RE: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:How to go from force to energy - Casimir heating or cooling
On Tuesday, December 28, 2010 4:08 PM OrionWorks said .. In my own Finite Element Method Magnetic computer simulation studies one of the personal tenants that was finally driven home to me was the apparent fact that static forces, no matter how powerful those forces might be measured to exist at, do not in themselves allow for the extraction of exploitable excess energy. I was never able to discover anything close to an asymmetry. People keep trying finesse an asymmetry out into the open... I've tried for years as well... but to no avail. [/quote] Steven, I agree that Casimir geometry is static even where gradients between different geometries occur but you can overcome this with a 3rd body in motion relative to these gradients To exploit these changes. This would be worthless if you have to provide the motive force to this 3rd body because you are then limited by COE. You are applying the same criteria Garet Moddel used to discount 2 of the 3 models for rectifying energy from Casimir cavities. I chose the 3rd and most obvious model which employs gas law for motive force. I know Casimir force and gas law are both related to HUP and dispersion forces but gas law is very local and steers the atom randomly while Casimir force is an average static value for a less local area formed by the plate geometry such that it's value is unaffected by the hydrogen's motion. In this case nature provides both the gradient proportional to change in cavity geometry and the motive force in the form of standard gas law. I should also mention that nature doesn't WANT to do this - it would rather close the plates and relieve the Casimir force like we see in stiction or the difficulty we have in producing strong skeletal catalysts because the molten metals oppose this geometry and will not normally form cavities. Turtur seems to promote an EM method of exploiting ZPE which I haven't studied yet but I would say it must also obey this same sort of 3rd body interaction where nature provides the motive force to move a 3rd FIELD relative to a static gradient... In his video a high voltage potential with little or no current drawn to maintain the potential is the static gradient. I did note a large poster of Tesla on the wall in Turtur's video and his method does remind me of Tesla's posit that High Voltage solidifies the ether. I think the HV field can be shaped to provide the gradients similar to change in Casimir geometry but am unsure what equates to a 3rd body in his video where a floating wheel is encouraged to spin (reportedly will even spin in vacuum). Regards Fran
Re: [Vo]:RE: OT: How government institutions tax citizens under a Virtual Currency system - (2 of 2)
Craig Haynie wrote: It is not possible for any type of program to improve the welfare of all individuals, unless those individuals freely agreed to join the program. If that were true, no program could help babies or senile adults, who are not capable of agreeing or understanding anything. Manifestly, many economic and social programs do help such people. Sewers, inoculations and public health programs benefit everyone, even people who pay no taxes to support them, and even people who refuse the inoculations. Countless programs help you even though you do not even they exist. Some of them are in other countries, such as Japan, where the government helps develop industrial standards, product safety, advanced traffic safety, and hybrid automobiles. Yesterday the Kanagawa prefecture government announced they are buying hundreds of electric cars. That will help you eventually. You did not freely agree to this, but it will benefit you. No system is perfectly efficient, fair or foolproof. All systems must change, or perish. Our economic system has changed many times. For example, there was a huge debate in the late 19th century as to whether money should be based on silver or gold. It is no longer based on either. It is hard to imagine a modern economy based on the gold standard, where the amount of money is arbitrarily limited by the amount of gold. People say this is a good system because the supply of gold is finite, and limited. You can say the same thing for the supply of electrons in the universe, the number of people, the number of clouds in the sky. Why not base the money supply on them, instead? People say gold is limited and inherently valuable. At present, rare earths appear to be more valuable in a practical sense since the Chinese are jacking up the price and restricting supplies. This will continue until the U.S. and Canada re-open their mines, which they are now hustling to do. We can always find more gold. We can improve recovery from mining and recycling, or extract it from seawater, by mining asteroids, or perhaps even transmutation. We can always find more of anything, up to some unknowable limit. The economic system must change because machines will gradually replace most workers, and people will no longer be needed. The system can no longer be based on the exchange of labor for goods. It should be fair, and it should preserve freedom, capitalism and competition, but above all, it should work. It should give everyone what we need to survive. If it doesn't do that, it will not accomplish anything else, either. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RE: OT: How government institutions tax citizens under a Virtual Currency system - (2 of 2)
