was 99 ml deionized water and 1 ml ethyl alcohol. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 34 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 21 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 8 mm. The next sample was 63 ml deionized water and 1 ml Amnonia. The recomened dilution for window wash was 1 Tsp/ Qt =3D 15 ml/950 ml =3D 1 ml/63ml ratio dilution. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 30 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 28 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 20 mm. The next sample run was Paulsen & Roles 64 to 1 Glass Cleaner (GC) containing isoprocal alcohol. I mixed 1ml GC /64 ml deionized H20. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 17 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 12 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 10 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 9 mm. I then tried to get a new base line on deionized water by its self 3 times rensing between measurments. The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 38 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 20 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 23 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 19 mm. Same beaker new deionized water The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 37 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 22 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 19 mm. A new beaker with deionized water The data was 0.5 mm tube raised 31 mm, 1.1 mm tube raised 19 mm, 1.25 mm tube raised 24 mm, 1.5 mm tube raised 17 mm. -------------------------------------------------- ********************************************** * David Doty * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * Canby School District 86 * * 45=BA 15' N, 122=BA 41' W * * home (503) 266-3969 * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. = * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ***********************************************=20 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 05:04:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA24068; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:02:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 05:02:35 -0700 (PDT) From: alansch@zip.com.au (Alan Schneider) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 12:02:44 GMT Message-ID: <3270b074.27970118@mail.zip.com.au> References: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> In-Reply-To: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"bbxhl2.0.-t5.QDCQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1670 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Fri, 18 Oct 1996, Michael Randall wrote: >At 12:13 PM 10/18/96 -0400, you wrote: >[snip] >I believe there are some models which provide a charged >>target on the device to attract the particles so it gets dirty instead = of the >>nearby furniture.=20 >> >>Mike Carrell > >Correct for current technology. Patrick Flanagan's device is different = at >the emitter. A simple but brilliant design. Check out my Part 2 info and= the >book (the patent is is the appendix). > >BTW I checked with Patrick and his Electron Cascade Generator (R) is not >currently being manufactured. > >Michael Randall > =46rom where can "Toward a new Alchemy" be purchased?=20 Is there enough detail provided in the book to reproduce an=20 "Electron Cascade Generator" to experiment with?=20 5kv @ 25kHz shouldn't be too difficult to generate but is the waveform critical? The voltage? Electrode geometry? I think most of us would enjoy the occasional breath of=20 "fresh mountain air", particularly if we don't have to cope with particulate precipitation as well! Cheers, Alan =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. - Michael Sinz =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 10:14:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA10468; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 10:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 10:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: 19 Oct 96 13:07:39 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: Negative Gravity? Message-ID: <961019170738_76016.2701_JHC37-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"SYcGj3.0.QZ2.TkGQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1672 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Following is an edited post to Rick Monteverde from CIS Science Forum. It received little response there and is presented here for your comment/entertainment: ##################################### Rick, After reading many of the AG papers which propose a theory of an electromagnetic explanation of gravity I'm wondering if there might not be some truth to this all. Podkletnov said that he saw a minute shielding effect (0.05%) due to a superconductor alone. Li states that, even at zero temperature, the nuclei of the lattice ions cannot exhibit zero motion since this would violate the uncertainty principle; so, she proposes an orbital motion about the lattice zero point which exibits the characteristics of a vortex with increasing angular momentum with decreasing radius. While this rotational mass might generate a gravitomagnetic field of sufficient intensity to explain the superconductor shielding of the magnitude observed by Podkletnov in the superconductor alone, providing that her theory of an 11 order increase due to the magnetic field penetration is accurate, I cannot fathom how the rotation of the lattice ions could explain a 2% reduction in the weight of the sample. However, there could be another possible explanation. Lindsay, et.al., as I recall, in some of the inflationary universe theories (of which I tend to reject in favor of the unbounded theories ) proposed the existence of a repulsive gravitational force in the early stages of the universe. The basis of such theories, to my understanding, was the creation of a particle with mass but zero spin. He demonstrated that a zero spin, zero angular momentum particle would exhibit a negative gravity. Now, the BCS theory of superconductivity proposes (in my feeble memory) that electrons of opposite spin combine to form what is referred to as the Cooper pair. Such a hybrid particle would exhibit zero spin and zero angular momentum. Given this, is it likely that, also given the "proper" dynamic magnetic field, that the Cooper pairs could achieve a coherence such that they exhibit the same negative effect as Podkletnov claims in his experiments? [end crosspost] Podkletnov's dynamic field had a frequency of 1 MHz. He states that the maximum shielding effect occured during spin-down of the disk to 3000 RPM (or 50 cps). Since this posting, Fredrick Sparber has conjectured that a dynamic field of 10 MHz might cause an increase in the effect. What puzzles me is why does a macroscopic spinning of the disk have any effect at all? Does this result in some type of heterodyne interaction with the applied field and the field of the laboratory's reference frame? Would the "proper" dynamic field have the same effect with no disk rotation? Li's theory of superconductivity states that the current due to the Cooper pairs is a result of a "dragging" of the paired electrons as the ions rotate about their zero point in the crystal lattice. Is there a microscopic synchronization of the lattice ions due to the macroscopic rotation of the disk? What is the effect due to temperature? It seems that the disk has to be well below the critical temperature (to around 40K) for the effect. Is the lattice ion rotation quantized wrt temperature? Finally, has anyone tried BiSrCaCu2O9 SC disks? Is the shielding effect the same given similar conditions? Questions, questions. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 10:27:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA14194; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 10:25:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 10:25:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <32689424.53B2@loc100.tandem.com> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 09:41:08 +0100 From: Bob Horst Reply-To: bhorst@loc100.tandem.com Organization: Tandem Computers Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Macintosh; I; 68K) Mime-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley's paper, To be glass beads or not to be glass beads, References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Mb65V1.0.dT3.XyGQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1674 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark Hugo, Northern wrote: > from what I know is that Miley DID try glass beads with Ni, and got a > nul result. There may even be a little hidden politics here as that > info may come out later, as the "critics" heat up. I.e., a nul result > with glass beads is somewhat of a control He may have seen a null result for excess heat with glass beads, but I do not think it was a null for reaction products. When I spoke with Miley this summer, he said he still saw transmutations with other substrates and that they were diffferent with different substrates. Assuming he correctly ruled out contaminants embedded in the substrate, this might indicate that the effect is triggered at the junction of dissimilar materials. -- Bob Horst From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 12:18:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA03322; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 12:16:53 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 12:16:53 -0700 (PDT) From: bpaddock@execpc.com (Bob Paddock) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 15:09:36 -0400 Reply-To: bpaddock@execpc.com Message-ID: References: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> <3270b074.27970118@mail.zip.com.au> In-Reply-To: <3270b074.27970118@mail.zip.com.au> Lines: 47 Resent-Message-ID: <"FqC7g3.0.qp.aaIQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1675 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>Correct for current technology. Patrick Flanagan's device is different at >>the emitter. A simple but brilliant design. Check out my Part 2 info and the >>book (the patent is is the appendix). >> >>BTW I checked with Patrick and his Electron Cascade Generator (R) is not >>currently being manufactured. >> >>Michael Randall >> >From where can "Toward a new Alchemy" be purchased? Look at http://www.earthpulse.com, or follow the links at my web site, under the Neurophone page. >Is there enough detail provided in the book to reproduce an >"Electron Cascade Generator" to experiment with? The patent is included in one of the appendixes. Here's what Dr. Flanagan had to say when asked about his device producing Ozone: ----- Date: 19 Oct 96 00:32:37 EDT From: Patrick Flanagan <71650.60@CompuServe.COM> To: Bob Paddock Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator (fwd) The EFG does not generate ozone but makes free electrons. Ozone kills by oxidation, leaving free radicals behind. Free electrons kill by electronic reduction -- the opposite of ozone. My Electron Field Generator kills viruses, bacteria, odors and eleminates dust from the air. Patrick ----- -- For information on any of the following check out my WEB site at: http://www.execpc.com/~bpaddock/ or http://www.net/bpaddock Chemical Free Air Conditioning/No CFC's, Chronic Pain Relief, Electromedicine, Electronics, Explore!, Free Energy, Full Disclosure, KeelyNet, Matric Limited, Neurophone, Oil City PA, Philadelphia Experiment. . From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 13:22:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA15952; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:17:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:17:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 16:16:49 -0400 Message-ID: <961019161648_1414295640@emout14.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"uW1qY1.0.7v3.ITJQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1676 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman says: "He finds output when the full magnetic circuit does not rotate, and finds that there is no output when the full magnetic circuit does rotate. In neither case is there any flux linkage with the external circuit. How does either the rotating conductor, or the external circuit, "know" and why do they "care" about what has happened with the un-linked external magnetic circuit? Still mind blown. Robert Stirniman" Interesting - I'll have to put my thinking cap on. Hal Puthoff From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 13:22:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA16154; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:18:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: 19 Oct 96 16:16:29 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Miley's paper, To be glass beads or Message-ID: <961019201628_100433.1541_BHG91-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"AuIEA3.0.9y3.JUJQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1677 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > When I spoke with Miley this summer, he said he still saw > transmutations with other substrates and that they were diffferent > with different substrates. Assuming he correctly ruled out > contaminants embedded in the substrate, this might indicate that > the effect is triggered at the junction of dissimilar materials. It might be worth mentioning that the Kucherov/Savvatimova glow-discharge CF reports suggest that new elements might be formed at the grain boundaries of the host metal. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 15:31:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA04554; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 15:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 15:29:59 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 14:35:28 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"CNtHZ.0.071.cPLQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1678 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >I could fax you the paper on these homo' experiments with pictures if you >give me your fax#. > > Thanks much! My fax is on my home phone 907-746-0820, which is often busy due to my son or myself being on internet. If I hear a fax poll upon answering the phone I just run to the fax and press start. I'll leave the fax on and the answering machine off unitl I get your fax. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 20:40:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA23668; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: 19 Oct 96 23:36:23 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Message-ID: <961020033622_76016.2701_JHC101-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"5Kygw2.0.kn5.UwPQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1679 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Hal Puthoff says: >>Interesting - I'll have to put my thinking cap on.<< Is that the one with the little turboprop on top? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 20:44:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA25320; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:42:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 20:42:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Puthoff@aol.com Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:41:56 -0400 Message-ID: <961019234156_1711901569@emout19.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"e55td2.0.YB6.x-PQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1680 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry asks: "Hal Puthoff says: >>Interesting - I'll have to put my thinking cap on.<< Is that the one with the little turboprop on top?" Yes, the one with day-glo colors! Hal From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 19 23:51:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA24967; Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961020065827.006d7d70@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 23:58:27 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"qwAZ43.0.066.XkSQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1681 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A At 11:36 PM 10/19/96 EDT, you wrote: >Hal Puthoff says: > >>>Interesting - I'll have to put my thinking cap on.<< > >Is that the one with the little turboprop on top? > >Terry > > Mine is pyramid shaped, with an all-seeing eye, but hasn't been working lately. (still under warrenty). Gary From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 00:49:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA04517; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 00:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 00:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: 20 Oct 96 03:46:44 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Negative Gravity? Message-ID: <961020074644_76216.2421_HHB44-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"rD_WS3.0.Q61.raTQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1682 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry asked: > "Is there a microscopic synchronization of the lattice ions due > to the macroscopic rotation of the disk?" Hmm...got some grass seed and an old turntable? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 01:12:58 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA06790; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3269DF1D.55A0@rt66.com> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 01:13:17 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com CC: wireless@rmii.com, jechampion@aol.com Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"SN-Xx.0._f1.VvTQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1683 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, what a great idea! What are the NMR parameters for measuring He3 and He4, Li6 and Li7, Be9, B10 and B11, and C12, C13, and C14? I have reason to believe these are produced in high-voltage sparks on carbon electrodes in high vacuum. Rich Murray From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 05:02:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA07105; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 04:59:26 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 04:59:26 -0700 (PDT) From: alansch@zip.com.au (Alan Schneider) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 11:58:28 GMT Message-ID: <327007dd.30844532@mail.zip.com.au> References: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> <3270b074.27970118@mail.zip.com.au> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"u2Fjg.0.tk1.TGXQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1684 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, Bob Paddock wrote: [snip] >>From where can "Toward a new Alchemy" be purchased?=20 > >Look at http://www.earthpulse.com, or follow the links at my >web site, under the Neurophone page. > >>Is there enough detail provided in the book to reproduce an=20 >>"Electron Cascade Generator" to experiment with?=20 > >The patent is included in one of the appendixes. > [snip] Many thanks, Bob. I checked out the earthpulse site and I have ordered the book. I should hopefully have it in a week or two (snail mail, y'know). >Here's what Dr. Flanagan had to say when asked about his >device producing Ozone: > [header snipped] > >The EFG does not generate ozone but makes free electrons. > >Ozone kills by oxidation, leaving free radicals behind. > >Free electrons kill by electronic reduction -- the opposite of ozone. > >My Electron Field Generator kills viruses, bacteria, odors and=20 >eleminates dust from the air. > >Patrick >----- Now, as to detection, does anyone in the group know any objective way of detecting the presence of ozone? Presence of dust could be checked for with a normal=20 electrostatic precipitator. Would a free-electron field have any adverse effects on, say, computer and other sensitive electronic and electrical equipment in the vicinity? Cheers, Alan =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. - Michael Sinz =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 05:28:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA09140; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 05:26:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 05:26:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 12:25:41 +0000 Message-ID: <19961020122539.AAA25694@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"fn5YN.0.kE2.bfXQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1685 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:58 AM 10/20/96 +0000, you wrote: >-- >Now, as to detection, does anyone in the group know any >objective way of detecting the presence of ozone? > > >Alan > >====================================================== >Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. > - Michael Sinz >====================================================== > Ozone has a very distinctive odor; once you characterize that odor you will recognize it anywhere. How do you become familiar with the ozone smell? I learned of it from ozone generators. A Xerox machine in full operation generates some ozone. The level of detection by the nose is about 2 ppm, at higher concentrations ozone is irritating and injurious. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 06:20:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA13490; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:16:03 -0700 (PDT) From: alansch@zip.com.au (Alan Schneider) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:16:16 GMT Message-ID: <32722509.38312860@mail.zip.com.au> References: <19961020122539.AAA25694@LOCALNAME> In-Reply-To: <19961020122539.AAA25694@LOCALNAME> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"BHXBu.0.iI3.IOYQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1686 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 20 Oct 1996 12:25:41 +0000, you wrote: >At 11:58 AM 10/20/96, Ed Strojny wrote: >>-- >>Now, as to detection, does anyone in the group know any >>objective way of detecting the presence of ozone? >> >>Alan >> >Ozone has a very distinctive odor; once you characterize that odor you = will >recognize it anywhere. How do you become familiar with the ozone smell?= I >learned of it from ozone generators. A Xerox machine in full operation >generates some ozone. The level of detection by the nose is about 2 = ppm, at >higher concentrations ozone is irritating and injurious. > >Ed Strojny > Sorry, Ed. I should have been more specific. Now, as to detection, does anyone in the group know any *O*B*J*E*C*T*I*V*E* way of detecting the presence of ozone? I am well familiar with the SUBJECTIVE detection of ozone.=20 Just about every photocopier/laser printer ever made produces=20 the stuff, some much more than others. What I would like is a totally objective way of quantitising ozone's presence. Cheers, Alan =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. - Michael Sinz =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 06:29:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA14241; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:26:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 05:32:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Surface tension HS Resent-Message-ID: <"SL05u2.0.RU3.VYYQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1687 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>Hank Scudder said > >>How are you cleaning your capillary tubes before testing them? > >I was just run tap water through the tubes then deionized water. > >Frank Stenger said > >For consistant results, the capillary tubes should all be >cleaned with something like sodium triphosphate. With this done, >with clean water, the capillary head should be proportional to >1/D (where D = tube i.d.). > [snip] I would suggest, as a control, that every tube be tested with distilled water or some other standard solution, and then dried prior to tests with other substances. A quick drying solution, like 100% alcohol, might make a good standard. This would be a good quick check for cleanliness, tube dimension variations, etc. You might find some irregular tubes that should not be used. If you get the same hight for all tubes of a given size during the preliminary control test, then the subsequent results can then be depended upon to be strictly a function of the solutions tested or the test procedure. The control test would have to be repeated after any use of a tube and subsequent cleaning Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 06:46:01 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA16901; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:43:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 06:43:57 -0700 (PDT) From: bpaddock@execpc.com (Bob Paddock) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:38:43 -0400 Reply-To: bpaddock@execpc.com Message-ID: References: <199610190546.WAA19046@andorra.it.earthlink.net> <3270b074.27970118@mail.zip.com.au> <327007dd.30844532@mail.zip.com.au> In-Reply-To: <327007dd.30844532@mail.zip.com.au> Lines: 20 Resent-Message-ID: <"4Xzyb.0.x74.SoYQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1688 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Would a free-electron field have any adverse effects on, >say, computer and other sensitive electronic and electrical >equipment in the vicinity? As you will see when the SMAIL-Person brings the book one of the reasons for the device is to use it in such an environment to keep down static discharge. The latest and greatest CPU/Memory devices can be damaged by very little in the way of static discharge. So it would help rather than hurt. Of course you would not want to lay your floppy disks near the the thing.... ;-) -- For information on any of the following check out my WEB site at: //www.execpc.com/~bpaddock/ or http://www.usachoice.net/bpaddock Chemical Free Air Conditioning/No CFC's, Chronic Pain Relief, Electromedicine, Electronics, Explore!, Free Energy, Full Disclosure, KeelyNet, Matric Limited, Neurophone, Oil City PA, Philadelphia Experiment. : From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 08:17:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA29811; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 08:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 08:14:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 08:14:31 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19961020065827.006d7d70@mail.eskimo.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"FNeKl.0.iH7.R7aQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1689 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sat, 19 Oct 1996, Gary Hawkins wrote: > At 11:36 PM 10/19/96 EDT, you wrote: > >Hal Puthoff says: > > > >>>Interesting - I'll have to put my thinking cap on.<< > > > >Is that the one with the little turboprop on top? > > Mine is pyramid shaped, with an all-seeing eye, but hasn't been > working lately. (still under warrenty). Did you know that the thinking cap is a "valid" radionic device? If the Hieronymous machine actually works, then the thinking cap plans in the book PSIONICS 101, C. Cosimano, 1987, Llewellyn St. Paul, probably result in a functioning device. Just trying to keep things on a serious footing here. ;) ! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 09:27:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA14694; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:25:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:25:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 09:24:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199610201624.JAA05325@hungary.it.earthlink.net> X-Sender: mrandall@mail.earthlink.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Randall Subject: Don Smith's, Electrical Energy System Resent-Message-ID: <"Tmx312.0.Wb3.c9bQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1690 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I received the new (to me it was new) and fascinating work of Don Smith, his ITS Symposium Workshop video and 1996 edition of his book "An Answer to America's Energy Deficit," both available at the ITS bookstore. The video (2.5 hrs) is a must view for those interested in how to build a Smith unit(s). He showed lots of pictures of his units An early unit schematic is in the book (five editions). His latest design a 30kva is commercially manufactured in Japan and other parts of the world (not in the USA yet), and his advanced design is solid state device (not discused due to commercial aspect of his technology). All of the devices needed to be grounded to earth to work at high energy output. Some of his theory is explained in the ITS journal Apr/May/Jun 1996. D'Arsonval experimented with this back in 1800's and the orignal notes of Maxwell's equations showed this (electron pair). Don said that some of his schematic and info is on the Internet over in Holand, England and Japan. Has anyone seen it? Does anyone know where I could get more info from Japan? He said that within 6 months to a year it will be available in the USA from Japan. He encourages others to build a unit. So far only 6 out of 100 researchers who tried building a unit succeeded. Michael Randall From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 10:24:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA25960; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:22:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:22:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961020173027.006bc870@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 10:30:27 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields Resent-Message-ID: <"bCGaw1.0.YL6.t-bQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1691 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:14 AM 10/20/96 -0700, you wrote: >Did you know that the thinking cap is a "valid" radionic device? As I'm told, that's where the dunce cap concept came from. Dumb kids were placed in a corner with the cap on when they were exceptionally stupid, a cap shaped like a cone, to bring cosmic energy down on them from above. Einstein flunked math in fifth grade or something. Maybe they finally used one on him. Makes plants grow faster too. But let's not talk about witches. :> ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA | The Great Perpetrator Shortage of the 1990's | | | | Sadly, overly zealous victimhood status hunters resulted | | in not enough perpetrators to go around for everybody | | so they had to begin feeding on each other, a gruesome sight. | From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 13:04:01 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA27127; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:02:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:02:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326A85FD.F76@rt66.com> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:05:17 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Horace Heffner CC: little@eden.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, wireless@rmii.com Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"c3ISP3.0.jd6.FLeQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1692 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks, Horace, for the NMR data, and sources in the CRC Handbook. Would you post for us a general description on how to cheaply do NMR on, say, a 1-10 cc volumn? Can we easily do NMR on a 2 cm wide by 20 cm long mercury discharge SiO2 tube? I have some that Toby Grotz ran some Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge processes on, creating many-fold light output, and eroding the cathode. I'd like to get a competent friend to run non-destructive tests, comparing the used versus unused tubes, searching for as many elements as possible, particularly the noble gases. Can you do this? How sensitive? Toby Grotz Wireless Engineering 760 Prairie Craig, CO 81625 970-824-6834 fax 7864 Rich Murray From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 13:59:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA07336; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 13:55:42 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: Hieronymous machine - Beaty Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 16:55:28 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"TRpNm.0.Xo1.D7fQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1693 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A ---------- > From: William Beaty > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: Re: Spinning magnetic fields > Date: Sunday, October 20, 1996 11:14 AM > (snip) > Did you know that the thinking cap is a "valid" radionic device? If the > Hieronymous machine actually works, then the thinking cap plans in the > book PSIONICS 101, C. Cosimano, 1987, Llewellyn St. Paul, probably result > in a functioning device. > Back in the 60's or 70's, J. W. Campbell, Jr. ran many editorials in "ASTOUNDING" science fiction mag. with the Hieronymous machine as subject. As I recall, it was an electronic device to amplify psionic effects. I think the circuit used at least one triode - maybe more. After several editorials, it started to become clear that some experimenters were getting "action" from the machine EVEN WHEN IT WAS TURNED OFF! Soon, at least one experimenter began using ONLY A SCHEMATIC OF THE MACHINE instead of the actual circuit! Reports were that the schematic worked as well as the real circuit -- that it was really the connectivity of the systen - not the wires - that did the trick! Now, we could save Horace a lot of work if we could come up with some OU devices that would function FROM ONLY A DRAWING OF THE DEVICE! WAITING FOR INPUT AT THE DRAWING BOARD----------------- Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 19:21:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA12822; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 19:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 19:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 19:04:07 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hieronymous machine - Beaty In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"xykgk1.0.B83.WejQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1694 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, Francis J. Stenger wrote: > TURNED OFF! Soon, at least one experimenter began using ONLY A > SCHEMATIC > OF THE MACHINE instead of the actual circuit! Reports were that the > schematic > worked as well as the real circuit -- that it was really the > connectivity of the systen - > not the wires - that did the trick! > > Now, we could save Horace a lot of work if we could come up with some > OU devices > that would function FROM ONLY A DRAWING OF THE DEVICE! > > WAITING FOR INPUT AT THE DRAWING BOARD----------------- Frank Stenger This may have already been done. No, wait, I'm serious! ;) The Keely devices and the Hendershot device are infamous for only functioning while in the immediate proximity of their inventors. So, if psi and PK effects are real, then one severely confusing, obfuscating effect in o/u research might arise when the inventor's subconscious mind reaches out and fulfills his/her goal by inputting excess energy and running the turbine, or creating oscillations and lighting the bulbs, etc. There's a chance that the Hendershot device is not an o/u discovery, but is more like a Hieronymous device schematic, and only functions because the inventor believes it should, and PK makes the belief real. So, rather than building a power plant by harnessing Fort's little PK girls to 'will' a huge turbine into motion, maybe all we need is a large population of micro-PK people who supply energy by seriously believing in conservation-violating transformer nonlinearities in a huge power oscillator circuit. Run the whole damn country by placebo effect. To test for this phenomena, whenever we attain an o/u effect, we should have a confederate perform various unexpected hiccup-cure procedures (leap out and scare us) and note whether sudden distractions and upsets in the inventor's mind causes transients in o/u output. - Bill B. (with tongue only halfway in cheek!) PS conventional generators may already function by this effect, the difference being that they are powered by the psychic powers of huge numbers of believers in Conservation of Energy! .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 21:10:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA11553; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:05:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326AF695.5193@rt66.com> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:08:47 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Hieronymous machine - Beaty References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"wYVcd1.0.Rq2.9QlQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1695 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Well, Bill, if only you knew how right you are...after all, we only experience our experience as events in our own consciousness, including the frameworks of time and space, of assumed casuality, of enduring objects with identities of their own...these very words only exist for you, the reader, as little black marks on whitish background in the visual domain of your own consciousness, or little white marks on blackish background of your own consciousness...that's why these little events more or less diminish suddenly when you allow the sensations called, "feeling my eyelids come down"...so what is this consciousness itself?...the technical term in philosophy for the direct experience of events in consciousness "as" events in consciousness is "qualia"...so, to explain these extremely varied and variable qualia, we assume the reality of the daytime external social world and physical universe, along with those human social conventions, "time", "space", and "knowledge"...but the mystery is fundamental...consciousness itself is a complete unknown...if consciousness itself is a complete unknown, then what grounds are available to set any limits on what this unknown might allow, be, and do?...if no limits can be established, then is this not about the same as admitting that consciousness itself is unlimited...then is this not in turn about the same as admitting that consciousness is actually infinite...if consciousness itself is actually infinite, then must it then be so that your consciousness, the one which right now magically holds these little marks and creates these meanings, is already intrinsicly, innately, permanently, and irrevokably infinite "now", therefore infinite in the "past", therefore infinite in the "future"...so how is it that there seems to be repetitive experiences of an ordinary, limited reality?...it must be that repetitive experiences of an ordinary, limited reality must be infinity in drag, infinity disguised...no wonder, then, that all sorts of "anomalies" keep popping up in all areas of experience...ordinary, repetitive, limited, "normal" experience itself is "anomalous"...if considering this right now makes you feel a little strange, then good!, this missive has achieved its mission...take a look at "The Nature of Personal Reality" by Jane Roberts, or "Time, Space, and Knowledge" by Tarthang Tulku, Rinpoche of Nyingma Institute, Berkeley, California, if you're ready for metaphysical adventure. Rich Murray From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 20 21:42:48 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA19329; Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 21:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326AFF0B.2C93@skypoint.com> Date: Sun, 20 Oct 1996 23:41:47 -0500 From: John Logajan Organization: Skypoint Communications, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"yI2XC.0.wj4.hulQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1696 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In an important clue, Miley in his pre-print published in the #9 I.E. tells us that though nearly 40% of the base Ni was transmuted into other elements or isotopes, that relatively speaking, external energy input or output was negligible on the nuclear event scale. (About a half watt power output.) In such transmutation cases (insignificant energy inputs/outputs) the average binding energy of the inputs *must* equal the average binding energy of the outputs. This means that the isotopic/elemental distribution of the outputs cannot just be any random mix. It means we can compare the average binding energies of the inputs and outputs as yet another cross-check against random data leaking into the results, including contamination. Unfortunately we do not know all the inputs. Fortunately, an obvious guess gives a very nice result! In Table 2 under the NAA (Neutron Activation Analysis) column, Miley lists the ratio of major elements found in a 10 bead sample after the run -- in which the base material was initially Ni. By multiplying the percentage of the new element by its binding energy (per nucleon), summing these for each new element and comparing against the binding energy of a Ni nucleon, a difference value is found that must be made up by the other input product(s) -- assuming, of course, that Ni is one of the inputs. This equation is just balanced at 2 H's per Ni (2.08, actually, but I also only used the major isotopes of the elements listed in Table 2 since the specific isotopes were not given.) Now my math may be in error for all the above, but I believe the general concept is sound -- that massive transmutations, lacking significant external energy exchanges, *must* have their average input binding energies match their average output binding energies. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 01:01:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA19997; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 01:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 01:00:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 00:59:54 -0700 Message-Id: <199610210759.AAA02835@dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> From: aki@ix.netcom.com (Akira Kawasaki ) Subject: Miley's final remarks at ICCF-6 oral presentation To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Resent-Message-ID: <"Li9sq3.0.Nu4.SsoQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1697 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: October 20, 1996 Sunday Miley's ICCF-6 oral presentation final remarks viewgraphs on the microsphere report. Given Oct. 15, 1996 8:00-8:47, Q&A of 8 minutes. Results Large product yield observed - over 50% of material in film after run. Radiation emissions - (only soft /< 20 KEV X-rays or Betas found to date ~ issue uncertain. Impurity issue (problem in 10:1 electrolyte to film volume ratio) all impurity source envisioned to date ruled out. Production rates for Fe & high yield elements approach 0.1 milligrams per 1000 microspheres. Isotopes ratios deviate from natural - but issues remain. Systematics reasonably consistant with Mizuno et al's Pd data. Comment - Theory Data obtained provides key guidelines (criterion) for any theory. Theoretical model must account for both/and Q reactions REFEX (REaction in a Film Excited compleX) proposed to explain reactions consistant with SEL theory for barrier penetration. (Miley has no theory at this point -AK-) Conclusions Large yields appear possible in thin films While expected nuclear features, e.g., energetic radiation, large isotope shifts in high concentrations elements, heat correlations with all +Q reactions, etc. do not appear, there appears to be no other explanation for there (these? -AK-) observation. Systematics seen to fit with growing body of observations with others. Much more work needed to show reproducibility and conclusively prove nuclear origin. Future Work Establish excess power - production rate correlation. Establish reaction rate variation with position in packed bed. Study products not covered, especially gases like He-4, Xe. Firmly establish radiation emission characteristics both during operation and from microspheres following a run.. Study cell and electrolyte variations. Continue to study any possible impurity sources. Refine analytic methods (NAA, EDX, AES, SIMS, SEM, etc.) e.g., absolute calibration of SIMS for NI microspheres; study average Vs local element/isotope variations. Work with others to demonstreate reproducibility by independant groups. Using guidelines from experiments, develop a theory such as RIFEX. (REFEX? -AK-) -AK- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 03:42:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA05015; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 03:41:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 03:41:33 -0700 (PDT) From: alansch@zip.com.au (Alan Schneider) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Electron Field Generator Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:41:43 GMT Message-ID: <327052c8.4226156@mail.zip.com.au> References: <3.0b36.32.19961021042943.006af6d8@world.std.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0b36.32.19961021042943.006af6d8@world.std.com> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"OSKUl3.0.DE1.SDrQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1698 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 21 Oct 1996, Mitchell Swartz wrote: [snip] >>>>Now, as to detection, does anyone in the group know any >>>>objective way of detecting the presence of ozone? >>>> >>>>Alan > > what sensitivity do you need? in what background? > Just thinking in terms of reproducing the Electron Field Generator and testing out the claims of no ozone production. So background would be ambient air, sensitivity probably fairly high. Cheers, all Alan =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams that Stuff is made of. - Michael Sinz =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 05:32:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA16947; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 05:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 05:29:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 96 05:28:54 PDT From: Barry Merriman Message-Id: <9610211228.AA21538@joshua.math.ucla.edu> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: biological transmutation---why no replications? Resent-Message-ID: <"AXz8Q1.0.h84.JosQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1699 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The subject of biological transmutation came up in this group a few weeks back, and flew about as far as a platinum balloon (which is even less than a lead balloon). I will agree that IF transmutation a'la Miley is endemic (which seems unlikely), then it has most likely been harnessed by biologicals, particularly bacteria. Thus searching for a biological transmutation reactor would seem reasonable for those prone to accept Miley's results as transmutation. But, there is no real need to guess in this regard---the entire book by Louis Kervran, "biological transmutation", is devoted to the subject, and claims to present a number of experiments verifying the effect. Further, even as CF experiments go these are quite simple, as hey require simplying growing some animals on a controlled diet, then digesting them and all their excrement in acid and doing a chemical assay (the animals in question may be mice or bactria, as Kervran describes in his book). NOw, having read Kervran book recently, I'm not overly impressed by his science, and I see several obvious holes in his techniques to the extent they are presented in the book (i.e., the book does not go intro great experimental detail), though Kervran claims to have eliminated these objections in his work. Howver, the question I have is "why hasn't anyone replicated Kervrans simple, low cost experiments?". A quick scitation check shows no scientific references to his work in the 12 years after the US publication of his book, so it seems no scientists ever took it very seriously. But beyond the scientific community, why don;t any members of this forum try to replicate Kervrans work? It seems considerably more plausible than many of the outright speculations that pass through here... after all, it is at least supposedly based oon many repeatable experiments (of Kervran...), and beyond that it is _cheap_. His experiments with mice or bacteria could be repliated for a few hundred dollars (most going to the cost of the final chemical assays), in a few weeks time, with no expensive equipment. So---is anyone here will to try to replicate a Kervran experiment? If not, why not? My own plate if full with my existing CF experiments of which you are all aware (see http:\\www.math.ucla.edu\~barry),and moreover I don't find Kervrans science that compelling---those are my excuses. But I would think that, just to name a few names, Horace H might like to undertake such a low cost, potentially earth-shaking experiment, or, say, Scott Little at EarthTech would jump at the chance to test such a simple CF reactor (a plate of bacteria!). I guess I'm just a bit amazed that a group such as this would go bonkers over Miley or Potapov, but ignore the exisitng work of Kervran. Comments? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 09:34:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA12184; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:19:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Barry Merriman , Vortex-L Subject: RE: biological transmutation---why no replications? Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:12:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"9To7Q2.0.I-2.TAwQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1700 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry I can only speak for my own motivations, but I suspect it is common to many Vortexians. I am an engineer, motivated by Hard Science, and know very little about the softer Biological sciences. I can run CF experiments, with a minimum of new knowledge required. I don't know anything about raising rats, or even bacteria, killing them, processing their waste products, etc. I also suspect my wife would have a fit if I started raising mice in the guest room. Electronics is one thing, biology another. In the academic world, it may be easier to do this, especially if the school has an agricultural section. Maybe you could interest someone at UC Davis in doing experiments along these lines? There was a post a couple of weeks ago to you about replication of Joe Champion's stuff. I never saw any answer, and I just checked your home page, and did not see anything new there. Are you working along these lines, and can you talk about what you are doing? Any results yet? Regards Hank Scudder ---------- From: Barry Merriman To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: biological transmutation---why no replications? Date: Monday, October 21, 1996 5:28AM The subject of biological transmutation came up in this group a few weeks back, and flew about as far as a platinum balloon (which is even less than a lead balloon). I will agree that IF transmutation a'la Miley is endemic (which seems unlikely), then it has most likely been harnessed by biologicals, particularly bacteria. Thus searching for a biological transmutation reactor would seem reasonable for those prone to accept Miley's results as transmutation. But, there is no real need to guess in this regard---the entire book by Louis Kervran, "biological transmutation", is devoted to the subject, and claims to present a number of experiments verifying the effect. Further, even as CF experiments go these are quite simple, as hey require simplying growing some animals on a controlled diet, then digesting them and all their excrement in acid and doing a chemical assay (the animals in question may be mice or bactria, as Kervran describes in his book). NOw, having read Kervran book recently, I'm not overly impressed by his science, and I see several obvious holes in his techniques to the extent they are presented in the book (i.e., the book does not go intro great experimental detail), though Kervran claims to have eliminated these objections in his work. Howver, the question I have is "why hasn't anyone replicated Kervrans simple, low cost experiments?". A quick scitation check shows no scientific references to his work in the 12 years after the US publication of his book, so it seems no scientists ever took it very seriously. But beyond the scientific community, why don;t any members of this forum try to replicate Kervrans work? It seems considerably more plausible than many of the outright speculations that pass through here... after all, it is at least supposedly based oon many repeatable experiments (of Kervran...), and beyond that it is _cheap_. His experiments with mice or bacteria could be repliated for a few hundred dollars (most going to the cost of the final chemical assays), in a few weeks time, with no expensive equipment. So---is anyone here will to try to replicate a Kervran experiment? If not, why not? My own plate if full with my existing CF experiments of which you are all aware (see http:\\www.math.ucla.edu\~barry),and moreover I don't find Kervrans science that compelling---those are my excuses. But I would think that, just to name a few names, Horace H might like to undertake such a low cost, potentially earth-shaking experiment, or, say, Scott Little at EarthTech would jump at the chance to test such a simple CF reactor (a plate of bacteria!). I guess I'm just a bit amazed that a group such as this would go bonkers over Miley or Potapov, but ignore the exisitng work of Kervran. Comments? From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 09:53:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA17789; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:39:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 11:12:32 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no replic Message-ID: <961021151231_100433.1541_BHG36-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"zzGZ-1.0.qL4.0TwQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1701 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Barry, I would tend to support the idea of checking on biotransmutations - at least insofar as the simple ones like allowing a fertilised bird's egg to mature and then assaying it before it hatched, then comparing that with the results from an undeveloped one. It would be easy enough to compare (for example) the K, Ca, P, Fe, and S from the two. There is one problem which might be overlooked - the need for a license to work with animals. Even chick embryos might require that. Perhaps some friendly bio lab could be found to supply the killed eggs at their pre-hatch point? Plants would be easier, I suppose. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 10:53:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA06341; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 09:49:24 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hieronymous machine - Success! Resent-Message-ID: <"551UF2.0.zY1.0PxQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1703 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Now, we could save Horace a lot of work if we could come up with some >> OU devices >> that would function FROM ONLY A DRAWING OF THE DEVICE! >> >> WAITING FOR INPUT AT THE DRAWING BOARD----------------- Frank Stenger > >This may have already been done. No, wait, I'm serious! ;) The Keely >devices and the Hendershot device are infamous for only functioning while >in the immediate proximity of their inventors. So, if psi and PK effects >are real, then one severely confusing, obfuscating effect in o/u research >might arise when the inventor's subconscious mind reaches out and fulfills >his/her goal [snip] >- Bill B. (with tongue only halfway in cheek!) > [snip] I am happy to report a successful test of the converse of the above principle. I sat in my 1976 Chrysler with a drawing of an obviously o-u EM device I drew and placed the car in reverse, expecting it to back out of the driveway. It did not move. I did not sit there very long waiting for it to start as the temperature is -2 deg. F this morning. However, I did inspect the drawing while waiting for the engine to warm up and noted that the device was symmetrical! No energy to be obtained here! Then I realized the test had successfully correlated with the fact the device would not work. Wow, such power! Now, back to the drwawing, maybe if I draw in a diode here, and maybe there ... Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 10:59:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA05575; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:41:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961021175002.006d8798@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:50:02 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no replic Resent-Message-ID: <"rHj2j1.0.vM1.rMxQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1702 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 11:12 AM 10/21/96 EDT, you wrote: >There is one problem which might be overlooked - the need for a license >to work with animals. Even chick embryos might require that. Perhaps >some friendly bio lab could be found to supply the killed eggs at their >pre-hatch point? > >Plants would be easier, I suppose. > >Chris > > Well, while working with chickens, might as well check out Walter Rawls results as well, from the book "Magnetism and It's Effects On the Living System", where chickens that had been hatched from eggs that were exposed to either pole of a strong permanent magnet showed vast physiological and temperament differences, depending on whether it was the north or south pole that the egg had been exposed to. It might say something about South American vs. North American temperaments. The south pole (northern hemisphere) egg resulted in a robust aggressive bully, while the north magnetic pole (southern hemisphere) was smaller and fearful. Then what of a people who developed over centuries in England, then moved to New Zealand or Australia? More balanced? Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA *Unless your vote is a tie-breaker between Dole and Clinton, your vote is not wasted on a third party. Vote for Harry Brown, the Libertarian candidate, or the National Tax-Payer's Party candidate.* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 11:20:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA09753; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:55:23 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 10:01:16 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR Resent-Message-ID: <"mf0OY3.0.6O2.9axQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1704 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Sorry, I meant to post the following but it went eleswhere so here it is again, if that makes sense: >Horace, what a great idea! What are the NMR parameters for measuring >He3 and He4, Li6 and Li7, Be9, B10 and B11, and C12, C13, and C14? I >have reason to believe these are produced in high-voltage sparks on >carbon electrodes in high vacuum. > >Rich Murray Ele. MHz at 1 T ---- ----------- 3He 32.4352 6Li 6.2660 7Li 16.5478 9Be 5.986 10B 4.5751 11B 13.6626 13C 10.7081 The other isotopes you mention above do not exhibit NMR. I should have included 3He in the original list as it has a high sensitivity and only a 0.0001 % abundance in nature. This would be a great indicator for transmutation! The carbon, glass and high vacuum environment should provide a nice clean signal. The big problem with 3He might be obtaining a sample vial for calibration purposes. You only need that for rigorous purposes though. If you get a peak in that vicinity when none was present prior, and you are operating with a sealed vacuum container, that's good enough for starters! The list I provided was fairly arbitrary, and I must have left out 3He due to a personal foible. Don't know how I missed 11B, it should give a good signal also. I should mention the source for the above and prior NMR data is the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 74th edition, pp 9-156 to 9-158. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 11:48:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA13182; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 11:09:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 11:09:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Robert Stirniman Message-Id: <199610211801.LAA00917@shell.skylink.net> Subject: Re: Negative Gravity? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 11:01:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <961020074644_76216.2421_HHB44-1@CompuServe.COM> from "Rick Monteverde" at Oct 20, 96 03:46:44 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"K4Acw.0.tD3.2nxQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1705 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > Terry asked: > > "Is there a microscopic synchronization of the lattice ions due > > to the macroscopic rotation of the disk?" > Hmm...got some grass seed and an old turntable? > - Rick Monteverde I don't get the grass seed joke -- some kind of junior high science experiment? Anyhow -- A small gyrocsope (or microscopic angular mometum), which is rotating as apart of a larger gyroscope (macroscopic angular momentum), will precess until it's axis is in alignment with the larger rotating body. Some examples: A freely gimballed gyroscope on the earth's surface will always precess into alignment with the earth's polar axis. In free energy schemes, based on using gyroscopes to tap the kinetic energy of the earth's rotation, this is know as the "polar alignment problem". There is a patented invention which claims to beat this problem. But that's another story. In the Barnett effect, it is found that spinning a magnetic material, such as an iron bar, causes the material to develop a magnetic field, due to alignment of the angular momentum of the unpaired electrons with the macroscopic spin axis. In the inventions of Henry Wallace. The angular momentum of the spin of unpaired nuclei are aligned with the spin of a macroscopic disk of material (such as copper or bismuth). Causing generation and detection of a gravitomagnetic field. Ning Li proposes something similar to what Wallace invented, based on alignment of the angular momentum of the nuclei (lattice ions) in a rotating superconductor. Regards, Robert Stirniman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 12:53:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA08051; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 12:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 12:42:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 15:38:23 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no re Message-ID: <961021193823_100433.1541_BHG103-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"pIEbM.0.jz1.r8zQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1706 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gary, > Then what of a people who developed over centuries in England, > then moved to New Zealand or Australia? More balanced? At the risk of being taken seriously (which should happen very rarely) I would point out that Australians are regarded as very well-balanced indeed - by having a chip on each shoulder... Also worth mentioning is the simple fact that any 'positive' results obtained from chick embryos or other biological systems will be ignored or laughed off. Sheesh, even *I* would be hard to convince. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 13:41:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA17506; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 13:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 13:18:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 12:20:42 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR Resent-Message-ID: <"7_v4i1.0.QH4.ifzQo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1707 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's another delayed "post" that went elsewhere previously: >Thanks, Horace, for the NMR data, and sources in the CRC Handbook. >Would you post for us a general description on how to cheaply do NMR on, >say, a 1-10 cc volumn? Can we easily do NMR on a 2 cm wide by 20 cm >long mercury discharge SiO2 tube? I have some that Toby Grotz ran some >Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge processes on, creating many-fold light >output, and eroding the cathode. I'd like to get a competent friend to >run non-destructive tests, comparing the used versus unused tubes, >searching for as many elements as possible, particularly the noble >gases. Can you do this? How sensitive? > >Toby Grotz >Wireless Engineering >760 Prairie >Craig, CO 81625 >970-824-6834 fax 7864 > >Rich Murray As to the "competent friend" part, that is not I. No competence here, just luniacal drive. Also, I am retired and working on a very small budget and have almost no resources. You might find someone at a university with an old NMR spectrometer handy. They used large electro magnets, so aren't much in vogue I would think. Warning, what follows is off the top of my head and written just to get some discussion going on this problem. As to "can you do this?" I have been asking myself the same question off and on for some days now. It should not be very difficult to pick out just one peak for analysis during a run, especially if a sample of the isotope to be measured is available for calibration. I recall reading about a magnetometer in the Scientific American Amateur Scientist section many years ago. This used the proton NMR frequency to measure the earth's magnetic field. The protons supplied were in a gallon of water wrapped with 2 purpendicular coils of wire. Of course the frequency was very low with the earth's field only on the order of about a gauss, and water provides its own shielding as well. However proton NMR sensitivity is high, and there was a whole gallon of H2O to work with. The signal should be much stronger using a permanent magnetic field of about .25 T or 2500 gauss. This permits a small sample size and good signal. Suppose you build a sample chamber with the magnetic field going through the chamber left to right. Let's say the sample tube is placed into the sample chamber veritcally, so the portion of the tube to be analyzed is positioned in the chamber, which is about 2 cm on a side. I would wrap the parallel stimulation coils around the top and bottom of the sample chamber ends so that the sample tube goes directly through the two stimulation coils. Front and back would then be receiver coils which are identical to the stimulation coils, but purpendicular to them. The receiver coil would then be run through the equivalent of a radio tuner. The signal would be amplified, and then fed through a frequency control and gain control to a DMM. The frequency control is optional, but may improve the resolution. Next the stimulation or excitation frequency. You want this frequency to be accurately controllable and digitally measured if possible. Many DMM's have digital frequency counters. It should be possible to manually vary the input frequency and measure the output "volume" from the receiver coils. So the basic materials are a variable frequency oscillator, 2 DMM's, one with frequency measuring in the 10 MHz range, some strong magnets, and a good "C" magnetic flux circuit. I have thought about using a milling vice for the flux circuit. This way the flux could be varied and the chamber easily opened, closed, or repositioned with accuracy. Recalibration would have to occur after any such repositioning though. Maybe the biggest problem is getting a clean uniform magnetic field. The more variation in the field strength accross the sample chamber the wider and therefore less distinct the peaks. This should not be too big a problem in that the experiments involve only very simple compounds, so most peaks should be well isolated from their neighbors. Resolution should be at minimum in parts per million, but possibly into the parts per billion range. The resolution is determined in the calibration phase. One big advantage of transmutation experiments is being able to watch a specific peak grow from nothing. It should be fairly easy to get a definitive answer if the answer is yes - transmutations are occuring. As the frequency is varied across a peak current in the stimulation coil should increase and then decrease as the resonant frequency is passed. The current in the receiver coil should be maximum after lingering on the resonant frequency and then dropping the stimulation altogether or sliding the frequency up or down. The delayed current is due to the realxation or "winding down" of the precessing nucleii that occurs when the resonant frequency stimulation dissappears. There are various other methods for NMR. Maybe there are a bunch of good ideas or corrections about all this from vortexians. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 15:36:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA18936; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 15:11:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 15:11:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 18:10:15 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Negative Gravity? Message-ID: <961021221014_76216.2421_HHB64-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"2ShLt1.0.jd4.VK_Qo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1708 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman wrote: > I don't get the grass seed joke -- some kind of junior high > science experiment? > > Anyhow -- A small gyrocsope (or microscopic angular > mometum), which is rotating as apart of a larger gyroscope > (macroscopic angular momentum), will precess until it's > axis is in alignment with the larger rotating body. > > Some examples: > > A freely gimballed gyroscope on the earth's surface will > always precess into alignment with the earth's polar axis. In > free energy schemes, based on using gyroscopes to tap the > kinetic energy of the earth's rotation, this is know as the > "polar alignment problem". There is a patented invention > which claims to beat this problem. But that's another story. > > In the Barnett effect, it is found that spinning a magnetic > material, such as an iron bar, causes the material to develop a > magnetic field, due to alignment of the angular momentum of > the unpaired electrons with the macroscopic spin axis. > > In the inventions of Henry Wallace. The angular momentum of > the spin of unpaired nuclei are aligned with the spin of a > macroscopic disk of material (such as copper or bismuth). > Causing generation and detection of a gravitomagnetic field. > > Ning Li proposes something similar to what Wallace invented, > based on alignment of the angular momentum of the nuclei > (lattice ions) in a rotating superconductor. > > Regards, Robert Stirniman Grass seed refers to the messages recently on either this list or freenrg regarding an experiment which supposedly places a tray of sprouting grass over a rotating turntable (tray not rotating, and allegedly shielded from air current effects). The grass is reported to grow tilted towards the axis of the rotating platform below. Chris Tinsley also mentions Wallace in his article in Infinite Energy V2,#9t. I've noticed the similarities among these things also. It seems from my understanding of it that the gravitational effects in Li's & Torr's theory only arise when there are supercurrents consisting of paired electrons that have lost their net magnetic moment and QM spin due to the pairing, thereby bringing out a non-magnetic effect to counterbalance their still substantial KE. But aren't the currents which give rise to magnetism in solids essentially a multitude of tiny supercurrents? It seems reasonable to me then that the alleged gravitational effects seen above a superconductor would also be detectable above a room temperature material having such currents associated with it under certain conditions. Maybe the cold helps, where the lattice ion's thermal motions are down to low levels which allow any rotational motion to loom large in the equation of the total KE of the ions. Li's focus in the papers is the rotational motion that is theoretically left over at 0T. There might be a way to achieve the effect in room temperature materials too, by inducing larger amplitude rotations of the ions about their neutral center points, large enough to loom large again amidst all the random motion, by means other than simple macroscopic rotation. Rotating EM fields perhaps? Perhaps a bismuth sample in a strong magnetic field, preferably chilled, with an EM field of the proper polarization and orientation rotating or pulsing (especially near the ion acoustic resonance frequency?) might get the lattice ions moving in the right direction. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 17:02:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA06706; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:24:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 19:20:21 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: Negative Gravity? Message-ID: <961021232020_76016.2701_JHC88-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"_RYTI2.0.fe1.vO0Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1709 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Robert Stirniman writes: >>The angular momentum of the spin of unpaired nuclei are aligned with the spin of a macroscopic disk of material (such as copper or bismuth). Causing generation and detection of a gravitomagnetic field.<< Ah, intriguing. Perhaps you can help me with some larger questions? What is the magnitude of the gravitomagnetic field of the Earth? How does the gravitomagnetic field affect normal mass as opposed to the gravitoelectric field? Is not the larger interaction of masses due to a negative gravitoelectric potential? Thanks for your consideration. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 17:13:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA06852; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:25:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:25:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 19:20:15 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: RE: biological transmutation---why no replications? Message-ID: <961021232014_76016.2701_JHC88-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"jaQcc.0.wg1.FP0Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1710 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Henry, >>There was a post a couple of weeks ago to you about replication of Joe Champion's stuff.<< Forgive my ignorance, because I have just joined this list; but, did Champion's experiments relate to laying hens? My home town was once known as the poultry capital of the world. Not a renown for which its inhabitants are particularly proud; however, there is a local folklore which might be of interest. It regarded the strength of eggshells. Fred Haley, owner of an egg farm of high production, became embroiled in an argument with a competitor regarding the benefit of a high calcium diet for his layers. To prove his point, Fred fed one group of his layers a diet totally depleted of that element and compared the strength of those eggs with a group of hens fed the normal diet. Initially, the eggs produced by the deprived fowl were a bit weaker than those from the normal brood; however, after a few weeks, the eggs from the experimental group recovered their strength. The remarkable thing was that, soon thereafter, the experimental eggs developed shells which were ACTUALLY STRONGER than the control group. His opponent conceded the bet but said that his calcium deprived hens would have such fragile bones that they could not walk. Several birds sacrificed their lives in the name of science but a qualitative examination showed no difference in the strength of the birds' bones with the different diets. While not a scientific experiment, it was covered in the local newspaper. BTW, Fred also discovered that feeding his hens marigold petals resulted in yellower yolks, an idea stolen by Frank Perdue. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 17:35:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA21735 for billb@eskimo.com; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:34:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Envelope-From: daved@nimbus.anu.edu.au Mon Oct 21 17:33:56 1996 Received: from nimbus.anu.edu.au (nimbus.anu.edu.au [150.203.126.21]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA21612 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:33:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from daved@localhost) by nimbus.anu.edu.au (8.8.0/8.8.0) id KAA08776 for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:30:57 +1000 (EST) Old-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:30:57 +1000 (EST) From: Dave DAVIES Message-Id: <199610220030.KAA08776@nimbus.anu.edu.au> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no re X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: > > Gary, > > > Then what of a people who developed over centuries in England, > > then moved to New Zealand or Australia? More balanced? > > At the risk of being taken seriously (which should happen very rarely) I > would point out that Australians are regarded as very well-balanced > indeed - by having a chip on each shoulder... Are you fishing for an argument? > > Also worth mentioning is the simple fact that any 'positive' results obtained > from chick embryos or other biological systems will be ignored or laughed off. > Sheesh, even *I* would be hard to convince. > > Chris > > Seriously though:), do you really need a permit to boil an egg down there? My memory of the bio-trans. stuff was that it seemed both poorly conducted and poorly reported. Have to be looked at again though if kitchen table transmutation is possible. Coming out of hibernation its good to see vortex-l still in an upbeat mood. Lots of interesting reports and ideas. If this is millenial fever is sure is a fascinating trip. dave From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 17:53:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA13251; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 16:53:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: 21 Oct 96 19:50:16 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin Message-ID: <961021235015_100060.173_JHB72-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"c33qI3.0.zE3.ap0Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1711 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vortexians, I was saddened to read in today's Daily Telegraph (London) that Tony Griffin has died. He was aged only 75, and had been one of the most highly decorated naval officers in the British Navy. He was not only Controller of the British Navy, but also Third Sea Lord, responsible for the Navy's ships and materiel, and for the whole current structure of our fleet. Quite a guy!! His obit takes up 1/3 of a full sized page, about 20 col. inches, and the penultimate paragraph runs as follows: "Latterly he was much involved in the design of an engine which used water as fuel, converting his garage into a labyrinth of tubes, bubbling vats of water and electric wires. He believed himself to be on the verge of a breakthrough." As you know, Tony Griffin was convinced that Stanley Meyer's pulsed HV electrolysis was genuine, and he spent a great deal of time Stateside with Meyer. What a pity Meyer is such a plonker! Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 18:22:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA18791; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 17:20:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 09:59:20 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no re In-Reply-To: <961021193823_100433.1541_BHG103-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"VHHE92.0.Vb4.tC1Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1712 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 21 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > Gary, > > > Then what of a people who developed over centuries in England, > > then moved to New Zealand or Australia? More balanced? > > At the risk of being taken seriously (which should happen very rarely) I > would point out that Australians are regarded as very well-balanced > indeed - by having a chip on each shoulder... > A typical reaction from a pom to explain why they can't win a cricket match. The other side tries too hard!! :-) Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 20:30:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA17520; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961022024301.006e52bc@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:43:01 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: RE: biological transmutation---why no replications? Resent-Message-ID: <"9oe5F3.0.dH4.NA3Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1713 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 07:20 PM 10/21/96 EDT, you wrote: >bones that they could not walk. Several birds sacrificed their lives in the Hopefully somebody fried them up for dinner so it wasn't a total tragedy. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 21:17:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27731; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 20:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 20:21:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961022033010.006ed854@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 20:30:10 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: The Galtek Motor is Real? Resent-Message-ID: <"rWcIs.0.3n6.ns3Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1715 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:20 PM 10/9/96 -0400, you wrote: >Jeff Jolett of the Az dept of energy sent the police down to Galteck and >accused Russ Chapmann of fraud. Russ didn't like the whole affiar. Jeff is >friends with one of our members Reed Huish. Reed you have been quiet lately. > What is up? Russ Chapmann of Galtek expressed an interest in calling you. > Did he call? What happened? What is the latest from Jeff Jolette? > > >Frank Z > > Talked to Reed Huish on his way through Seattle today. He has been doing a lot of travelling. He was given some trouble by Jeff Jolett himself, on some energy saving installations for grocery stores. He said that Russ's group have decided to concentrate on their usual semiconductor manufacturing, encountered some difficulty from stockholders on their o/u claims. No conclusion on this one yet, but RH will likely shed some light. Gary H ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA *Unless your vote is a tie-breaker between Dole and Clinton, your vote is not wasted on a third party. Vote for Harry Brown, the Libertarian candidate, or the National Tax-Payer's Party candidate.* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 21:45:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA13161; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:25:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326C4D70.5B88@rt66.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:28:32 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy References: <326AFF0B.2C93@skypoint.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"MA_2K1.0.YD3.3p4Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1716 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Wow! Outstanding! Brief! Simple! Why didn't I think of it! Congratulations, and Thanks! Rich Murray From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 21:57:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA16937; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:40:58 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:40:58 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326C50F6.1C22@rt66.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:43:34 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: RMCarrell@aol.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR References: <961021160440_1581660256@emout08.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"M80Cj2.0.Y84.K15Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1717 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Toby Grotz found an operating regime for SiO2 murcury vapor lamps that for the same power input produced three to four times more UV and light, and that rapidly eroded the cathode within a few hours. Toby Grotz wireless@rmii.com From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 22:02:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA21691; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:59:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 21:05:13 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Checks on Miley using NMR Resent-Message-ID: <"LUExb.0.fI5.bI5Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1718 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Toby Grotz found an operating regime for SiO2 murcury vapor lamps that >for the same power input produced three to four times more UV and light, >and that rapidly eroded the cathode within a few hours. > >Toby Grotz >wireless@rmii.com Did he by any chance use a transformer secondary to drive the lamp and put a capacitor in series with the primary of the transformer? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 22:17:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA25235; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326C596E.57AE@skypoint.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 00:19:42 -0500 From: John Logajan Organization: Skypoint Communications, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"DwaBy2.0.DA6.gX5Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1719 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is just a mathematical table of the earlier NAA analysis numbers in my investigation that the sum of the binding energy of the inputs must equal the sum of the binding energy of the outputs in a condition such as Miley's where no significant energy is exchanged with the external environment. The conclusion was that the output distribution points to a limited number of possible inputs, the most obvious fitting candidate being 2H+Ni ==> empirical distribution results + (+/-)very small energy (NAA Results) Atomic Atomic Per Nucleon (* ratio) Ele Ratio A Z Mass Binding Ener Weighted B.E. --- ------ --- --- ---------- ------------ -------------- Al 0.0051 13 27 26.98154 0.999316296 0.005096513 Ag 0.0661 47 107 106.905092 0.999113009 0.06604137 Cr 0.0594 24 52 51.940509 0.998855942 0.059332043 Fe 0.1453 26 56 55.934939 0.998838196 0.14513119 Ni 0.6231 28 58 57.935346 0.998885276 0.622405415 Cu 0.0796 29 63 62.939589 0.999041095 0.079523671 V 0.0001 23 51 50.943962 0.998901216 0.00009989 Co 0.001 27 59 58.933198 0.998867763 0.000998868 Zi 0.0204 30 64 63.929145 0.998892891 0.020377415 H 1 1 1.007825 1.007825 Average non-Ni Binding Energy 0.99920658 Delta Binding Energy (Ni's-other's) -0.000321304 Required protium / Ni nucleon ratio to balance 0.035941162 Required H/Ni atomic ratio 2.084587384 -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-699-9472 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 23:11:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA06264; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:08:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:08:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610220547.WAA28576@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:07:44 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Miley's paper, To be glass beads or Resent-Message-ID: <"MPrL9.0.kX1.NJ6Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1720 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 04:16 PM 10/19/96 EDT, you wrote: > > When I spoke with Miley this summer, he said he still saw > > transmutations with other substrates and that they were diffferent > > with different substrates. Assuming he correctly ruled out > > contaminants embedded in the substrate, this might indicate that > > the effect is triggered at the junction of dissimilar materials. > >It might be worth mentioning that the Kucherov/Savvatimova >glow-discharge CF reports suggest that new elements might be formed at >the grain boundaries of the host metal. > >Chris > > about where you would expect ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 23:20:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA09086; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:17:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326C682B.2D1E@pacbell.net> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 23:22:35 -0700 From: Hank Scudder Reply-To: hjscudde@pacbell.net Organization: Rocketdyne X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no replications? References: <961021232014_76016.2701_JHC88-1@CompuServe.COM> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"xrzLD2.0.uD2.-R6Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1721 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Terry Blanton wrote: > > Henry, > > >>There was a post a couple of weeks ago to you about > replication of Joe Champion's stuff.<< > > Forgive my ignorance, because I have just joined this list; but, did Champion's > experiments relate to laying hens? Joe Champion may have laid an egg, but he is secretive and flaky enough that nobody knows whether it is golden or not. His communications were about transmutations, and methods to create them. He published at least one how-to book, and several notes on his homepages which involved high enough energy reactions, such as adding Na to liquid Pb, that I stayed away from them since I live in a city, with very close neighbors. Several Vortexans have pursued some of his ideas, but very little has been written about their results. Joe sent Jed Rothwell some samples, which Jed had tested, with some strange results, and more testing was to be done, but I haven't seen these results on Vortex yet. Joe invited a number of Vortexans (including me) to see his process work in August at a mine in California, but as far as I know the demo didn't come off. In my message to Barry, I was responding to his suggestion about why people had not tested the biological transmutations idea. I also asked Barry if he had tested any of Joe's ideas, which might better have been done in a separate communication. Anyhow, I stand perplexed in LA at this point about whether Joe's ideas work. Its probably better then being sleepless in Seattle, but our fires sure could use some of their rain. I can see the glow from them out my windows. The Malibu fire is about five miles away, downwind thank goodness. Hank Scudder From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 21 23:42:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA20706; Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961022025747.006830f4@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 19:57:47 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Exam of some claims Cc: eric@voicenet.com Resent-Message-ID: <"qU18t1.0.L35.GO3Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1714 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Someone asks that his page about the claims of Dennis Lee be mentioned here, for anyone interested: http://www.voicenet.com/~eric/dennis.html From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 02:40:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA12823; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 02:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 02:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 05:36:46 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022093645_100433.1541_BHG47-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"4j3Xa2.0.D83.lO9Ro"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1722 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A I'm dragging up this hoary old problem once more: It is stated in various textbooks (and by Robert Stirniman here) that a cylindrical homopolar generator will work; in other words if you have a radial field and a cylindrical conductor then the emf developed between two brushes an axial distance 'd' apart will be V = B*d*omega*r this being topologically equivalent to a disk with an axial field. On investigation the disk configuration appears to behave exactly as predicted, but the cylindrical one just does not. All that is ever seen is a small end effect. This fits one model of the homopolar effect, which is that the driving effect is the relative motion of the fixed and moving circuits, and the fact that there is a discrepancy between the flux passing *through* one as against the other. This can be seen in a different version of the cylindrical homopolar generator, where two cylindrical high-field magnets are placed in a tube with like poles forced together. In that configuration, when the cylinder is spun axially, quite a high emf is produced from two probes placed either side of the join. As I see it, the point in this case is that the two brushes cut the field as it curves back axially from the join. In other words, an 'end' effect. No such axial field cuts the brushes to the long radial-field cylinder. In fact, in the like-pole variant, the emf developed can readily be changed simply by altering the angle at which the brush leads address the cylinder - just as one would expect from this simple model. Further, in my view these experiments suggest that the notion that emf can be produced by *translation* within an invariant field is false, and that a *rotation* of an *axial* field is required. In other words, the long cylinder is not the topological equivalent of a disk, but the topological equivalent of a flat plate of infinite length. An axial field is available from the like-pole variant, but is available only at the ends of a long cylinder. In support of my contention that this effect is one which has been promoted by textbooks from previous textbooks with no actual experiment having been done, I would point out that a high-voltage homopolar generator would be very valuable and the cylindrical variant would be the ideal way of producing one - yet such devices do not (to my knowledge) exist. At the risk of appearing tiresome, I keep coming back to this basic point. The homopolar effect appears to be poorly understood, yet it seem to me the most basic of electromagnetic phenomena. It dates to the experiments of Faraday in the early 1830s. Comments, anyone? Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 03:52:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA20338; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 03:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 03:51:03 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 06:49:13 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022104913_100433.1541_BHG71-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"U9Tqv3.0.iz4.LSARo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1723 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: As an addendum to my previous post, I should point out that every way I look at this makes problems. I said that a long-cylinder homopolar generator with radial field was really topologically equivalent to an infinite surface (implying a field normal to its surface). But that seems to introduce a problem too. In that case the rest of the circuit includes the link between the probes - the meter or whatever. That part of the circuit is indeed cutting the field as the surface moves beneath it, just as the two probes to the like-poles 'short' cylinder generator cut the axial field. All of that seems to show that the field must indeed be axial rather than radial - which seems a bit nasty to me. One way around the problem would, I think, be to point out that in a radial field the actual 'quantity of flux' cut by the conductor moving through an invariant field varies with radius. That would mean that it would be possible to construct a Faraday disk which gave null results by having a field which varied in inverse ratio to its radius - and possible to have a 'long cylinder' which gave the effect because its field varied along its length. But I think not. It never seems to matter how much the field varies radially in a disk generator - my own experiments used an annular magnet and the emf always appeared to be proportional to the total quantity of flux cut by the conductor, and not in any way to the variations with radius of the field strength. So, my tentative conclusion remains the same. It is the *quantity of radial flux cut by a conductor per unit time* which determines the emf. So the emf varies with B and omega*(r2-r1). How is it that we can remain confused by all this after 165 years? Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 04:27:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA24605; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:26:23 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:26:23 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 07:23:54 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022112353_100433.1541_BHG95-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"NNQUm3.0.J06.UzARo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1724 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: My apologies to all for clogging the bandwidth. I wrote: "So, my tentative conclusion remains the same. It is the *quantity of radial flux cut by a conductor per unit time* which determines the emf." I meant axial flux. Sorry 'bout that. I'm still hopelessly confused. Why should cutting radial flux (or flux which is normal to a surface) be different from cutting axial flux in a rotary manner? Think about it. In *both cases* we have a surface (imagine it horizontal) with vertical flux emerging from it. In one case we rotate horizontally a horizontal wire around one of its end - and see an emf. In the other, we simply pull it along the surface - nothing. I thought the answer had to be that in the former case the external circuit is not moving, while in the latter it had to move with the wire. Except that the system should have some symmetry, and in both cases one conductor is moving relative to the other. And it seems to make no difference whether or not the field through the fixed circuit is weaker (as must be the case in a 'long cylinder'). The question of what difference there is between a fixed and moving magnet seems to me quite irrelevant, since in either case the actual flux density remains constant. Either the effect is due solely to rotation within a field, or it is due to the interaction between the fixed and moving conductors. And there IS such relative motion between the fixed and moving conductors in the case of the 'long' cylinder, yet that gives no effect. I admit to being confused still. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 04:59:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA29386; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 04:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 07:51:02 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Meyer Message-ID: <961022115102_100060.173_JHB72-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"nTY3X1.0.3B7.JMBRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1725 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Could you elucidate "plonker". (english is not my first language) What brings you to this opinion about Meyer ? << A plonker is a euphemism for one who is full of piss and wind and who can only find fulfillment in their own company. In other words talks much and achieves little. This opinion is derived from my own experience and that of others who have tried either to validate Meyer's claims or work with him directly. Those with whom I have had direct contact, and who have paid Meyer top $$$ for his designs have been left in mid-air without a working product. Tony Griffin actually believed Meyer and spent a great deal of time and cash trying to sell his designs to the British Government and other commercial organisations. Tony's motivation was entirely environmental improvement and the technological advancement of the British Navy. He had no financial involvement in any of the projects. I was amazed at his confidence in Meyer, knowing what he did about the character and attitude of the man. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 07:28:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA26575; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 07:12:28 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 07:12:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 06:17:00 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"e8diP3.0.7V6.7PDRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1726 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] I would point out that a high-voltage homopolar >generator would be very valuable and the cylindrical variant would be >the ideal way of producing one - yet such devices do not (to my >knowledge) exist. > [snip] > >Comments, anyone? > >Chris Why would a HV HPG be very valuable? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 08:57:14 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA23173; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 08:54:37 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"3OmN3.0.zf5.rtERo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1727 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris T. wrote: > >This can be seen in a different version of the cylindrical homopolar >generator, where two cylindrical high-field magnets are placed in a tube >with like poles forced together. In that configuration, when the >cylinder is spun axially, quite a high emf is produced from two probes >placed either side of the join. This is what Faraday's equation predicts. I don't know what you meant by "a DIFFERENT version of the cylindrical homopolar generator," since what you go on to describe sounds to me like THE cylindrical homopolar generator. The cylindrical rotor must be short enough that the radial magnetic field direction does not change sign near the ends, or you will begin to induce a canceling component of the EMF. If your machine has radial field penetrating the cylinder in one direction at one end and in the opposite direction at the other end, then the total EMF will be zero. Stated more succinctly, the axial EMF is proportional to the radial FLUX penetrating the moving cylinder. >.....In fact, in the like-pole >variant, the emf developed can readily be changed simply by altering >the angle at which the brush leads address the cylinder..... Now this is puzzling (to me). I don't understand why the EMF should depend on the ANGLE of the brush leads. >In support of my contention that this effect is one which has been >promoted by textbooks from previous textbooks with no actual experiment >having been done, I would point out that a high-voltage homopolar >generator would be very valuable and the cylindrical variant would be >the ideal way of producing one - yet such devices do not (to my >knowledge) exist. Actually, given the usual laws, the limitations on EMF from an axial HP are practical ones. The EMF is proportional to (a) the rotor peripheral speed and (b) the total radial FLUX penetrating the rotor (not to length). Peripheral speed is limited by strength of materials. Radial flux is limited by saturation of iron; because, since magnetic flux is conserved (unless someone discoverers an isolated magnetic charge), the radial flux must have entered a central axial iron core through the ends, and the maximum flux that can so enter is given by the the cross section area of that core times its saturation flux. The numbers nature deals us are such that you don't get "high" voltage. >.....It never seems to matter how much the field varies >radially in a disk generator - my own experiments used an annular magnet >and the emf always appeared to be proportional to the total quantity of >flux cut by the conductor, and not in any way to the variations with >radius of the field strength. This is as predicted by Faraday's equation. It's the total FLUX. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 10:39:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA18235; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:24:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 12:55:41 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022165541_100433.1541_BHG126-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Z4Fnm3.0.qS4.SDGRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1729 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael, > This can be seen in a different version of the cylindrical > homopolar generator, where two cylindrical high-field magnets are > placed in a tube with like poles forced together. In that > configuration, when the cylinder is spun axially, quite a high > emf is produced from two probes placed either side of the join. > > This is what Faraday's equation predicts. Yup, just what you'd expect - but not the point I was trying to make. > I don't know what you meant by "a DIFFERENT version of the > cylindrical homopolar generator," since what you go on to describe > sounds to me like THE cylindrical homopolar generator. The > cylindrical rotor must be short enough that the radial magnetic > field direction does not change sign near the ends, or you will > begin to induce a canceling component of the EMF. Wait a minute - perhaps I should describe the two variants more carefully. In the "short, like poles" one, then both brushes touch the outer surface of the conducting tube with the two magnets inside. Naturally, the angle and the exact position determine the emf you get. The "long" version is like this, and is described in the textbooks (well, at least some of them). It has a radial field emerging normal to the surface (a bit like the one passing through the drive coil of a cone loudspeaker). According to the textbooks, the emf between two brushes placed at different points along the surface of the cylinder will be a function of B, r, omega and the brush separation distance - in other words, like the disk its V is a function of swept area and field strength. Except it isn't, unless my experimental technique is badly off. I agree about the limitations of emf available from a disk. But if the "long cylinder" variant did work, there would be a much higher limit. Yes, of course the total flux cut per unit time determines the emf. My problem is to do with the apparent difference between rotation and translation, and also why the textbooks quote an (an apparently) wrong result. Chris (not explaining things very well today) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 10:57:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA23882; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 10:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 13:47:13 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022174713_100060.173_JHB78-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"5afad.0.3r5.kaGRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1730 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris me boy, >> Either the effect is due solely to rotation within a field, or it is due to the interaction between the fixed and moving conductors. And there IS such relative motion between the fixed and moving conductors in the case of the 'long' cylinder, yet that gives no effect. I admit to being confused still. << I think I can deconfuse you here. The measurement points for the disc system voltage are at the centre of the rotating axis and the periphery; for the cylinder they are at either end of the cylinder. The relative velocity between the disc points is proportional to the rad. and for the cylinder is zero, they both being at the same rad. Ergo you will see no emf from the cylinder unless you have one of the contact points at a different radius from the other. The end effect probably comes from the wall thickness of the cylinder. Am I right or am I right? Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 12:13:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA08301; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:48:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 14:42:44 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022184244_100433.1541_BHG124-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"wz1061.0.c12.VRHRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1731 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman, > The relative velocity between the disc points is proportional to > the rad. and for the cylinder is zero, they both being at the same > rad. Ergo you will see no emf from the cylinder unless you have > one of the contact points at a different radius from the other. Yes, that's what happens. But why? And why does it say otherwise in (at least some of) the books? Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 13:38:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA00605; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 13:16:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 16:11:05 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022201105_100060.173_JHB122-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"hNMQq2.0.G9.MkIRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1732 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris, >> Yes, that's what happens. But why? << I reckon its because the emf is proportional to the change in rate of cutting of the flux, and this is zero or very near for the cylinder, and 0 to R for the disc. This is the only difference in em analogy between the two constructs. BTW I've written to Tony Griffin's wife offering condolences and help if they need it with his experiments. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 15:09:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA23343; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:56:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <961022093645_100433.1541_BHG47-1@CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:55:37 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"GUtq82.0.Si5.xBKRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1734 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In Chris Tinsley's experiment, > in other words if you have a radial field >and a cylindrical conductor then the emf developed between two brushes >an axial distance 'd' apart will be > >V = B*d*omega*r > >this being topologically equivalent to a disk with an axial field. > >On investigation the disk configuration appears to behave exactly as >predicted, but the cylindrical one just does not. All that is ever seen >is a small end effect. The voltage given in the equation should show up. The problem is most likely that the radial B is too small. Since the divergence of the magnetic field is zero the magnetic flux out of the cylinder must equal the flux going into the cylinder end or: 2 Pi r L B(radial) = Pi r*r B(end) or B(radial) = B(end) * r/(2*L) with L the length of the cylindrical magnet. Moreover, There would not be much magnetic flux coming out of the annular magnet that was used unless the magnetization was gradually reduced along the axial length of the magnet. That is most likely not the case and most of the flux is probably coming out of the end of the annular magnet. This just looks like a too small radial B field problem. Try measuring the field. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 22 20:55:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27199; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:48:18 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: fm: ben Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"9T8q71.0.re6.EMPRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1740 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:53:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Postmaster To: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro Cc: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Repeat Date: 21 Oct 1996 From: Ben Filimonov To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: RAW DATA YUSMAR TEST Greetings to all, 12 Oct 11:15:49 Frank Znidarsic wrote: > YUSMAR TEST WITH MAGNETITE ADDITION OCTOBER 96 > > >Time Temp In Temp Out Flow Power In Power Out COP >(Min) (F) (F) (GPM) (KW) (KW) >________________________________________________________________ >0 60 60 0.78 4.8 0.00 0 >15 60 78 0.76 4.8 2.00 0.42 >30 60 89 0.77 4.6 3.26 0.71 >45 60 96 0.735 4.6 3.86 0.84 >60 60 101 0.75 4.5 4.49 1.00 >75 60 102 0.735 4.7 4.51 0.96 >90 60 103 0.76 4.6 4.77 1.04 >105 60 104 0.75 4.7 4.82 1.03 >120 60 104 0.74 4.7 4.75 1.01 > Frank, where I can see the scheme of your Yusmar test experiment? . By any way, what figures of columns 2,3 and 4 of your table mean? It's likely that they mean water temperatures at HEAT EXCHANGER In-Out and water flow thru the same? IF SO, column 6 Power Out is for the heat released from Yusmar with heat exchanger but the heat stored in Yusmar loop isn't figured here. So the run duration is only two hours and final water temperature is only 40 degs. Celsius, enthalpy of loop water may not be neglected, and it must be added to the heat released. May be, it would yield o/u energy, may be, not. It seems to me that the most suitable method for short Yusmar runs heat measurement is that used by Japanese Field Co, i.e. using no heat exchangers at all and measuring no water flows, only measuring loop water temperature: being aware of the loop inner volume, one can calculate Power out easily. BTW, the most frequently posed objection to Hydro Heat Generators (HHG, home-made term for Yusmar, its produced-in-Belarus version Yurle, and Griggs's Hydrosonic Pump) o/u operation data is the fact that `one can't measure turbulent liquid-vapor-gas flow correctly'. Using heat exchanger, one can eliminate that problem but creates the new one, namely, non-counting stored heat. So, please inform me of your Yusmar loop inner volume (or water quantity in it), and additionally the same for its parts: Yusmar chamber and tube, Yus.-to-heat-exchanger forward tubing, heat exchanger proper, and heat-ex.