In the spirit of the Virtual Currency system trading directly with precious metals would probably be frowned upon. ;-) However, not to the point that any of its adherents would ever be threatened in any way, nor sent to jail. Heaven's no! Why send people to jail for simply exchanging pieces of silver and gold amongst each other. I suspect the percentage of individuals who would possess vast quantities of precious metals is likely to be insignificant, particularly when compared to the entire economic population base. Why get all bent out of shape with small incidentals! Around 2005, e-gold was trading around $5,000,000 US equivalent in gold, each day. The Secret Service came after them and told them that had to register with FinCen, but they disagreed. $800,000 and 18 months later, e-gold won the law suit. They were just trading gold, after all, which had been demonetized in 1977. Then 6 months later, the Secret Service came again, this time charging them with aiding child pornography, since they had apparently found someone accepting e-gold for child pornography. So Jackson worked a plea deal and got 6 months house arrest, and they shut down e-gold. All $200 million in gold was accounted for, and the judge said she had trouble sentencing Jackson because he didn't know he was doing anything wrong. So... some people get bent out of shape on such things. :) IOW, those who wish to continue to smoke. Go ahead. The Virtual Currency system was not designed to play the role of mother or father. In the end everyone is responsible for the maintenance of their own lungs - to do what they want with them. Without the threats, I have no moral issue with it. The only time the VC system might be accused of creating money out of nothing would be when a participating customer needs an essential service but doesn't have sufficient credits to pay for them from out of his personal credit account. From a practical point, once you separate a person's ability to pay, from the services he receives, then the pricing mechanism loses feedback. In other words, there's nothing to then stop the seller from raising his prices. Under the VC system, such individuals will still receive the essential services they desperately need. Under the VC system, the seller of the essential products will continue to get paid from CC precisely because he has faithfully performed a valuable and necessary service that helps/assists others. Why shouldn't sellers of essential products be paid if they perform essential services, regardless of who actually pays them? If the service is 'essential', then there is no limit to the price the sellers would charge. It is not possible for any type of program to improve the welfare of all individuals, unless those individuals freely agreed to join the program. The best thing that a program intended for society can do, is improve the welfare of some people at the expense of others. All individuals have individual values. I value my family, my friends, my house and car, and my plans for the future, more than I value your family, friends, material items, and plans. So only I know how to best pursue my values. If I choose not to participate in a program, then it's because I don't believe that such a program will help me pursue my values. What is good for you, is not necessarily good for me. I think you have succinctly expressed the very heart of the disagreement you seem to have with the Virtual Currency system. The disagreement strikes me personally as mostly philosophical in nature. (I hasten to add that philosophical perceptions are not in themselves good or bad.) Your expressed perception seems to be a popular one that many adhere to. Many express the opinion that they would prefer to make all the necessary decisions as to the maintenance of their personal welfare, which typically means also taking care of their loved ones. For some, there seems to be an almost inherent visceral-like distrust of relinquishing such decisions to organizations typically perceived to be faceless managed bureaucracies. Because it's not possible for others to decide anything that's in my best interest. They have no idea what I value and to what degree I value them. The only thing that a committee of others can do is throw money at things that 'they' believe are important - and not what those who receive such money believe - and to the detriment of those from whom they take the money for their good intentions. To choose not to help others, because it isn't necessarily good for one’s own immediate concerns is a choice we all struggle with, such as every time we go past the ringer for a Salvation Army bucket on our way out of the grocery store. We constantly ponder: Do we put our spare change in the bucket, or do we simply pocket the pieces of silver and get on with the rest of our personal business. It is perfectly
[Vo]:FWIW
http://www.allnewsweb.com/page119462.php 26 December 2010 Barack Obama to make UFO announcement in coming weeks Michael Cohen m.co...@allnewsweb.com All News Web has received information from government insiders close to the US President that Barack Obama has been given the go ahead to make an important off the cuff announcement regarding UFO visits and US contact with aliens. Allegedly DARPA has given this move the green light. The comments by the President will be made within the next month. Our sources claim this will not be outright admittance of UFO visits and contact with aliens, however the comments will come as close to admittance as any President has to date and will be made in the context of a speech on an entirely different matter. From what we understand The President will concede that there is 'some evidence' to suggest aliens might have attempted to contact Earthlings. All of this is said to be part of a warm up program leading to eventual outright admittance of knowledge of UFO and alien visitation by major world governments within three years. end
[Vo]:Another comment posted in N. Y. Times discussion
See my comment (#7) below this rather dreary article about the future, by someone at Microsoft: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/12/27/why-do-we-need-to-predict-the-future/why-technological-change-makes-us-more-cautious http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2010/12/27/why-do-we-need-to-predict-the-future/why-technological-change-makes-us-more-cautious?permid=7#comment7 I would appreciate it if people would recommend it to make it visible under the Reader Recommendations tab. This is an interesting series of short articles about the future. - Jed
RE: [Vo]: Refined materials (Was: A theory of zone melting)