- to-Yus. backward tubing including pump - for correcting your Power Out data. I mean, one wouldn't be mistaken attributing Temp Out temperature values for Yus. tube and Y-to-HE tubing, Temp In for HE-to-Y tubing including pump, and mean temperature to Yus. camera and HE (though temperature field in Yusmar tube DIFFERS from this simplified pattern). BTW, Frank, why magnetite addition?? Regards, Ben Dr. Veniamin Filimonov 14 Leningrad Street Institute of Physical-Chemical Problems Belarus State University Minsk 220080 Belarus Phone: 375-0172-207681, Fax: 375-0172-264696 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 00:12:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA11986; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 00:10:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 21:25:40 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders In-Reply-To: <961022093645_100433.1541_BHG47-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"k6l7Z.0.Cx2.gJSRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1741 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 22 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > I'm dragging up this hoary old problem once more: It is stated in > various textbooks (and by Robert Stirniman here) that a cylindrical > homopolar generator will work; in other words if you have a radial field > and a cylindrical conductor then the emf developed between two brushes > an axial distance 'd' apart will be Chris, how is your first magnet magnetized? I mean the one in the "problem" configuration? I understand that the second version has two short cylinder magnets with like-poles glued together, which gives an S-N-S (or the opposite) composite magnet. When you say "radial field" and "annular magnet" I imagine a hollow cylinder magnet that has been magnetized with an N pole all over its curved outer surface, and S pole all over the inner surface, with the result that the outer surface is N and the two (hollow) end faces act like S poles. With the result that again you have an S-N-S magnet. If OTOH you are using a stack of axially-magnetized cylinders, so that the resulting magnet has an N pole on one flat end face and an S pole on the other, then the resulting HPG should in theory have *no* voltage because the radial fields from the N and the S which penetrate the cylinder will give cancelling voltage when the the brushes are placed at opposite ends of the cylinder. And if you place your brushes near each other and near the end of the cylinder (so that some radial field from just that pole is "gathered" between the brushes) then you would see a voltage appear. And if you placed the same two brushes in the same orientation but at the other end of the cylinder, you'd get about the same voltage, but opposite polarity. And if you keep the brushes at one close spacing while sliding both of them from one end of the spinning cylinder to the other, youd get a max voltage at one end, zero volts for most of the central region, then a negative max voltage at the other end. Isn't the cylindrical HPG topologically the same as the disk only when the cylinder is short and the magnet is long, so that one magnet pole can be placed within the cylinder, while the other is far away? Or it's the same when the magnet is long and is magnetized S-N-S, so the central N pole can be placed within the short cylinder and the two S poles can be at a distance? You want to have only *one* pole within the cylinder, so that only one direction of radial flux lines penetrate the cylinder surface. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 00:34:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA03388; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:28:16 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 17:28:16 -0700 (PDT) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:09:32 -0400 Message-ID: <961022200931_1912746085@emout20.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no replications? Resent-Message-ID: <"SnXsn1.0.lq.DQMRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1736 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene Mallove tole me that there was a paper by a Russian scientist at the Japanese CF conference on biological transmutation in bacterial cultures. He may try to get permission to publish the paper in IE. Perhaps low energy transmutation is not in fact uncommon, we just haven't been looking for it and the prevailing paradigms forbid it, so every separate indication is denied. There ***must*** be a mistake... Familiar scenario? Mike Carrell From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 01:48:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA12145; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 16:05:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 19:01:07 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961022230107_100433.1541_BHG57-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"lRD_Y.0.gz2.oCLRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1735 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Lawrence, I have to leave this for a day, I won't be online again until late tomorrow. > This just looks like a too small radial B field problem. Try > measuring the field. No. The device used was a cylinder co-rotating with its magnets, which were NIB plates plating the whole inside of the cylinder, all like poles outward. Nix, nothing at all, except for the end effects. Either the books are wrong, or I am. If I'm wrong, how come nobody makes cylindrical generators like the ones in the textbooks? (I'm not talking about the two-magnets-pushed-together, I mean a constant radial field along a considerable length of cylinder.) I made a small one, Norman Horwood made a nice big machined one - neither of them did anything. Certainly no "emf proportional to axial distance between brushes at a given (high) speed" like the books say will be there. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 02:47:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA26048; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:43:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:43:32 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Forwarded mail.... Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"P79TW1.0.tM6.vHPRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1737 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:52:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Postmaster To: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Cc: vortex_l@eskimo.com From: Ben Filimonov To: Vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: 10 beats 20! + Line testing Hello, Vortexans: One more message sunk in FSU electronic vortexes. At 3 October Ben Filimonov wrote: Mark Hugo wrote: A comment on the "autoradiographs". The claim was made some time ago that these were due to exposure to hydrogen "reducing" the silver in the films, and that this hydrogen can penetrate the plastic covering that exist(ed) on some of the films. Dr. Oriani was concerned about this too, so he took a small pressure vessel, some dental Xray film, and a tank of H2. I think he went to 2 atm if I recall....Nul result, no effect even after several days exposure. Thus I'd say this arguement against the "auto-radiographs" is specious at best... MDH Mark, there are hydrogen and `hydrogen'. Gaseous H2 can't reduce Ag but `hydrogen' reloaded from H-absorbing metal is `active' one containing both atomic hydrogen H and excited H2* molecules. This matter does can reduce silver and can diffuse up to tens centimeters in air before relaxation/ molarization (H, H2* -> H2). The same for `hydrogen' from electrolysis using cathodes non absorbing hydrogen. What about penetration through plastic films/coverings, I don't know certainly, but it may be the same as in air with accounting a factor of 10^-3, i.e. some shares of millimeter. Ben> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 03:47:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA27029; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:47:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 20:47:37 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Repeat (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ektAZ2.0.Cc6.cLPRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1739 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 12:53:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Postmaster To: peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro Cc: vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subject: Repeat From: Ben Filimonov To: Peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro Cc: Vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: David Doty please help + Line testing Dear Peter, dear Vortexans, Approx. 3 weeks ago I wrote: Greetings to all, Frank Znidarsic wrote: As you may be aware I am working with the distinguished Russian scientist Yuri Potapov. We are attempting to prove to the world that his Yusmar cavitation system does produce energy by a process of cold fusion. This recalls me one Russian anecdote, and I share it with you. Its main person is Russan famous schoolboy Vovochka [->Vova ->Volodya ->Vladimir]. Once at a lesson a teacher [young woman Maria Ivanovna] asks pupils: - Children, what will be your professions, when you'll be adults? - A fireman.. a cosmonaut [astronaut].. an actress.. and so on. - And you, Vovochka..? - I'll be a sxopatologist. - Wow! Do you understand anything in that matter? - Of cource. For instance, M.I., look through the window. Whom do you see? - There are three young women at the street eating an eskimo [!] icecream. - More detailed, please. - Well, one of them licks it, other sucks, and third bites. - M.I., for your mind, which one of them is married? - Mmm, I think, the third one. - No, M.I.! That one who has a wedding ring on her left [right in original version] hand. But.. being a future sxopatologist, I like the way you think. Being a cold-fusioneer, I don't consider Yusmar as CF device. But, Frank.. I like the way you think. Of cource, *apriori* approaches are useful for such a matter as New Energy devices, so namely they determine what to be looked for. But, before quessing CF, or ZPE (sorry, Hal), or UQT (sorry, Lev [Sapogin]), let's try something more simple. The null hypothesis: is o/u in Yusmar a real sign of excess energy generation or rather of latent stored one? A reason for thinking so is the fact that maximal Yusmar COPs were observed at the beginning of experiment and then they tend asymptotically to unit value. Oct. 21 correction: the latter seems to be correct if one counts ALL the heat - both released and stored in Yusmar loop water (see Re: Raw Data Yusmar Test of Oct. 21) and, of course, if one DOES obtain o/u data. Another one: isn't Yusmar some sort of heat pump tapping heat from environment? This model also needs occurence of heat-to-latent-form-energy conversion and vice versa, similar to 0-case. Oct. 21 addition: Yusmar seemingly doesn't contain formal signs of heat pump, namely phase transitions (of vaporization-condensation types) with heat effect absorption-release occuring during working circle. SEEMINGLY and FORMAL. But in reality it deals with breaking hydrogen bonding water structure after vortex forming and restructuring of the same after laminarization (?) of flow, those are in fact phase transtions of melting-crystallization types with heat of such melting transferred from clear to latent form and vice versa.. These models have certain sequels which can be easily checked and certain though limited resource of improving - I mean up to the thermodynamic `COP' value of heat pump which is well o/u. They surely don't discredit Yusmar but provide certain reference points - what to be looked for. Some more complex cases also propose clear criteria for experimenter. For instance: Lev Sapogin's UQT requires a liquid containing more free protons than water. So, let's try with sulfuric acid [a joke again, and bad one]? This case is good one, so it isn't necessary to check it - it had been already done. It's known that water based organic substances solutions (antifreeze) and even non-water organic liquids containing immensely less free protons than water also work. Ben> And I wonder - was that message lost due to known unusual behavior of electrons at the Eastern Europe (Peter, you are well aware of it), or filtered by Russ. FSK (to avoid it, this time I hide some `key terms') or unselected by Vortex-L software? The latter means: may be those jokes are unappropriate at such a respected scientific forum? If so, I beg your pardon: "Making science, one shouldn't be ferally serious" - N.V.Timofeev-Ressovsky. (Peter, I've broken my poor brain trying to translate the phrase to English and to conserve nuances. In Russian it was as follows: "Nauku nuzhno delat' bez zverinoy ser'yeznosti" - note that `feral seriousness' relates to man making science, not to science itself). Regards, Ben From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 04:41:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA16077; Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 14:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: 22 Oct 96 17:01:04 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: BlindCopyReceiver:; Subject: Critique of the NHE Experiments Message-ID: <961022210103_72240.1256_EHB39-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"XH-TE.0.6x3.FoJRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1733 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: >INTERNET:asami@nhelab.iae.or.jp; Kazuaki Matsui >INTERNET:mac@iae.or.jp; Elliot Kennel >INTERNET:kennel@nhelab.iae.or.jp; Hideo Ikegami >INTERNET:ikegami@nifsbbs.nifs.ac.jp; Tadahiko Mizuno >INTERNET:mizuno@athena.hune.hokudai.ac.jp; Makoto Okamoto >INTERNET:mokamoto@nr.titech.ac.jp; Scott Chubb >INTERNET:chubb@ecf.nrl.navy.mil; Michael McKubre >INTERNET:mike_mckbure@qm.sri.com; Vortex; Arthur; Gene; Chris Dear Correspondent, Attached is a preliminary draft of an Open Letter about the NHE program that I intend to publish in the next issue of Infinite Energy magazine, in English and Japanese. I realize that the tone of this letter is somewhat severe and blunt, but I want to make sure the message gets through. Concern for sensibilities must be are overridden by a crisis that could destroy the field of cold fusion and terminate the last major source of funding. I am circulating this draft to Ikegami, Pons and Fleischmann, Storms, Mallove and other leading scientists in this field. If anyone has corrections or comments, please e-mail them to me by the end of November. If you disagree with my analysis and you wish to publish a rebuttal in the magazine, to be printed along with this Open Letter, please submit it by that time. - Jed Rothwell ------------------------------------------- Critique Of NHE Experiments An Open Letter to The NHE Lab Directorate by Jed Rothwell Over the last three years I have felt a growing sense of unease about the NHE cold fusion program. At ICCF6, during the visit to the NHE lab, and in conversations with Pons, Fleischmann, Kennel, Asami and others, I found my worst fears have been justified. The program has great promise, but in execution it is deeply flawed. Let me be blunt, and let me make some strong statements and recommendations. In my opinion, the equipment at the NHE lab is splendid, the attitude of the researchers is laudable, but the experiments are an unmitigated disaster. I feel that you are making many fundamental mistakes. Fleischmann agreed with me. Your researchers are ignoring techniques described in papers by Ikegami, Storms, Fleischmann, Celani and other leading researchers. After hearing the presentations, meeting with your people, and discussing this work, my impression is that they are ignoring the literature. In the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Ikegami [1] spelled out four essential conditions to achieving the cold fusion effect: high current density, high loading, a cathode temperature over 80 deg C, and proper surface preparation. Celani adds a fifth essential: non-equilibrium triggering conditions. (Storms disagrees, but most other experts say a trigger is needed.) Storms [2] and Cravens [3] describe essential characteristics of the palladium, and methods of testing it. I believe you have met the first two conditions listed by Ikegami and ignored all the others. As McKubre pointed out in his closing remarks, an SRI-style flow calorimeter is designed to ensure maximum equilibrium, unchanging temperatures, and a cool cathode. I have been saying for a long time that if you deliberately set out to design an instrument to prevent the CF effect, you could not come up with a better one. I do not understand why it has taken McKubre so many years to realize what others have been saying all along. In addition to the fundamental errors described in the literature, experts at the conference made specific criticisms of the materials and techniques. For example, Fleischmann told me that glassware is much better than Teflon for these long duration experiments. I think it is likely your funding will be cut to zero in a few years. Frankly, if I was in charge of the project, I would cut it to zero now, and I would allocate the money to other groups that have achieved significant results. I believe you face a crisis, and in such times I follow the advice of the Duke of Albany in the closing lines of King Lear: The weight of this sad time we must obey, Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say. Not only have you ignored the literature, but you have concentrated exclusively on bulk palladium with heavy water, ignoring the easier, better alternatives. You have limited yourselves to the most difficult and unpromising materials and techniques. This is a recipe for disaster. Instead of using the materials that nearly always work, like thin film nickel or gold, or materials that often work, like high-temperature proton conductors, you persist in trying to use bulk palladium at low temperatures, which only worked a few times at SRI years ago, in experiments that even SRI cannot now replicate. When researchers repeat a difficult experiment many times over a period of months with no success because there is no alternative, that is laudable, dogged persistence. That kind of heroic dedication and hard work is essential to scientific progress. But when they repeat that same experiment for years without success, ignoring better techniques and disregarding papers by leading scientists describing their mistakes, that is misguided. It shows an inability or unwillingness to learn from experience, and from other scientists. It is a tragic waste of talent. It is folly. The NHE lab is considered the flagship of cold fusion. It has the best equipment and some of the finest, most dedicated and skillful workers. You have the opportunity to make scientific history. You should not squander such talent and resources on unproductive, dead-end experiments. I urge you to open your eyes to some of the well-established, replicated alternatives before it is too late. You should start with a 20-minute taxi trip over to the University of Hokkaido. The experiments being performed there by Mizuno, Ohmori, Enyo et al. are the best in Japan, and among the best in the world. They get consistent results at high signal to noise ratios. They observe dramatic, massive transmutations that produce unnatural isotopic ratios and other indisputable proof of nuclear reactions. This proof is more convincing than the mainstream neutrons, x-rays or tritium results, because the effects are large and easy to detect, non-transient, and cumulative. The longer the reaction runs, the more metal is transmuted. Mizuno's proton conductors [4] have confirmed by Oriani, [5] who is one of the best electrochemists in the world. Enyo and Mizuno's palladium transmutation results have been confirmed by Minevski & Bockris [6]. Ohmori's [7] gold results have been confirmed by Swartz [8]. Ohmori has repeated his experiment more than 50 times, demonstrating massive excess heat and transmutations in every run. He inputs 0.1 watts. After a 3 to 5-day incubation period, he observes between 0.4 and 1.0 watts output, producing a 4 deg C Delta T temperature in his isoperibolic calorimeter. The reaction generates transmuted material at levels 100 times higher than contamination from all sources in the cell, including material with highly unnatural isotopic distribution. I think it is best to replicate experiments done by people close by, who can assist you on a day to day basis. But you might also consider testing CETI style beads fabricated by the University of Illinois, if that can be arranged. Miley [9] reported that up to 40% of the nickel in these beads is transmuted into other metals. You should not attempt to fabricate the beads yourself until you have gained experience using them and you are sure they work with your equipment. You will experience significant problems with things like conductivity and cleanliness, so you should start with beads you know will work when everything else is right. It will take humility and honesty for you to admit it, but you must realize that the Hokkaido University researchers run rings around you. You have much to learn from them. They have been doing cold fusion since 1989. They know far more about electrochemistry than you do. They have degrees in electrochemistry and they have been working on similar experiments for decades, whereas I do not think you have any full-time Ph.D. electrochemists in the NHE lab. You appear to be modeling your work on SRI's program, yet Hokkaido University's results are far superior to anything SRI has ever achieved. I cannot understand why you ignore such splendid work in your own back yard while you attempt to replicate experiments by people who having difficulty replicating that work themselves. I do not think that you or anyone else can suggest a valid reason to doubt the Hokkaido University results. Their calorimeters are not as sophisticated as those of SRI, but they are simpler and more reliable, and the excess heat is 30 times larger than SRI's relative to input, so it is easier to detect with confidence. Again I must urge you to spend some time in the labs at Hokkaido University observing the experiments and learning the techniques from people who have spent their careers doing electrochemistry. You cannot master a highly technical skill by any other means. I have never heard of anyone gaining a Ph.D. level of understanding of electrochemistry by reading textbooks and scientific papers alone. (And for that matter, let me repeat the hard truth: your people are ignoring many of the key scientific papers.) I urge you to get a fully made-up, prepared cell from Ohmori, bring it back to your lab, and test it with your own instruments. Do not attempt to make one yourself at first. After you have verified and mastered a cell made up by an expert, then it will be time to try to make one yourself. I discussed this work in detail with Ohmori and Mizuno, while I was translating their papers into English. The experiment is much harder than it looks. A step-by-step learning process is essential. I have successfully completed several technical R&D projects during my 20-year career. I always did it by starting at the beginning, admitting my ignorance, going step-by-step, and learning from experts. I never expected to get things right without help. You must take advantage of every opportunity to make the job easier and to improve the likelihood of success. You have seen dramatic examples of what can go wrong in your own lab with the Pons and Fleischmann boil-off experiment. Even with some direct, hands-on help from Stan Pons, you were not able to replicate this in 20 attempts. Both SRI [10] and the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEREM) [11] were able to replicate this experiment. Why did they succeed where you failed? I believe it is because: 1. McKubre is an experienced electrochemist; 2. Lonchampt et al. got more direct, hands-on assistance from Pons and Fleischmann over a longer period of time than you did; 3. Lonchampt insisted on doing a rigorous precise, engineering-style replication, down to the last wire. He is an engineer. He works the way an engineer would set up a semiconductor production line: he does everything exactly according to the book, making no attempt to be "creative" or to change anything. He knows that you must master the subject first, then add your own contribution to the field. I saw several gross differences between your boil-off cell and Pons and Fleischmann's, starting with the fact that theirs was half-silvered. I have no idea which differences in the hardware or protocol caused your cell to fail, but since the experiment has now been independently replicated twice, it must be your mistake, not Pons and Fleischmann's. If you had gotten more help, and if you had replicated the experiment with exactly the same glassware and wires, or better yet, if you had practiced with a cell and cathode that had worked repeatedly in France, then your boil-off experiment would have worked as well as CEREM's did. You could have built on that lesson. You might go back and do so now, but it would be better to start with an easier, more reliable experiment like Ohmori's. Footnotes [1] H. Ikegami, "The Next Steps in Cold Fusion," Oyou Butsuri, Vol 62, No. 7, July 1993, p. 717 [2] E. Storms, "How to Produce the Pons-Fleischmann Effect," Fusion Technology, March 1996. [3] D. Cravens, "Factors Affecting the Success Rate of Heat Generation in CF Cells," ICCF4. Voted Best Paper in Conference by Fleischmann [4] T. Mizuno, "Formation of 197Pt Radioisotopes In Solid State Electrolyte Treated by High Temperature Electrolysis in D2 Gas," Infinite Energy, #4 [5] R. Oriani, "A Confirmation of Anomalous Thermal Power Generation From A Proton-Conducting Oxide," ICCF6, O-036. To be published in Fusion Technology, 1996. [6] Z. Minevski, "Two Zones of 'Impurities' Observed After Prolonged Electrolysis of Deuterium on Palladium," Infinite Energy, combined issues 5 and 6, p. 67. [7] T. Ohmori, "Isotopic Distributions of Heavy Metal Elements Produced During the Light Water Electrolysis on Au Electrode," ILENR2 and ICCF6, TS-004 [8] M. Swartz, "Deuterium Production and Light Water Excess Enthalpy Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes," ILENR2 [9] G. Miley, "Nuclear Reaction in Palladium-Hydrogen System," Infinite Energy, #8 [10] S. Crouch-Baker, "Mass Flow Calorimetric Studies under Non-Steady State Conditions," ICCF6, P-004 [11] G. Lonchampt, "Reproduction of Fleischmann and Pons Experiments," ICCF6, O-044 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 06:13:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA16105; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 06:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 06:08:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 06:08:08 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders In-Reply-To: <961022230107_100433.1541_BHG57-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vv6EA3.0.Vx3.yYXRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1742 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 22 Oct 1996, Chris Tinsley wrote: > plates plating the whole inside of the cylinder, all like poles outward. Nix, > nothing at all, except for the end effects. Hmmmmmm. HMMMMMMMM! I too would say to measure the field. The composite magnet you constructed might not *have* a proper radial field. Think this way: if you cover a sphere with plate magnets which are each magnetized through their thickness, the result is not a monopole, the result is an unmagnetized sphere. All the fields cancel. So, if one were to construct a very long, narrow, hollow cylinder of thin magnet plates having outwardly pointing flux, I'd speculate that there would be no field in the central part of the cylinder at all. Just as it is impossible to construct a point-monopole via a spherical magnet array, it is impossible to construct a line-monopole with a cylindrical array. In order to create a cylinder magnet with uniform flux on its curved surface and very large flux on its end plates, I think you need *weak* magnet plates plastered all over the curved surface of an iron cylinder. The core must be far from saturation, so that the strong flux on the cylinder end plates is able to exist. It might help to stick big properly-oriented disk magnets on the flat ends of the cylinder. Maybe the end-plate magnets and a squat iron cylinder are all that's needed to produce a uniformly radial cylindrical field? I realize that my explanations sound overly glib, and I'm repeatedly changing them to force them to fit the situation. On the other hand, I'm also just speculating out loud, and trying different ideas to see what might actually fit. The above version sounds more sensible than most, eh? .....................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-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 07:11:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA28761; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:03:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:01:26 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: "Bruce A. Perreault" cc: freenrg-L@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, huish@zenergy.com Subject: freenrg-L In-Reply-To: <326CF5DD.2FBA@cyberportal.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"-6n_81.0.F17.-MYRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1743 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Bruce A. Perreault wrote: >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, wrote: > > > >Stefan! > > >I too have been deceived by th Perrault information. Like your > >friend, I purchased the information in response to an ad in the Tesla > >Society Magazine.. I too was led to believe that the material > >offered building instructions. After investing a lot of time and > >about 700.00 and several converstions with Bruce Perrault, I had to > >finally sign a nondisclosure statement with a third party in order to > >eventally learn from Bruce that the device described in the material > >I purchased HAD NEVER BEEN BUILT nor was it the device he did build. > > >Mr. Perreault responds: > > >I will check with Mr. Reed Huish as to the details of this "nondisclosure statent," > >if I am correct you are in breach of contract! In which case you and your company > >will see Zenergy and myself in court... Mr. Perreault, this goes far beyond my limit. I've been partly a disinterested third party to this, but I will not stand by and have you threaten another freenrg-L member with legal action IN ORDER TO PUNISH HIM FOR VOICING HIS VALID COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOU. If you did sell plans to a device that had not been built or tested, and you did not clearly state this fact, that is getting close to fraud. It is misrepresenting the nature of the plans by witholding information. If you sold plans to a device but kept an essential ingredient (radium) for success a secret, and did not state this fact upfront while selling the plans, that also is getting close to fraud. (I don't mean that you should have revealed the secret, I mean that you should have stated "this version of the device has not been tested at the time of publication of these plans, is not guaranteed to work well, and there is a secret ingredient which I must withold because of proprietary issues.") Mr. Humphrey has a valid complaint. Others who bought the plans have a valid complaint. You should take what he says very seriously. You should also assume that a very large group of people is watching this conversation, and think carefully before responding. VERY IMPORTANT: you should not assume that Mr. Humphrey is attacking you for some personal reason. If you had done to me what you did to Mr. Humphrey, I would be angry and complaining too. I don't think I'm biased in this. What do others think? Does Chuck H. have a valid bone to pick? Are Bruce P.'s actions in this situation acceptable? .....................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 chuck@cougar.ssi.stratus.com Wed Oct 23 07:38:44 1996 Received: from mailhub.stratus.com (mailhub.stratus.com [134.111.1.14]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id HAA09112; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 07:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cougar.ssi.stratus.com (cougar.ssi.stratus.com [198.97.42.123]) by mailhub.stratus.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id KAA05649; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:38:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: by cougar.ssi.stratus.com (IBM OS/2 SENDMAIL VERSION 2.0/96.03.29) with SMTP id KAA002.69; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:39:44 -0400 Message-Id: <199610231439.KAA002.69@cougar.ssi.stratus.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 96 10:28:09 +0000 From: "Charlie Hodgson" To: "William Beaty" , "Bruce A. Perreault" Cc: freenrg-L@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, huish@zenergy.com Subject: Re: freenrg-L X-Mailer: Ultimedia Mail/2 Lite, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center Content-ID: <53_104_4_846080889> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Status: RO X-Status: > I don't think I'm biased in this. What do others think? Does Chuck H. > have a valid bone to pick? Are Bruce P.'s actions in this situation > acceptable? This thread is begining to look like an Evan Soule monolouge. Since this is an open invitation, I have to agree with Bill. I watch this list looking at what others are doing, sparking ideas of my own. Many posts here are of an experimental nature - we *think* years ago so-and-so got this to work. We *know* failure is quite likely but maybe - just maybe we'll do it. A plan is not a plan if you can't build what is purported. Charlie. One more thing, Mr. Perreault: When responding to a message PLEASE use traditional quoting conventions. It is hard to follow your style of posting. If your mail program is anemic, quote it manually. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 09:02:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA28636; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610231532.IAA11166@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:32:10 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Critique of the NHE Experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"FMdC_3.0.G_6.lzZRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1745 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:01 PM 10/22/96 EDT, you wrote: >To: >INTERNET:asami@nhelab.iae.or.jp; >Kazuaki Matsui >INTERNET:mac@iae.or.jp; >Elliot Kennel >INTERNET:kennel@nhelab.iae.or.jp; >Hideo Ikegami >INTERNET:ikegami@nifsbbs.nifs.ac.jp; >Tadahiko Mizuno >INTERNET:mizuno@athena.hune.hokudai.ac.jp; >Makoto Okamoto >INTERNET:mokamoto@nr.titech.ac.jp; >Scott Chubb >INTERNET:chubb@ecf.nrl.navy.mil; >Michael McKubre >INTERNET:mike_mckbure@qm.sri.com; >Vortex; Arthur; Gene; Chris > >Dear Correspondent, > > >I am circulating this draft to Ikegami, Pons and Fleischmann, Storms, Mallove >and other leading scientists in this field. If anyone has corrections or >comments, please e-mail them to me by the end of November. If you disagree >with my analysis and you wish to publish a rebuttal in the magazine, to be >printed along with this Open Letter, please submit it by that time. > >- Jed Rothwell > >------------------------------------------- > >Critique Of NHE Experiments > >An Open Letter to The NHE Lab Directorate by Jed Rothwell > Bravo! ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 09:02:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA28628; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:53:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610231539.IAA11720@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:39:34 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: biological transmutation---why no replications? Resent-Message-ID: <"0ziav1.0.5_6.kzZRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1744 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:09 PM 10/22/96 -0400, you wrote: >Gene Mallove tole me that there was a paper by a Russian scientist at the >Japanese CF conference on biological transmutation in bacterial cultures. He >may try to get permission to publish the paper in IE. Perhaps low energy >transmutation is not in fact uncommon, we just haven't been looking for it >and the prevailing paradigms forbid it, so every separate indication is >denied. There ***must*** be a mistake... Familiar scenario? > >Mike Carrell > > I am glad to hear of this. It looks like this field is beginning to open up the way it should have 20 years ago. If it does, Vortex will have had a lot to do with it. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 09:23:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA03524; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 09:09:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 09:09:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 08:38:53 -0800 To: Vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"blZAj3.0.vs.0DaRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1746 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley's homopolar cylinder appears to have been: rotating cylinder --> ////////////////////////////////// attached magnets --> XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CL ------------------ - -------------------- Beaty correctly surmised that this magnet configuration will produce only a weak radial magnetic field along most of the length of the cylinder. The radial field will be strong only near the ends. Therefore, the actual distribution of magnetic field would appear to explain Chris's measurements, ie. that the axial EMF was strong only near the ends. The reason the magnetic field is weak in the center is that all the magnetic flux from the center-pointing poles has no place to go. Therefore, although the permanent magnets have magnetization or MMF (analogous to pressure or voltage), the circuit reluctance (analogous to resistance) is increasingly high for magnets increasingly far from the ends, and so they end up unable to make more than just a little contribution to the radial magnetic flux (analogous to fluid flow or current). One could considerably improve things by putting a soft magnetic core, in the form of a solid cylinder, inside your cylinder with its magnets. It shouldn't matter whether this core rotates or is stationary. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From hheffner@anc.ak.net Wed Oct 23 11:28:47 1996 Received: from anc.ak.net (root@anc.ak.net [204.17.241.19]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA11323; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [204.17.242.73] (unused2-73.ak.net [204.17.242.73]) by anc.ak.net (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id MAA16309; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:31:06 -0800 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:34:35 -0800 To: William Beaty , "Bruce A. Perreault" From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: freenrg-L Cc: freenrg-L@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, huish@zenergy.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:01 AM 10/23/96, William Beaty wrote: >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Bruce A. Perreault wrote: >> >I will check with Mr. Reed Huish as to the details of this >>"nondisclosure statent," >> >if I am correct you are in breach of contract! In which case you and >>your company >> >will see Zenergy and myself in court... > >Mr. Perreault, this goes far beyond my limit. I've been partly a >disinterested third party to this, but I will not stand by and have you >threaten another freenrg-L member with legal action IN ORDER TO PUNISH HIM >FOR VOICING HIS VALID COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOU. > [snip] > >I don't think I'm biased in this. What do others think? Does Chuck H. >have a valid bone to pick? Are Bruce P.'s actions in this situation >acceptable? > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 Here's a vote in support of Bill Beaty. This series of communications is an abomination reminiscent of other litigious personages like Archie Pu, etc., and is a clear demonstration of why moderated lists have value. Only worse than vicious dogs are the master that releases them. (Sorry, personal predjudice against vicious dogs, lawsuits, and the like.) If the topic is to go any further it seems that since it is well established that there is at least one unhappy customer that the complaints should be dealt with in a detailed, straightforward and cooperative manner. I don't know of any reputable business that will not allow returns for a refund if there is a valid reason. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 12:03:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA18197; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:55:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:55:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: 23 Oct 96 14:53:00 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: "Michael J. Schaffer" , Vortex Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961023185300_100433.1541_BHG124-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"-8z603.0.AS4.oecRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1748 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael, > You could considerably improve things by putting a soft magnetic > core, in the form of a solid cylinder, inside your cylinder with > its magnets. It shouldn't matter whether this core rotates or is > stationary--your choice. That is exactly how we built it. There is a massive 'soft' iron core, with slots cut along its outer length to take the magnets in line. Otherwise there really is no way to hold the thing together. I know the field is not as strong through the (brass) conductor as it would be with just a single magnet - for the reasons you suggest. However, it is still very strong, and will pull in anything near it. It is also quite uniform, since the magnets are touching lengthwise and only a small fraction of an inch apart along the circumference - the intervening space is of course the 'shoulders' of soft iron which separate the rows of magnets. Actually, I agree it's a bit of a kludge - but anything like this ends up as a bit of a kludge, despite Norman Horwood's excellent engineering. All this discussion has set me thinking again, and I just may have some kind of phenomenological description of the 'general homopolar machine' in a day or two. The situation seems quite simple - either our measurements are crap, or there is no homopolar effect to be obtained without rotation of the conductor in its own plane. I do appreciate that I may have screwed up completely.... Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 13:00:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA00338; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: 23 Oct 96 15:43:09 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: E-mail addresses corrected Message-ID: <961023194309_72240.1256_EHB172-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"ZvfMI.0.C5.kPdRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1749 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The version of "Critique of NHE Experiments" I posted here had two incorrect e-mail addresses in the heading. The correct versions are: Scott Chubb >INTERNET:CHUBB@cfe1.nrl.navy.mil; Michael McKubre >INTERNET:mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com Also, the version of the document that I got back from Vortex had a scrambled paragraph, which should have read: When researchers repeat a difficult experiment many times over a period of months with no success because there is no alternative, that is laudable, dogged persistence. That kind of heroic dedication and hard work is essential to scientific progress. But when they repeat that same experiment for years without success, ignoring better techniques and disregarding papers by leading scientists describing their mistakes, that is misguided. It shows an inability or unwillingness to learn from experience, and from other scientists. It is a tragic waste of talent. It is folly. The NHE lab is considered the flagship of cold fusion. It has the best equipment and some of the finest, most dedicated and skillful workers. You have the opportunity to make scientific history. You should not squander such talent and resources on unproductive, dead-end experiments. I am making various corrections as suggestions flow in. I will post an updated version by and by. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 13:08:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA00634; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:49:29 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 12:49:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: 23 Oct 96 15:43:57 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Ragland abstract Message-ID: <961023194356_72240.1256_EHB172-3@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"OUZ5b.0.m9._QdRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1750 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Here is one of the abstracts from ICCF6 which people might have overlooked. Evan Ragland is an unassuming 70-year-old retired engineer who does not make a big deal about himself, but he has done solid work in the past and I take his claims seriously. I wish I had had a chance to go to Mississippi and observe the cell he had running there all summer. I talked to him about it, but I did not get a chance to go. He reports input was between 1 and 2 watts, the flow rate was 25 ml/min, and the Delta T was generally 4 to 5 deg C, indicating total output of 8 or 9 watts. He said he would have 10 fully made up cells fabricated for me in the near future by a firm in Texas, which will cost between $500 and $800 each. He was not able to mount a physical experiment but he did display the triode anode-cathode. He hung it on the wall next to poster. Typical of him. I believe the triode configuration has much in common with the Takahashi method and with proton conductors, which were in the spotlight at ICCF6, as I shall report later. - Jed ICCF-6 P-016 TRIODE CELL EXPERIMENTS FOR CONTROLLED FLEISCHMANN/PONS EFFECT Evan L. Ragland, The Boiler Works, Diamondhead, MS, USA Experimental research and evaluation of three electrode (triode) cold fusion electrolysis cells is reported herein. Apparatus development began, after patent application, in June 1995. The triode apparatus introduces controlled loading and operation of Fleischmann/Pons-type cells. In August 1995 excess heat generation was observed in triode apparatus experiments by Dennis Cravens in his laboratory in New Mexico. In November 1995 the Boiler Works laboratory in Diamondhead began experimental evaluation of the triode apparatus. Understanding gained from these experiments led to development of a triode fusion reactor. The reactor has been in continuous operation since 20 March 1996. The experimental reactor data base is being applied in further triode apparatus developments. Near-term goals are, completion of a reactor test bed for "quick change" cathode specimen evaluation and engineering design of a 5 to 10 KW reactor cell. Thin film cathode specimens prepared by the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory of the University of Alabama in Birmingham are presently ready for test and evaluation. These include Pd film on Ag, Al, Cu. and quartz substrates and Pt films on Si bead specimens. Details of triode apparatus operation, control, and experimental results will be presented. The suggestion is made in conclusion that present experimental and theoretical understandings of cold fusion are sufficiently advanced for engineering design and development. If possible, a physical display and/or a demonstration will be available for inspection. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 16:04:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA13283; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:56:27 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Plasma-Induced Transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"Q7abh1.0.NF3.v4gRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1752 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If you have any interest in EV's (condensed charge), and especially their role in transmutation, then I recommend checking out the following article with the subject title: This is published (linked to) on the Institute of New Energy (INE) page. The authors are Hal Fox, Robert W. Bishop, and Shang-Xian Jin. The paper discusses the concept of a nuclear reaction creating EV, called a (NEV). The paper hypothesizes and discusses quantitatively how positive ions in an EV can be accelerated to MEV energies, thus overcoming the coulomb barrier. Personally, despite some discussion of changed branching ratios, I think this hypothesis does not account for the lack of radiation signatures associated with CF or low energy transmutation, and in fact says "reactions produced by NEV's in a low pressure gas environment will be similar to the experimental results from a similar bombardment of a target material with high-energy positive ions." Despite this, the article may shed some new light on some experimental observations and represents another chunck of puzzle pieces fit together. To me, the article relates the low voltage electrolysis environment to the higher voltage gas phase environment in a concrete way. However, it seems to me, with the hypothesized inclusion of large numbers of nuceli in the EV (i.e. possibly 10^6 positive ions,) that the distinction between an EV, NEV, and Bose-Einstein condensate is becoming very blurred. Of secondary interest from the article may be the technique of using an AM radio to determine if EV's are being generated. This may relate to Frank Znidarsic's request for instrumentation ideas for the YUSMAR. It would be interresting to determine if sonoluminescent bubbles emit detectable radio waves. The antenna could either be in the form of a probe or a coil. A probe, in the form of a small insulated antenna could be placed in the YUSMAR vortex tube, mounted in a machine screw fitting with coaxial cable output lead. A small FET could be mounted on the machine screw to amplify the signal before sending down the coax, the whole assembly shielded with foil. An alternative might be mounting antenna coils on the inside walls of the vortex tube. If the quantity and intensity of bubbles related to the amplitude of an RF signal, then the signal could be used to tune the device and determine if it is operating in the correct mode. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 22:17:38 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA06445; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:15:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <326EFC2F.3260@rt66.com> Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 22:18:39 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: "NASA'S Fling With Anti-Gravity" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"6XoSc3.0.ca1.UjlRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1755 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: "Science", Oct. 11, 1996, page 183, on "Random Samples" page, has a 1/3 page article: "Anti-gravity-- this year's "cold fusion"? Gravity is one force that has always seemed immutable. But, if dreams come through at NASA, a device that uses a spinning disk of superconductor to defy gravity could one day revolutionize spacecraft propulsion...London Sunday Telegraph came out with a story touting a soon-to-be published paper by engineer Eugene Podkletnov, a sometime researcher at Finland's University of Tampere...In the ensuing publicity--which included confusion over the identity of a co-author--Podklenov withdrew his paper, scheduled to appear in the British Journal of Physics D....But NASA has already sunk several hundred thousand dollars into the anti-gravity game, according to L. Whitt Brantley, chief of the Advanced Concepts Office at Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama...physicist Ning Li of the University of Alabama...currently heads a project to build Podkletnov's device...electromagnetically suspended ring of superconducting ceramic, 275 millimeters in diameter, that is cooled in liquid nitrogen... Engineer Ronald Koczor of the Marshall Center, who readily admits that "This is far-out stuff," says that they ought to get results from the experiment within a year...Paul Chu of the superconductivity center of the University of Houston...says he heard a presentation by Li, but neither he nor his colleagues fully understand "What Li was trying to say."...Podketnov could not be reached for comment. Indeed, NASA officials don't seem to know how to reach him..." From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 23 23:47:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA22307; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 23:42:59 -0700 (PDT) Date: 24 Oct 96 02:41:46 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: "NASA'S Fling With Anti-Gravity" Message-ID: <961024064145_76216.2421_HHB49-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"gvJOS1.0.TS5.n_mRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1756 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From the "Science" article... > Paul Chu of the superconductivity center of the University of > Houston...says he heard a presentation by Li, but neither he > nor his colleagues fully understand "What Li was trying to > say." That's the most discouraging thing in there. I had been wondering what Chu and the other superconductor gods thought about Li's theories, but this is the first I'd heard. I wonder if there's a language/speech barrier involved? Personally, the list of why *I* don't understand starts off with a little thing called Vector Calculus. But a Nobel laurate? Terry, is Dr. Li easy to listen to and understand in person, or would you guess the problem is with the math or some incompleteness or vagueness in the theories? - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 01:47:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA22816; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: 23 Oct 96 19:26:55 EDT From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@CompuServe.com> To: Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961023232654_76216.2421_HHB68-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"x_wm4.0.Ja5.lhgRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1754 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Chris Tinsley wrote: > All this discussion has set me thinking again, and I just may > have some kind of phenomenological description of the 'general > homopolar machine' in a day or two. The situation seems quite > simple - either our measurements are crap, or there is no > homopolar effect to be obtained without rotation of the > conductor in its own plane. I forget now, does rotating the external circuit around a stationary magnet/disk generate current? What if the bulk of the external circuit is shielded magnetically in either case? I'm fine with wires and sheet metal cutting flux, but that point right where the brush makes contact with the (relatively?) rotating disk is where it all stops making sense to me. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 03:48:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA19413; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:14:08 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 16:14:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: 23 Oct 96 17:58:25 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961023215824_100060.173_JHB47-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"elRgk3.0.Cl4.wQgRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1753 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A Michael Schaffer said: >> One could considerably improve things by putting a soft magnetic core, in the form of a solid cylinder, inside your cylinder with its magnets. It shouldn't matter whether this core rotates or is stationary. Michael J. Schaffer << If I can try to clarify the design of the model I made: I made a central soft steel thick walled tube with 8 x 5mm deep splines equally spaced around the circumference. The (25mm x 12mm x 5mm" N-S) magnets were slotted into the splines with like poles radially aligned and the ends forced together along the length of the 20 cm assembly. The circumferential spacing left 12mm wide gaps between the rows so that there was a path for the radial flux for all the magnets. The outer brass cylinder (82mm o/d 76mm bore x 210mm long) was a sliding fit over the magnets which anyway were firmly attracted to the splined steel cylinder. The end plugs, which spiggoted all the components in place, were turned wood. The whole assem bly was held together by 2 x 8mm dia steel bolts compressing the end plugs longitudinally together. The whole assembly was mounted on a solid steel shaft located in the wood end plugs. A Vee pulley was mounted on one end of the shaft and driven by belt from a 1/4 HP motor at about 3000 rpm. The whole rotating assembly was supported in heavy duty self-aligning ball bearings. Spring-loaded carbon brushes were mounted on the frame to contact the brass cylinder at any position along the length of the brass cylinder and wired to the dvm. The only position to give a reading on the dvm was with the brushes both close to one end of the assembly. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 04:01:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA08419; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 03:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 03:48:04 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 02:53:53 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"TLNku2.0.S32.ZbqRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1757 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >I made a central soft steel thick walled tube with 8 x 5mm deep splines >equally >spaced around the circumference. > >The (25mm x 12mm x 5mm" N-S) magnets were slotted into the splines with like >poles radially aligned and the ends forced together along the length of the 20 >cm assembly. The circumferential spacing left 12mm wide gaps between the >rows so that there was a path for the radial flux for all the magnets. > [snip] >Norman There's the problem - the gaps between rows that permits the return of the radial flux. At best the radial flux, except at the ends of the cylinder, makes a two way trip through the cyclindrical conductor, thus cancelling. You need the flux to make a one way trip through the conductive cylinder and return through the ends of the cylinder without cutting the cylinder again. The only way to do this is to provide a magnetic circuit from the outside of the cylinder, through the one end or both, and back through the inside center of the steel cylinder. In other words, the magnetic core about the conductive cylinder might consist of an iron block with a cylinder bored into it to accomodate the rotating assembly. As Michael Schaffer points out, the magnetic core inside the steel armature could either rotate with it or not. Also, the flux must be uniform. If the flux is not uniform the voltage generated is determined by the weakest link. If there are any gaps in potential gradient you could expect eddy currents in the outer conductive cylinder - if the cylinder/field have relative velocity. Since you are having the magnets rotate with the conducting cylinder, the voltage is generated entirely by the flux lines cutting the stator. For this reason, the lack in uniformity in your radial magnetic field due to the spline separations will cause an AC component to be generated in the stator. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 04:03:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA27778; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 14:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 13:53:02 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: freenrg-L Resent-Message-ID: <"UsKjZ3.0.wn6.s9fRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1751 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:01 AM 10/23/96, William Beaty wrote: >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Bruce A. Perreault wrote: >> >I will check with Mr. Reed Huish as to the details of this >>"nondisclosure statent," >> >if I am correct you are in breach of contract! In which case you and >>your company >> >will see Zenergy and myself in court... > >Mr. Perreault, this goes far beyond my limit. I've been partly a >disinterested third party to this, but I will not stand by and have you >threaten another freenrg-L member with legal action IN ORDER TO PUNISH HIM >FOR VOICING HIS VALID COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOU. > [snip] > >I don't think I'm biased in this. What do others think? Does Chuck H. >have a valid bone to pick? Are Bruce P.'s actions in this situation >acceptable? > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 Here's a vote in support of Bill Beaty. This series of communications is an abomination reminiscent of other litigious personages like Archie Pu, etc., and is a clear demonstration of why moderated lists have value. Only worse than vicious dogs are the master that releases them. (Sorry, personal predjudice against vicious dogs, lawsuits, and the like.) If the topic is to go any further it seems that since it is well established that there is at least one unhappy customer that the complaints should be dealt with in a detailed, straightforward and cooperative manner. I don't know of any reputable business that will not allow returns for a refund if there is a valid reason. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 04:07:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA10332; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 04:03:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 04:03:25 -0700 (PDT) From: RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com (Chuck Davis) Date: 24 Oct 96 04:02:06 -0700 (+0100) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-ID: Subject: Magnetic Entrainment... (forwarded) Organization: ROSHI Corporation X-Mailer: MiniMail 1.4b (2.7.96) (c) 1996 by Pelle Claesson of TheEnd Amiga (http://www.lls.se/~volley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"s73d9.0.IX2.xpqRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1758 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What's H-field with no E-field ??? - ----- Beginning of forwarded mail ----- - garwonko@msn.com (Dr. Gar Won Ko) FS: Brainwave Entrainment System 23 Oct 96 19:08:54 -0700 The Microsoft Network (msn.com) Newsgroups: bionet.neuroscience I have an ensemble for entraining any specific frequency within the 4 windows, i.e., 0.05 to 3.5 Hz (Thelta); 4.0 to 8.0 Hz (Theta); 8.0 to 13.0 Hz (Alpha); and 13.0 to 25.0 Hz (Beta). The rate of irritability with some human systems is 6.67 Hz. A state of Zen or enlightenment is near 7.5 to 8.0 Hz. Riotous behavior is represented at 11.35 Hz for some humans. There are neuronal frequencies for every emotional state or specific or precise state of consciousness, subconsciousness, or superconsciousness. The system achieves this in a purely magnetic wave or H-field with no E-field (electric wave) present. There is no other apparatus like this in existence. This system is for sale ($72K). garwonko@msn.com - ----- End of forwarded mail ----- - 72,000 dollars !?!? -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 04:10:53 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA11391; Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 11:28:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 10:34:35 -0800 To: William Beaty , "Bruce A. Perreault" From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: freenrg-L Cc: freenrg-L@eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com, huish@zenergy.com Resent-Message-ID: <"oB-9G2.0.un2.XFcRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1747 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 7:01 AM 10/23/96, William Beaty wrote: >On Tue, 22 Oct 1996, Bruce A. Perreault wrote: >> >I will check with Mr. Reed Huish as to the details of this >>"nondisclosure statent," >> >if I am correct you are in breach of contract! In which case you and >>your company >> >will see Zenergy and myself in court... > >Mr. Perreault, this goes far beyond my limit. I've been partly a >disinterested third party to this, but I will not stand by and have you >threaten another freenrg-L member with legal action IN ORDER TO PUNISH HIM >FOR VOICING HIS VALID COMPLAINTS AGAINST YOU. > [snip] > >I don't think I'm biased in this. What do others think? Does Chuck H. >have a valid bone to pick? Are Bruce P.'s actions in this situation >acceptable? > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 Here's a vote in support of Bill Beaty. This series of communications is an abomination reminiscent of other litigious personages like Archie Pu, etc., and is a clear demonstration of why moderated lists have value. Only worse than vicious dogs are the master that releases them. (Sorry, personal predjudice against vicious dogs, lawsuits, and the like.) If the topic is to go any further it seems that since it is well established that there is at least one unhappy customer that the complaints should be dealt with in a detailed, straightforward and cooperative manner. I don't know of any reputable business that will not allow returns for a refund if there is a valid reason. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 05:35:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA28633; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:31:30 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:31:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Unverified) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 04:37:29 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Hieronymous machine - Success! Resent-Message-ID: <"Eb2FO.0.G_6.V6sRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1759 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: 8^) Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 24 05:50:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA01671; Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 05:43:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: 24 Oct 96 08:42:10 EDT From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961024124210_100433.1541_BHG50-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Yrs8H1.0.-P.uHsRo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1760 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > There's the problem - the gaps between rows that permits the > return of the radial flux. At best the radial flux, except at the > ends of the cylinder, makes a two way trip through the > cyclindrical conductor, thus cancelling. Um. I do wonder about that. If you make a Faraday disk in the same way - by sticking separate magnets onto a sheet of copper, leaving gaps between them, even much bigger gaps than the width of the magnets .... it works fine. You get a strong net signal *one way*. Once again, I'm sure that intuition is a poor guide to this thing. Everyone who has not spent a lot of time playing with these little buggers seems quite sure how they work, while us poor experimenters end up banging our heads on the wall! I think the problem is that under no circumstances ever have I been able to get a signal without rotation within the plane of the conductor. I'm still trying to puzzle out the two-magnets-in-a-cylinder system, but I think that in that system it is an inside-out disk, with the two brushes 'rotating' around the 'fixed' tube. But the more I think about it, the more I feel confused. And I've seen quite a few FAQs on homopolar systems, none of which seem to fit the observations I have made. Either our cylinder/flat plane results are in error, or the whole idea behind the things is wrong. Rick's questions are good ones, but I don't know the answers. At a wild guess, my thoughts on it are thus: Relative motion is required between two conductors, one of which is in the flux going one way, and the other is in the flux return path - and there is *relative motion* between them. Further, the relative motion between them must be such that one is (relative to the other) rotating in the plane of its surface (I think). Brush contact is essential for any effect to be possible. About the only other thing I am certain of is that you can't treat one of the conductors in isolation from the other one. That's the way the books always treat the system, but I beg leave to be sceptical! Oh - I don't take freenrg, but as far as I am concerned Bill has to be right. It is his ball, he does all the hard labour so that we can chat here. Accordingly, *he* sets the rules and *we* stick by them. Chris From webhead-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 07:42:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA00179; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:32:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:32:00 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@eskimo.com, webhead-L@eskimo.com, freenrg-L@eskimo.com Subject: MAIL CRASH AT ESKIMO.COM Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"dhvux3.0.k2.H-CSo"@mail> Resent-From: webhead-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: webhead-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/47 X-Loop: webhead-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: webhead-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Eskimo.com email was screwy yesterday (thurs) and yesterday night. All email was either bounced or eaten, and digests were apparently affected. Please re-send anything which hasn't come back to you via the list, or which hasn't appeared in the monthly archive. .....................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-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 08:00:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA03894; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:46:35 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 07:46:35 -0700 (PDT) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:45:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: HOW TO SPIN THATS THE? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01IB22ILAXBM8YC709@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Resent-Message-ID: <"DPbyh1.0.my.8BDSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1786 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Subj: RE: Spinning magnetic fields >What evidence is there that the field does not spin with the magnet? >Horace Heffner ************************* >The field must rotate with the magnet since the field lines are composites >of many field lines from many small domains........The magnetic >field lines must move with and be connected to the domain >Horace Heffner ************************* >.....conductor cuts stationary mag field >.... rotating mag field cuts external >Hal Puthoff Evidence exist that the magnetic field location is independent of the material producing it. A flux line (if lines exist) does not have a specific geographic location where it enters and leaves a magnetic material as suggested by domain "theory" (which I have posted my feelings about a few moons back, to many inconsistencies). No need for complex experiments: use two donut magnets magnetized across largest dimension. (north and south on top and bottom). One magnet is fixed in position, wrap fine magnet wire (about 33 ga or less) thru the center hole and around the magnet about 100 turns or so in about a 30 to 50 degree sector on one side of the donut magnet (like a toroid but not all the way around), A fixed shaft is placed thru the center hole of the fixed magnet. The other magnet is fitted with a bearing in the center hole, and placed on the shaft with a spacer to hold it just above (as close as possible) to the conductors on the fixed magnet so that it can spin freely. The spinning magnet is placed so that it is attracted to the fixed magnet (opposite poles facing). Hook a scope to the coil leads. Spin the upper magnet. If the magnetic flux is pinned to geographic domains then the flux of the fixed magnet must constantly uncouple and couple to new geographic locations on the spinning magnet. If this occurs then the flux will move back and forth relative to the conductors. This would be a changing flux cutting the conductors and would appear as a potential across the coil. Whether current is flowing or not is moot, if a potential is measured across the coil then a small amount of current is flowing thru the impedance of the scope. The potential would have AC since the lines would be moving back and forth as they uncouple and couple. or If a potential is measured but has DC then the field is free to move and is pinned to the spinning magnet. or If no potential is exhibited by the coil then the field is free to move independent of any particular geographic location on the spinning magnet and might be pinned by the stationary magnet. But since there is no physical reason why the field would choose which magnet to pin to then no potential would give reason to believe that the field is FIXED in space about the magnetic field producing material and ONLY moves with the PLANE of the material. Spinning as described here does not move the plane. However a conductor moving in a magnetic field does change position relative to the plane of the material. The plane of the material is a plane that extends from the center of the mass of the material, the exact dividing line between the north and south pole, and this plane extends outward in all directions from the material along the polar division. THE MAGNETIC FIELD IS FIXED TO THE PLANE, NOT THE MAGNETIC MATERIAL. A homo-polar motor's disk also changes position relative to this plane. Different coil configurations can be used, but remember to only place one half of the current loop between the magnets. Both sides of the loop between the magnets would cancel. The above is from a paper I am publishing in the near future "External Magnetic Effects on Current Loops in Stationary Magnetic Fields". It is based on 25 years of study and experimentation on this subject. Anyone wanting further information on the publication or more accurate coil configuration for the above experiment E-mail joeflynn@delphi.com Joe Flynn Flynn Research Inc. P.O. Box 11657 Kansas City, Mo. 64138 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 08:26:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA07482; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:01:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:01:20 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Institutions and policies that can bring us closer to workable free energy (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"OfF7v.0.nq1.BPDSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1787 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ................................freenrg-L.................................... William Beaty bilb@eskimo.com EE/Programmer/exhibit-designer/science-nerd Moderator: FREENRG-L VORTEX-L TAOSHUM-L WEBHEAD-L http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/flist.html Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com voice:206-781-3320 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 18:53:47 -0400 From: Kap808@aol.com Reply-To: freenrg-l@eskimo.com To: freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: Institutions and policies that can bring us closer to workable free energy Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:54:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-From: freenrg-l@eskimo.com As I mentioned in an earlier posting, Brian O'Leary and I are in the final stages of preparing an article for the general public on free energy developments, which we will first submit to the NY Times Magazine. We would like to get your views regarding the kinds of policies or practices by public or private groups that would best facilitate research and development in the field. How can people best use the Internet? Should new groups be formed? Would it be useful to create a free energy mutual fund? What role should government play? Active investor in research? Conduct research in government laboratories? Or should government just get out of the way? Are new institutions needed? This is your chance to play "statesman" or "stateswoman". Tell us your views. If you want your views to be kept confidential, you can write to me at 3635 SW 87th, #12, Portland, OR 97225. We want to be able to report what people who are active in this field believe about how we can best move into a free-energy world. Thanks in advance for your responses. Steve Kaplan & Brian O'Leary From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 09:01:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17680; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:38:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: John Schnurer , Vortex-L Subject: RE: EEG entrainment Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 08:36:00 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"cOAa12.0.4K4.AyDSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1788 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: John As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available for a researcher to try and develop this? -Hank Scudder ---------- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 09:40:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA28905; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 12:17:36 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: "Scudder,Henry J" cc: Vortex-L Subject: RE: EEG entrainment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"5XlZ-1.0.Z37.VZESo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1789 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: There are maybe 20 such 'systems' either on the market now or soon to be released ..... prices range from $ 200 to $ 25K On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: > John > As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, > have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer > which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would > be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available > for a researcher to try and develop this? > -Hank Scudder > > ---------- My personal outfit has trouble finding the 'hat' .... much less the rest! > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 09:58:54 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA00988; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: 25 Oct 96 12:23:56 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961025162355_100060.173_JHB96-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"579pw.0.MF.ufESo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1790 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Garry, >> To figure out what you're dealing with, you find the boundaries. There are two ways to find them, either having someone show you, or you bump into them. When you're the first explorer in that part of the cave, you've only one choice. So hats off to you. Gary Hawkins << Thanks pal! One of the problems is that unless you have a close contact with a higher level of technology to bounce your results and ideas off, you have difficulty in making positive progress. The obverse is that often those who are further advanced in current technology can put you off trying anything non-standard. Angels rush in etc. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 10:10:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA02528; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:33:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:33:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610251631.JAA15202@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 09:31:31 +0900 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Institutions and policies that can bring us closer to workable free energy (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"9bfPH3.0.Nd.-kESo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1791 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:01 AM 10/25/96 -0700, you wrote: > > >................................freenrg-L.................................... >William Beaty bilb@eskimo.com EE/Programmer/exhibit-designer/science-nerd >Moderator: FREENRG-L VORTEX-L TAOSHUM-L WEBHEAD-L >http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/freenrgl/flist.html >Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com voice:206-781-3320 > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 18:53:47 -0400 >From: Kap808@aol.com >Reply-To: freenrg-l@eskimo.com >To: freenrg-l@eskimo.com >Subject: Institutions and policies that can bring us closer to workable free energy >Resent-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 1996 15:54:25 -0700 (PDT) >Resent-From: freenrg-l@eskimo.com > >As I mentioned in an earlier posting, Brian O'Leary and I are in the final >stages of preparing an article for the general public on free energy >developments, which we will first submit to the NY Times Magazine. We would >like to get your views regarding the kinds of policies or practices by public >or private groups that would best facilitate research and development in the >field. How can people best use the Internet? Should new groups be formed? > Would it be useful to create a free energy mutual fund? What role should >government play? Active investor in research? Conduct research in >government laboratories? Or should government just get out of the way? >Are new institutions needed? > >This is your chance to play "statesman" or "stateswoman". Tell us your >views. If you want your views to be kept confidential, you can write to me at >3635 SW 87th, #12, Portland, OR 97225. We want to be able to report what >people who are active in this field believe about how we can best move into a >free-energy world. Thanks in advance for your responses. Steve Kaplan & >Brian O'Leary > > 1. Policy should not be restricted to free energy devices, as there may be important supplementary technology techniques which will be of considerable assistance in the commercialization of the devices,such as Muller's polycrystalline core material. 2. Increase budgets to Federal Labs expressly for working on a short turn-over with INDIVIDUAL INVENTORS AND EXPERIMENTERS to validate claims and measure parameters using the best of scientific methods and equipment, even if the basic concept to be examined seems dufously simplistic and supposedly impossible. Make use of the Wright brothers and the "impossibility of human flight" as an historical example. 3. Commission with $40 million a national commission composed of non-academics and non-corporate-executives-of-fortune-500-companies to undertake a national examination of how human individuals, every American citizen qua citizen, have been systematically closed out of the policy dialog and action agenda of institutions by a systematic organization of special interest groups, all corporataly or bureaucratically based, focusing on the inability of technically and scientifically creative individuals, qua individuals, to interact meaningfully and usefully with the scientific and educational institutions of this once fine land. 3. Create a parallel to the Small Business Innovation Research program but cast it as the "Science and Technology Innovation Reseach" program - STIR. Eliminate the need for "matching grants" (these insure that only corporate based people can get access to the grants). Make the grants more realistic in size, more flexible in amount, and granted on a continous stream, as approved, not on some hideous schedule which batches them into approval a year down the road. Something like $25,000 to $250,000 in grants, put $100 million into it. A program like that will make patriots out of a lot of people. 4. Pound like hell on the academics and the absolute necessity to see that science and technology policy is broadened right on past them. Everywhere in this country they are croaking all over creative thought and innovation like big fat ugly smelley toads. Keep exposing them for the selfish, competitive interests they really are and their use of institutional "legitimacy" to shut everybody else out. 5. Demand that the Federal and State Governments obey the constitution and strip all requirements that availability of money and position is tied to degreed eligibility requirements. Or, recognize what degrees are, a title, which when required, is actually the conferment of aristocratic privilege, hence, clearly unconstitutional. 6. Institute an absolute credit on income taxes, an absolute write-off for investment in technical and scientific education, activity, and early stage development (which is anything before profits). 7. Enable non-profits and foundations to GIVE MONEY TO INDIVIDUALS AS INDIVIDUALS, science and scholar stipends which do not have special reporting requirements, deductions, or other bureacratic impositions on either the giver or the getter. In the country today, the corporate non-profit community ONLY gives money to non-profit corporates. Another example of how the individual has been turned into a nigger in the woodpile. Totally insane. 8. Eat nails for breakfast. Bite tires for lunch. Realize that we need to kick the shit of the institutional presumptions of the comfortable. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Fri Oct 25 11:39:07 1996 Received: from emout01.mail.aol.com (emout01.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.92]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id LAA02775; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:38:39 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Received: by emout01.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id OAA05337; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:38:06 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:38:06 -0400 Message-ID: <961025143805_1582160921@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, CldFusion@aol.com, david@vesicle.ibg.uu.se, billb@eskimo.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, Puthoff@aol.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, tlpst15+@pitt.edu, gam+@pitt.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Yusmar tests continued. Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Yusmar tests continued. Date: 96-10-25 14:34:38 EDT From: FZNIDARSIC To: FZNIDARSIC Many more tests of the Yusmar system have just been completed. For the latest see: http://members.aol.com/fznidarsic/index.html or if you system supports auto E-Mial links, pick the link below. See the latest at Yusma r Tests Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 10:59:01 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA19364; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:45:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 10:45:09 -0700 (PDT) From: RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com (Chuck Davis) Date: 25 Oct 96 10:43:39 -0700 (+0100) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com In-Reply-To: (by: John Schnurer ) Message-ID: Subject: RE: EEG entrainment Organization: ROSHI Corporation X-Mailer: MiniMail 1.4b (2.7.96) (c) 1996 by Pelle Claesson of TheEnd Amiga (http://www.lls.se/~volley) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"Lxoq.0.Ok4.ZoFSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1792 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 25 Oct 1996 12:17 -0400 (+0400), John Schnurer wrote to me: > There are maybe 20 such 'systems' either on the market now or > soon to be released ..... prices range from $ 200 to $ 25K Please, tell me more about this, John. I'm very interested in this process. $72k is a bit much ;) > On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: >> John >> As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, >> have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer >> which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would >> be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available >> for a researcher to try and develop this? >> -Hank Scudder >> >> ---------- > My personal outfit has trouble finding the 'hat' .... much less > the rest! How come the hat is a problem? Thanx, -- .-. .-. / \ .-. .-. / \ / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------= \-- RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / \ / `-' `-' \ / `-' `-' Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre mind= s. -Albert Einstein- From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 11:33:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA27098; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:14:57 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:14:57 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: From: "Francis J. Stenger" To: Subject: Re: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:03:29 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"m-lbB1.0.Kd6.VEGSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1793 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: ---------- > From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN > Date: Friday, October 25, 1996 4:46 AM > (snip) > No need for complex experiments: use two donut magnets > magnetized across largest dimension. (north and south on top > and bottom). One magnet is fixed in position, wrap fine magnet > wire (about 33 ga or less) thru the center hole and around the > magnet about 100 turns or so in about a 30 to 50 degree sector > on one side of the donut magnet (like a toroid but not all the > way around), A fixed shaft is placed thru the center hole of > the fixed magnet. The other magnet is fitted with a bearing in > the center hole, and placed on the shaft with a spacer to hold > it just above (as close as possible) to the conductors on the > fixed magnet so that it can spin freely. The spinning magnet is > placed so that it is attracted to the fixed magnet (opposite > poles facing). Hook a scope to the coil leads. Spin the upper > magnet. Joe, I guess I don't see why you would expect an emf from the pickup coil whether or not the field spun with the magnet! It seems to me, if I understand the above setup, that there is no magnetic flux threading the PLANE OF THE COIL TURNS! It seems to me that your setup involves an axially-symmetric magnetic field - with no flux in the THETA (around the large ring magnet circumference) direction. Your pickup coil seems to be wound with the coil loops in the r-z plane (again, using cylindrical coordinates) in which case they would be decoupled from any changes or movement of the magnetic field. What say you to my query? With ignorance probably showing again, --------Frank Stenger From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 11:48:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA01160; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:32:09 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961025184004.00714510@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:40:04 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN Resent-Message-ID: <"QbLy_.0.yH.ZUGSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1794 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>Subj: RE: Spinning magnetic fields > >>What evidence is there that the field does not spin with the >magnet? >Evidence exist that the magnetic field location is independent >of the material producing it. A flux line (if lines exist) does >not have a specific geographic location where it enters and >leaves a magnetic material as suggested by domain "theory" What then, is going on. Lines of flux might then be made up of strings of spinning ether, where the spin is not produced by any one set of magnetic domains, but from some other means. If there is no grip on the lines of flux by the magnetic material, then there would be an important key of understanding to be found there. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 12:06:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA02313; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:34:23 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: EEG entrainment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"lyhFd1.0.2a.5ZGSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1795 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The Hat .... is a euphemism for pass the hat ... or a hat to_____ in On 25 Oct 1996, Chuck Davis wrote: > On 25 Oct 1996 12:17 -0400 (+0400), John Schnurer wrote to me: > > > There are maybe 20 such 'systems' either on the market now or > > soon to be released ..... prices range from $ 200 to $ 25K > > Please, tell me more about this, John. I'm very interested in this > process. $72k is a bit much ;) > > > On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: > > >> John > >> As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, > >> have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer > >> which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would > >> be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available > >> for a researcher to try and develop this? > >> -Hank Scudder > >> > >> ---------- > > > My personal outfit has trouble finding the 'hat' .... much less > > the rest! > > How come the hat is a problem? > > Thanx, > -- > .-. .-. > / \ .-. .-. / \ > / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ > -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- > RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / > \ / `-' `-' \ / > `-' `-' > Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. > -Albert Einstein- > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 12:07:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA03231; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:40:38 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:38:06 -0400 Message-ID: <961025143805_1582160921@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, CldFusion@aol.com, david@vesicle.ibg.uu.se, billb@eskimo.com, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, Puthoff@aol.com, 75013.613@compuserve.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, 101544.702@compuserve.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, tlpst15+@pitt.edu, gam+@pitt.edu, vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Yusmar tests continued. Resent-Message-ID: <"LYCR_1.0.Mo.YcGSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1796 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: Yusmar tests continued. Date: 96-10-25 14:34:38 EDT From: FZNIDARSIC To: FZNIDARSIC Many more tests of the Yusmar system have just been completed. For the latest see: http://members.aol.com/fznidarsic/index.html or if you system supports auto E-Mial links, pick the link below. See the latest at Yusma r Tests Frank Znidarsic From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 12:27:06 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA05003; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 11:48:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:45:19 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: EEG entrainment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Q61a91.0.3E1.RjGSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1797 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Vo., This whole field of brain actuated devices is so scattered and poorly understood ... mis represented and so on it would take me pages to bring you up to speed. The BEST thing to do is to look through the gizmo adds ... I think there is one in the latest Wired, call the 'foof' science mags like Omni and Discover and see if anyone is either adverstising or for press releases... get the idea? But the BEST thing to do of all is to educate yourself .... read some regular biomedical engineering texts, talk to some doctors in the field. Would you expect to knw the really effective ins and out of auto racing or fly fishing with no background? Yes it is interesting. and 'cars' range from models, to go carts, to chevvys, to jet powered Bonneville Salt Flats. J On 25 Oct 1996, Chuck Davis wrote: > On 25 Oct 1996 12:17 -0400 (+0400), John Schnurer wrote to me: > > > There are maybe 20 such 'systems' either on the market now or > > soon to be released ..... prices range from $ 200 to $ 25K > > Please, tell me more about this, John. I'm very interested in this > process. $72k is a bit much ;) > > > On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Scudder,Henry J wrote: > > >> John > >> As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, > >> have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer > >> which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would > >> be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available > >> for a researcher to try and develop this? > >> -Hank Scudder > >> > >> ---------- > > > My personal outfit has trouble finding the 'hat' .... much less > > the rest! > > How come the hat is a problem? > > Thanx, > -- > .-. .-. > / \ .-. .-. / \ > / \ / \ .-. _ .-. / \ / \ > -/--Chuck Davis -------\-----/---\---/-\---/---\-----/-----\-------/-------\-- > RoshiCorp@ROSHI.com \ / \_/ `-' \ / \ / > \ / `-' `-' \ / > `-' `-' > Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. > -Albert Einstein- > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 14:15:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id NAA06847; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 13:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <2.2.32.19961025210608.0067b804@mail.eskimo.com> X-Sender: ghawk@mail.eskimo.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:06:08 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Gary Hawkins Subject: Re: Institutions and policies that can bring us closer to workable free energy (fwd) Resent-Message-ID: <"3PxO23.0.og1.YdISo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1798 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:01 AM 10/25/96 -0700, you wrote: > >As I mentioned in an earlier posting, Brian O'Leary and I are in the final >stages of preparing an article for the general public on free energy >developments, which we will first submit to the NY Times Magazine. We would >like to get your views regarding the kinds of policies or practices by public >or private groups that would best facilitate research and development in the >field. How can people best use the Internet? Should new groups be formed? > Would it be useful to create a free energy mutual fund? What role should >government play? Active investor in research? Conduct research in >government laboratories? Or should government just get out of the way? >Are new institutions needed? We need to somehow encourage investors in private enterprise to take a look at farout science. A mere mention toward that by government to reduce the stigma surrounding it might help tip the balance. Success stories from those who invested in individual research, which later became well-known companies, like Physio-Control, might help. The National Science Foundation would be an example of where government involvement simply becomes too cumbersome, political, and beaurocratic. If that were not so, they would be funding cold fusion, and many smaller ones less well publicized. A good idea, I might call it a *New* Energy Mutual Fund. And yes, as public as it can possibly be, with a newsgroup for it, and a website to provide daily news about it. When it comes to, for example, the unusual pieces of metal sent to Art Bell, this group, if done right, would jump on that like a mouse on cheese. It would approach people doing research, not wait for them to make a trek to the top of some lofty mountain and "apply". Just some miscellaneous thoughts. Gary Hawkins ------------------------------------------------------------------ Horizon Technology Tomorrow's Technology Today http://www.eskimo.com/~ghawk/ Seattle, WA From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 15:59:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA26259; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:30:05 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 15:30:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Ultrasound and Thermocouples, Thermistors Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:28:25 +0000 Message-ID: <19961025222823.AAA23236@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"j90QU.0.6Q6.izJSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1800 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Does anyone know how to measure temperatures with either thermocouples or thermistors in the presence of 30 KHz sound ? I found that thermocouple readings give strongly negative readings and that thermistor readings jump upward a few degrees when 30 KHz frequency is present. These are not thermal effects since the readings drop immediately to the expected readings when the oscillator is turned off. At frequencies below 3 KHz (I didn't check frequencies between 3 KHz an 30 KHz) both thermocouple and thermistor behavior appear to be normal. I am using a PCL-812PG board in a 486 computer to gather the analog signals from the transducers. Voltage measurements, taken at the same time as the transducer readings, were normal in the 30 KHz field. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 17:24:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA07174; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:18:25 -0400 (EDT) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Ultrasound and Thermocouples, Thermistors In-Reply-To: <19961025222823.AAA23236@LOCALNAME> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"6k7473.0.0m1.naLSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1801 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear VO, If any of you do A/D .... especially in these environments ... pleas please please put [go find a ham radio hardware person] a good parallel choke/pi and or ladder networks in .....BEFORE A/D board. On Fri, 25 Oct 1996, Edwin Strojny wrote: > Does anyone know how to measure temperatures with either thermocouples or > thermistors in the presence of 30 KHz sound ? I found that thermocouple > readings give strongly negative readings and that thermistor readings jump > upward a few degrees when 30 KHz frequency is present. These are not > thermal effects since the readings drop immediately to the expected readings > when the oscillator is turned off. At frequencies below 3 KHz (I didn't > check frequencies between 3 KHz an 30 KHz) both thermocouple and thermistor > behavior appear to be normal. > > I am using a PCL-812PG board in a 486 computer to gather the analog signals > from the transducers. Voltage measurements, taken at the same time as the > transducer readings, were normal in the 30 KHz field. > > Ed Strojny > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 19:25:57 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA01161; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 19:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 19:21:07 -0700 (PDT) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:19:28 -0400 Message-ID: <961025221928_1280973213@emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, RVargo1062@aol.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, Puthoff@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Subject: embeded commands Resent-Message-ID: <"G1U97.0.zH.HMNSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1802 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In case you like the way I embeded a command into your email. I hope it works on all browsers. Example. See home page at Yusmar Tests And you would like to do the same. Make a local file (in notebook or some other text processer) like the one below. The file below is the link above. It links the blue icon to http://members.aol.com/fznidarsic.index.html. (HTML) (P) See home page at (A HREF="http://members.aol.com/FZNIDARSIC/index.html")Yusmar Tests (/A) (/P) (/HTML) Replace the http address with your address. Replace Yusmar Tests with your title. Replace the parentheses ( ) with angle brackets < >. I had to use parentheses in the example in order to show the code. Cut and paste the link into you email. Wah Lah...Linked Email. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 19:59:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14690; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:37:02 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 14:37:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <961022210103_72240.1256_EHB39-1@CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 17:33:52 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Critique of the NHE Experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"QRzBr2.0.Pb3.iBJSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1799 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is an excellent critique which will help reinforce the idea in the view of the skeptics that cold fusion with solid palladium cathodes does not work. The implication as I read it is that the two main labs doing solid palladium CF, SRI and NHE, have now only null results. The solid rod technique is the oldest and most thoroughly investigated. If that technique has now been debunked then perhaps it will only be a matter of time until the newer techniques are also similarly disproved. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 20:25:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA12114; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:23:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 20:23:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 22:23:30 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199610260323.WAA12066@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: Ultrasound and Thermocouples, Thermistors Resent-Message-ID: <"d3YwF3.0.Cz2.4HOSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1803 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Edwin Strojny wrote: >Does anyone know how to measure temperatures with either thermocouples or >thermistors in the presence of 30 KHz sound? >thermistor readings jump upward a few degrees when 30 KHz frequency is present. Something about yr data acq inputs must be partially rectifying the noise caused by the kHz signals...causing a DC offset. Generally I find thermistors much better in noisy environments than thermocouples. Stay with the thermistors and put a hefty RC filter on their signal right at the input to the ADC board. You can use a 1 second time constant and you'll still have plenty of response for most thermal things. You'll need to use good low-loss capacitors such as mylar or polypro....I have not had good results trying to use electrolytics in this situation because their leakage can make a perceptible change in the measured resistance of the thermistor. This having been said, I must admit that I have run some really noisy experiments where I had to turn off the noise briefly in order to read the temperatures accurately. just ask if you want more details or suggestions. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Fri Oct 25 21:10:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA20021; Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:00:47 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 25 Oct 1996 21:00:47 -0700 (PDT) Date: 25 Oct 96 23:58:52 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Critique of the NHE Experiments Message-ID: <961026035852_72240.1256_EHB87-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"yzSvB1.0.eu4.jpOSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1804 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Larry Wharton writes: "This is an excellent critique which will help reinforce the idea in the view of the skeptics that cold fusion with solid palladium cathodes does not work." Yes, it probably will, but that is only because the "skeptics" know nothing about the subject and because they will read the first half of the critique, skip the part about the French Nuclear Agency and SRI replicating Pons & Fleischmann and jump to an absurd, totally unwarrented conclusion. The French work was directed by one of the six agency commissioners -- a man at the highest level in the French scientific & government establishment. He expresses no doubt whatsoever that the effect is real, massive, and nuclear. "The solid rod technique is the oldest and most thoroughly investigated. If that technique has now been debunked . . ." It has not been debunked. Not by a million miles! IMRA Europe has been running a cell at boiling, producing hundreds of watts, for three months. When the the French Nuclear Agency decided to replicate them, they did it right and got a huge excess at very high power levels. The INFN Italian researchers brought several rock solid Pd D2O results to ICCF6, showing helium and x-rays correlated with the heat. They also descsribed scaled up devices producing 200% excess at several hundred watts. The evidence for Pd D2O CF is stronger by far than it has ever been before. " . . . then perhaps it will only be a matter of time until the newer techniques are also similarly disproved." No technique has been disproved. Anyone who thinks that is reading his own fantasy into the critique, and has never read any of the references. That is an absurd distortion of what the document says, reflecting on the wistful hope that CF will go away -- mere wishful thinking. Wharton is like a Christian Scientist who has glanced at a headline in the newspaper saying "Antibiotics No Longer Effective in Treating Some Forms of TB" and who has jumped to the conclusion that no disease anywhere ever responds to any form of antibiotic, so that we can abandon medical science and ignore experimental evidence from now on. The only thing the NHE experiments proved was that if you ignore the literature and use the wrong materials at the wrong temperatures with mistaken protocals, the experiment does not work, even when you repeat these mistakes 50 times in a row. I could have told them that years ago. Fleischmann *did* tell them. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 03:48:10 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA20179; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 03:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 03:47:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: 26 Oct 96 06:45:29 EDT From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Message-ID: <961026104529_100060.173_JHB83-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"vP9Ui2.0.Dx4.kmUSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1805 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >> Angels rush in etc. Norman << OK so I meant "Fools rush in" N. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 04:12:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA21664; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 04:11:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 04:11:34 -0700 (PDT) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961026111547.00738504@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 04:15:47 -0700 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Decoding EEG X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"Q-WcF.0.QI5.a7VSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1806 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I would like to point out a possible connection between the "inventor dependent" phenomenon discussed here under the Hieronymous machine thread and one of the KeelyNet files (filename ALTSCI1.*) This file provides very nice correlation between the EEG emanations from human brain and physical effects when working with o/u devices. Especialy these ones using pulsating magnetic fields or high voltage or rotating objects like the Podletnkov antigravity. 1) Please notice how similar the Adams motor is in the arangements of pulsating/rotating magnetic fields. 2) Also please crossreference the SHAPE of "plasma glow" around one of the Hamel flying disks (http://www.cascadia-net.com/magnet/p66.htm) and the shape of the electical exitation field described in the KeelyNet article. 3) Taos Hum, HAARP, Searl, ESP, Podletnkov antigravity spinning disk and all kinds of weird stuff could be related here. I am including an excerpt from this article below for your convenience. (It seems far out, but try to read it all and correlate) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...Excitation and accelerated time, less inertia, gravity, and mass, are all connected. Ships may travel hundreds of times faster than light without time dilation, and energy needed for this is very little. Communications are also FTL. EEG waves from 1-60 Hz (cycles per second) ARE telepathy, but they come from fast time, so they are compressed in time or bandwidth. Ordinary radios are not quick enough to detect the information. All we detect is this 60 Hz signal at light speed but information inside travels faster than light. And an ordinary radio will reveal the signal when in an excited state.* Man left to himself dreams of a paradise where technology and nature are in perfect harmony, where he is immortal and free of disease, needs, and wants, and this can be done directly from mind to product this very day using lightlines. As someone who has worked on the B2 bomber and its more advanced cousins in the Air Force for twenty years, I can tell you the whole story is unbelievable. Twenty hours is too conservative a time estimate for complete explanation. Some crafts we have do use electromagnetism to nullify gravity and even extract hidden information from EEG waves, but these are not deployed and will not be until they are needed. They pump electricity from inside themselves into a sheet of electricity some distance away, exactly as the earth is positive "ground" and the ionosphere a negative sheet. This sheet bends parallel radar waves around the craft like a water droplet in a rainbow, or just like the ionosphere bends radio waves, making for long distance communications. This is a relatively simple and straightforward effect. And it is what Einstein was attempting in Project Rainbow or the Philadelphia Experiment. We desperately wanted radar invisibility. The Germans were engaged in the same effort fifty years ago. But electric vacuum, the vortex field, also causes excitation of atoms in it, which shifts waves in frequency and accelerates time. I am willing to reveal all I know about these things in full detail here. The Air Force feels it has nothing to worry about because nobody would believe these things, even though they require no special admission but are based entirely on relativity and simple electromagnetic laws. First, I tell how electrons are controlled in electromagnetic fields using physics and Maxwell's equations. Then two systems are given for establishing a "permanent excitation" in a volume. The practical system uses a magnetic vortex and weak static field. Next temporal effects are described by contrasting how people in gravity and then excitation fields perceive quanta. Then FTL travel and communications are discussed, as well as how EEG waves are telepathy, but information is compressed in time or bandwidth. By the end you will see there is much more at stake in the government keeping this secret than gravity alone. There are three fields we can use to set up such an "electric vacuum" with external electric sheet. These are: (1) Static magnetic fields (2) Alternating magnetic fields (3) Pulsating (PDC) magnetic fields and we need a description of electromagnetics to understand these. Imagine a permanent magnet with north pole out of your monitor. Its flux can be imagined as a large number of X marks on your screen. An electron moves in the plane of the monitor from left to right. As it cuts flux Lorentz force F = qvB deflects it downward. The electron actually spirals clockwise with radius r = mv / qB, with B in teslas and all other measures in MKSA units. If the electron came from opposite direction it would spiral same direction, or clockwise as we see it. Lorentz force derives from static magnetic fields when there is relative motion between the field and electron. No force is felt when motion is parallel to magnetic flux, only when flux lines are cut. And this static field performs no work. The relevant Maxwell equation here is curl E = -dB/dt, and since tesla density is static here, dB/dt is zero, curl E is zero, and the field is by definition conservative. No work is done on electrons, so we deduce electrons spiral but maintain the same velocity or kinetic energy. Static electrons can also be accelerated by magnetic fields. In that case curl E is nonzero and we see electrons must absorb energy, or be accelerated, by the time-variant magnetic field. This case is actually the same as the above case, but as current changes in the coil flux expands or collapses from the coil. There is still relative motion and electrons still experience the same Lorentz force. For example, sending pulsating instead of direct current through the same coil in the same direction causes the same spiraling effect on static electrons as the static field had on moving electrons. Sending AC through causes periodic reversals of electrons. The field around the coil can be given by E(r,t) = 1/2pir*dF/dt, where F is flux in webers. The electric lines form concentric circles about the coil, and another way to say this is E = f * B, where f is frequency in Hz, B is average tesla density of a periodic current, and E is volts per meter close to the coil. These three fields, static, AC, and PDC make for any manipulation of electrons. There are two ways to produce the sheet. Both require pumping electrons from inside the ship into a sheet of electricity. The first does this from a central magnetic pole. A strong static magnetic field is set up, and PDC is sent oppositively through the pole to set up circular electric lines about it. Electrons are accelerated circularly about the pole and as soon as they move they experience an outward centrifugal deflection qvB. Each electron which leaves the center of the ship creates a positive hole, and so there is also an internal electric centripetal field F = knqq/rr, where n is the number of electrons removed to the sheet. Each electron has potential energy - kq/r, and the ship has the same potential energy, so it is excited, because excitation is the only way matter absorbs electric energy without heating. Also, one may view removing an electron from an atom as "exciting it past ionization potential." The problem here is electrons are limited to speed of light, and one may assume they gain lightspeed or close to it instantly in any tangible electric field (by v=Eqt/electronmass provided collision time is high enough). Thus speed of light acts to limit qvB centrifugal force and so limit power in the field to around 40 megajoules, very marginal. Another better way is to use a four-coil, two-phase ring, exactly as in two-phase AC motor stators. Its field is in every way that of a real rotating permanent magnet. Imagine such a magnet in the plane of your monitor. We can show flux cuts electrons in such way Lorentz force creates unidirectional electric lines through the monitor. That is, electrons are blown through the screen as air molecules are blown through a circular fan blade. Now suppose we set up the same magnet as above, a coil into the monitor. Its magnetic flux is perpendicular to that of the rotating magnetic field. Electrons are sucked from in front of the monitor, but since they are limited to lightspeed they enter the static field only so far before assuming a circular orbit through Lorentz deflection. Electrons are pulled from inside the ship parallel to static lines, but when they begin to cut static lines just below your monitor screen they spiral out to the same radius as above. Without velocity greater than light they can go no farther. So lightspeed, once our enemy, now means we can put almost any energy into the field we wish. No energy is lost in the field except by collisions, which are minimal at higher electric frequencies, and zero in vacuum. Field density is a function solely of magnetic vortex frequency and tesla density, or electric field strength in volts per meter. The stronger this electric field the more electrons are stripped from inside the ship and more dense the electric sheet becomes. Very little energy is needed at higher frequencies to produce sheets dense enough to bend light, even with its high frequency. Note here an oblate spheroid sheet of charge is formed which may become very dense. Anything in it will be heated electrically. Inside there are powerful electric fields, though these are no more dangerous than the 10 kV/m field under a thundercloud, and there is no internal Joule heat because electrons are held outside the ship. Charge in either hemisphere rotates opposite to that in the other hemisphere. This can be seen by considering Lorentz force. Electrons entering the static field from outside are deflected one direction. Those leaving the static field from inside are deflected in the opposite direction. This bears similarities to Coriolis force, and if so, so be it. Let this be indicative of a gravitational connection. We find this field also accelerates time, which can be seen as decreasing gravity, mass, or inertia through relativity. One way to view this is as follows. A ship near light has its time slow, and this may happen so much the universe dies in a blink of these peoples' eyes. Since time is slower one may say they see more cycles per second and frequencies are shifted up. But this does not happen. Instead, they are not quick enough to perceive as much information as we do. So according to Hartley's law their incoming frequencies and bandwidths are compressed. People outside, on the other hand, see these people moving extremely slowly so more information is available to them, and they see bandwidth and frequencies boosted. This is only a relative effect, because quantum energy is conserved, and so real information and frequency of light are constants when absolutely figured. But different temporal and excitation levels of the observer obviously change frequency perception. Excitation causes shifts opposite to gravity. For instance, if atoms are excited electrons are farther from nuclei, and under less electric force. They are more loosely bound. Now incoming quanta of the same hv energy cause greater transitions than before, and so appear to have more quantum energy or frequency. Waves from inside seem to be high in energy but low in energy or frequency to people outside. Again, like gravity, this is a conservative field, affecting only perception. However, its shift is opposite to gravity's. Since gravity's effect on frequency derived from slowing of time what effect other than accelerating of time does excitation derive from? Note here excitation does not have to cause actual transitions to higher orbital to give frequency shift effects. Given Schrodinger wave constraints such is not possible. With electric vacuum suction on electrons incoming quanta still take less energy to cause transitions. The main problem we had was finding means for excitation without relaxation, which normally releases all stored energy in ten billionths of a second. Energy required for any significant frequency shift is enormous. Setting up a weak static magnetic field allows a sort of resonance effect, where massive amounts of energy are absorbed by the field without release. Excitation and resonance are only obtainable when relaxation is eliminated as it can be in the magnetic vortex system. What uses are this? Ships can travel faster than light (FTL). Time may be accelerated by excitation four times. Then when we travel close enough to light, the ship simply regains the mass or time it originally had, but it is traveling four times faster than light when that happens. Thus any star in this or any other galaxy are within reach without time dilation and with very little energy input. Remember, NO supplemental energy is needed in vacuum due to infinite collision time. Another way to view FTL travel is the people in the ship may accelerate to 200 meters per second in their seconds. Someone outside has four seconds for one of theirs, so the ship seems to them to travel at 800 meters per second to an external observer. Faster than light communications are also possible, but not without another effect. Suppose we emit a 1 to 60 MHz (million cycles per second) signal from a field where time is accelerated one million times. This is possible because energy required decays exponentially for faster times. The signal leaves and shifts down to 1 to 60 Hz. Anyone outside sees only this 60 Hz "magnetic wave" traveling at light. The information inside is compressed in time or bandwidth. But it does penetrate water and other matter very well. Another antenna in the same one million field expands bandwidth, or is "quick" enough to get at the original information. This again shows the interconvertibility of time and bandwidth. And EEG waves from 1-60 Hz contain more information than presently thought. The reason for FTL propagation is the same as a stationary observer looking at light in a light clock on a relativistic ship. Light seems to travel faster in this ship and since Einstein took lightspeed to be constant, he saw time must slow on the ship. But this gravity field makes light travel faster relative to the temporal state of the stationary observer (ref INSIDE RELATIVITY by Mook and Vargish). In our case, the signal travels a million times faster than light because gravity outside the ship is a million times greater. Aliens do exist, but the public is taken for granted (to put it mildly). NASA's SETI is complete rubbish, cover-up at its worst. They scan at one to 10 GHz (Billion cycles per second). No alien transmission occurs above a 100 Hz and NASA knows this. They are all compressed in time, like subspace communication on Startrek. Nothing else has comparable efficiency. Light takes perhaps fifteen minutes to reach another planet, but is all but instantaneous with compression. EEG wave telepathy is another cover-up, even though brain-related signals have never been detected anywhere else on our spectrum. By mutual exchange of information links can be made through lightlines, which convey force, energy, or information even through walls. This gives complete control over reality itself, and it is hard to overstate its importance. Communication with the dead, and eternal life are easy, so too manufacturing directly from mind to product. Truth be told this planet will be socialist, but only when matter is so ridiculously easy to manipulate anyone who says "pay me" will have to mean it as a joke. Telepathy is only thought from fast time, or excitation field (as in the brain), while matter is only thought frozen in slow time, or gravity field; but since gravity and excitation are one spectrum there is no separation between mind and reality, life or death. Aliens have given clues along the way. After we conducted THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT, we were mailed a book THE CASE FOR THE UFO: ANNOTATED EDITION with quotes written in the margins by philosophical aliens who said: "Anyone wishing to know how our ships are powered would have to realize electrons cross what would in their terms be millions of lightyears of space, and they leave in their wake a magnetic node, or vortex, as this one thing is variously called. Realizing this, as Einstein did, it makes it clear how matter may be made into energy, dissolute, or invisible." This book as well as George Adamski's INSIDE THE FLYING SAUCERS were required reading for us in the Air Force. Other truthful sources are found in THE FLYING SAUCER READER by Jay David who said: "You wonder how our ships operate. They operate in resonating electromagnetic fields, just as planetary bodies do." and BEYOND EARTH: MAN'S CONTACTS WITH UFOS by Ralph and Judy Blum, who said "The ship is powered by reversible electro-magnetism. Reversing magnetic and electric energies allows us to nullify gravity and control matter." The greatest source of information is Adamski's book though. Taking these sources as accurate would have been all the public would have needed to come to the conclusion excitation nullifies gravity. Look at it this way. If gravity can be electromagnetically overcome, which is our only practical way to ever hope to overcome gravity anyway, gravity has to be electromagnetic. Then it must be acting on some electric or magnetic property in matter, due to concept of dual poles. Otherwise no electro-magnetic force could be coupled. This reduces the problem to finding the one magnetic or electrical property intrinsic to all mass, because gravity acts on all mass. Diamagnetism is that universally intrinsic property, but even that is related to distance of electrons from nuclei by formula for magnetic moment M=IA, or moment equals current times loop area. This does not tell whether proximity to or distance from nuclei is antigravity, but directly suggests that correspondence exists. In summary, the public has been misled contemptuously. They have told you aliens are not visiting the Earth and do not exist. Rather than spacecraft, people are seeing the whole planet Venus fly across the sky. Then they start an "effort" to find signals from intelligent beings, which they have already detected below 100 Hz. There have been signals picked up even on the frequencies they scan for, but all signals aliens normally use are below 100 Hz and can never be picked up with conventional equipment. Finally comes the ultimate insult. The world can be better than science fiction has ever dreamt of, with devices to beam information directly into brains for virtual reality, access information from any source, which would make the Internet pale in comparison, derive energy from the sun through its lines, and literally construct anything as if by magic. Everyone on this planet who has died since 1967 did not have to, the only cure for AIDS, cancer, and particularly genetic diseases lies in these lightlines. This is what the public is being kept in the dark about. Perhaps the United States government has reasons for keeping this secret, but they are not in my opinion good ones. Ultimately it is not the Air Force's problem the public does not presently enjoy these things, if you know what I mean. To be heard one has to make some noise. In sum, we reach all stars in this galaxy easier than governors want us to know, but they know as Einstein did. And same EXCITATION accelerates time and allows FTL travel, communications, and upward frequency shifts to boot. Now surprise: aliens transmit invariably below 100 Hz despite bandwidth information constraints, because their waves are compressed in time itself, and EEG waves from 1 to 60 Hz are telepathy we have never found. Ordinary radios in "electric vacuum" fields pick it all out as broadcast, and there are means I know to raise body frequency and use telepathy / clairvoyance in two hours mentally, but all things minds can do machines do and vice versa because there is no division but our belief between realms. Something simple as orbital excitation nullifies gravity and speeds up time. Three mind-stretching proofs: (1) Since our only practical means to nullify gravity is electro-magnetic, gravity must be electromagnetic and due to concept of dual poles acts on an electrical or magnetic property of mass. The only universally intrinsic EM property of mass is diamagnetism, but even this is related to distance of electrons from nuclei (ie; excitation) by magnetic moment M=IA. This logical or Greek method. (2) Permeability and permittivity are directly proportional to distance of electrons from nuclei, thus allowing external magnetic and electric fields to more easily distort excited orbits and store energy in the atom. But according to Maxwell's Wave Equation speed of light is determined by one over square root of permeability times permittivity in ANY spatial region. So excitation must affect speed of light just as relativistic gravity speeds light. This EM refract method. (3) A ship near light has slow time, or great gravity / mass, than static one . So people inside see the universe die in the blink of an eye. How can they be quick enough to get as much information as we get? And does this not through Hartley's Bandwidth=Information Law suggest bandwidth AND frequencies have been divided by tau time-dilation? Aha! This clear and present danger ironclad proof. Now an excited atom. Its electrons are farther from nuclei, under less electric force, and incoming quanta of same E=hv quantum energy or frequency now cause greater transitions than in unexcited atoms. So person in an excited field perceive incoming waves as higher frequency, and several waves, boosted in bandwidth or information content as well. Hartley's law===> bandwith=information. So since gravity compressed bandwidth by slowing time, excitation here must be accelerating time, or converting mass into energy. Here we see excitation overcomes gravity, mass, and time in not one but THREE independent proofs with yet another coming later. But consider great potential use. There are several uses for this. A ship of hydrogen excited into n=2 orbital. Time accelerates four times using E=hv calculations. It can now go four times faster than light before regaining its original gravity or mass! Proxima Centauri is one year away. But this takes 1o eV per atom. With only 3.6 eV more we totally ionize hydrogen (i.e.; frequency shift it to infinity). Thus we are not limited by distance or time in travel as Relativity suggests, because energy needed is not linear but exponentially decays for higher speeds. Or another application based on frequency shift. We have never picked up telepathic signals, but have picked up EEG waves at 1 to 60 Hz. If these enter an excited region they shift up in frequency (or relatively perceived quantum energy), expanding bandwidth, and baring their original information content, beautiful like goat's milk. This is surprises. Thought reigns as physical as we are, but it operates from faster time; likewise, matter is only thought frozen in slow time. Thus we shall be using a mental energy before we can reach the nearest star. This paragraph alone has significant implications because (1) Machines can be built to control reality directly (2) The human mind from my experience can produce these fields (3) If brains produce energy for such great downshift energy to travel between stars must be meager indeed. All these things derive from excitation, a simple quantum mechanical occurrence, but how do we produce excitation without heat or normal 0.01 microsecond relaxation? Means to produce permanent electric vacuum is needed, for as long as the field is applied. This can be done using two-phase four coil system (precisely as in AC motor stator but higher frequency) to create a rotating magnetic field. An orthogonal static magnetic field then limits electron flux to spherical surface some distance from ship, which adds potential energy to these electrons (and contra wise the ship). There is no heating of crew because electron flux is outside ship but they are exposed to high electric fields as under thunderclouds. Earth operates in such magnetic vortex. It explains the earth's positive ground charge, its negative ionosphere layer, and Coriolis force. The last is explained because Lorentz deflection in above electric vacuum system is in opposite directions in north and south fieldsphere hemisphere, so electrons in different hemispheres revolve in opposite directions about the ship. High frequencies are needed to provide sufficient voltage and increase collision time for electrons so energy is not wasted. Again electrons are responsible for inertia, causing water to lag in different directions in different hemispheres. The electric sheet has force and inertia but the ship does not. And this is another proof for antigravity. Yet another use presents itself. The ionosphere bends radio waves depending on their angle and frequency because they travel at different speed through this highly charged region. This was alluded to in permeability and permittivity. Why not create such intense field around a ship parallel radar or light rays are bent around the ship, like water droplets in a Rainbow. This could be done if the field were intense enough and right distance from the ship. And it is invisibility, though anyone in such fields could escape faster than we perceive, because their time is faster. The science is sound (more or less). From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 05:04:34 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA25527; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 05:03:32 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 05:03:32 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:03:16 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Critique of the NHE Experiments In-Reply-To: <961026035852_72240.1256_EHB87-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"DO6L-2.0.nE6.IuVSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1807 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed wrote: > > It has not been debunked. Not by a million miles! IMRA Europe has been running > a cell at boiling, producing hundreds of watts, for three months. When the > the French Nuclear Agency decided to replicate them, they did it right and > got a huge excess at very high power levels. The INFN Italian researchers > brought several rock solid Pd D2O results to ICCF6, showing helium and x-rays > correlated with the heat. They also descsribed scaled up devices producing > 200% excess at several hundred watts. The evidence for Pd D2O CF is stronger > by far than it has ever been before. > I got interested in CF again after watching the excellent CBC production on CF back in 1993. What really caught my attention was the video of a P&F cell boiling away. P&F now have a cell boiling for 3 months? Is there any chance they'll let anyone outside of IMRA look at it? Is the French Nuclear Energy result proprietry too? Boiling cells are pretty dramatic. Can you get one of those going in your CF exhibit in New Hamshire? Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 05:45:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA28626; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 05:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 05:44:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:44:24 +1000 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: "NASA'S Fling With Anti-Gravity" In-Reply-To: <961024143448_76016.2701_JHC114-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"XlIM43.0.7_6.zUWSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1808 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 24 Oct 1996, Terry Blanton wrote: > Rick Monteverde asks: > > "Terry, is Dr. Li easy to listen to and understand in person, or would you guess > the problem is with the math or some incompleteness or vagueness in the > theories?" > > Rick, look at the broad expertise required to understand Dr. Li's papers! > Almost every field of science is involved. How do you get a peer review on a > paper for which there might be only a half-dozen qualified people in the entire > world? > This is not the point. No one would pay much attention to a paper predicting that gravity would be shielded if blah, blah and supported by a lot of maths unless it was written by Hawking or some other leader in the field. I got the impression that Li was doing experimental work. Such a paper should be easy to understand if there's a 2% effect. eg. "A previously balanced beam was placed above the disk. It was observed to be displaced by amount corresponding to a 2% reduction in the weight on the end. Table 1 shows the effective weight above the disk for a wide variety of materials and masses" etc. etc. Easy to understand. If she hasn't got results like that, why on earth does she think she's in line for a Nobel prize? > BTW, is there anyone on the list that knows whether it is true that spin-zero > particles with mass would exhibit a repulsive gravitational force? I know this > was inherent in some inflationary theories in cosmology; but, I can't seem to > find the confirmation I need in a format that I can understand. After all, I'm > JAE*. > > Terry > * Just an Engineer General Relativity admits only attraction between all types of masses. There are a million other attempts at Quantum Theories of gravity all designed by highly intelligent and imaginitive theorists. None of them really work. The bottom line is we don't understand Gravity at a quantum level so don't trust any Quantum theories of them. On the other hand I think you may be getting a bit mixed up with the "false vaccum" required to drive the inflationary stage of the Big Bang. In this model a new spin 0 particle field is required to fill all space in such a way as to provide a non zero energy density in all space. Under these circumstances the space-time expands much faster than the speed of light, in fact at an exponentially increasing rate until the curvature of space -time is reduced sufficiently for the vacuum to decay to its present ground state and the expansion continues much more leisurely at light speed. Very interestingly the Standard Model of particle physics REQUIRES a spin 0 particle, the Higgs particle, to be present throughout space-time with a non-zero expectation value. The effect of this particle is to provide mass to all particles in the standard model. When you calculate the mass density of this particle in space you find that the self attraction of space is too small by 50 orders of magnitude! Hal Putoff has done many calculations of the effects of the Zero Point Energy fluctuations which can be used to provide mass to particles. All in all it shows we don't understand Space-time or the vaccuum very well. That Scientific American writer who claimed we are at the end of Science was right out to lunch. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 08:04:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA17726; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 08:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 08:03:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: 26 Oct 96 11:01:47 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Revised Open Letter to NHE Message-ID: <961026150147_72240.1256_EHB87-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"nSQ_l2.0.tK4.xWYSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1809 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex I apologize for cluttering the bandwidth with the same document twice, but I have made substantial revisions to this letter, so I thought I should post the latest version. I have received many valuable corrections, suggestions and comments about it. I thank T. Mizuno, S. Chubb, E. Storms, E. Mallove, C. Tinsley and others for their assistance. I have added additional references to the literature describing the role of temperature in promoting the cold fusion reaction. Let me repeat, if you have corrections or comments, please e-mail them to me by the end of November. If you disagree with my analysis and you wish to publish a rebuttal in the magazine to be published along with this Open Letter, please feel free to submit it by e-mail or regular mail by the end of November. I will be publishing some details about ICCF6 here in a few days. My review has been delayed because of a snafu getting tapes of the lectures. - Jed Rothwell 2050 Peachtree Industrial Court, Suite 113-A Chamblee, Georgia 30341 ------------------------------------------- Critique Of NHE Experiments An Open Letter to The NHE Lab Directorate by Jed Rothwell October 25, 1996 Version Over the last three years I have felt a growing sense of unease about the NHE cold fusion program. At ICCF6, during the visit to the NHE lab, and in conversations with Pons, Fleischmann, Kennel, Asami and others, I found my worst fears have been justified. The program has great promise, but in execution it is deeply flawed. Let me be blunt, and let me make some strong statements and recommendations. In my opinion, the equipment at the NHE lab is splendid, the attitude of the researchers is laudable, but the experiments are an unmitigated disaster. I feel that you are making many fundamental mistakes. Fleischmann agreed with me. Your researchers are ignoring techniques described in papers by Ikegami, Storms, Fleischmann, Celani and other leading researchers. After hearing the presentations, meeting with your people, and discussing this work, my impression is that they are ignoring the literature. In the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Ikegami [1] spelled out four essential conditions to achieving the cold fusion effect: high current density, high loading, a cathode temperature over 80 deg C, and proper surface preparation. Celani adds a fifth essential: non-equilibrium triggering conditions. (Storms disagrees, but most other experts say a trigger is needed.) Storms [2] and Cravens [3] describe essential characteristics of the palladium, and methods of testing it. I believe you have met the first two conditions listed by Ikegami and ignored all the others. As McKubre pointed out in his closing remarks, an SRI-style flow calorimeter is designed to ensure maximum equilibrium, unchanging temperatures, and a cool cathode. I have been saying for a long time that if you deliberately set out to design an instrument to prevent the CF effect, you could not come up with a better one. I do not understand why it has taken McKubre so many years to realize what others have been saying all along. At ICCF3, ICCF4 and ICCF5 Fleischmann [4, 5, 6] described the essential role of high temperatures in promoting the reaction, in what he calls "'positive feedback' between the temperature and the rate of excess enthalpy generation." At ICCF4, Storms [7] characterized the role of temperature, and McKubre [8] described one of the most dramatic heat bursts in the SRI flow calorimeter, which occurred in 1993 when the flow was accidentally blocked and the cathode temperature rose higher than planned. McKubre pointed out that this confirmed Fleischmann's hypothesis. Why has the NHE ignored these vital lessons about temperature, repeated year after year by leading scientists? In addition to the fundamental errors described in the literature, experts have made specific criticisms of the materials and techniques. For example, at ICCF6 Fleischmann told me that glassware is much better than Teflon for these long duration experiments. I think it is likely your funding will be cut to zero in a few years. Frankly, if I were in charge of the project, I would cut it to zero now, and I would allocate money to other groups that have achieved significant results. I believe you face a crisis, and in such times I follow the advice of the Duke of Albany in the closing lines of King Lear: The weight of this sad time we must obey, Speak what we feel, not what we ought to say. Not only have you ignored the literature, but you have concentrated exclusively on bulk palladium with heavy water, ignoring the easier, better alternatives. You have limited yourselves to the most difficult and unpromising materials and techniques. This is a recipe for disaster. Instead of using the materials that nearly always work, like thin film nickel or gold, or materials that often work, like high-temperature proton conductors, you persist in trying to use bulk palladium at low temperatures, which only worked at SRI years ago, in experiments that even SRI now cannot replicate. It seems the NHE program was set in stone years ago, you have ignored all progress, and you have ignored the setbacks reported by SRI. Scientific research requires flexibility. You cannot set a precisely defined course of action three years ahead of time and then stick to it without alteration and without paying attention to developments in other labs. When researchers repeat a difficult experiment many times over a period of months with no success because there is no alternative, that is laudable, dogged persistence. That kind of heroic dedication and hard work is essential to scientific progress. But when they repeat that same experiment for years without success, ignoring better techniques and disregarding papers by leading scientists describing their mistakes, that is misguided. It shows an inability or unwillingness to learn from experience, and from other scientists. It is a tragic waste of talent. It is folly. The NHE lab is considered the flagship of cold fusion. It has the best equipment and some of the finest, most dedicated and skillful workers. You have the opportunity to make scientific history. You should not squander such talent and resources on unproductive, dead-end experiments. I urge you to open your eyes to some of the well-established, replicated alternatives before it is too late. You should start with a 20-minute taxi trip over to the University of Hokkaido. The experiments being performed there by Mizuno, Ohmori, Enyo et al. are the best in Japan, and among the best in the world. They get consistent results at high signal to noise ratios. They observe dramatic, massive transmutations that produce unnatural isotopic ratios and other indisputable proof of nuclear reactions. This proof is more convincing than the mainstream neutrons, x-rays or tritium results, because the effects are large and easy to detect, non-transient, and cumulative. The longer the reaction runs, the more metal is transmuted. Mizuno's proton conductors [9] have confirmed by Oriani, [10] who is one of the best electrochemists in the world. Enyo and Mizuno's palladium transmutation results have been confirmed by Minevski & Bockris [11]. Ohmori's [12] gold results have been confirmed by Swartz [13]. Ohmori has repeated his experiment more than 50 times, demonstrating massive excess heat and transmutations in every run. He inputs 0.1 watts. After a 3 to 5-day incubation period, he observes between 0.4 and 1.0 watts output, producing a 4 deg C Delta T temperature in his isoperibolic calorimeter. The reaction generates transmuted material at levels 100 times higher than contamination from all sources in the cell, including material with highly unnatural isotopic distribution. I think it is best to replicate experiments done by people close by, who can assist you on a day to day basis. But you might also consider testing CETI style beads fabricated by the University of Illinois, if that can be arranged. Miley [14] reported that up to 40% of the nickel in these beads is transmuted into other metals. You should not attempt to fabricate the beads yourself until you have gained experience using them and you are sure they work with your equipment. You will experience significant problems with things like conductivity and cleanliness, so you should start with beads you know will work when everything else is right. It will take humility and honesty for you to admit it, but you must realize that the Hokkaido University researchers run rings around you. You have much to learn from them. They have been doing cold fusion since 1989. They know far more about electrochemistry than you do. They have degrees in electrochemistry and they have been working on similar experiments for decades, whereas I do not think you have any full-time Ph.D. electrochemists in the NHE lab. You appear to be modeling your work on SRI's program, yet Hokkaido University's results are far superior to anything SRI has ever achieved. I cannot understand why you ignore such splendid work in your own back yard while you attempt to do obsolete experiments performed years ago by SRI, which they themselves have not been able to replicate in the last year. I do not think that you or anyone else can suggest a valid reason to doubt the Hokkaido University results. Their calorimeters are not as sophisticated as those of SRI, but they are simpler and more reliable, and the excess heat is 30 times larger than SRI's relative to input, so it is easier to detect with confidence. Again I must urge you to spend some time in the labs at Hokkaido University observing the experiments and learning the techniques from people who have spent their careers doing electrochemistry. You cannot master a highly technical skill by any other means. I have never heard of anyone gaining a Ph.D. level of understanding of electrochemistry by reading textbooks and scientific papers alone. (And for that matter, let me repeat the hard truth: your people are ignoring many of the key scientific papers.) I urge you to get a fully made-up, prepared cell from Ohmori, bring it back to your lab, and test it with your own instruments. Do not attempt to make one yourself at first. After you have verified and mastered a cell made up by an expert, then it will be time to try to make one yourself. I discussed this work in detail with Ohmori and Mizuno, while I was translating their papers into English. The experiment is much harder than it looks. A step-by-step learning process is essential. You must take advantage of every opportunity to make the job easier and to improve the likelihood of success. You have seen dramatic examples of what can go wrong in your own lab with the Pons and Fleischmann boil-off experiment. Even with some direct, hands-on help from Stan Pons, you were not able to replicate this in 20 attempts. Both SRI [15] and the French Atomic Energy Commission (CEREM) [16] were able to replicate this experiment. Why did they succeed where you failed? I believe it is because: 1. McKubre is an experienced electrochemist; 2. Lonchampt et al. got more direct, hands-on assistance from Pons and Fleischmann over a longer period of time than you did; 3. Lonchampt insisted on doing a rigorous precise, engineering-style replication, down to the last wire. He is an engineer. He works the way an engineer would set up a semiconductor production line: he does everything exactly according to the book, making no attempt to be "creative" or to change anything. He knows that you must master the subject first, then add your own contribution to the field. I saw several gross differences between your boil-off cell and Pons and Fleischmann's, starting with the fact that theirs was half-silvered. I have no idea which differences in the hardware or protocol caused your cell to fail, but since the experiment has now been independently replicated twice, it must be your mistake, not Pons and Fleischmann's. If you had gotten more help, and if you had replicated the experiment with exactly the same glassware and wires, or better yet, if you had practiced with a cell and cathode that had worked repeatedly in France, then your boil-off experiment would have worked as well as CEREM's did. You could have built on that lesson. You might go back and do so now, but it would be better to start with an easier, more reliable experiment like Ohmori's. Footnotes 1. H. Ikegami, "The Next Steps in Cold Fusion," Oyou Butsuri, Vol 62, No. 7, July 1993, p. 717 2. E. Storms, "How to Produce the Pons-Fleischmann Effect," Fusion Technology, March 1996. 3. D. Cravens, "Factors Affecting the Success Rate of Heat Generation in CF Cells," Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Lahaina, Maui, EPRI TR-104188, Vol. 2, 18-1 Voted Best Paper in Conference by Fleischmann 4. M. Fleischmann, "Calorimetry of the Pd ED2O System: from Symplicity via Complications to Simplicity," Frontiers of Cold Fusion; Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Cold Fusion, Nagoya, 1992, ed. H. Ikegami (Universal Academy Press, Tokyo, 1993), p. 47 5. M. Fleischmann, "Calorimetry in the Pd-D2O System: The Search for Simplicity and Accuracy," Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Lahaina, Maui, EPRI TR-104188, Vol. 1, p. 1-13 6. M. Fleischmann, "More about Positive Feedback; more about Boiling," Proc. 5th Intern. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Valbonne, France, IMRA Europe, p. 140 7. E. Storms, "Some Characteristics of Heat Production Using The 'Cold Fusion' Effect," Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Lahaina, Maui, EPRI TR-104188, Vol. 2, p. 4-1 8. M. McKubre, "Loading, Calorimetric and Nuclear Investigation of the D/Pd System," Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Lahaina, Maui, EPRI TR-104188, Vol. 1, p. 5-52 9. T. Mizuno, "Formation of 197Pt Radioisotopes In Solid State Electrolyte Treated by High Temperature Electrolysis in D2 Gas," Infinite Energy, #4 10. R. Oriani, "A Confirmation of Anomalous Thermal Power Generation From A Proton-Conducting Oxide," Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Hokkaido, Japan, O-036. To be published in Fusion Technology, 1996. 11. Z. Minevski, "Two Zones of 'Impurities' Observed After Prolonged Electrolysis of Deuterium on Palladium," Infinite Energy, combined issues 5 and 6, p. 67. 12. T. Ohmori, "Isotopic Distributions of Heavy Metal Elements Produced During the Light Water Electrolysis on Au Electrode," Proc. 2nd Int. Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conf., College Station, Texas, and Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Hokkaido, Japan, TS-004 13. M. Swartz, "Possible Deuterium Production and Light Water Excess Enthalpy Experiments Using Nickel Cathodes," Proc. 2nd Int. Low Energy Nuclear Reactions Conf., College Station, Texas 14. G. Miley, "Nuclear Reaction in Palladium-Hydrogen System," Infinite Energy, #8 15. S. Crouch-Baker, "Mass Flow Calorimetric Studies under Non-Steady State Conditions," Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Hokkaido, Japan, P-004 16. G. Lonchampt, "Reproduction of Fleischmann and Pons Experiments," Proc. 6th Int. Conf. on Cold Fusion, Hokkaido, Japan, O-044 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 10:15:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA14712; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:11:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Tony Rusi To: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> cc: Vortex , vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Revised Open Letter to NHE In-Reply-To: <961026150147_72240.1256_EHB87-1@CompuServe.COM> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"vSyKM.0.ob3.uOaSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1810 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: If you have any of the refernces in electronic form please post them. This was the most informative article I've read in quite a while on CF. Tony Rusi From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 10:15:51 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA15258; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:12:34 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:12:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Ultrasound and Thermocouples, Thermistors Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 07:15:44 +0000 Message-ID: <19961026071542.AAA20559@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"_jG7h2.0.Ik3.0QaSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1811 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks to all for your suggestions. I will try them out. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 10:30:03 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA19705; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 10:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: 26 Oct 96 13:26:53 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: "NASA'S Fling With Anti-Gravity" Message-ID: <961026172653_76016.2701_JHC59-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"b8W4g2.0.ip4.6faSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1812 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Martin Sevior writes: >>I got the impression that Li was doing experimental work. Such a paper should be easy to understand if there's a 2% effect.<< Dr. Li will probably have her model which replicates Podkletnov working within the next two weeks. She is using a 10" disk in a similar configuration as he. >>Easy to understand. If she hasn't got results like that, why on earth does she think she's in line for a Nobel prize?<< Well, her papers to date are leading up to a theory of gravity control; however, she has not made public THE paper which will bring her previous work together. I understand that she thinks she can control gravity 100% on both a repulsive and attractive basis. At this point, all we have are theory and some limited experimental evidence. I'm sure that the results of her Podkletnov replication will make the news and we'll all rejoice over it. But, it's the next experiment she has planned which should make the world take notice; or, if a failure, yawn and go back to sleep. I understand that the new model will be working in late winter, early spring. >> In this model a new spin 0 particle field is required to fill all space in such a way as to provide a non zero energy density in all space. << I was reading a Hawking explanation of the inflationary theory and could have sworn he said that these spin zero particles would have a repulsive gravitational force. Alas, I could be mistaken. But, is not a spin two particle a graviton? I'm just trying to understand how Dr. Li could think that she could control repulsive and attractive gravity; unless, she can control particles with these characteristics. >>That Scientific American writer who claimed we are at the end of Science was right out to lunch.<< Yes, it IS a bit arrogant, innit? Although, someone seems to make this claim about every 100 years. When I hear such a claim, I am always brought back to the Bard and his, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than dreamt of in your philosophy." Many thanks for your explanation, Martin. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 11:42:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA06143; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 11:39:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: 26 Oct 96 14:24:18 EDT From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: "NASA'S Fling With Anti-Gravity" Message-ID: <961026182417_76016.2701_JHC71-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"4o8Xk3.0.vV1.qhbSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1813 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Earlier I wrote: >> But, it's the next experiment she has planned which should make the world take notice; or, if a failure, yawn and go back to sleep. I understand that the new model will be working in late winter, early spring.<< I would like to clarify something. I am not in contact with Dr. Li personally and many of my comments regarding her work are interpretation of 2nd hand and 3rd hand comments from others. I do not understand her work to the point that I feel qualified to judge it. The 100% control and future experiments comments are resulting from email conversations I have had with Mr. Otis Port, the author the Business Week article to whom Dr. Li speculated that her work could lead to vehicles which could transport us into space. I pray that she is correct since it is the only way I will get to visit space in my lifetime. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 14:41:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14942; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 14:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 14:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 13:45:07 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: HOW TO SPIN THATS THE? Resent-Message-ID: <"6m_Au.0.Jf3.6KeSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1814 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >If the magnetic flux is pinned to geographic domains then the >flux of the fixed magnet must constantly uncouple and couple to >new geographic locations on the spinning magnet. If this occurs >then the flux will move back and forth relative to the >conductors. [snip] > >Joe Flynn Joe, A while back I went on a wild flight of imagination by making the assumption flux lines (tubes) existed and could not be broken or cut each other. This led to the concept of core coupled transformers, I=|dB|/dt for current in a secondary coil wrapped on an interlinked "secondary" core, and to wild ideas about intertwining flux lines, and to the "suddenly reluctant torus" (SRT) for generating e+, e- pairs by using electrodynamics and flux momentum in a "baseball seam" SRT to tie flux loops into spinning knots and then pull on them to cause massive angular accelerations. A quick test indicated that the main flaw in the reasoning was the idea that flux tubes could not cut flux tubes. In fact, my basic assumption was that flux is made of quantum stuff, every bit as real as electrostatic fields, and other artifacts of "real" particles, and that it has mass, momentum, location, velocity, and other properties of quantum waveforms, and that it can break away from the matter (quantum waveform) of origin in the form of photons, thus reducing the mass of such matter. The flaw in my assumptions I believe was the idea that the flux tubes could not cut through flux tubes. The superposition principle demands that this be false. My preliminary experiments showed this to be a bogus idea (however flux tubes, if they exist, *do* interact as in the experiment where I floated a N-S magnet over an indentical magnet in the same orientation, and at an elevation several times the length of the magnets. The interaction appears to be dependent upon the *orientation of the flux tubes.) The fact EM waves can pass through each other demands that this be false. Other parts of my assumptions and conclusions appear to have some merit, to yield some new ideas, and I have specific plans for further experiments to follow up on all that. I did post way too much brainstorming material on the subject hoping for some synergism and probably upset or inconveienced a number of vortexians who either don't appreciate hypothesies, theory, or ideas that are probably bogus (sorry for that, but thanks for your tolerance). Getting back to the point, your statement above seems to assume that the field from the two magnets can not remain *completely independent* of each other, that one can not freely move through the other. You are talking about a "net field" or "net resulting vector" as though it is "the filed", though there is no reason to assume the fields actually lose their true physical reality and identity when their combined effect is netted out. Each loop of flux, or flux tube to be more precise, must be either tied to the charged particle of origin, or if not so tied, must exist in the form of photon, and therefore be moving through space at the speed of light. Based on this, I would say it appears that the fact that the wire coil is wrapped around a magnet is not important, except that the static lines of flux in the stationary magnet can align atoms in the rotating magnet (due to permeability) and thus create more rotating lines of flux which can cut the wire coil. Despite all this, each loop of flux from the rotating magnet must cut each turn of wire exactly twice per rotation, thus netting out the voltage induced to zero. Assuming totally uniform magetic properties your device should show no effects, no induced current or voltage. In a practical sense, due to non-uniformities, you may see some AC noise generated. Is this assesment of the results true? Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 16:19:12 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA09148; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 16:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 16:17:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 16:17:06 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty Reply-To: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: next-gen@ix.netcom.com Subject: quantdyne Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"mYDTI1.0.pE2.4mfSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1815 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Here's an interesting URL (see below) passed on to me by Chuck Humphrey on freenrg-L. Interesting not only because it appears to be yet another earthshaking energy invention (YAEEI) (!) , but has signs of Inventor's Disease. If my company came up with a 1000MHZ 80x86 processor, should I: a) start selling them to everyone and his brother. b) keep them secret, and start working on a gold-plated home computer which will have all kinds of desirable custom peripherals and which everyone will just HAVE to buy if they want my processor. Why choice b, of course! "It is very doubtful that the "Energy Chipstm" will be sold individually and separately at retail. (Most consumers don't buy CPU's, they buy the whole computer. Such will generally be the case with Quantadyne's products). Quantadyne's "Energy Chiptm" will be sold as integrated parts of Quantadyne's PETA Powertm systems." .....................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 http://www.quantdyne.com [INLINE] The "Energy Chiptm" _________________________________________________________________ Quantadyne's "Energy Chiptm", the XR-1000, is a hafnium oxide bismuth telluride thermoelectric module that has an average output of 15.5 watts per 200 Delta T F. (This is engineering talk for temperature difference). The thermoelectric material used in Quantadyne's XR-1000 produces about 1 to 2 watts of electrical output per gram (depending on the Delta T). Quantadyne's thermoelectric material itself has a covalent-bond structure very similiar to semi-conductors in that the material is "doped" with impurities to produce electrical "charge carriers". The dynamic direction flow of electrons is determined whether the material is a "n" material, or a "p" material. Quanatadyne can make various types of "Energy Chipstm" from a number of different materials. Quantadyne has a scientist, Joel Miller, who originated a patent for a material that can be used to make an "Energy Chiptm". This material has a unique lattice structure which provides certain advantages over prior art materials. Quantadyne will set up mass manufacturing of Quantadyne's Energy Chip after achieving certain capital formation levels. It is very doubtful that the "Energy Chipstm" will be sold individually and separately at retail. (Most consumers don't buy CPU's, they buy the whole computer. Such will generally be the case with Quantadyne's products). Quantadyne's "Energy Chiptm" will be sold as integrated parts of Quantadyne's PETA Powertm systems. The thermoelectric material used by Quantadyne generates electricity by use of the Seebeck Effect, or more correctly, the Fermi Effect. The Seebeck Effect was discovered in 1821. During World War II, the Soviet military used thermoelectric materials having poor Fermi or Seebeck properties to power small vacuum tube radios. After the war, both the United States and the Soviet military poured lots of effort and money into making better thermoelectric materials. In the late 50's and early 60's, a new family of materials were developed which were much more effective. But the technology still was not efficient enough to be commercially viable. The Soviet's wanted to use thermoelectric materials to create electrical power plant systems for nuclear submarines. But they failed to achieve this goal. In 1995, Joel Miller in conjunction with other team members, produced a new thermoelectric material (using prior art compounds and other materials) having a unique lattice structure. They did it by using sophisticated high vacuum equipment that built the material molecule by molecule. Later in 1995, Joel Miller produced the world's first Post Event Thermal Amplification Thermoelectric Generation system. This technical name has been shortened to PETA Thermoelectric System. Quantadyne's brand name for this new technology is PETA Powertm. For the first time in scientific history, heat that has failed to be converted into electricity (at a thermoelectric event), can be recycled for identical processing through a sequential (thermoelectric) event. A PETA Powertm system does this by amplifying a 6 degree temperature difference (or greater) into a much larger temperature difference. The PETA Thermoelectric system is a revolutionary breakthrough in energy processing! _________________________________________________________________ (This Site Sponsored Exclusively By Bob Armstrong) _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Home Page/ [INLINE] Our Welcome/ [INLINE] The "Energy Chip"/ [INLINE] Fuel Processing/ [INLINE] PETA Power Uses/ [INLINE] Market Projections/ [INLINE] Quantadyne/ [LINK]E-Mail Us! [LINK]Guest Registry [INLINE] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 17:45:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA28496; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 17:43:10 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 17:43:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: Date: 26 Oct 1996 16:40:16 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/26/96 16:40:52 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"ZYOsE.0.Az6.T0hSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1816 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? In response to Jed's comment's on Joe Champion, I just have a couple of questions: A. Wouldn't Hitachi have known they cannot SIMs a powder? B. Couldn't they Xrf some of it? I had some of Joe's work, through Dan York, subjected to Xrf at a local lab a couple months ago. 5 bags of various types of powders. 