I don't think so. The magnetic fields should be exactly the same, but the copper windings would heat up increasing the resistance. Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona -Original Message- From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 9:29 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Refined materials (Was: A theory of zone melting) In reply to David Jonsson's message of Tue, 28 Dec 2010 23:42:20 +0100: Hi, [snip] And why is transformers under load more lossy than those unloade. The explanation of transfromer losses that I have read can't explain why the loss is proportional to the effect through the transformer. [snip] I think the simple answer is that losses are proportional to the strength of the magnetic flux (because the flux also creates eddy currents in the core material). The flux is proportional to the current, and the current is larger in a loaded transformer. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html
RE: [Vo]:FWIW
Terry sez: http://www.allnewsweb.com/page119462.php 26 December 2010 Barack Obama to make UFO announcement in coming weeks Michael Cohen m.co...@allnewsweb.com All News Web has received information from government insiders close to the US President that Barack Obama has been given the go ahead to make an important off the cuff announcement regarding UFO visits and US contact with aliens. Allegedly DARPA has given this move the green light. The comments by the President will be made within the next month. Our sources claim this will not be outright admittance of UFO visits and contact with aliens, however the comments will come as close to admittance as any President has to date and will be made in the context of a speech on an entirely different matter. From what we understand The President will concede that there is 'some evidence' to suggest aliens might have attempted to contact Earthlings. All of this is said to be part of a warm up program leading to eventual outright admittance of knowledge of UFO and alien visitation by major world governments within three years. As a former UFO scholar who at present must confess to having acquired a somewhat jaded perspective on the entire sociological phenomenon, please let me rant for a few seconds. I luv these kinds of film at eleven reports. They come off as so incredibly exciting, and yet the substance of the announcement remains completely unsubstantiated! Just who the hell was Mr. Cohen talking to? The same sources that have kept Richard Boyland informed for all these years? While I've never met Cohen I have met Boyland. I know Boyland has had his own unique CE4K experiences/encounters. Boyland seems like a nice guy. But nice guys aren't necessarily informed individuals. For all I know individuals like Cohen and Boyland could be nothing more than clueless patsies who have allowed themselves to become completely enamored with the drama of it all. Mr. Cohen's announcement strikes me as nothing more than spin. Under current circumstances, what the hell can BO really say on the subject of UFOs that would be of any practical use to most U.S. Citizens. For decades I've heard all the speculation that the government is clandestinely attempting to acclimate the general public to the existence of UFOs and aliens. It certainly sounds nice and dandy. To be honest I seriously doubt that's what's really happening. I doubt our own intelligence gathering operations can yet agree among themselves as to what UFOs are, let alone whether some of the objects are piloted by aliens. Without a doubt, I'm sure it's a given that certain government organizations have acquired strikingly better pictures of UFOs than what we, as citizens, can ever hope to snap with our Best Buy digital cameras. I'm also convinced there exist government officials who are absolutely convinced that UFOs are real, that some of those UFOs are even piloted by extraterrestrials. But top-secret super resolution photographs and radar signatures that the government keeps carefully concealed doesn't automatically translate into acquiring a greater comprehension as to who or what is behind the curtain. We have to ask ourselves: Why do such reports remain concealed after all these decades? Obviously, not because there's nothing out there to report, as most debunkers want everyone to believe. It's more likely the case that government officials studying the phenomenon simply don't know THEMSELVES what the phenomena really is, period. I bet they are still bickering amongst each other. Just like out in the world that you and I live in, the phenomenon continues to be open to personal interpretation particularly since all such experiences end up being filtered through our own cultural backgrounds. A government official who is also a born-again fundamentalist Christian is likely to interpret UFO phenomenon differently than a colleague who has found the relig'in of atheism to be far more palatable. So, Toto, if you MUST push the curtain back, don't expect the majority to pay any attention to what the old man might have to say. PS: Terry, I seem to recall you telling us that you were once involved within MUFON, that you even held a high administrative position within the organization. In an attempt to set my own pessimism aside for a spell, what say you about this report? Anything you'd like to add? Inquiring minds want to know! ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Fwd: [Vo]:FWIW
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 5:11 PM, OrionWorks s...@orionworks.com wrote: PS: Terry, I seem to recall you telling us that you were once involved within MUFON, that you even held a high administrative position within the organization. In an attempt to set my own pessimism aside for a spell, what say you about this report? Anything you'd like to add? Inquiring minds want to know! ;-) Ackshully, I was co-moderator on the MUFON forum for CompuServe. I believe that my opinion is expressed in the title of the thread, FWIW. I feel compelled to report what I find; but, I have experienced so many false starts to Disclosure that I have become jaded. Someone once said that disclosure is not our choice but theirs. When they think we are ready, they will come. But, I do not expect a savior. T
Re: [Vo]:FWIW
Ya gotta love this stuff! - Jed