1 & 2% Gold each, 4-12% Silver---except for the one bag, which had a powder that looked almost exactly like TANG. That assayed 90% gold. The Xrf used was low power, so the results were qualified as being surface only. I passed the results on to Joe. There obviously is NO quality assurance on the source. (I think that's why it hasn't been pushed a lot.) MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 18:51:13 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA10141; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:48:40 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:48:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:48:14 -0700 (PDT) From: William Beaty To: vortex-L@eskimo.com, freenrg-L@eskimo.com, webhead-l@eskimo.com, list physics teaching , vortcor-list@eskimo.com Subject: Put Feynman on a Stamp! Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"7tj3y2.0.3U2.rzhSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1818 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Friends of Tuva and Fans of Richard Feynman, I hope this letter finds you well. In two years, Richard Feynman will be eligible for a commemorative postage stamp to be issued in his honor. You might think it's a no brainer that Feynman should be honored with a stamp: American born and educated, an original thinker whose impact went beyond physics to influence scientists around the world and millions outside of science who have read his popular books; a patriot who served his country in the Manhattan Project and on the Challenger Commission. But no: I learned that Richard Feynman was considered last year by the Citizens Stamp Advisory Committee, and was rejected! Apparently, although enough people had written in on their own for him to be considered, there was not enough organized support for him to gain approval. NOTE: I also learned that when a person has been considered and rejected, the letters that come in for the next twelve months after the rejection have little effect because there is a one year moratorium on reconsideration. Now that the one year moratorium has passed, I want to make sure Feynman is not rejected again. Therefore, if you would like to see a Feynman postage stamp that will be seen by millions of people in the USA and by stamp collectors around the world, please follow these recommendations carefully: 1) Write a letter (with an impressive letterhead, if possible) explaining why Richard Feynman should be honored with a commemorative postage stamp. (For those writing from outside the US, it might help to mention that you, and many others like you around the world, would be interested in a Feynman stamp as a collector.) 2) Address the letter itself to the Citizens Stamp Advisory Committee, but DO NOT send it to Washington, DC. (See note above) 3) Address your envelope to: Feynman Stamp, Box 70021, Pasadena CA 91117 (USA). 4) If you would like to be kept informed about the status of this project, make sure you have envelopes on file at Friends of Tuva HQ. I hope to send a mountain of letters to Washington, DC by the end of this summer! 5) Forward this message to anyone you know who is a fan of Richard Feynman, and who might be persuaded to write a letter of support. Spread the word by contacting friends, and by sending this message to any publication whose readership might be interested in seeing a Feynman stamp. Please emphasize that letters should be sent to Box 70021, Pasadena CA 91117, so they can be gathered together and sent all at once. Thank you for reading this message. Please respond to it soon, while it's on your mind. A letter from you today will help bring Richard Feynman's smile to unsuspecting millions around the world in 1998! - Ralph Leighton (fot@lafn.org) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Petition for a Feynman Stamp Please return to: Ralph Leighton, Box 70021, Pasadena CA 91117 (fot@lafn.org) To the Citizens Stamp Advisory Committee Washington, District of Columbia Fellow Citizens! We, the undersigned, wholeheartedly support Richard Feynman to be portrayed on a United States postage stamp in a denomination that will reach millions of Americans as well as collectors around the world. Feynman is arguably the most illustrious and inspiring scientist born and educated in the USA. Our nation needs more people enthusiastic about science. Putting Richard Feynman's image on a stamp will effectively serve that end. Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ Signature ____________________________________ Date _______ Name (printed) __________________ City & State _________________ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 18:51:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA10015; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:48:18 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 18:48:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: 26 Oct 96 21:46:25 EDT From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? Message-ID: <961027014625_72240.1256_EHB122-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"LQfPN1.0.PS2.WzhSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1817 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Mark Hugo writes: A. Wouldn't Hitachi have known they cannot SIMs a powder? Yes, they knew, and they said the results were meaningless. I gather they tried some tricks to make it work, but no go. B. Couldn't they Xrf some of it? I don't know. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 21:57:27 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA14158; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 21:56:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3272EC99.2BAA@pacbell.net> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 22:01:13 -0700 From: Hank Scudder Reply-To: hjscudde@pacbell.net Organization: Rocketdyne X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Resent-Message-ID: <"Kw8dO2.0.8T3.VjkSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1819 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Mark I was hoping you would disclose your results. Have you tried to duplicate any of this stuff yet? I think Barry is trying, you might ask him if he has any results . Also don't ever use TI chip sockets. They are worthless. I'm having to take several out of my circuitry. The damn contacts open up, and also break off. -Hank Mark Hugo, Northern wrote: > > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? > In response to Jed's comment's on Joe Champion, I just have a couple > of questions: A. Wouldn't Hitachi have known they cannot SIMs a powder? > B. Couldn't they Xrf some of it? I had some of Joe's work, through > Dan York, subjected to Xrf at a local lab a couple months ago. 5 bags of > various types of powders. 1 & 2% Gold each, 4-12% Silver---except for > the one bag, which had a powder that looked almost exactly like TANG. > That assayed 90% gold. The Xrf used was low power, so the results were > qualified as being surface only. I passed the results on to Joe. There > obviously is NO quality assurance on the source. (I think that's why > it hasn't been pushed a lot.) MDH -- 1¾ From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sat Oct 26 23:37:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA01373; Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:35:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <32730154.78F3@rt66.com> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 1996 23:31:44 -0700 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sukhanov@srdlan.npi.msu.su, VIV@rpd.univ.kiev.ua, filimonov@chem.bsu.minsk.by CC: Vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: [Fwd: Biological nuclear transmutation] Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------3B8058C33FDF" Resent-Message-ID: <"lBiZc2.0.NL.6BmSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1820 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------3B8058C33FDF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Dr.Yuri Bazhutov and Prof. Vladimir Vyotskii, I heard about the paper "Experimental discovery of the phonomenon of low-energy nuclear transmutation of isotopes (Mn-55_>=Fe-57) in growing biological cultures," on the Vortex-L discussion group [Vortex-L@eskimo.com in USA], from a post from Filimonov. Can you email me a copy or send a copy by mail or send it to Vortex-L? I know you will appreciate this very creative post by Larry Wharton. I suspect during the whole history of the Earth, life forms have altered the isotopic abundances of elements like carbon and oxygen in order to have a single majority isotope for each important element: C-12 98.90 %, N-14 99.634 %, O-16 99.762 %, Mg-24 78.99 %, Si-28 92.23 %, S-32 95.02 %, K-39 93.2581 %, Ca-40 96.941 %, compared to pre-life abundances. But also, Cl-35 75.77% and Cl-37 24.23%, Ni-58 68.077%, Ni-60 26.223%, Ni-61 1.140%, Ni-62 3.634%, Ni-64 .926%, Cu-63 69.17 %, Cu-65 30.83 %. Does anyone have typical pre-life isotopic data? Rich Murray --------------3B8058C33FDF Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Received: from mail.eskimo.com (root@mail.eskimo.com [204.122.16.4]) by Rt66.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id DAA03896 for ; Sat, 5 Oct 1996 03:04:45 -0600 (MDT) Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA18038; Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:26:00 -0700 (PDT) Resent-Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 14:26:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 4 Oct 1996 17:24:46 -0400 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Biological nuclear transmutation Resent-Message-ID: <"30w7n1.0.lP4.a3OLo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1386 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Now that it appears that nuclear transmutation may be possible under mild conditions it may be worthwhile to look at the hypothesis that it is going on in biological systems. While the chicken and egg stuff is nice because we can study them, I think the case of the ancient, long extinct, metal loving bacteria is more interesting. George Miley has allegedly transmuted large quantities of metals and the question I have is - could these bacteria have been doing the same thing. It is generally accepted that iron ore deposits were caused by iron loving bacteria dying and forming a sedimentary layer. There is good evidence that other metal deposits like gold are caused by the appropriate metal loving bacteria. These bacteria are gone now (what a shame) so we don't see something like a pond with a layer of gold sediment on the bottom. We would have noticed something like that. The question I always had is why did these bacteria want so much of their favorite metal and how could they get so much of it? And then why are they all gone now? Modern bacteria can lay down sediments but there is not any significant metal concentrations in them. One theory could be that the bacteria actually lived on CF energy and the associated metal deposit was actually a nuclear metabolic waste product or the nuclear ash. The bacteria would then die when they had consumed their feed elements. This would reduce the concentration of the feed elements and increase the concentration of the waste elements. If we knew the starting concentration in the earth and the effect of differential settling of the heavy elements then we could compare to the present concentration to find out which elements make good nuclear food. The good food elements should be reduced in concentration and should be the best candidates for CF reactions. Making an unscientific estimate of this I took the concentration of the elements in stony and iron meteorites, from the Scheffield University element web page, and added them (not knowing what weight to use). Then I divided by the observed concentration in the Earth's crust. So then large numbers, larger than expected from the differential settling effect, should indicate good CF reactants. The result in no particular order (except for some of the larger values first) is: Element Ratio (meteor/earth) rhodium 21650 ruthenium 11900 iridium 1210000 osmium 83700 rhenium 2250 platinum 20100 palladium 7733 silver 1.7 gold 1654 tungsten 8.2 mercury 2.6 cadmium .73 molybdenum 5.9 indium .285 thallium .005 lead 4.3 niobium .015 tantalum .043 tin .94 nickel 1025 halfnium .045 aluminum .122 titanium .13 cobalt 350 iron 28 bismuth 10.6 antomony 2.2 copper 8 zinc 1.1 vanadium .43 chromium 36.5 calcium .30 zirconium .094 uranium .006 The first seven elements on this list would be good candidates. A noticeable standout is nickel with a relatively light weight and a ratio of 1025. Where did all the nickel go? It seems too light to have all but one part in 1000 gone to the center of the earth. Maybe something ate it or maybe it was transmuted through geological CF. And that iridium ratio, 1.2 million, is an amazing number. I would believe that number if there only was molecular diffusion in the Earth's core but the eddy diffusion would totally overwhelm the molecular diffusion. The number should be closer to 10 than a million. I think that somehow the vast majority of the Earth's iridium was transmuted. Iridium is likely the most reactive CF element, but of course it is very expensive. Rhodium is up there too and last I checked it was $5,000 a Troy Oz. For a cheap reactant metal nothing beats nickel, but I guess we already knew that. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 --------------3B8058C33FDF-- From bpaddock@execpc.com Sun Oct 27 00:49:19 1996 Received: from mail.usachoice.net (www.usachoice.com [208.0.8.10]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id AAA11398; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 00:49:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from s17.usachoice.net ([208.0.8.67]) by mail.usachoice.net (post.office MTA v1.9.3 ID# 0-13428) with SMTP id AAB233; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 02:47:45 -0500 From: bpaddock@execpc.com (Bob Paddock) To: billb@eskimo.com Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com, next-gen@ix.netcom.com Subject: Re: quantdyne Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 01:01:03 -0500 Reply-To: bpaddock@execpc.com Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Lines: 29 Status: RO X-Status: > Quantadyne's "Energy Chiptm", the XR-1000, is a hafnium oxide bismuth > telluride thermoelectric module that has an average output of 15.5 > watts per 200 Delta T F. (This is engineering talk for temperature > difference). The thermoelectric material used in Quantadyne's XR-1000 > produces about 1 to 2 watts of electrical output per gram (depending > on the Delta T). Quantadyne's thermoelectric material itself has a Is it only coincidental that this sounds like a description of a NASA developed, "Power Stick", for the Department Of Energy developed? I've got the relevant paper setting on my desk at work, I'll post the stuff Monday, unless I find I copy here at home in the mean time. The heat source NASA/DOE used was Uranium Oxide, into a "bismuth telluride thermoelectric converter". Is it only my imagination, or do all of the neat gravity/energy devices work with diamagnetic (Bismuth), or paramagnetic (?) 'stuff'? -- For information on any of the following check out my WEB site at: //www.execpc.com/~bpaddock/ or http://www.usachoice.net/bpaddock Chemical Free Air Conditioning/No CFC's, Chronic Pain Relief, Electromedicine, Electronics, Explore!, Free Energy, Full Disclosure, KeelyNet, Matric Limited, Neurophone, Oil City PA, Philadelphia Experiment. : From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 02:43:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA23072; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 02:41:42 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 02:41:42 -0800 (PST) Date: 27 Oct 96 05:40:55 EST From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: quantdyne Message-ID: <961027104054_76216.2421_HHB42-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"HSkoo.0.Le5.bnpSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1822 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Bob Paddock wrote: > Is it only my imagination, or do all of the neat gravity/energy > devices work with diamagnetic (Bismuth), or paramagnetic > (?) 'stuff'? It's probably your (and my) imagination that _any_ of these neat gravity/energy devices work! However I think you're right about diamagnetism looming as a common denominator to the claims. Could be something. I hope we get a positive report from Huntsville soon. I want to hover-convert my Dodge. - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 06:57:18 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA13260; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 06:55:58 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 06:55:58 -0800 (PST) From: bpaddock@execpc.com (Bob Paddock) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: glr@glr.com Subject: Re: quantdyne Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 08:53:39 -0500 Reply-To: bpaddock@execpc.com Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Lines: 37 Resent-Message-ID: <"8S91R1.0.3F3.yVtSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1823 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In article , you wrote: > >> Quantadyne's "Energy Chiptm", the XR-1000, is a hafnium oxide bismuth >> telluride thermoelectric module that has an average output of 15.5 >> watts per 200 Delta T F. (This is engineering talk for temperature >> difference). The thermoelectric material used in Quantadyne's XR-1000 >> produces about 1 to 2 watts of electrical output per gram (depending >> on the Delta T). Quantadyne's thermoelectric material itself has a > Now that I'm talking to my self... BP> The heat source NASA/DOE used was Uranium Oxide, BP>into a "bismuth telluride thermoelectric converter". I was wrong it was Plutonium-Dioxide, not Uranium Oxide. This is taken from a booklet I wrote on "Implants", like where to buy them and how to build them, follow the links at my WEB page for more info on that, as its not really relevant here.... Powerstick: The least common today, but most interesting, type of Active Implant power source is a Nuclear based one. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory New Technology Report "Miniature Radioisotope Power Source", NPO-19339, describes a small Nuclear power source called a Powerstick. This Nuclear energy source consists of a Plutonium-Dioxide heat source to a Bismuth-Telluride Thermoelectric Converter. The intent of such a small Nuclear device, about the size of a small flashlight, is to power some thing like a pacemaker for several years, possibly even several decades. Figure 5 shows a block diagram of such a device. [Not shown.] From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 10:19:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA19213; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 10:16:50 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 10:16:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3273B4CA.476B@rt66.com> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 11:15:22 -0800 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: wireless@rmii.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com, claytor_t_n@lanl.gov, dashj@sbii.sb2.pdx.edu, jdunn@ctc.org, rgeorge@hooked.net, bhorst@loc100.tandem.com, dag@lsd.tandem.com, xgld@aol.com, ghlin@greenoil.chem.tamu.edu, barry@math.ucla.edu, cc840@freenet.carleton.ca, g-miley@uiuc.edu, mizuno@athena.hune.hokudai.ac.jp, ceti@onramp.net, reeber@aro.ncren.net, edonrott@nkn.net, danyork@iadfw.net, 72240.1256@compuserve.com, 74750.1231@compuserve.com, ggmurray@uriacc.uri.edu, jmyeo@juno.com, dcyeo@juno.com, key@rt66.com, "72507@3443"@compuserve.com, rollo@artvark.com, letters@scicop.org, editors@sciam.com, bssimon@helix.ucsd.edu, sarfatti@well.com, cmurray@uh.edu, lucille@telis.org, 76570.2270@compuserve.com, rmcarrell@aol.com, mica@world.std.com, dennis@wazoo.com, mrandall@earthlink.com, uban@world.std.com, puthoff@aol.com, conte@teseo.it, mhugo@eprinet.epri.com, 100433.1541@compuserve.com, steckly.gary@ic.gc.ca, ine@padrak.com, fstenger@interlaced.net, 100276.261@compuserve.com, little@eden.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, edstrojny@worldnet.att.net, schaffer@gav.gat.com, joeflynn@delphi.com, griggs@mindspring.com, eachus@spectre.mitre.org, zumm@flash.net, rvanspaa@netspace.net.au, ross@pacificnet.net, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov, mwm@aa.net, dacha@shentel.net, msevior@liszt.ph.unimelb.edu.au, russia@a.net, revtec@postoffice.ptd.net, discpub@netzone.com, robert@skylink.net, hawk@eskimo.com, jlogajan@skypoint.com, bockris@chemvx.tamu.edu, hjscudde@pacbell.net, hheffner@anc.ak.net, aki@ix.netcom.com, tessien@oro.net, wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov, mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com, kennel@nhelab.iae.or.jp, b:rerich@itim.org.soroscj.ro, chubb@cfel.nrl.navy.mil, mike_mckubre@qm.sri.com, asami@nhelab.iae.or.jp, mac@iae.or.jp, mokamoto@nr.titech.ac.jp, sukhanov@srdlan.npi.msu.su, filimonov@chem.bsu.minsk.by, VIV@rpd.univ.kiev.ua, info@znergy.com, herman@college.antioch.edu Subject: Transmutations, 1923, spark Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"8xsbO2.0.2i4.HSwSo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1824 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Toby Grotz, I mailed you Friday your electric discharge book (sorry about it getting rained on in car!) and some zeroxes of Wendt's and of Anderson's exploding wire work. R.A. Sawyer and A.L.Becker (1923), Astrophysical Journal, 51, p.37-113, "The Explosion Spectra of the Alkaline Earth Elements", University of Michigan, put a spark from a 40,000 volt, 0.3 MF capacitor on a fine asbestos fiber in air: "...50 calories or so,...The temperature of the explosion is probably about 15,000 degrees C. and the pressure 10 to 20 atmospheres." The fiber had been dipped in water solutions of MgCl2, CaCl2, SrCl2, or BaCl2, giving about 1-2 mg sample of solids per spark. The fiber was reused dozens of times. From six to twenty sparks were needed for each spectrum: "...because of the high pressure and gaseous velocities in the explosion, the lines were rather broad. The problem, however, was principally one of identification and the accuracy attained was sufficient for that." They discarded a lot of spectra data from "impurities", for instance, from air and from brass clamps: Al,Pb,C,N,Cu,Zn: "A striking fact is that in the spectrum obtained from a salt of any one of the four metals used there always appear many of the strong lines of the other three and of cadmium which is also a member of this group of metals. Although no great effort was made to secure purity of the salts used, the other metals of the group could have been present in the solutions only in very minute quantities. This source seems to be effective in producing spectra of substances which are present in the solution only in extremely low concentrations. It is of interest to note that no lines of the acid radical employed, chlorine, not any lines of hydrogen or oxygen have been identified. If any radiations of these elements were produced, their intensities were too low to register with the exposures used." Wow! Plenty of hints of copious nuclear transmutations, of Al, Pb, C, N, Cd, Mg, Ca, Sr, Ba, Cd, Cl, H, and O. They just totally didn't see it. Apparently, most of each 1-2 mg sample was transmutted with each spark, since the Cl, H, and O barely registered. They made no mentions of any products from these open air sparks. Their report seems to me rather confused, which makes me suspicious of low level radiation sickness. They listed about 36 lines, including 10 frank unidentifieds, and at least two of their identifications are false, according to Chemical Rubber Company Handbook data. I found, besides the expected Mg, Ca, Ba, and and Sr lines, one possible Cl line, many close matches for Fe, Cr, V, Ti, Ar, Be, Co, Ge, Cu, Ni, Pb, Al, and K, plus about the same number of possible matches for other elements. Their data was usually accurate +- 0.1 A, with a range from -0.2 to +0.3 A. 12Mg-24 + 2 17Cl-35 -> 26 Fe54 + 20 Ca-40 12Mg-24 + 17Cl-35 + 2 e- -> 27 Co-59 17Cl-35 + 17Cl-37 -> 2 18Ar-36 + 2 e- 20Ca-40 + 2 17Cl-35 + 2 e- -> 26Fe-54 + 26Fe-56 20Ca-40 + 2 17Cl-35 + 2 e- -> 2 12Mg-24 + 28Ni-62 38Sr-88 -> 20Ca-40 + 2 12Mg-24 + 6 e- 56Ba-138 -> 3 20Ca-46 + 4 e- These are some of the plausible reactions I see so far. Some take electrons and some give electrons, and likewise for energy . There should be lots of neutrinos. It looks like that at that voltage, a spark in air will give dozens of transformations with just about anything. A good experiment should take a spectrum from UV to IR, monitor for gammas, betas, alphas, and neutrons, monitor mass changes and energy balance, and collect all the products without loss for mass spectrometry and SIMS. If many sparks could be done in the same sealed glass bulb without breaking it, then that bulb could be sensitively studied for changes in the spectrum with each spark, and with NMR for element and isotopic changes. It should be weighed to better than microgram accuracy, in case enough mass is lost to neutrino and other radiations to be measured. Can the bulb be kept on a microbalance for continuous weight monitoring? Then, of course, the bulb can be sent to any interested, competent lab to be opened up for mass spectrometry and SIMS on any deposits and gases, at their cost. It may suffice to explode the W filament with a single spark for each bulb, generating enough spectral data, radiation, products, and mass loss. This report basically supports the intepretation that Wendt's experiment really did completely transmute his W wires into gases (nobel gases, I think) with a simgle spark. How much mass is in a typical W filament? So, we can set up a preliminary experiment to establish that some transmutations must be occuring, to arouse interest in others, and attract major funding for a competent survey. Even a very simple optical spectrograph might well find spectral lines from transmutations of 1-2 mg of electrode per spark, and that spectrum could be videotaped for each spark. A hundred sparks might accululate 0.1 gm of products. That could be done in a day, or an hour! So, let's set up a simple, controlled, exactly repeatable spark on a standard bulb, to establish a preliminary base of data. Useful bulbs include neon lamps, light bulbs, SiO2 Hg lamps, automobile headlamps, and flashlight bulbs, most of which contain Ar, and some have Kr. If the W filament is first burned out, we can spark between the interior leads. Can we spark from the filament through the glass without breaking it? The bulb can be submerged in water, compressed air, or Hg to prevent breaking from the spark shock wave. Could a Tesla coil circuit deliver a single pulse of ~ 50 KV? Could a shock wave be provided on the outside of the bulb from an underwater spark to cancel out the shock wave of the inside spark? Will it work to simply connect a neon sign transformer to spark a bulb with continuous high-voltage AC? Let's find an experiment that generates deposits and obvious spectra, and do it! This is a sure-fire and simple experiment for generating important results quickly, along with cooperation and major funding. Would your friend in Boulder want to collaborate? Who would like to fund us about $ 3,000/month apiece to get started, salary and materials? We could do a lot in a month or two! What are your ideas? Rich Murray HCR 70 Box 515 Pecos, NM 87552 505-757-6145 rmforall@rt66.com Theodore Lyman, "The extension of the spectrum beyond the Shumann region," Astrophysical Journal, (1916), 89-102, The Jefferson Laboratory, Cambridge, Mass. Robert A. Millikan, "The extension of the ultra-violet spectrum," Astrophysical Journal, 52 (1920), 47-64, Ryerson Physical Laboratory, University of Chicago. Theodore Lyman, "The spectrum of helium in the extreme ultra-violet," Astrophysical Journal, 60 (1924), 1-14, Jefferson Physical Laboratory, Cambridge, Mass. Gerald L. Wendt and Clarence E. Irion, "Experimental attempts to decompose tungsten at high temperatures," American Chemical Society Journal, 44 (1922),1877-94, Kent Chemical Laboratory, University of Chigago. John A. Anderson, "The spectrum of electrically exploded wires," Astrophysical Journal, 51 (1920), 37-48, Mount Wilson Observatory. Sinclair Smith, "Note on electrically exploded wires in high vacuum," National Academy of Sciences Proceedings, 10 (1924), 4-5, Mount Wilson Observatory, Carnegie Institution of Washington. John A. Anderson, "The vacuum spark spectrum of calcium," Astrophysical Journal, 59 (1924), 76-96, Mount Wilson Observatory. Sinclair Smith, "A study of electrically exploded wires," Astrophysical Journal, 61 (1925), 186-203, Mount Wilson Observatory. John A. Anderson and Sinclair Smith, "General characteristics of electrically exploded wires," Astrophysical Journal, 64 (1926), 295-314, Mount Wilson Observatory. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 16:34:22 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA09851; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:29:07 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 16:29:07 -0800 (PST) Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 18:28:30 -0600 (CST) Message-Id: <199610280028.SAA14223@natashya.eden.com> X-Sender: little@mail.eden.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Scott Little Subject: NHE critique Resent-Message-ID: <"VJ9Wb1.0.rP2.Iv_So"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1825 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, In general, I think you've written an informative letter. It is a bit harsh but perhaps that tone is warranted. I am sure it will get the message across! In yr letter you mention that SRI has been unable to replicate the Pd-D2O experiments that they once did. Can you elaborate...or point me to something written about this? Thanks From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 20:36:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA01469; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:32:16 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:32:16 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <327444FE.1475@rt66.com> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:30:38 -0800 From: Richard Thomas Murray Reply-To: rmforall@rt66.com Organization: Room For All X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "George H. Miley" CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com, wireless@rmii.com Subject: Re: Miley, Mizuno data: SIMS creates nuclear products References: <199610280244.VAA241308@postoffice.cso.uiuc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"kp1nB3.0.rM.ET3To"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1826 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear George Miley, Your comment that it seems unlikely that SIMS would often be producing low energy nuclear reactions for half a century without this being discovered is very reasonable and natural. One way to test this would be to deliberately try to use SIMS to induce reactions in a thin film. Even a day of work could test out a lot of parameters. But, eeeee, it's expensive, man! as they say here in Santa Fe. It'd be helpful if you had your SIMS expert write a long post for Vortex-L on the limitations and subtleties of SIMS testing. This week we were told that SIMS couldn't analyze powders, as in Joe Champion's notorious samples, or that only the surface composition was tested. I was glad to get some credit for measuring the mass balances in your data, but I merely forwarded a post by John Logajan [jlogajan@skypoint.com], who originated this creative, insightful, and productive analysis. I'll look into the literature some more to see if some anomalies show up in some of the beginning work in the development of SIMS. As you can see from my post today, Sunday, Oct. 27, on electric spark explosions in air in 1923 on an asbestos fiber wet with MgCl2 solution, the three dozen published spectral lines indicate, within +- 0.1 A, many anomalous elements that are indicative of nuclear transmutation of much of the 1-2 mg sample in a single spark. The two experimenters noted major anomalies in their spectral data, but made no effort to collect gases or search for deposits from their explosions. Isn't 1-2 mg a fairly substantial amount of reactants, even in 1922? Surely simple chemical tests and mass spectrometer tests would have proved the identity of microgram levels of products. It just didn't occur to them to even consider the possibility of nuclear transmutations. This is the pattern of almost every study I listed at the end of my post. I will be publishing many posts analyzing each one. Even in 1924, the resistance to considering the possibility of nuclear transmutation was enormous. You're running into it yourself in 1996. I haven't heard a peep in the media about your remarkable results, so thoroughly and carefully compiled, and confirmed by several other prestigious laboratories. I hope you're getting a lot of behind-the-scenes encouragement and support from individuals in the scientific establishment. I am also concerned about wider implications of exploding wire research. Perhaps dangerous levels of radiation may be released in an instant, enough to swamp a geiger counter. Researchers may have been and may still be at risk. The instantaneous transmutation of milligram amounts in a single spark might be rather exothermic...how would we know, when all we know now is that we don't have a theory for these reactions? Perhaps some spark transmutation experiments the last three-quarters of a century have also destroyed both laboratory and experimenter. Finally, what if these transmutation reactions can be induced to grow exponentially, as in nuclear explosion technology? These are grave national security and world security issues. It is imperative that the parameters of nuclear transmutation processes in exploding wire research be determined. It is imperative to cast aside the widespread prejudice that these transmutation reactions can not and therefore must not and do not exist. The community of researchers needs to be constantly and deliberately mindful that we are tickling the unknown dragon's tail. We must take precautions against unexpected radiations and explosions. We must search the historical scientific literature to find what has unwittingly already been achieved. What professional organizations are there for assessing the possible health hazards of exploding wire work? Even high school students can do these experiments. These health and danger issue organizations might fund exploratory research. It's their charter. Rich Murray From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Sun Oct 27 21:43:24 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id VAA15091; Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:41:29 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 21:41:29 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:41:07 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II In-Reply-To: <326C596E.57AE@skypoint.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"GQ-TS3.0.jh3.9U4To"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1827 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I've been thinking about this very interesting post by John Logajan: >The conclusion was that the output distribution points to a limited >number of possible inputs, the most obvious fitting candidate being >2H+Ni ==> empirical distribution results + (+/-)very small energy > > (NAA > Results) > Atomic Atomic Per Nucleon (* ratio) > Ele Ratio A Z Mass Binding Ener Weighted B.E. >--- ------ --- --- ---------- ------------ -------------- > Al 0.0051 13 27 26.98154 0.999316296 0.005096513 > Ag 0.0661 47 107 106.905092 0.999113009 0.06604137 > Cr 0.0594 24 52 51.940509 0.998855942 0.059332043 > Fe 0.1453 26 56 55.934939 0.998838196 0.14513119 > Ni 0.6231 28 58 57.935346 0.998885276 0.622405415 > Cu 0.0796 29 63 62.939589 0.999041095 0.079523671 > V 0.0001 23 51 50.943962 0.998901216 0.00009989 > Co 0.001 27 59 58.933198 0.998867763 0.000998868 > Zi 0.0204 30 64 63.929145 0.998892891 0.020377415 > H 1 1 1.007825 1.007825 > > Average non-Ni Binding Energy 0.99920658 > Delta Binding Energy (Ni's-other's) -0.000321304 > Required protium / Ni nucleon ratio to balance 0.035941162 > Required H/Ni atomic ratio 2.084587384 John finds that the mass excess of the collection closely match those of 2H + Ni. You can also do an analysis of the proton and neutron numbers of the elements and see if they also match those of 2H + Ni. I don't have Miley's paper but using the numbers above I get Average "Z" (proton number) = 28.117 Average "A" (Proton + plus neutron number) = 59.42 Very interestingly the "Z" of Ni = 28. The calculation of "A" would be much more accurate if the isotopic abundances of elements were used rather than the "A" of the normally most observed nucleaus. I don't have isotopic distribution of the final state products which are said to be anomalus. Can someone with access to the paper do the calculation to see if the average "A" = 60? (58 from Nickel plus 2 from the protons.) The implication is that the two protons are being transformed into 2 neutrons in the processing of the material! If these nuclei are contaminants they have arrived in very intriguing ratios!! Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 03:20:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA22055; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 03:13:54 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 03:13:54 -0800 (PST) From: rvanspaa@netspace.net.au (Robin van Spaandonk) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:13:52 GMT Organization: Improving Message-ID: <327693b5.48302102@mail.netspace.net.au> References: <961027014625_72240.1256_EHB122-1@CompuServe.COM> In-Reply-To: <961027014625_72240.1256_EHB122-1@CompuServe.COM> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99f/32.299 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Resent-Message-ID: <"2INcB2.0.SO5.mL9To"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1828 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 26 Oct 96 21:46:25 EDT, Jed Rothwell wrote: >To: Vortex > >Mark Hugo writes: > > A. Wouldn't Hitachi have known they cannot SIMs a powder? > >Yes, they knew, and they said the results were meaningless. I gather = they >tried some tricks to make it work, but no go. Actually, I am somewhat surprised that no one has simply melted the powder to form a glass like or crystalline mass, and then used SIMS on the result. > > > B. Couldn't they Xrf some of it? > >I don't know. > >- Jed > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Check out: http://netspace.net.au/~rvanspaa for how CF depends on=20 temperature. Man is the creature that comes into this world knowing everything, Learns all his life, And leaves knowing nothing. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 06:20:30 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA26811; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 06:13:43 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 06:13:43 -0800 (PST) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610281412.HAA20211@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 06:11:41 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: RE: EEG entrainment Resent-Message-ID: <"40QBl3.0.nY6.K-BTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1829 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:36 AM 10/25/96 -0700, you wrote: >John > As a "practical" application which would be unclassified, >have you or anyone tried to build a "brainwave" interface to a computer >which would replace the mouse as an input device? I think it would >be an interesting project. Would your outfit have any funds available >for a researcher to try and develop this? > -Hank Scudder > > ---------- > > Hank, how about a unit that takes off from the look and shoot tech of the military, so all we have to do it look at the location/button item and maybe blink slowly or maybe thrice or something like that. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 08:16:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA00358; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:32:58 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:32:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 07:29:37 -0800 (PST) From: William Beaty To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Gas Separations and Isotopic Enrichment (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"ZzKOt3.0.T5.e8DTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1831 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Forwarded message about Hilsch Vortex Tube .....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:44:26 -0600 From: brian whatcott Reply-To: webhead-l@eskimo.com To: webhead-l@eskimo.com Subject: Gas Separations and Isotopic Enrichment Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 18:44:52 -0800 (PST) Resent-From: webhead-l@eskimo.com At 08:52 PM 10/25/96, Bill Beaty wrote: ... >Very strange stuff. The Hilsch Vortex Tube is actually some sort of >acoustic device. When its fundamental frequency is inhibited by a >nearby resonator, it stops creating a temperature difference. > ... >I just searched altavista and found a Vortex Tube page! > > Linkname: Ranque-Hilsch Vortex Tube > URL: http://t_cockerill_pc.sunderland.ac.uk/rhvtmatl/ > This Web reference is quite astonishing. Not only do Maxwell's Daemons sort the cool from hot molecules, they do quite well at sorting the oxygen from the nitrogen! The mind leaps immediately to the otherwise quite difficult task of enriching a flow with the atmosphere's third most numerous species...argon. Then there is an immediate connection to those WWII juggernauts that were winnowing U238/235. But finally, having grasped this nuclear nettle, I speculate that this vortex tube might work quite well on a more solid fluid - tap water. As you know, D2O occurs at abouut 1:7000 in tap water. Anyone for deuterium oxide? Regards brian whatcott Altus OK From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 15:51:47 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA25301; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:47:05 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 14:47:05 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: edstrojny@postoffice.worldnet.att.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 22:42:52 +0000 Message-ID: <19961028224250.AAA27902@LOCALNAME> Resent-Message-ID: <"fqxdl3.0.9B6.bVJTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1836 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 05:41 AM 10/28/96 +0000, you wrote: > >I've been thinking about this very interesting post by John Logajan: > >>The conclusion was that the output distribution points to a limited >>number of possible inputs, the most obvious fitting candidate being >>2H+Ni ==> empirical distribution results + (+/-)very small energy >> >> (NAA >> Results) >> Atomic Atomic Per Nucleon (* ratio) >> Ele Ratio A Z Mass Binding Ener Weighted B.E. >>--- ------ --- --- ---------- ------------ -------------- >> Al 0.0051 13 27 26.98154 0.999316296 0.005096513 >> Ag 0.0661 47 107 106.905092 0.999113009 0.06604137 >> Cr 0.0594 24 52 51.940509 0.998855942 0.059332043 >> Fe 0.1453 26 56 55.934939 0.998838196 0.14513119 >> Ni 0.6231 28 58 57.935346 0.998885276 0.622405415 >> Cu 0.0796 29 63 62.939589 0.999041095 0.079523671 >> V 0.0001 23 51 50.943962 0.998901216 0.00009989 >> Co 0.001 27 59 58.933198 0.998867763 0.000998868 >> Zi 0.0204 30 64 63.929145 0.998892891 0.020377415 >> H 1 1 1.007825 1.007825 >> >> Average non-Ni Binding Energy 0.99920658 >> Delta Binding Energy (Ni's-other's) -0.000321304 >> Required protium / Ni nucleon ratio to balance 0.035941162 >> Required H/Ni atomic ratio 2.084587384 > >John finds that the mass excess of the collection closely match those >of 2H + Ni. > >You can also do an analysis of the proton and neutron numbers of the >elements and see if they also match those of 2H + Ni. > >I don't have Miley's paper but using the numbers above I get > >Average "Z" (proton number) = 28.117 >Average "A" (Proton + plus neutron number) = 59.42 > >Very interestingly the "Z" of Ni = 28. The calculation of "A" would be >much more accurate if the isotopic abundances of elements were used rather >than the "A" of the normally most observed nucleaus. I don't have isotopic >distribution >of the final state products which are said to be anomalus. Can someone with >access to the paper do the calculation to see if the average "A" = 60? >(58 from Nickel plus 2 from the protons.) The implication is that the two >protons are being transformed into 2 neutrons in the processing of the >material! > >If these nuclei are contaminants they have arrived in very intriguing >ratios!! > >Martin Sevior > Does anyone know or can speculate on the conditions necessary to enhance the transformation of protons to neutrons? Wouldn't one deuteron also lead to the same result? If so, wouldn,t a two-body event (D + Ni) be more successful? I don't know; based on what has been said here and in spf I gathered that a three-body nuclear event had a very low probability of happening. Ed Strojny From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 16:36:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA04251; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 15:31:59 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 15:31:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 10:25:11 +1100 (EST) From: Martin Sevior To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"CvyCK.0.H21.s8KTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1837 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On 28 Oct 1996, MHUGO@EPRI wrote: > *** Reply to note of 10/27/96 21:41 > From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. > Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II > Martin: Do you have Miley's paper yet? If not, we should get you a copy. MDH > > No I don't have a copy. I was waiting till his "new" data as delivered at ICCF6 was incorporated into it. I did the calculation of the average number of nucleons assuming normal terestial isotopic abundances. I get average A = 60.07. The average atomic mass of terestial Nickel is 58.69. We need unnatural isotopic abundances to make 2N + Ni => Goulash theory is right. Martin Sevior From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 17:05:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA10816; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:06:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 16:06:22 -0800 (PST) Date: 28 Oct 96 18:59:10 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Stanley Meyer Message-ID: <961028235909_100060.173_JHB51-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"i01bH3.0.qe2.cfKTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1838 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians, I am in desperate need of solid evidence of either the honesty or otherwise of Stanley Meyer. Has anyone proof of the validity of any of his claims, or alternatively PROOF of either the falsity of any of his claims, or of his dishonesty in any business activity. I'm not interested in his strange psyche or other personal quaintness. Has anyone any real inside knowledge of his supposed connections with any US government dept. or any significant commercial organisation? I have a very good reason for asking for this info. like yesterday please!! I will reveal all in a few days. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 17:43:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id RAA21560; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 17:00:15 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 17:00:15 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 17:58:32 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II Resent-Message-ID: <"_Rr193.0.cG5.HSLTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1839 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Edwin Strojny asked: >Does anyone know or can speculate on the conditions necessary to enhance the >transformation of protons to neutrons? Beta decay converts a neutron into proton plus electron plus neutrino. Either electron capture or positron emission convert a proton into a neutron plus neutrino. All three processes involve the 'weak' nuclear force. A positron would quickly be anihilated with an electron and produce a pair of 0.51 MeV gammas. The more common beta emits energetic photons, called bremsstrahlung, as it slows down in whatever medium it finds itself in. Both the anihilation radiation and the bremsstrahlung are detectable by simpler radiation counters, even if the reactions were to produce no gammas directly. One of the 'three cold fusion miracles', is the almost total absence of countable radiation. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 19:16:21 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA13079; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:33:20 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 18:33:20 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 21:29:44 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: I hate to give Jed a rough time...but?? In-Reply-To: <327693b5.48302102@mail.netspace.net.au> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"Yn3aD3.0.EC3.cpMTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1840 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I think you like to give Jed a tough time! :) J From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Mon Oct 28 20:32:55 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA09778; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 20:06:51 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 20:06:51 -0800 (PST) Date: 28 Oct 96 22:01:55 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: vortex Subject: CF Cell Geometry Message-ID: <961029030155_76016.2701_JHC99-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"UpcXZ.0.bO2.5BOTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1844 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hi Vortexians, Early automotive catalytic convertors consisted of small beads coated with an alloy of platinum (not unlike the active portion of the Patterson Cell). Recently, I had reason to open a modern catalytic convertor and found that the design has changed. The inner material consists of a rectangular honeycomb approximately 2 mm on each side with square cells. Imagine a window screen extended in a third dimension. The result is a smaller convertor with the exhaust gas flowing through the long rectangular cells. It's easy to see that a great surface area per unit volume of working material is accomplished. I now wonder. Since such a manufacturing process exists for creating this structure and coating it with the required alloys, would it not behoove us to examine the possible application on a cold fusion cell? Or has someone already tried this? Catalytic convertors have a lot in common with CF cells. It clearly worked better than beads for exhaust gases. Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 01:42:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA12277; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:22:22 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 08:22:22 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Date: 28 Oct 1996 08:18:08 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/28/96 08:18:22 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"uiAAe1.0.X_2.wsDTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1833 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/27/96 21:41 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II Martin: Do you have Miley's paper yet? If not, we should get you a copy. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 02:34:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id CAA10698; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 02:32:41 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 02:32:41 -0800 (PST) From: JOEFLYNN@delphi.com Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 21:21:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: Subj: RE: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01IB6VKJ1POY8Y5BP7@delphi.com> X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Resent-Message-ID: <"I6XQN.0.4d2.9rTTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1845 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >Joe, I guess I don't see why you would expect an emf from the pickup coil >whether or not the field spun with the magnet! It seems to me, if I understand the >above setup, that there is no magnetic flux threading the PLANE OF THE COIL TURNS! >Your pickup coil seems to be wound with the coil loops in the r-z plane (again, >using cylindrical coordinates) in which case they would be decoupled from any changes >or movement of the magnetic field. What say you to my query? >Frank Stenger The coil setup I used in the actual experiment is more complex than described here, and is difficult for me to describe in the litery sense (a picture is worth a thousand words). However the conductors, in the described setup, located on the surface where flux changes are at a right angle to the magnetic field and the electrons in the conductors would undergo an acceleration at a right angle to the flux. The conductors on the side where flux would not be expected to change are at a right angle to a static field. Therefore if current is induced in the conductors on the flux changing side then as the electrons move through the condutors in the static field side the following relationship would apply: Lorentz force F=e(v * B) therefore the motion of e in a uniform magnetic field B with velocity v where from Newton's second law the force on the particle is = to the product of it's mass and it's acceleration so a(dv/dt) (assuming v< X-VMS-To: INTERNET"vortex-l@eskimo.com" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Resent-Message-ID: <"J5xTy3.0.5x4.UcUTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1846 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >If there is no grip on the lines of flux by the magnetic material, >Gary Hawkins There is a spacial grip parallel to the axis, no angular axial grip parallel to the plane. Joe Flynn From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 03:49:43 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id DAA23637; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 03:47:56 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 03:47:56 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 02:48:36 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Subj: RE: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN Resent-Message-ID: <"mygy_2.0.Fn5.hxUTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1847 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > >If you would like a diagram of the actual coil arrangement >email me and I'll send or fax you a thousand word picture. >If you have a scope available, wrap the coil as described, move >a small magnet back and forth over the coil, you'll see the >induced voltage. > >Joe Flynn Joe, Moving a small magnet back and forth over the coil is totally different from the originally described rotating magnets because you are generating an AC output by changing the net amount of magnetic flux going *through* the coil. Another way to look at it is that you are creating a momentary imblance in the number of lines of flux cutting the coil per second. Each complete pass of the magnet over the coil should produce *two* pulses one + and one - pulse. If you time it right and don't go completely over the coil you can merge the two adjacent + peaks and the two adjacent - peaks into a single pair of + and - peaks so it looks like the waveform is in synch with the hand motion, but it is actually 90 degrees out of phase. In the orginal case of the rotating magnets (assuming they are very uniorm) there is complete balance at all times - so you should get no induced current. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 04:32:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA02080; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 04:28:12 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 04:28:12 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 03:28:54 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN Resent-Message-ID: <"f01b42.0.MW.RXVTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1848 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >>If there is no grip on the lines of flux by the magnetic >material, > >>Gary Hawkins > >There is a spacial grip parallel to the axis, no angular axial >grip parallel to the plane. > >Joe Flynn I think there must be very large but balanced, and therefore unobserved, lateral forces between the lines of flux generated by two attracting fields moving past each other as in the case of two rotating magnets. This is because flux creates pressure corresponding to the amount of flux. In April I posted the following experiment in relation to rail guns: "Make a vertical plastic slot (or stands with grooves) that supports two strong flat magnets (I used 35 MGO magnets) that have the magnetic fields running purpendicular to the thin dimension. Drop the two magnets into the slot. If they are oriented in opposite directions they will attract, but if oriented in the same direction the second will float above the first at a significant distance. Note - I did this experiment with two 35 MGO magnets, each 1" x 1" x .5". The magnetic field was in the .5" direction - through the thickness of the magnets. The two magnets were dropped into a 1" x .6" x 5.5" slot made two plexaglass sheets taped to two .6" thick plastic uprights screwed to a wooden base. The magnet poles both faced in the same direction. The bottom of the top magnet floated 1 7/8" above the top of the bottom magnet. I think it takes more than "like poles oppose" to explain an elevation 3.75 times the width of the magnets, i.e. the distance between poles on one magnet." This experiment clearly demonstrates a lateral pressure between parallel lines of flux (assuming flux exists in some sense.) So why can two attracting circular magnets frictionlessly rotate? The answer must be that, for uniform circular rotating magnets, the repulsion in the direction of motion by approaching flux must be exactly balanced by the repulsion of separating flux. So, there is no net "grip". Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 04:39:04 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA12427; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:44:01 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 10:44:01 -0800 (PST) X-Sender: wharton@128.183.251.148 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <961026035852_72240.1256_EHB87-1@CompuServe.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:02:51 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Larry Wharton Subject: Re: Critique of the NHE Experiments Resent-Message-ID: <"zKpvx.0.-13.XxFTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1834 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: In Jed's critique he points out the problem: >Yes, it probably will, but that is only because the "skeptics" know nothing >about the subject and because they will read the first half of the critique, >skip the part about the French Nuclear Agency and SRI replicating Pons & >Fleischmann and jump to an absurd, totally unwarrented conclusion. The French To correct this he should lead off with the positive results and then address the question as to why the NHE experiments are not working. >It has not been debunked. Not by a million miles! IMRA Europe has been running >a cell at boiling, producing hundreds of watts, for three months. When the >the French Nuclear Agency decided to replicate them, they did it right and >got a huge excess at very high power levels. The INFN Italian researchers >brought several rock solid Pd D2O results to ICCF6, showing helium and x-rays >correlated with the heat. They also descsribed scaled up devices producing >200% excess at several hundred watts. The evidence for Pd D2O CF is stronger >by far than it has ever been before. Here we have some reports of positive results which I did not know about and which were not included in the critique. I think they should be included up front and then go through the arguments as to what these successful experiments had that the NHE experiments were lacking. Also the claim that SRI is now failing to replicate their previous results should be elaborated upon. In many past CF papers and lectures, the SRI results have been given as the most convincing evidence that CF works. If those results can no longer be replicated then that casts a very negative implication on the entire CF field. If the past evidence of the reality of CF is now invalid then one must ask how much of the current body of evidence will be found to be invalid in the future. It is all right to throw out the SRI results, which you do when you say that they cannot replicate them, but that is a very serious step which must be taken with caution and only if it is true. Lawrence E. Wharton NASA/GSFC code 913 Greenbelt MD 20771 (301) 286-3486 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 05:01:02 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA08931; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 04:59:02 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 04:59:02 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961029125820.008c44c8@freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny@freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:58:20 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: CF Cell Geometry Resent-Message-ID: <"Y1Xaj1.0.RB2.L-VTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1849 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:01 PM 10/28/96 EST, you wrote: >Hi Vortexians, > >Early automotive catalytic convertors consisted of small beads coated with an >alloy of platinum (not unlike the active portion of the Patterson Cell). >Recently, I had reason to open a modern catalytic convertor and found that the >design has changed. The inner material consists of a rectangular honeycomb >approximately 2 mm on each side with square cells. Imagine a window screen >extended in a third dimension. The result is a smaller convertor with the >exhaust gas flowing through the long rectangular cells. It's easy to see that a >great surface area per unit volume of working material is accomplished. > >I now wonder. Since such a manufacturing process exists for creating this >structure and coating it with the required alloys, would it not behoove us to >examine the possible application on a cold fusion cell? Or has someone already >tried this? Catalytic convertors have a lot in common with CF cells. It >clearly worked better than beads for exhaust gases. > >Terry > The reason for such an open structure in catalytic converters is that large volumes of gas is required to pass through at high velocities without creating an unwanted amount of back pressure. In cold fusion, back pressure is not a significant problem; you want as high a surface area as you can get and still get some flow. A highly packed microsphere structure is one way of achieving this condition. Ed Strojny > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 05:15:07 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA22861; Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:46:53 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Oct 1996 11:46:53 -0800 (PST) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-Id: Organization: Chemistry Department From: filimonov@chem.bsu.minsk.by (Filimonov) Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 21:31:34 +0200 (MSK) Subject: Repeat: Obstacles to making use of YUSMARs... X-Mailer: BML [MS/DOS Beauty Mail v.1.25] Resent-Message-ID: <"5TZPt2.0.5b5.hsGTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1835 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 From: "Ben Filimonov" To: "Peter Glueck" Cc: Vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Obstacles to making use of YUSMARs in Belarus Dear Peter, Dear Vortexans, Discussion about YURLE (Belarus analog of YUSMAR) in our press seems to be finished in our intrinsic manner. Some time ago jounalist Oleg Vengerenko (you have some his articles amid the extraction I sent you earlier) published one more article entitled "Do We Need YURLE Heat Generator?" in "Narodnaya Gazeta" (`People's Newspaper', one of our official `organs'). Author informs about New Energy researches throughout the world, reports on YURLE operation at customers and describes some problems on the way of commercializing this device. There are some words about `worldwide known professors paying attention to heat generator - Russian ones Sapogin, Nikitskii and American (?!) one Glueck'. This annoying mistake would be funny but for other points are too serious, even sad ones. As you can know, about 150 YURLE units having power up to 30 kW each were constructed and put into operation in Belarus during last three years. Most of customers evaluate them positively, however not all of them report o/u heat production. The main problem YURLE and its producer have to withstand now is strangling cost for feeding electric energy. It is established five times higher than the same for industrial needs. At the same time YURLE sets of up to 240 kW supply heat to schools, hospitals and small factories at the periphery - at those places where there is no centralized heat supply from Heat-Electric Plants. Official reply to noted article was published at the same newspaper at Oct 15, just before the `heat supplying season'. Relating to last year tests of YURLE at `Belenergoremnaladka' (Belarus Energy Repair Arrangement) state enterprice, it states that "the only source of liquid heating in the system is electrical energy consuming by installation and transferring to heat under multifold cycling heat carrier in closed loop" and then "YURLE installation is analogous by efficiency to electric boilers and hasn't any advantages as related to the latter". (It is not correct because warranted period of electrical boiler is far not enough to provide round the heating season operation, contrary to YURLE generator). So.. cost of electrical energy for YURLE must be the same as for electrical boilers - i.e. 5 times more than for industrial needs. It is normal for `this country' - I mean SU and its the most conserved part, Republic Belarus, where industrial needs were always preferred, not human needs. The most exciting statement is: "As for ecologic cleanness of the installation, it occurs ONLY at customers. But producing of electric energy used by heat generator YURLE being implemented by burning organic fuel at electric power plants, is accompanied by harmful substances pollution to atmosphere". Real mess. It should not work because power plants are air polluting. I'll send you both mentioned articles. Yours, Ben> From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 05:52:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA17186; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:41:18 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:41:18 -0800 (PST) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961029134511.0071dd70@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:45:11 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, freenrg-l@eskimo.com Subject: Spinning, moving X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"SYFua3.0.IC4.vbWTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1850 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Picking up on the endles debate whether a magnetic field moves with the permanent magnet, imagine this: 1) A uniform magnetic field perpendicular to the plane of your computer monitor is set up by a permanent magnet (ie. the flux lines are poking you in the eye) 2) A charged particle, let's say an electron enters a this uniform magnetic field from left to righ with the trajectory parallel to the plane of your monitor 3) Upon the entance into the magnetic field the electron experiences an upward Lorentz deflection and the force of this deflection F=qvB. This causes the electron to assume a circular orbit in the plane of your monitor. I assume no problemo so far. Now, what happens if: 1) The electron is put in the center of your monitor plane 2) The permanent magnet that sets up the uniform magnetic field through the plane of your monitor is moved from right to left parallel to the plane of your monitor with velocity v 3) This causes the same relative motion between the electron and magnet as in previous scenario I assume no problemo so far What happens now ? 1) Is the electron accelerated upward ? 2) If the electron is accelerated then the uniform magnetic field must move with the permanent magnet 3) If the electron is NOT accelerated then the uniform magnetic field is independent of the permanent magnet 4) What would be the mathematical equation for vertical and horizontal position of the electron at any given time after the magnet is moved in respect to the electron with velocity v. ? 5) The above equation will NOT describe a circle to a stationary observer, right ? What wil it be: a line, elipse, parabola, hyperbola... etc. ? 6) Considering the changing direction and magnitude of the electron-velocity-vector in time, will the electron be continuosly accelerated by the magnetic field moving from right to left. ? 7) If the trajectory of the electron is ellipsoid or circular, will the electron be deaccelerated during certain segments of this trajectory by the moving magnetic field ? 8) What will happen if the magnetic field moves very fast (close to c) ? Your answers will shed light on homopolars and spinning magnets... Instead of invisible electrons an experiment could be set up with electricaly charged styrofoam dust or ionized air and smoke. In order to visualize whats happening with charged particles. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 06:11:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA20763; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:57:51 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 05:57:51 -0800 (PST) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961029140057.0072e054@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 06:00:57 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Gas Separations and Isotopic Enrichment (fwd) X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"VWkGZ.0.K45.QrWTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1851 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Well, vortex coolers are nothing new, they use the energy stored in the compressed gas to do their work. It all works on the basis of conservation of angular momentum, like a ballerina with her arms stretched out (slow, cold) or arms pulled in (fast, hot) My sawing machine is using such e vortex cooler to chill the needle below freezing. However, the application for separating H20 and D20 is fascinating. I always wanted to drink some heavy water and become invisible in MRI scan, he he.. I still don't get how the isotopic separation is actualy done. At 07:29 AM 10/28/96 -0800, you wrote: >Forwarded message about Hilsch Vortex Tube > >.....................uuuu / oo \ uuuu........,............................. >William Beaty voice:206-781-3320 bbs:206-789-0775 cserv:71241,3623 >EE/Programmer/Science exhibit designer http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/ >Seattle, WA 98117 billb@eskimo.com SCIENCE HOBBYIST web page > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 20:44:26 -0600 >From: brian whatcott >Reply-To: webhead-l@eskimo.com >To: webhead-l@eskimo.com >Subject: Gas Separations and Isotopic Enrichment >Resent-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 1996 18:44:52 -0800 (PST) >Resent-From: webhead-l@eskimo.com > >At 08:52 PM 10/25/96, Bill Beaty wrote: >... >>Very strange stuff. The Hilsch Vortex Tube is actually some sort of >>acoustic device. When its fundamental frequency is inhibited by a >>nearby resonator, it stops creating a temperature difference. >> >... >>I just searched altavista and found a Vortex Tube page! >> >> Linkname: Ranque-Hilsch Vortex Tube >> URL: http://t_cockerill_pc.sunderland.ac.uk/rhvtmatl/ >> > >This Web reference is quite astonishing. >Not only do Maxwell's Daemons sort the cool from hot molecules, >they do quite well at sorting the oxygen from the nitrogen! > The mind leaps immediately to the otherwise quite difficult task of >enriching a flow with the atmosphere's third most numerous species...argon. > > > Then there is an immediate connection to those WWII juggernauts that were >winnowing U238/235. > >But finally, having grasped this nuclear nettle, I speculate that >this vortex tube might work quite well on a more solid fluid - tap water. >As you know, D2O occurs at abouut 1:7000 in tap water. > Anyone for deuterium oxide? > >Regards >brian whatcott >Altus OK > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 07:00:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id GAA01106; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 06:48:25 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 06:48:25 -0800 (PST) Posted-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:21:58 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <327621E7.1BEC@winternet.com> Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:25:27 -0600 From: Bob Fickle X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02Gold (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: CF Cell Geometry References: <1.5.4.32.19961029125820.008c44c8@freeway.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"24L612.0.BH.taXTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1853 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From what I've read here of late, it seems that obtaining a consistently high loading of the cathode is still a major issue in these experiments. The majority of the beads (or whatever cathode) might not be participating in the reaction at all. If that's the case, I would consider using a flat substrate divided into electrically isolated cells perhaps 1 mm2 in area, with each cell being connected thru a resistive layer to the substrate. While the resistance would dissipate some power, the overall effect might be to limit the current through the nonfunctioning elements so that the total input power is reduced. The flat geometry would also make it easier to investigate the performance of individual cathode elements. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 07:28:17 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA07916; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:19:25 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:19:25 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Date: 29 Oct 1996 07:17:07 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/29/96 07:17:35 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"Z1Z9W3.0.ax1.x1YTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1855 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/29/96 03:06 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Re: Miley and the Curve of Binding Energy II Martin: Send me a personal note at MHUGO@EPRI.EPRI.COM and we'll try to get you the Miley paper. MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 08:39:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA23279; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:27:00 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:27:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 11:25:20 -0500 (EST) From: John Schnurer To: vortex-l@eskimo.com cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Spin ... Grip? In-Reply-To: <01IB6VSQL2888Y5BP7@delphi.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-Message-ID: <"h5Cdk2.0.bh5.I1ZTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1859 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: On Mon, 28 Oct 1996 JOEFLYNN@delphi.com wrote: > >If there is no grip on the lines of flux by the magnetic > material, > > >Gary Hawkins ************************************************* > > There is a spacial grip parallel to the axis, no angular axial > grip parallel to the plane. > > Joe Flynn > > ********************************** Dear Joe, Can you please try to state this a different way, and let us know how you came to the conclusion and how we too can measure same? Thanks. Not disputing ... VERY curious. Is this true with ALL materials? By what mechanism? J From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 09:44:28 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id JAA06126; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:28:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:28:35 -0800 (PST) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610291727.KAA30301@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: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 09:27:32 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Stanley Meyer Resent-Message-ID: <"5D1bI3.0.bV1.1xZTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1860 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 06:59 PM 10/28/96 EST, you wrote: >Vortexians, > >I am in desperate need of solid evidence of either the honesty or otherwise of >Stanley Meyer. > >Has anyone proof of the validity of any of his claims, or alternatively PROOF of >either the falsity of any of his claims, or of his dishonesty in any business >activity. > >I'm not interested in his strange psyche or other personal quaintness. > >Has anyone any real inside knowledge of his supposed connections with any US >government dept. or any significant commercial organisation? > >I have a very good reason for asking for this info. like yesterday please!! > >I will reveal all in a few days. > >Norman > > Norman: In 1991 I was asked to do due diligence on Brown's Gas by a local investor. In early 1992, as an extension of that due diligence I researched Stanley Meyer's work because it seemed that he might have a more efficient method of electrolysis. Consequently, we purchased all of Meyer's patents, combed through them, and then conducted a lot of phone queries. I never talked with Meyer because I did not want any "confidentiality" issues. I found that Meyer had organized investment into his effort at least twice before, that one set of investors was sueing him to recover something over $1 million, and that his claim to be just six months away from a demonstrable automobile had an active lifespan of nearly ten years and at least two different invested ventures. >From those facts I concluded that Meyer was not ethical enough to consider backing. Investors, if handled properly (ethically with straight honesty), are not going to sue a broke inventor or a bankrupt business. They sue when they conclude that they have been manipulated and cheated and they sue largely to prevent other investors from being similarily cheated and/or out of a sense of revenge. >From an analysis of his patents, I concluded that most of the technology was borrowed or obvious. Meyer borrowed heavily from Pucharich and other prior art. Electrolysis is not patentable, application of rf energies is too obvious in itelf to be patentable and was well covered by Pucharich and published research related to microwaving water, and the idea of resonance for achieving the maximum efficiency is also too obvious, the most that could be said is that he MIGHT have some particularly efficient ways to accomplish the task and his circuits MIGHT be protected but we all know that every circuit can be redone in a variety of ways. >From this I concluded that Meyer was more the promoter than the inventor. Given the continuing aura of sourgrapes which I encounter connected to his name, I feel that I wisely counseled my investor client to stay away from Meyer. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 10:34:40 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id KAA18020; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 10:22:17 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 10:22:17 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 13:14:11 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Stanley Meyer Message-ID: <961029181411_100060.173_JHB144-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"Qq9Qk3.0.QP4.NjaTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1861 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael, >> From this I concluded that Meyer was more the promoter than the inventor. Given the continuing aura of sourgrapes which I encounter connected to his name, I feel that I wisely counseled my investor client to stay away from Meyer. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher << Absolutely right. Its such a shame that Tony Griffin was so badly conned, although I don't think he actually gave Meyer any cash. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 12:31:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id MAA11448; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:11:26 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:11:26 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: Michael Mandeville , Vortex-L Subject: Re: Stanley Meyer Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 12:03:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"AfuIR3.0.io2.WJcTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1862 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: mwm Would it be possible for you to write a short synopsis of Meyer's claims and works? I personally haven't seen any definitive summary? -Hank Scudder - From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 19:18:39 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA09779; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:11:21 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:11:21 -0800 (PST) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961030031536.0070995c@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:15:36 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Adams Motor experiment #8 X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"8G1Ek3.0.gO2.NTiTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1866 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Dear Rob I really hope that you are measuring your current and voltage with an rms (root-mean-square) meter with a frequency response of at least 10MHz. It is a classical mistake to NOT use rms techniques with periodic waveforms, they can be 100s % wrong. Do NOT calculate power by multiplying the average volts and amps. It is another common BIG mistake. (ie. 3 Volts x 4 Amps = 12 Watts, Is correct only for DC and resistive loads) PLEASE TAKE THE ABOVE VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY !!! As far as I remember form the original "Adams motor manual..." (I have it), the best speed for energy efficiency is the slowest speed NOT the fastest. Adams writes that in the fast speed mode his motor operates just like an conventional motor. For more control over the back EMF (the current doesn't really change the direction through the coil) use diodes or mosfets+logic to capture the back EMF into a capacitor (energy in capacitor = Capacitance times Voltage squared). This back EMF captured in a capacitor can be discharged into the drive coils at a later, more appropriate (efficient) time. Remember that the timing of the pulses to the drive coils must allow for the field collapse after the trailing edge of the pulse. The magnetic field around the drive coil will collapse slow with 10ohm load, fast with 1000ohm load (the load that the back EMF current sees) BTW: How did you deal with the current draw of your TTL logic and the optos. Do you have separate power supplies ? P.S. Do something else for me: put a cylindrical magnet right in the center of the rotor (where the axis is) so the pole points up. This would make this magnet perpendicular to all the other magnets on the rotor circumference. In other words put the major symmetry axis of the center cylindrical magnet in line with the axis of the rotor. The magnetc field of this additional center magnet will not interfere with the rotation of the rotor because it will be symmetrical to the drive coils and perpendicular to the fields produced by the magnets on the circumference. Take your measurements again and report any differences. I have a good reason for suggesting this. At 12:58 AM 10/30/96 -0800, you wrote: >Date:Tuesday, 29th October, 1996 Time: 23:54 > >Dear All, > >Sunday night I got the motor running for the first time. > >It was running very slow and useing a lot of power, about 3 revs per >second and drawing about 200mA at 12 volts. > >I then reduced the opto gap until the optos were strapped together so the >duty cycle for the coil was about 4 or 5 degrees out of 360 degrees(four >magnets giving four sets of 5 degrees). > >Then I removed and ferrous parts causing magnetic drag, the "helping >hands" were not being very helpful. > >This increaseed the speed by a great deal, about 15 revs per second, and >dropped the supply current to the coil to about 20 mA. > >The back EMF was about 40mA but before you all jump for joy, and say he's >done it, the voltage produced by the back EMF if discharge back through >its own coil will be very low, hence the high current. > >Also, I tried it with no back EMF load applied, and the motor slowed down >to a very slow pace, it lost about 50% of its speed. > >I tried charging a 12 volt battery and it charged at about 5 mA (from the >back EMF) with 20mA being fed to the coil. > >The BT 3000 relays arrived today (all 10 of them), 240 ohm coils, with a >soft iron core. >I then used one of these and this produced a slower rotation, about 4 >revs per second, but... it only used an incredible 2mA of current at 12 >volts! >I did not test the charging at this point because it would have been less >than 0.5 mA > >I tried feeding the back EMF into another coil to increase the speed of >the rotor but it did not seem to make any difference, but I will need to >measure the speeds with a frequency meter to verify all this better. > > >One thing that does not make sense is that the coil is switched on and >off about 30 degrees out of 360 degrees before the magnet lines up with >the coil. This position gives the best speed and I think when I tried >the top dead centre idea it stopped rotating. > > > >Regards > >Rob King > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 19:53:15 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA17777; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:47:04 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 19:47:04 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 22:45:18 -0500 Message-ID: <961029224517_134211182@emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, RVargo1062@aol.com, tlpst15+@pitt.edu, Fostrdae@bbms.iac.honeywell.com, CldFusion@aol.com, tkepple@twd.net Subject: movie stock Resent-Message-ID: <"-i4_s.0.fL4.t-iTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1867 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Galteck stock droped like a rock to a record low. I lost 1/2 of my investment in one week. What is going on? My movie is out. It stinks. Movie home page at Movie Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 20:16:05 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA22368; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:05:39 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:05:39 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 23:03:30 -0500 Message-ID: <961029230330_1247874372@emout09.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-L@eskimo.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, fstenger@interlaced.net, RVargo1062@aol.com, tlpst15+@pitt.edu, CldFusion@aol.com Subject: Fwd: try link again Resent-Message-ID: <"GhCwC3.0.KT5.HGjTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1868 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --------------------- Forwarded message: Subj: try link again Date: 96-10-29 23:02:28 EST From: FZNIDARSIC To: FZNIDARSIC Movie home page at Movie Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 20:38:50 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id UAA26314; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:22:14 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:22:14 -0800 (PST) From: epitaxy@localaccess.com Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961030042614.00719b60@mail.localaccess.com> X-Sender: epitaxy@mail.localaccess.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 20:26:14 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Fwd: try link again X-Mailedby: NT SMTP/LISTSERVER v2.11 (ntmail@net-shopper.co.uk) Resent-Message-ID: <"j4Bmz1.0.2R6.qVjTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1869 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: What is your movie about ? At 11:03 PM 10/29/96 -0500, you wrote: > >--------------------- >Forwarded message: >Subj: try link again >Date: 96-10-29 23:02:28 EST >From: FZNIDARSIC >To: FZNIDARSIC > > > > >Movie home page at Movie > > > >Frank Z > > > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Tue Oct 29 22:41:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA13039; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 16:12:59 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 16:12:59 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 19:08:50 EST From: Rick Monteverde <76216.2421@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Surviving without Bridget, but barely! Message-ID: <961030000849_76216.2421_HHB62-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"K58M93.0.ZB3._rfTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1864 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: > [snip] ...That's what I would do. *I* would respect the guy's request that we ignore/delete the personal message, and not continue to comment on it or offer our thoughts on his private matters. I think he's embarrassed enough as it is, without us all adding our own two cents worth on it. This is Vortex-L, not "Dear Abby". Please! - Rick Monteverde Honolulu, HI From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 00:09:08 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA13253; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:43:26 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:43:26 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Date: 29 Oct 1996 07:37:07 PST From: "Mark Hugo, Northern" Subject: When it rains it pours.... To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/29/96 07:37:57 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"Zn1v33.0.zE3.JOYTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1856 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: When it rains it pours.... - As some of you know, a very personal letter of my got posted. Thanks for all the Vortexians who wrote me very sympathetic and kind personal notes as a result. Almost as a humorous footnote, one of the Vortexians was pushing buttons on his machine, and "whoops" reposted my personal note! He sent an apology immediately, and asked Bill to delete from the archives (thanks for that, I hadn't thought of it)---but that in a way was appreciated also, as it reminded me of how easy it was to make the original mistake. Keep up the good thoughtful work guys! MDH From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 00:21:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA04458; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:02:11 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:02:11 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 10:00:25 EST From: Terry Blanton <76016.2701@compuserve.com> To: "INTERNET:vortex-l@eskimo.com" Subject: Re: CF Cell Geometry Message-ID: <961029150025_76016.2701_JHC109-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"H7ukG3.0.V51.nnXTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1854 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Ed Strojny wrote: >> In cold fusion, back pressure is not a significant problem; you want as high a surface area as you can get and still get some flow. A highly packed microsphere structure is one way of achieving this condition.<< I agree whole heartedly; however, if we get the reaction rate high is enough, then the flow rate will become critical. As a matter of fact, wouldn't you think that flow consistency is important? A fluid flowing around many small spheres is likely quite turbulent. It is also likely that different modes of flow are established within the cell. There might be areas where a significant flow of electrolyte occurs and others where eddying occurs. Might this be one cause of damage to the spheres? Terry From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 01:05:37 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA02035; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:01:48 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:01:48 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 03:59:49 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re-post of lost msg Message-ID: <961030085948_100060.173_JHB35-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"VZRyV2.0.eV.wbnTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1870 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: The following is a re-posting of a message I sent previously which seems to have got lost in the system. The symposium has been stopped and Meyer will be subjected to intense questioning by a top barrister today in London. snip:> Date: 29-Oct-96 15:47:26 MsgID: OUTBOX MgTo: Vortex Mail >internet:vortex-l@mail.eskimo.com Subj: Meyer Vortexians, [If any of you are within shouting distance of Fayette County, Ohio, can you please contact the Court of Common Plea there and confirm the outcome of case No: 930292 CVH determined on 10 Sept. this year. His Honor WJ Corzine presiding. The Notary Public, TL Speirs.] Note: since sending this I have now a faxed copy of the judgement from the court. The defendant was Stanley Meyer and the plaintiff one of his victims. The court found that Meyer was guilty of contravening section 191, namely "Fraud and Deceit" and was required to repay $25,000 to the plaintiff and to meet their costs of $12,500. The clincher was that the court forced him to run one of his "fuel cells" in court in the presence of independent experts who actually MEASURED the input energy and compared that with the output of electrolysed gases. The result was that the output was what could be expected from normal electrolysis and no more or less. This could be the start of an avalanche of court claims which should finish Meyer's game for good, and I know of one victim, not far from here who is currently taking counsel's advice to recover some $450,000 from him for the useless expense he put them to in '93/94. This information has come to me just in time to advise a British charity who are in the act of inviting Meyer to head up a symposium in the House of Lords in London this week to promote his water fuel cell and the dune buggy. The symposium was organized by a great old man, the late Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, who died last week, and who was taken, hook - line & sinker by Meyer, and who spent a fortune promoting those dud products for him, all in the name of environmental protection. Comments? Norman <:snip From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 01:35:52 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id BAA09940; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:30:59 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 01:30:59 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 10:27:20 +0100 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Eudora F1.5.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) Subject: Re: Blue speaks Resent-Message-ID: <"TIOOl.0.DR2.I1oTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1871 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >From a post by Dick Blue on SPF, I Extract the following text which seems to raise a valid point : >The heart of the Miley claims is two pages of tabulated data on isotopes >ranging from Si through Pb and the claim that observed isotopic abundances >clearly indicate that the material found on the reacted microspheres got >there through a nuclear production process - presumably by the transmutation >of the starting nickel layer. >I started at the beginning with the silicon isotopes, and what I found in just >just the first three lines of this huge table is totally mind-boggling. Let's >just say that I am not favorably impressed by the quality of the evidence >Miley presents. Frankly, I think he should be ashamed of himself! >The table first lists the three stable isotopes with their natural relative >abundances: 28Si - 0.92, 29Si - 0.05, 30Si - 0.03. >For now I skip one column and come to columns headed "Fresh MS atoms" and >"Reacted MS atoms". I take these to be the number of atoms of the specified >isotope normalized to content of one microsphere. For now it is only the >isotopic ratios that need concern us. >Again taking the isotopes in order the observed number of atoms for a fresh >MS are: 28Si - 8.14 E +16, 29Si - 0.0, 30Si - 0.0. >The observed number of atoms for a reacted MS are: 28Si - 3.02E +17, >29Si - 2.04E +16, 30Si - 1.02E +16. >From these numbers, ultimately, the results presented in the last column >indicate the difference observed between the relative abundances for the >reacted MS versus the fresh MS. The numbers indicate that the abundance >of 28Si has dropped markedly ( - 45.46) while those for the other two >isotopes have risen by 30.81 for 29Si and by 14.66 for 30Si -- truly >remarkable changes. However, there is a bit of a problem with the >assertion that these changes are the result of a reaction that occurred >during the electrolysis. >Let's start within an examination of the isotope ratios for the silicon >on the reacted microsphere. If I take the ratios for the numbers of >observed atoms as given above I find relative abundances for mass numbers >28,29,30, respectively, to be 0.91, 0.06, and 0.03. There is, at most, >a one percent deviation from the "natural" ratios - well within the >stated precision for these analyses. In other words the very criterion >that Miley has chosen to prove that nuclear transmutations have occurred >proves that, at least for Si, the material depositied on a microsphere >during electrolysis is ordinary, natural silicon! >What then accounts of the shifts tabulated in the last column? Obviously >it is the fact that the silicon detected on a "fresh" microsphere consists, >it seems, entirely of 28Si - a rather unnatural material. Was the microsphere >intentionally doped with enriched 28Si? I don't find that explained anywhere >in the text so it would seem that the unnatural nuclear transmutations Miley >seeks occurred during the deposition of the nickel on the microsphere, not >during the electrolysis as claimed. >There are some further implications, I believe, to the observation that natural >silicon is deposited in high abundance on the microsphere during electrolysis. >There is no great mystery as to the source of this silicon. The Paterson cell >is, after all, of glass construction. Knowing, as we now do, that silicon >is transported to the microspheres it seems obvious that one should ask, "What >else leaches from the glass?" So in spite of the claimed care to avoid >contamination of the nickel-coated microspheres, this simple examination of >a small fraction of that data clearly indicates that a path for such >contamination is present. I suspect that most of the exotic materials found >on the microspheres following electrolysis have their origin in the glass, and >yet the topic of an analysis of that glass is never mentioned. >Next time we do titanium. >Dick Blue Can anybody explain why the SIMS/NAA analysis showed only the 28 Si isotope on the fresh microsphere ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 01:50:00 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA20571; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:13:44 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 08:13:44 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 10:47:26 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@CompuServe.COM> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Meyer Message-ID: <961029154726_100060.173_JHB101-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"J4G45.0.F15.pqYTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1858 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians, If any of you are within shouting distance of Fayette County, Ohio, can you please contact the Court of Common Plea there and confirm the outcome of case No: 93CVH292 determined on 10 Sept. this year. His Honor WJ Corzine presiding. The Notary Public, TL Speirs. The defendant was Stanley Meyer and the plaintiff one of his victims. The court found that Meyer was guilty of contravening section 191, namely "Fraud and Deceit" and was required to repay $25,000 to the plaintiff and to meet their costs of $12,500. The clincher was that the court forced him to run one of his "fuel cells" in court in the presence of independent experts who actually MEASURED the input energy and compared that with the output of electrolysed gases. The result was that the output was what could be expected from normal electrolysis and no more or less. This could be the start of an avalanche of court claims which should finish Meyer's game for good, and I know of one victim, not far from here who is currently taking counsel's advice to recover some $450,000 from him for the useless expense he put them to in '93/94. This information has come to me just in time to advise a British charity who are in the act of inviting Meyer to head up a symposium in the House of Lords in London this week to promote his water fuel cell and the dune buggy. The symposium was organized by a great old man, the late Admiral Sir Anthony Griffin, who died last week, and who was taken, hook - line & sinker by Meyer, and who spent a fortune promoting those dud products for him, all in the name of environmental protection. Comments? Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 02:54:20 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA16881; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:58:14 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 07:58:14 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 10:56:25 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Thanks to Wharton, Pons, Mizuno Message-ID: <961029155625_72240.1256_EHB137-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"c8iaO1.0.d74.KcYTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1857 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex The Open Letter to the NHE I wrote threatens to become the Monster That Ate November. Every time I start working on some other project, like my Brief Report on ICCF6 or a discussion of Ragland's triode cell, I get another batch of comments about the letter, which call for rewriting, looking up references, faxing the new version, and so on. Today I must thank Larry Wharton, Tadahiko Mizuno and Stan Pons for valuable ideas and corrections, which I review below. Here is part of what I am writing about ICCF6, which is germane to the NHE controversy. A major problem here is that the NHE story is a can of worms. Five witnesses will relate five utterly different accounts of what is happening at the NHE. Some describe it as a triumphant march towards a clearly defined set of engineering goals, others say it is political and bureaucratic morass. It is like Akutagawa's short story "Yabu no Naka" ("In a Grove") which was made into the famous movie "Rashomon" (1950) -- recommended for anyone studying Japanese culture. Some people in the project are defending their own management while some outside it have an ax to grind. It is difficult for me to judge who is right and who is wrong. The politics and responsibilities are murky, but the experimental results are clear: the NHE lab performed the experiment over and over again with only a few marginal cases of excess heat in their fuel-cell type CF cells, and no excess heat in their SRI style flow calorimeter. On two occasions they moved cells showing a with slight excess into the SRI style calorimeter. In both cases the excess went away. Considering the difficulties of that operation and the time it takes, I think it would be a miracle of the excess heat survived. The IMRA Japan lab has had a similar string of failures. Compared to the dynamic work at the Italian labs, Hokkaido University, or IMRA Europe the success rate at these labs has been abysmal. Peter Hagelstein and Mike McKubre disagree with me. They do not like the idea of classifying basic scientific research results as a "failure" or a "success." After the presentations by the NHE and IMRA Japan, McKubre commented that this data does not depress him, it is merely another lesson. It confirms that they, like him, have not been able to simultaneously replicate all of the specific conditions necessary for the CF effect. McKubre, for example, achieves high loading, but as soon as he raises current density, the loading appears to drop off dramatically. He ascribes this to some event in which the gas in the surface layers of the cathode "blows off catastrophically." Evidence for this is seen in sudden changes in cathode resistance. He cannot observe the cathode directly. Peter told me I am too harsh towards the NHE and others who report honest, negative results. I suppose he means that a result is a result, we should not judge it according to our subjective desires or emotions, or an engineering project milestone checklist. Peter is into theoretical physics and I am oriented towards engineering, technology and profit making ventures. I have two points in my defense: 1. As I said to Peter, Martin Fleischmann is disappointed in these results. I agree with him. 2. The NHE project is described in their official literature and published papers as an industrial engineering project with milestone checklists. They have not met their planned goals. Some say they bit off more than they could chew, the goal was too ambitious. Others say the goal is reasonable but they are doing the experiments wrong. They cite the reasons in the literature that I referenced in my letter. Well, let me briefly describe what Wharton, Pons, Mizuno have to say, and then I will get back to writing about what Ed Storms says about McKubre's presentation at ICCF6, and other fascinating topics. Wharton suggests I move some of the success stories from other labs into the opening paragraphs of the NHE letter. "[L]ead off with the positive results and then address the question as to why the NHE experiments are not working." Good idea. He suggests I add a few more references to the Italian work. Another good idea except: 1. I do not know as much about it as I would like. I referenced Storms and Mizuno because I have worked with them and I can navigate their papers blindfolded. Would someone like to recommend the Best of INFN Papers? 2. Celani and Gozzi gave good presentations at ICCF3, 4, 5 and 6 which I can reference. At ICCF6 Preparata described the most compelling results I have seen in years, but his presentation was chaotic. It was incomprehensible. If I had not talked to him for an hour the day before I would still not know what he claims. Maybe he will put a good paper in the Proceedings, but I will not reference that presentation. Stan Pons writes: In your last paragraph on page 4, you state that in item (2) "Lonchampt et al. got more direct, hands on assistance from Pons and Fleischmann over a longer period of time than you did." In fact, this was not the case. I had perhaps two or three half day meetings with Lonchampt over a period of 4 years. So the point you surmise in (2) is not true; however: it was evident from day one that Lonchampt was determined to _exactly_ replicate the experiments in question, and that is precisely what he did. You make this point abundantly clear in your point (3). My information about Stan helping Lonchampt came from my conversations with Lonchampt. He speaks no English and I speak no French, so Biberian had to interpret. I thought he said they met with Pons and Fleischmann on several occasions, totaling a couple of weeks. This goes to show what can happen when you talk via an interpreter. If I get a chance I will ask Biberian to clarify. In the same letter, Pons says Lonchampt worked on the experiment for nearly four years. He says, "Herein lies the problem. If you are qualified to do such experiments, and committed only to replication, it is likely that it will take you a very long time to arrive at the point where you can achieve consistent, positive results. The is point was obviously mis-stated by Pons and Fleischmann in 1989, and has not been appreciated by a great number of laboratories." I think he is a little harsh on himself. They did not mis-state the difficulties in 1989, they did not yet know how difficult it would turn out to be. Mizuno wrote that he agreed with my letter. The original NHE plan called for close cooperation between the lab and universities, but he says such cooperation has not been forthcoming. He reports that the NHE directorate in Tokyo faxed him today announcing Yet Another Planning Session. He says it is "very strange" that they would hold a meeting so soon after ICCF6 because "we have already presented our results" and there is nothing more to say at the moment. He thinks this planning session might be an emergency response to criticism of the project, including my letter. Okay, back to the salt mines. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 03:11:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id SAA11901; Tue, 29 Oct 1996 18:22:25 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 1996 18:22:25 -0800 (PST) Date: 29 Oct 96 21:20:17 EST From: Eugene Mallove <76570.2270@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Build Your Own Water Car? Message-ID: <961030022016_76570.2270_FHU68-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"0BAl92.0.qv2.VlhTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1865 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Vortexians: The article below from Nexus seems like complete BS, but the guy provides explicit plans to build this water car retrofit. It looks like it uses 12V DC electrolysis of ordinary water (no salt added) in a stainless steel pressure chamber -- provides an explicit parts list adndimensions for making everything. Chamber is 18 inches long, 6-inches OD with 0.125-inch wall thickness. Electrodes are stainless steel -- shades of wacho-Stanley Meyer! But it is straight DC, no waveforms, nothing special. It can't work, in my view, but it is interesting that the guy wastes our time with higher-order problems like corrosion-resistance, while just passing off the idea that this really can work. The only thing novel is electrolysis with SS under high pressure and elevated temperature. Your thoughts? Is Cella just a "metalhead" venting. ("Cella" is nice name for a guy who is "selling you a cell"!) Has anybody heard of this guy before? Gene Mallove ******* In the Oct/Nov. 96 Nexus, pp.43-46 A WATER-FUELLED CAR by Carl Cella I am the madman behind the US heavy-metal band, "Rampage", but long before my musical success I was mechanically inclined, and the possi-bility of running a car on fuel extracted from water intrigued me no end. After reading all the information I could find on the subject of hydrogen generators, I built my first actual unit in 1983, mounting it in the trunk of a 1979 Cadillac Coupe de Ville. I constructed my system from the best of all the other systems I read about, and then went even further, using the strongest materials and cleanest layout possible within reason. All the titanium nuts and bolts were scored from an aircraft salvage supply- they're cheaper, used, and since they'll never wear out that's one way to save some big- bucks. Certain head and exhaust system modifications have to be made to expect trouble-free extended use. For one, the combustion of hydrogen results in the rebonding of the previously-separated hydrogen and oxygen molecules, making the engine's exhaust water vapour steam, and nothing else-meaning absolutely no pollution at all! Most auto-makers use cast-iron exhaust manifolds and steel valves. The combined effects of heat and moisture (moisture not being present in the combustion of petroleum-based fuels) cause extremely rapid corrosion of the system. Part of the fix is to install stainless-steel valves and an exhaust system constructed entirely out of stainless steel. Racing shops sell stainless-steel valves and stainless-steel 'turbo' mufflers that all work fine. Since hydrogen does not contain lead as some gasoline does, if you're not using a late-model, no-lead engine, the heads will have to be reworked to include valve seats not needing the lubrication lead provides. As for building this device to sell as a completed system, that's a dead issue. In 1983, I contacted the Department of Energy to show them that my car actually worked. I was confronted by two very belligerent 'agents of tyrannical oppression' who told me that if I tried to sell pre-built units, I'd have a lot of "problems". I asked why, demanding an explanation, and vas told very bluntly, and not in a very nice tone: "Do you have any idea what a device like this, available to the public, would do to the economy?" This technology is so simple that anyone with over half a brain-and knowledgeable in auto mechanics-can build one of these units. I've included comprehensive, no-bullshit, drafted design layouts, parts lists, maintenance tips, and a whole lot of engine modification concepts to make construction, part fabrication and implementation as easy as reasonably possible. The unit I built works as great as I claim it to, but I offer only the printed informa-tion on how to build your own, and I take no personal responsibility for damage of any kind caused to your vehicle or self. (See schematics on follow-on pages.) I have only applied my unit to a carburetted engine; I've never attempted an applica-tion to a fuel-injected engine, nor do I make any such claim that an application of that type would be easily performed. if possibie at all. Every cubic foot of water contains aboat 1,376 cubic feet of hydrogen gas and 680 cubic feet of oxygen. Because there is no pollution produced, all smog devices may be completely removed, legally, and your car exempted from smog checks, as are propane-powered vehicles. The only maintenance I've encountered is, periodically, to wire-brush mineral deposits off the reaction chamber electrodes and, at longer intervals, to clean out the chamber itself -- neither of which is complicated or very time-consuming. I've incorporated so many backup electrodes so this job won't be required roadside-as it was for me when I first used only one, not knowing about any deposits entirely covering the electrodes and thus halting the electrical reaction process. When the car dies out, you just flip another switch until you're somewhere able to brush the reactor's electrodes clean in reasonable comfort-and not northbound on Highway 5, halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, where my first breakdown was. Where the steel gasoline tank used to be, a plastic water tank is fitted, along with an electric float sensor that should be attached to the vehicle's existing fuel gauge. If you were to start your engine with no modifications other than the carburettor to accept hydrogen fuel, it will run fine but the exhaust system will corrode in almost no time, and if you leave the engine turned off for an extended period, your stock valves and guides will rust up and seize! Stainless-steel valves don't cost much and are as trouble-free as the stainless-steel exhaust system, so don't be a fool and try to go cheap because you'll only cause yourself added expense and headaches, and you'll be cursing me for your own stupidity. For the cast-iron combustion chambers and valve ports, there is a high-temperature ceramic coating called "heanium" that can be pre-formed to guard against the same corrosion that affects the valves, guides, exhaust system and also the intake manifold; as moisture down there will also cause corrosion. Petroleum-based fuels have their own detergent action that protects against corrosion, much like soaking parts in oil prevents corrosion. When using hydrogen as an internal combustion engine fuel, extra precautions must be taken to make extended operation a reality, and not some drive-a-few-thousand-miles-between- fried-engines bullshit. Don't use sea water! It contains approximately three-fourths of a pound of salt in every gallon. Salt is a material that will coat the electrodes very quickly. Just making one big mess. The reason for electrode deposit buildup is that tap water is never 100 per cent pure: it contains mineral contaminants that are drawn to the reactionchamber electrode during the electncally-activated molecular separation process. That results in the hydrogen contained in water being released from the oxygen molecules they are bonded to, making a fuel that can power an internal combustion engine. I offer no design for an exhaust steam condenser, but I do make the suggestion that one applicable to an automobile can be built to increase the cost-free mileage even further between fill-ups. A concept would include some form of exhaust-fed radiator that could incorporate air ducts, leading from scoops, to direct highway speed airflow across it. I offer the idca, but not the design. Because many aspects must be considered, such as: the least amount of back pressure, unit pressure; unit placement with regard to configuration by the limit or abundance of that space, though this one would be constructed for a stationary, engine- powered electrical generator, where space limitation is of no concern. Remember, the cylinder walls are cast iron and prone to rust, but they can be kept clean by piston action (as long as it's not left sitting for long periods between use). An automobile engine could feasibly be constructed with non-corrosive stainlesssleel heads and cylinders straight from the factory -- a solid reason to justify spending twenty-five grand or more for a car, because the fuel to run it would be free. There has been much criticism over hydrogen as an auto fuel, most of it coming straight from those who have the most to lose if hydrogen ever achieves widespread use as an automotive fuel. There are some factory-built high-performance cars on the market that already come with slainless-steel valves, but they are few and far between, and you still havc to change the exhaust systems. For the carburettor to accept a vapour-state fuel, it must be converted using the same parts that are used in propane/butanc engine fuel systems, such as carburenor kits by "Impco", or similar, that do the same thing, i.e., enable your engine to be powered by a vapour-state fuel. Because no pollution is produced, the engine may be rebuilt 'legally' with higher performance parts, like a camshaft that, on gasoline, would have increased exhaust pollutant emissions, thus making it 'illegal' for highway use. Of course, it's only a 'crime' if you get 'caught', but those payagain-every-time-your-vehicle-fails smog checks are a pain in the ass, not to mention the wallet. A similar type of mechanism that opens and closes retractable headlights could be implemented in a dashboard switch activated system that could open a trunk lidmounted scoop that captures rain, with a flexible hose line that directs it into the main tank. either while the vehicle is in motion or parked. Just watch the fuel gauge, and close the scoop when you see "Full"! While it may be a long time before we are able to purchase an entirely corrosionresistant, exotic alloy engine, I am offering the complete design for a hydrogen generator that will power a car-but any engine modificalions I outline are only given as basic concepts. It's up to you to implement what is applicable to your particular Engine. Use some initiative. Don't rely on whether I wrote it or not. If you discover a part or a process that I haven't mentioned, that will in any way protect your engine further from the effects of corrosion, use it! I've written this to help people wake up from the big lie of having to depend on oil companies just to drive a car. Building as many units as I can for personal use only, and writing this booklet, are about the only things I can legally do to try to help the world wake up. A hydrogen generator produces an energy potential in excess of 100 per cent efficiency!!! You read it right: free energy! A car's battery starts the engine, but once it's running, the alternator takes over to charge the battery and power the igninon system. With an onboard hydrogen generator, that alternator also powers the hydrogen extraction process, producing the energy needed to fuel the engine that runs the alternator. No external power source is needed; so as long as there is water available, the entire system is self-sufficient in operation. An extra trunk-mounted battery would provide more current-if ever needed-to run everything at once without overloading the electrical system System Operation The dash-mounted switches for turning on the reactor are also wired to activate the chamber feedwater pump at the same time. When the car dies out that signals to you that an electrode has been totally crusted over with deposits from the impure fuel water. This means the electricaliy-activatcd molecular separation process (electrolysis) has halted. These switches should also have indicator lights to let you know which one is on, and flip-up caps to guard against accidental activation. When the need arises to go to backup, turn off the switch for the 'dead' electrode, as well as close its electrical shut-off valve. The purpose of these gas valves is to keep pressurised oxygen from escaping up through the off electrode fittings into the hydrogen lines, possibly resulting in your car becoming a "Highway Hindenburg"! Hydrogen is separated from its molecular bond with oxygen by exposing the fluid of water to direct-current voltage. Hydrogen is attracted to a negative charge, while oxygen is attracted to a positive charge. This process generates heat in the chamber, so trunk placement is best with an aluminium or plywood wall built between the reactor and the rest of the available trunk space. Small cars are light on gasoline, thus cheaper to operate, but when all of a sudden the fuel becomes free, the size and weight of the car is of no concern, except for Porsches and similar sportscars, street rods, etc. Water is pumped through the reaction chamber, which itself is positively charged, drawing the oxygen molecules out through the water return line to be vented off through the water tank's cap. The hydrogen-attracting electrode extending into the welded-in pipes (and insulated under the Tfitting) is negatively charged. There is a dash-mounted pressure gauge that is connected before the regulator and mixer. To begin hydrogen generation, flip one of the dash-mounted switches and wait for the gauge to show fuel-line pressure: then start the engine when pressure is shown by the gauge to exist. In mounting the unit, remember that the chamber itself is positive, and most cars use a negative chassis ground, so insulated mounts must be fabricated between the positive chamber and the negative trunk-tloor. As a final note, this unit is not a concept or a theory! It is tried and proven! I designed this system at age 18 in 1983, and built more than one, using Rampage profits for research and development. I can't sell actual working units, but nothing but death itself can stop me from distributing this information in the hope that people will take the initiative to wake up from the big lie of oil dependency for auto fuel, and flood the street with hydrogen powered cars. If enough people find out how simple it is, public pressure may someday soon be put on the government, resulting in the long overdue media exposure they're all so afraid of. Eyewitecss News (Channel 7) in Los Angeles didn't want to let the word out that an actual working vehicle had been built by an 18-year-old metalhead! We're supposed to be stupid in the public's eye from their point of view! Hydrogen and oxygen gases do not pollute; they help clean out carbon deposits from the engine for better mileage and less engine wear. You'll notice the improved engine performance immediately. Source: Carl Cella, PO Box 8101 (4l76-X), San Luis Obispo, CA 93409-0001, USA. Originally published in Iron Feather Joural #13, PO Box 1905. Boulder, CO 80306, USA, and then in Psychedelic Illuminations VIII Fall/Winter 1995/96, PO Box 3186, Fullerton, CA 92634, USA) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 05:34:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA25425; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:31:54 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:31:54 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199610301329.AA25487@gateway1.srs.gov> Alternate-Recipient: prohibited Disclose-Recipients: prohibited Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 07:57:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Kirk L Shanahan Subject: Re: Blue speaks To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:09:00 -0400 (EDT) Importance: normal Priority: normal A1-Type: MAIL Hop-Count: 2 Resent-Message-ID: <"zZuKw.0.7D6.8ZrTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1872 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jean de Laga1rde wrote: {snip} >>The table first lists the three stable isotopes with their natural >>relative >>abundances: 28Si - 0.92, 29Si - 0.05, 30Si - 0.03. {snip} >>Again taking the isotopes in order the observed number of atoms for a >>fresh >>MS are: 28Si - 8.14 E +16, 29Si - 0.0, 30Si - 0.0. >> >>The observed number of atoms for a reacted MS are: 28Si - 3.02E +17, >>29Si - 2.04E +16, 30Si - 1.02E +16. {snip} >>Dick Blue >Can anybody explain why the SIMS/NAA analysis showed only the 28 Si isotope >on the fresh microsphere ? Seems to me the data is defining the detection limit. 28Si is 92% of naturally occurring silicon, and the inability to see the other isotopes in the fresh microspheres just means they are below the detection limit. Note that in the used microspheres, the other isotopes now show up, implying a detection limit of about 1e15-1e16 atoms. SIMS is a surface only technique. NAA is a bulk technique (generally speaking). *Usually*, surface techniques are more sensitive than bulk ones, simply because the surface usually represents a significantly smaller fraction of the sample masswise. Thus surface analysis techniques *have* to be more sensitive in order to even see anything. If the Si is a surface contaminant, I might expect NAA to miss it completely. (On the other hand, if Miley is trying to apply it here, I may well not understand the use of NAA in this case...) Kirk Shanahan {{My opinions...noone else's}} From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 05:37:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA26508; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:36:35 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:36:35 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 08:34:24 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: My messages messed up? Message-ID: <961030133424_72240.1256_EHB108-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"04A0_3.0.4U6.XdrTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1873 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A To: Vortex Maybe this is just my computer, but the messages I send to vortex keep coming back to me messed up or truncated in just one spot. Here is the last part of the message titled "Thanks to Wharton, Pons, Mizuno." If other people got the original intact please let me know by private e-mail. I want to know if this is my computer, CompuServe, Vortex, or my imagination. . . . In the same letter, Pons says Lonchampt worked on the experiment for nearly four years. He says, "Herein lies the problem. If you are qualified to do such experiments, and committed only to replication, it is likely that it will take you a very long time to arrive at the point where you can achieve consistent, positive results. The is point was obviously mis-stated by Pons and Fleischmann in 1989, and has not been appreciated by a great number of laboratories." I think he is a little harsh on himself. They did not mis-state the difficulties in 1989, they did not yet know how difficult it would turn out to be. Mizuno wrote that he agreed with my letter. The original NHE plan called for close cooperation between the lab and universities, but he says such cooperation has not been forthcoming. He reports that the NHE directorate in Tokyo faxed him today announcing Yet Another Planning Session. He says it is "very strange" that they would hold a meeting so soon after ICCF6 because "we have already presented our results" and there is nothing more to say at the moment. He thinks this planning session might be an emergency response to criticism of the project, including my letter. Okay, back to the salt mines. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 05:46:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA27755; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:43:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:43:32 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961030134308.008ca0f4@freeway.net> X-Sender: estrojny@freeway.net (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:43:08 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Edwin Strojny Subject: Re: CF Cell Geometry Resent-Message-ID: <"vhxU-3.0.Xn6.3krTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1874 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 10:00 AM 10/29/96 EST, you wrote: >Ed Strojny wrote: > >>> In cold fusion, back pressure >is not a significant problem; you want as high a surface area as you can get >and still get some flow. A highly packed microsphere structure is one way >of achieving this condition.<< > >I agree whole heartedly; however, if we get the reaction rate high is enough, >then the flow rate will become critical. As a matter of fact, wouldn't you >think that flow consistency is important? A fluid flowing around many small >spheres is likely quite turbulent. It is also likely that different modes of >flow are established within the cell. There might be areas where a significant >flow of electrolyte occurs and others where eddying occurs. Might this be one >cause of damage to the spheres? > >Terry > The flow has to be enough to remove the excess heat. Yes, there is a point reached where back pressure becomes important. For commercial purposes the compromise conditions are established by a lot of research. I am thinking along the lines of using a material which is not damaged by the conditions necessary for a prolonged successful effect. The use of glass beads was a good idea. How about nickel microspheres? Nickel crystals? Needles? Palladium plated nickel microspheres? Nickel plated copper? Tiny, granular nickel is one form that should be readily obtainable from a chemical supply house which I intend to persue. Ed Strojny > From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 05:50:46 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA28693; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:48:37 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:48:37 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 08:46:27 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Build Your Own Water Car? Message-ID: <961030134627_100433.1541_BHG128-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"U9WsG.0.F07.qorTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1876 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Gene, Thanks for scanning and posting all that - interesting. I think Mr Cella is pulling the leg of Nexus - a leg which I think pulls quite easily. His fluent style and sensible remarks suggest that he's an intelligent man, quite capable of having a laugh at their expense. The one about being warned off by some equivalent of the Men In Black is probably a hint to the wary. On the other hand - hey, why not some of us try to find out if (a) this person really exists and (b) if he will do a demo? It could be a fun way to spend an afternoon. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 05:50:49 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA28653; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:48:29 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 05:48:29 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 08:46:21 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Re-post of lost msg Message-ID: <961030134620_100433.1541_BHG128-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"XN_yN2.0.b_6.iorTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1875 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Norman, Well, as I've been following this blow-by-blow over the last day or two I can only say that I am impressed by your efforts. I have been (without much success) trying to warn off those attempting replication and also various TV companies from covering Meyer. Recently (despite our squeals of protest) Channel 4 Equinox gave the man a platform. Worse, he sounded good! One particularly entertaining aspect of this was the story of Fayette County's very helpful court officer getting Jed Rothwell's call (at your request) and simultaneously one from the symposium organisers whom you had tipped off. Excellent work, Norman. And this has resonance with the Rothwell NHE letter, which has been getting praise and helpful suggestions from some the best people in the CF field around the world. The lesson has to be that those of us who feel that the various new science/technology efforts discussed here are worthwhile should make every effort to fight against error, incompetence and fraud in the field. It is all too easy and tempting to argue the case with various opponents, when in fact it is far more productive to set our own house in order. And it is a very great deal more "effort-effective", too! We all know that there is a grey area, where people may have quite legitimate problems even in reproducing their own results. That leaves an element of doubt, but when people like NHE do not follow known experimental requirements, or (vastly worse of course) there are out-and-out fraudsters like Meyer around, then something needs to be done. It seems it took a judge (who is now one of my heroes, I would add) to finger Meyer. But Meyer was an unusually slippery customer, and all of us knew that he would never provide any instrumented demos. We never knew for certain that he was a fraud, but it had been clear for years that it was a Big Mistake to have any dealings with him - and we advised people of that. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 08:51:19 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id IAA06739; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:31:03 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 11:29:07 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Blue speaks Message-ID: <961030162906_72240.1256_EHB79-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"ry8Xn3.0.Df1.5BuTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1877 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Kirk Shanahan writes: Seems to me the data is defining the detection limit. 28Si is 92% of naturally occurring silicon, and the inability to see the other isotopes in the fresh microspheres just means they are below the detection limit. I believe this is the case. Miley claims +/- 3% accuracy "when high resolution is employed." However "high resolution was used to eliminate possible line overlap in all important cases, but with the large number of elements found, this was not possible for all of the lower yield isotopes." I think the main problem Blue has found is the danger of indiscriminate electronic spreadsheets. The numbers in the last two columns of Table 3 are not meaningful for silicon. Frankly, I dismiss Dick Blue out of hand. If he was seriously critiquing this paper and he found some major objection, he would run his comments past Miley before publishing them. That is common sense. I always do that, and so do people like Storms or Hagelstein when they write their reviews. If I found some minor nitpicking error I would not bother. Blue assumes he has found a major blunder, so bad that Miley "should be ashamed of himself." If I found such an error in a paper written by a major physicist and editor of Fusion Technology, I would not automatically assume I was right, and I would not plaster my conclusions all over Internet without first checking them with the author. I must point out that Blue has made other statements about the Miley paper that do not survive Round One Quantitative Analysis. Blue saw a paragraph in Barry Merriman's report in the "Baseline Run" section describing an artifact caused by room air stratification. In Barry's cell, the outlet is 6 inches above the inlet, and both are exposed to ambient air. The ambient air is 0.2 deg C warmer six inches up. At low flow rates (10 ml per minute) this shows up as a ~0.2 deg C Delta T. Blue jumped to the conclusion that both Miley and Craven's excess heat are artifacts caused by the same problem. He published several messages on Internet and CompuServe making that assertion. There are major problems with this which Blue should have spotted: 1. Miley's paper states that the Delta T ranged from 0.1 to 4 deg C. If there is a 4 deg C ambient air temperature stratification over 6 inches, and we assume stratification is more or less linear, then the air temperature near a 9 foot ceiling would be ~90 deg C (~140 deg F). This gives rise to a variation of the "dead graduate student problem" . . . 2. Miley's cell is under a hood. It might be in a Dewar as well, I do not recall. Craven's cell, as I pointed out many times and as anyone can see in the photographs, is inside a Dewar. Cravens knows about thermal stratification and related problems, and he took steps to eliminate them. Let me suggest that we ignore Blue until he pays attention to academic norms. He should apply some minimum level of quantitative analysis to his own assertions, which are sometimes wrong by many orders of magnitude. He should not jump to conclusions and then publish extreme statements ("Miley should be ashamed") without first checking them with the author. He should answer objections like the ones I list here; he should explain why the graduate students in Miley's lab are not cooked. I know from many years experience that if I confront him he will never respond. I gave up trying long ago. He should publish formal, complete analyses from time to time, not just random potshots. I ignore many CF scientists who violate these academic norms, including, for example, Russ George, who refuses to publish proper scientific expositions, quantitative data, or any description of his calorimetry. We should hold everyone to the same standards. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 11:51:16 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id LAA14034; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:30:44 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 11:30:44 -0800 (PST) X-Intended-For: Message-Id: <199610301825.KAA26157@big.aa.net> X-Sender: mwm@aa.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 10:25:13 +0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: Michael Mandeville Subject: Re: Build Your Own Water Car? Resent-Message-ID: <"YfzJ-1.0.3R3.YpwTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1878 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: At 08:46 AM 10/30/96 EST, you wrote: >Gene, > >Thanks for scanning and posting all that - interesting. > >I think Mr Cella is pulling the leg of Nexus - a leg which I think pulls >quite easily. His fluent style and sensible remarks suggest that he's >an intelligent man, quite capable of having a laugh at their expense. > >The one about being warned off by some equivalent of the Men In Black >is probably a hint to the wary. > >On the other hand - hey, why not some of us try to find out if (a) this >person really exists and (b) if he will do a demo? It could be a fun >way to spend an afternoon. > >Chris > > > Given the careless terminology in the Cella STORY, and the appearance of the STORY in three zines, my theory is that he is a freelancer who scored a couple of hundred dollars a couple of times with the STORY. Next it may appear in even shorter form in the Enquirer or some such. ____________________________________ MetaSyn Media, electronic publishing Michael Mandeville, publisher mwm@aa.net http://www.aa.net/~mwm From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 14:23:56 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA03830; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:10:26 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:10:26 -0800 (PST) Date: 30 Oct 96 16:52:49 EST From: Chris Tinsley <100433.1541@compuserve.com> To: Subject: Re: Build Your Own Water Car? Message-ID: <961030215248_100433.1541_BHG56-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"bu3nF.0.kx.G9zTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1880 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Michael, (By the way, thanks for your comments on Stanley Meyer. Most helpful.) > Given the careless terminology in the Cella STORY, and the > appearance of the STORY in three zines, my theory is that he is a > freelancer who scored a couple of hundred dollars a couple of > times with the STORY. Next it may appear in even shorter form in > the Enquirer or some such. Hey, don't you guys ever do anything just for the sheer fun of doing it? On the other hand, getting paid *as well* is rather amusing, I suppose. Chris From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 14:25:25 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA01722; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:01:08 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 14:01:08 -0800 (PST) From: "John Steck" Message-Id: <9610301546.ZM17559@me525.ecg.csg.mot.com> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:46:36 -0600 X-Mailer: Z-Mail (3.2.1 10apr95) To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: (Fwd) Re: Build Your Own Water Car? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Resent-Message-ID: <"qP2og.0.oQ.Z0zTo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1879 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: --- Forwarded mail from vortex-l@eskimo.com Given the careless terminology in the Cella STORY, and the appearance of the STORY in three zines, my theory is that he is a freelancer who scored a couple of hundred dollars a couple of times with the STORY. Next it may appear in even shorter form in the Enquirer or some such. ---End of forwarded mail from vortex-l@eskimo.com A. Electrolysis of water to get hydrogen is not a 100% efficient energy transfer method. Not even close. I think the best efficiency rating is around 75%, and only in a large industrial setup. If your getting 50% out of the pickle jar at home you are kicking butt. B. Electrolysis of water is not very fast. Flow rate to sustain an internal combustion engine far exceeds production capacity at a car size scale. C. Alternative fuel, maybe. Replacement fuel, no. D. Alternator to split water to drive engine to drive alternator. Can you say perpetual motion machine? E. He financed R&D with profits from a heavy metal band....... Humor, romance, what more could you ask of an exploder! -john From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 16:01:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA21276; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:30:32 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 15:30:32 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 18:18:50 -0500 Message-ID: <961030181849_1080297866@emout01.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Fwd: Motorola New Enterprises Mail Receipt Notification Resent-Message-ID: <"0vu442.0.KC5.MK-To"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1881 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I asked MOT as a stockholder and I am waiting for the answer. --------------------- Forwarded message: From: new-enterprises@mot.com (Motorola New Enterprises) To: fznidarsic@aol.com Date: 96-10-30 10:40:19 EST Your mail regarding "cold fusion CETI" of Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:40:00 -0700 has been received by Motorola New Enterprises. Information on Motorola New Enterprises is also available on the World-Wide Web at http://www.mot.com/MNE/. Regards, - Motorola New Enterprises -------------------- Your Original Message Follows ------------------------ Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 08:40:00 -0700 From: nobody@csps1.corp.mot.com To: new-enterprises@mot.com Subject: cold fusion CETI What happened to the CETI deal for the development of cold fusion? Frank Znidarsic stockholder. Sent from fznidarsic@aol.com on host 206.215.92.3 (206.215.92.3) From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Wed Oct 30 22:44:23 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id WAA01379 for billb@eskimo.com; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:44:21 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:44:21 -0800 (PST) X-Envelope-From: joeflynn@delpi.com Wed Oct 30 22:44:18 1996 Received: from bos1e.delphi.com (SYSTEM@bos1e.delphi.com [192.80.63.5]) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA01352 for ; Wed, 30 Oct 1996 22:44:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.delphi.com (bixmgr@bix.com) by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-7 #10880) id <01IB9WGY6GNK8Y63TD@delphi.com> for vortex-l@eskimo.com; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 01:18:53 -0500 (EST) Old-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 01:18:13 -0600 From: joeflynn@delpi.com (Charles J. Flynn) Subject: Re: NOT WHETHER BUT HOW YOU SPIN X-Sender: joeflynn@pop.delphi.com (Unverified) To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Message-id: <01IB9WH4LEPU8Y63TD@delphi.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Diagnostic: Not on the accept list X-Envelope-To: vortex-l Status: RO X-Status: >This experiment clearly demonstrates a lateral pressure between parallel >lines of flux (assuming flux exists in some sense.) So why can two >attracting circular magnets frictionlessly rotate? The answer must be >that, for uniform circular rotating magnets, the repulsion in the direction >of motion by approaching flux must be exactly balanced by the repulsion of >separating flux. So, there is no net "grip". > > >Regards, > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 >Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 > The Grip is thru the plane where North and South meet. The axis of the plane would be the center of the Mass of the permanent magnet material. Take for instance the Faraday Motor. Place two independent cylinder magnets attracting, above and below on one side of the copper disk. As with the traditional setup, current flows from a point in the center, to a point on the periphery of the disk, and always between the magnets. The stationary magnets are free to rotate on their own axis, remaining in alignment. If the field is fixed to the permanent magnets, always enters and leaves at the exact same geographic locations, the permanent magnets should spin on their own axis in the opposite direction to the disk. It could be argued that the magnetic field from the current flowing in the disk acts equally on both sides of the axis of the permanent magnets. This would not be true since the magnetic field from the current flow acts at two different radius' on the permanent magnets so the force would not be equal on both sides of the axis of the permanet magnets. Also remember the magnetic field in the disk itself is fixed to the location of the current flow, not the material. This is why the disk rotates, the conductor is always trying to move out of the permanent magnets field. As the disk rotates the conducting path is always between the permanet magnets. The field of the old conducting path is always collapsing and the field of the new conducting path is always expanding. The integration of B old and B new gives the necessary field differential to cause continual rotation. Lenz's law allows for this differential, the reason why a magnetic field does not drop to zero immediatly when removing power. As for the levitation you describe I'm not sure that this would be dependent upon whether the field rotates with the material or remains stationary. Joe Flynn Flynn Research Inc. P.O. box 11657 Kansas City, Mo. 64138 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 00:54:26 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id AAA01556; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:52:46 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 00:52:46 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <9610310852.AA10603@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 02:05:04 -0500 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: dotyd@mail.clackesd.k12.or.us (David Doty) Subject: Re: CF Cell Geometry Resent-Message-ID: <"wnLs-.0.9O.SZ6Uo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1882 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: >At 10:00 AM 10/29/96 EST, you wrote: >>Ed Strojny wrote: >> >> In cold fusion, back pressure is not a significant problem; >>you want as high a surface area as you can get >>and still get some flow. > >The flow has to be enough to remove the excess heat. > Try two 1 mm thick Pd plated Ni electrodes in a baby food jar (BFJ). Place in a cooling water tray or quart jar where the level is almost causing the (BFJ) to become buoyant. This maybe obtained with a siphoning out the worm water at a constant level. Mix up 50 mls. saturated Potassium-bicarbonate electrolyte. Separate the electrodes with a cork stopper with a hole in the center for your temp. gage. The flat electrodes are about an inch apart with about 1square inch of surface area in the electrolyte. This may give you enough cooling surface area to keep the temp. down. I am not a heat transfer engineer. When the electrolite goes up 10 degrees C the cooling water went up 1 degree C in about 100 mls. water bath. ******************************************* * David Doty * * Custodian at Ackerman Junior High * * http://198.237.196.249/ams/ * * Canby School District 86 * * 45=BA 15' N, 122=BA 41' W * * home (503) 266-3969 = * * 340 S Locust Canby, OR. 97013 * * CEF "Good New Club" after school Bible Teacher * * Looking for Science Projects for students to do. * * http://www.wwln.com/fido/899499297.html * ********************************************=20 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 05:11:29 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id EAA13762; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 04:49:27 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 04:49:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 13:45:59 +0100 Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mailer: Eudora F1.5.1 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: jlagarde@cyberaccess.fr (Jean_de_Lagarde) Subject: Mass Balance in Miley's paper Resent-Message-ID: <"dToGo1.0.xM3.M1AUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1883 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Thanks to Kirk Shanahan and to Jed Rothwell for their comments to Blue's objections, but I have a question on my own : In table 1 of Miley's paper (page 21 of IE #9), I read that the total mass of metal of a microsphere is 2.04 micrograms. On the other hand, in table 4a (page 27) under the heading "microspheres", if I add up the figures of the last column (mass diff (g) / 1000 MS), I find a total of 6.89 milligrams for 1000 Microspheres (5.88 E-03 + 9.76 E-04 + 3,6 E-05), i.e. an average of about 7 micrograms per microsphere. How can these two figures be reconciled ? Jean de Lagarde From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 05:57:09 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id FAA19343; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 05:37:23 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 05:37:23 -0800 (PST) From: RMCarrell@aol.com Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 08:36:52 -0500 Message-ID: <961031083650_1482195705@emout03.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: My messages messed up? Resent-Message-ID: <"SX9MX1.0.5k4.IkAUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1884 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Jed, I got your message intact. Your comments are as usual astute. I am apalled, but maybe I shouldn't be. All these years of quiet work at NHE with the expectation of careful groundwaork toward a great blossoming. Phooey. I can understand why you are upset. All the work gives points on a curve, but there is not an infinity of time as you pointed out in the Wright essays. Regards, Mike From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 07:31:33 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA12270; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 07:25:38 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 07:25:38 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 06:26:22 -0800 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com From: hheffner@anc.ak.net (Horace Heffner) Subject: Re: Thanks to Wharton, Pons, Mizuno Resent-Message-ID: <"slrGQ1.0.e_2.mJCUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1886 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: [snip] > McKubre, for >example, achieves high loading, but as soon as he raises current density, the >loading appears to drop off dramatically. He ascribes this to some event in >which the gas in the surface layers of the cathode "blows off >catastrophically." Evidence for this is seen in sudden changes in cathode >resistance. [snip] > >- Jed Yikes! The gas can't do that, can it? It can suddenly transmute though, initiated by the high current, and you would certainly expect a change in resistance from that. The conduction electrons at some density may be sufficient stimulation to cause condensate waveform collapse? It would be a really good experiment to see if such an event can be caused by a single high current pulse - not enough to explode the cathode though. There is already evidence for exploding wire transmutation. Regards, PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645 Horace Heffner 907-746-0820 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 07:33:32 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id HAA06297; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 07:05:18 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 07:05:18 -0800 (PST) Date: 31 Oct 96 10:00:18 EST From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Subject: Mass Balance in Miley's paper Message-ID: <961031150018_72240.1256_EHB95-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"g7QKX1.0.IY1.a0CUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1885 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: To: Vortex Jean de Lagarde finds a discrepancy between Miley on Infinite Energy p. 21 Table 1 and p. 27 Table 4a. How many micrograms of metal should there be per microsphere? First, let me check to make sure we transcribed the numbers correctly . . . Okay, we got it right. I am not going to try to check Jean's arithmetic at this hour in the morning. Not without another cup of coffee. I think you need to run this by George Miley to get the answer. It could be: 1. A typo. I doubt it. 2. Different beads. George says he ran 20 experiments with 20 sets of beads. Some were nickel, some nickel and palladium, some had thicker film than others. The beads from CETI with electrolytically deposited metal are much thicker than the ones fabricated at U. Illinois. You can see the difference with the naked eye. Table 1 says these are batch #60 beads. Ask George which batch Table 4a refer to. This could be a mistake. In my comments about Dick Blue's discovery, I hope I did not give the impression that I think Big Gun Physicists and Editors of Major Journals never make dumb mistakes. After all, Chris and I found some errors in this paper. They said that with an ~11 ml per minute flow with a 4 deg C Delta T indicates 4 watts. As I said here, and as I wrote to George, that should be 3 watts, not 4. That's a careless but not really important. I would never say "Miley should be ashamed of himself" because he uses a quick approximation, makes a few typos, or because he includes a table with some computations that multiply errors at the limits of detection to large, meaningless numbers. Anyone can see that this paper is a work in progress and not a encyclopedia article submission. I think Jean has a good point, but Dick Blue is merely looking for excuses to insult Miley and ridicule the results. He is nitpicking. If he was serious, he would find the nits (as Chris and I did) but he would also address the main issues in the paper. - Jed From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 14:45:42 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id OAA14177; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:14:53 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 14:14:53 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:15:51 -0800 To: vortex-L@eskimo.com From: Schaffer@gav.gat.com (Michael J. Schaffer) Subject: Re: Homopolar cylinders Resent-Message-ID: <"iEYE01.0.OT3.RJIUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1887 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: I have been discussing Chris Tinsley's cylindrical homopolar experiments with him privately. I think I can explain his results by conventional Faraday's law analysis. He still has some reservations. We have agreed to post a summary of our conclusions. Brief description of rotor: The flat permanent magnets were mounted into slots in a thick-wall iron tube (cylinder). They had like poles radially aligned, and the ends forced together along the axial length of the assembly. The circumferential spacing left 5mm wide iron 'vanes' between the rows so that there was a path for the radial flux for all the magnets. To quote from Chris, "... we were after - an ac homopolar machine. we were after - an ac homopolar machine. An outer brass cylinder was a sliding fot over the magnet and iron core assembly. Spring-loaded carbon brushes were mounted on the frame to contact the brass cylinder at any position along the length of the brass cylinder and wired to a dvm. Schaffer's Explanation: The iron spacer vanes act as nearly ideal poles to return the flux from the inward-facing poles of the magnets. The iron poles provide a low reluctance path for this local radially-out-radially-in flux. The HOMOpolar (ie. uniformly radial) component of the magnetic field at the outer surface of the rotor will be very small, except near the ends where some of the flux fringes around the ends, because the reluctance for the homopolar flux path is large. This is why Chris sees DC generation only near the ends. The magnetic field away from the ends looks a lot like that from a conventional multipole rotor from an AC alternator. However, Chris informed me that he got no AC signals. I can explain this. Indeed, there is an axial electric field induced at the SURFACE of the rotor by the v X B (v=velocity, B=magnetic induction field) whose sign alternates around the circumference with the polarity of the passing radial magnetic field. This is by the same mechanism as invoked for homopolars, and it should be detected by brushes contacting the surface and leading to a measuring instrument. However, this is a bit naive, because the rotating alternating radial flux also induces an axial electric field in the SPACE outside the rotor, and this E-field integrates up to an EMF equal and OPPOSITE to that at the rotor surface. If the leads running to the measuring device are far enough away from the cylinder that all this alternating flux is linked by the lead-plus-rotor-surface loop, then this external EMF exactly cancels the part directly contacted by the brushes. Because the radial flux in Chris's machine extends only 10mm or so out from the rotor, his leads would have to run parallel to and just a few mm away from the surface in order to avoid picking up too much opposite EMF. I did not try to address some of Chris's concerns about his DISK homopolar and multipolar experiments. Tinsley's Position: My own feeling about the whole thing is that I'm really rather uncomfortable, both about my own measurements and about your explanations. At present I can't really do a full and proper set of tests (the apparatus is packed away). What I think is needed is some very careful thought to make a 'yes/no' test experiment, I found that this was the best approach - to avoid quantitative determination. I never got around to designing one for this basic test - that of determining whether a cylindrical device (be it multi- or homo-polar) really is an analogue of a disc. I'll be honest, and say that I am sceptical about it being an analogue. If it were, then I would expect to have seen at least some kind of result at some stage. Certainly I see no clear distinction between the multi-polar disc (which gives a clear ac scope signal) and the similar cylinder (which *appears* not to do so. However, I am by no means wedded to that idea, and I think it is essential to design a definitive experiment to find out once and for all. One good thing is that the multipolar variants are pretty easy to make, they require no special machining or even a massive iron core. It should be possible to mount the high-power flat magnets onto a conductor tube and have little problem with them 'fighting' one another mechanically, and the whole thing coming apart under the stress! Similarly, a large-radius disc would be pretty easy, keeping the gaps between the magnets at fairly constant width. I'd like to see whether the emf can be shown to be a function of angular or linear velocity - will a small-radius disc at high omega show the same emf as a larger, slower one with the same omega*r of its magnets? All I can say at this stage is that other (very mundane) things have more important calls on my time - regrettably. I believe it possible to devise both qualitative and quantitative methods for testing this idea. I am not at all sure that my results so far are by any means definitive, and I am (mildly) sceptical of the (very welcome) explanations I've seen to date. Michael J. Schaffer General Atomics, PO Box 85608, San Diego CA 92186-5608, USA Tel: 619-455-2841 Fax: 619-455-4156 From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 15:32:36 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id PAA28571; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:13:39 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 15:13:39 -0800 (PST) From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 18:10:57 -0500 Message-ID: <961031181055_1382243546@emout07.mail.aol.com> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, GeorgeHM@aol.com, williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu, zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil, Puthoff@aol.com, RVargo1062@aol.com, peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro, mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov Subject: Yusmar reveals secrets Resent-Message-ID: <"BOtsV1.0.6-6.WAJUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1888 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: A meeting was held today 11/31/96 . At the meeting were: Frank Znidarsic, engineer, that's me. John Barron, Engineer and my business partner. Frank Welter, Engineer and German scientist. Frank Welter, worked on the German V-2 project as a teen ager during the WW II. He is now retired in the US. The Yusmar system was discussed. A plan of action was developed. We agreed on a mechanism by which by which the Yusmar produces cavitation. It is more than a "simple valve" as H. E. Puthoff has suggested. .............................................................................. ......................... Operational mode: Hot water enters into the Yusmar. It is conducted through a nozzle at high velocity. The pressure of the water is reduced in the high velocity nozzle through Bernoulli action. The water flashes to steam at low pressure. The steam water mixture is then sent to a centrifuge. The centrifuge produces a high pressure collapsing the steam bubbles. The collapse of the steam bubbles produces extreme cavitation. .............................................................................. .............................. Planned improvments. Monitoring of the low pressure zone's pressure and temperature to determine the best operational pressure and temperature point. Steam tables will be used. Controlling the exit pressure to to enhance the collapse of the steam pockets for the greatest effect. Modifications to promote the flashing process. More hot water to be exposed for more time to the lowest pressure produced at the nozzzle. Modifications to allow for the greatest atomization of the steam pockets. .............................................................................. ............................................ The work will be completed in several weeks. New patents may follow which will be in addition to Yury's patent. We want to build a strong case for ownership and also to protect Yury's and our rights. I hope we finally are able to get this thing working. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 16:22:41 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA13661; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 16:11:57 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 16:11:57 -0800 (PST) Date: 31 Oct 96 19:09:20 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Thanks to Wharton, Pons, Mizuno Message-ID: <961101000920_100060.173_JHB92-2@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"0iLH91.0.ML3.81KUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1889 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Horace, >> > McKubre, for >example, achieves high loading, but as soon as he raises current density, the >loading appears to drop off dramatically. He ascribes this to some event in >which the gas in the surface layers of the cathode "blows off >catastrophically." Evidence for this is seen in sudden changes in cathode >resistance. [snip] > >- Jed Yikes! The gas can't do that, can it? << If I may insert a simple possibility here - how about the equivalent to superheating of water in a smooth container or at a smooth surface where the rapid gas generation due to the sudden increase in current creates an increase in potential gas volume which fails to form immediately and then explosively releases. This might even cause local cavitation on the surface of the bead. If I'm correct then it might pay to make the surface of the last metal layer roughened or granular to encourage gentle gassing at all current densities. Norman From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 17:03:59 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id QAA20252; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 16:43:37 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 16:43:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: From: "Scudder,Henry J" To: "FZNIDARSIC@aol.com" , Vortex-L Subject: RE: Yusmar reveals secrets Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 16:36:00 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Exchange Server Internet Mail Connector Version 4.0.993.5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Resent-Message-ID: <"bsC1F3.0.My4.qUKUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1890 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Frank Cavitation occurs where the absolute pressure tries to go negative, and you get flow separation. The cavitation bubbles are vacuum, except for the vapor pressure of water. The center of a Vortex has a very low pressure. The bubbles travel to higher pressure regions like a Helium balloon in a car, and collapse when the pressure overwhelms the surface tension. If any CF occurs, it is from the momentum of the molecules at the edges of the collapsing bubbles.This is what causes erosion in boat propellors. -Hank Scudder ---------- From: FZNIDARSIC@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; GeorgeHM@aol.com; williams@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu; zettsjs@ml.wpafb.af.mil; Puthoff@aol.com; RVargo1062@aol.com; peter@itim.org.soroscj.ro; mcfee@xdiv.lanl.gov Subject: Yusmar reveals secrets Date: Thursday, October 31, 1996 3:10PM A meeting was held today 11/31/96 . At the meeting were: Operational mode: Hot water enters into the Yusmar. It is conducted through a nozzle at high velocity. The pressure of the water is reduced in the high velocity nozzle through Bernoulli action. The water flashes to steam at low pressure. The steam water mixture is then sent to a centrifuge. The centrifuge produces a high pressure collapsing the steam bubbles. The collapse of the steam bubbles produces extreme cavitation. ........................................................................ ...... .............................. Frank Z From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 19:08:35 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id TAA00131; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 19:06:00 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 19:06:00 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: Date: 31 Oct 1996 09:08:09 PST From: "MHUGO@EPRI" Subject: Mass Balance in Miley's paper To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Comment: EPRI UA4B029 10/31/96 09:08:14 SMTP Resent-Message-ID: <"H9rdR2.0.y1.MaMUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1891 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: *** Reply to note of 10/31/96 08:55 From: Mark Hugo, Northern States Power Sr. Eng. Subject: Mass Balance in Miley's paper Maybe someone can give Jean Miley's Email address. This sounds like a very ligitimate question to pass on to George. From vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Thu Oct 31 23:45:31 1996 Received: (from smartlst@localhost) by mail.eskimo.com (8.7.6/8.6.12) id XAA08092; Thu, 31 Oct 1996 23:43:02 -0800 (PST) Resent-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 1996 23:43:02 -0800 (PST) Date: 01 Nov 96 02:41:06 EST From: Norman Horwood <100060.173@compuserve.com> To: Vortex Mail Subject: Re: Thanks to Wharton, Pons, Mizuno Message-ID: <961101074105_100060.173_JHB82-1@CompuServe.COM> Resent-Message-ID: <"johGj2.0.L-1.5eQUo"@mail> Resent-From: vortex-l@eskimo.com Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/1893 X-Loop: vortex-l@eskimo.com Precedence: list Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request@eskimo.com Status: RO X-Status: Hank, >> Do we get cavitation here too? Hank Scudder << Its quite possible under pseudo-superheating by local high density current flow causing "bumping" of the gas creation process where there are few gas generating nodes in a very smooth surface of the electrode. Just a personal surmise you understand from general lab experience - no other grand theory!! Norman