Re: [Vo]:How to blow $3.5 billion

[Daniel Rocha]

They are not blowing money. The aim of that is testing the implosion of the
core of nuclear weapons. There are many restrictions for testing  and
improvement of USA stockpile. That is a way to get around that.

2016-08-05 10:43 GMT-03:00 Jones Beene :

> How to blow at least $3.5 billion on nuclear fusion and get far less gain
> that Holmlid’s laser experiment costing 10,000 times less.
>
> One picture says it all … another Big Fizzix fail…
>
> *http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Lasers2-932x699.jpg*
> 
>
> Worst of all, LLNL will not attempt to replicate Holmlid… presumably the
> embarrassment of success would be too great.
>



-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

MJ  wrote:


> "small towers and dishes" ?  Will the plane be stationary?
>

Somewhat. Within a narrow range. Maybe not as much as a geosynchronous
satellite.

I do not think their fancy 10 Gbps lasers are intended to communicate with
normal ground installations, but I suppose they will use them with the
telephone company links and with other drone airplanes. The lasers aim
themselves and can hit a dime from 10 miles away. (Zowee!)

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

Russ George  wrote:

Communications costs are already an order of magnitude lower than those in
> the USA in many countries of the world, without any strange new technology.
>

Okay, so this will be 2 orders of magnitude cheaper than the U.S.

Internet service in Japan seems to be $20 to $40, versus about $80 in
Atlanta. It is not an order of magnitude, but it is cheaper.

I have heard that third world service is cheap but bandwidth is low and
they charge a lot if you start using U.S. levels of data, such as watching
Netflix. Even slow speed, low bandwidth Internet service is a godsend to
the people in the third world. It is saving millions of dollars and
thousands of lives, and enhancing people's quality of life.

At this moment, Google is installing a fiber network in my neighborhood in
Atlanta. They somehow got permission to install a "shack" (small building)
in a public park (Blackburn Park). Anyway, they are digging up roads and
stringing things everywhere. My guess is that the overall cost is
horrendous. This is to provide gigabit fiber service. How they will make
money selling this at $70 a month is beyond me.

https://fiber.google.com/cities/atlanta/?feeditemid==kwd-132451673297_physical_ms=9010952_interest_ms=1015254=1t1=e=g=c=paidsearch=Cj0KEQjw8pC9BRCqrq37zZil4a0BEiQAZO_zrJUqQfjT18q9-9C-xn6tOXkn0mpzmdXhhBbXK1t4aEgaArDy8P8HAQ=aw.ds

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

On 08/05/2016 05:21 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
No more stationary than a satellite.  As far as I know, fixed-position 
satellite dishes work just fine.  Get the altitude about right, get 
the azimuth sort of in the right direction, and the reflector produces 
some gain, which is what you need.


The signal's strong enough that you don't need a super high gain 
antenna, so it doesn't have to be aimed directly at the satellite -- 
or airplane, in this case.  A small dish isn't all that directional, 
anyway; its diffraction spread is pretty substantial.


If you're using a 6 meter dish, on the other hand, it's something else 
again.  It's got a much tighter pattern, and you'd better be aiming it 
carefully.


FWIW the Satnet dishes were about 6 meters, as I recall.  That was a 
project at BBN 'way back when, for providing a packet switched network 
in the sky back in the 80's and 90's.   The satellite was in 
geosynchronous orbit, so it was easy to track, which was a good thing; 
with a dish that big and very high frequency signals, over a few tens of 
thousands of miles it's almost as tight as a laser.  (Or ... maybe they 
were 9 meters.  Not sure.  It was a long time ago.)





At least that's how I understand it.


On 08/05/2016 05:15 PM, MJ wrote:


"small towers and dishes" ?  Will the plane be stationary?

Mark Jordan


On 05-Aug-16 17:28, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

Thanks -- that makes sense.

On 08/05/2016 02:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that 
can support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is 
solar powered, and when launched, it will create a 50-km 
communications radius for up to 90 days, beaming a signal down to 
the people in that area. This signal will be received by small 
towers and dishes that will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE 
network that people can connect to with their cellphones and 
smartphones."


https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/ 



In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between 
towers, and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper 
ones too.


It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of 
magnitude.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

No more stationary than a satellite.  As far as I know, fixed-position 
satellite dishes work just fine.  Get the altitude about right, get the 
azimuth sort of in the right direction, and the reflector produces some 
gain, which is what you need.


The signal's strong enough that you don't need a super high gain 
antenna, so it doesn't have to be aimed directly at the satellite -- or 
airplane, in this case.  A small dish isn't all that directional, 
anyway; its diffraction spread is pretty substantial.


If you're using a 6 meter dish, on the other hand, it's something else 
again.  It's got a much tighter pattern, and you'd better be aiming it 
carefully.


At least that's how I understand it.


On 08/05/2016 05:15 PM, MJ wrote:


"small towers and dishes" ?  Will the plane be stationary?

Mark Jordan


On 05-Aug-16 17:28, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

Thanks -- that makes sense.

On 08/05/2016 02:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that 
can support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar 
powered, and when launched, it will create a 50-km communications 
radius for up to 90 days, beaming a signal down to the people in 
that area. This signal will be received by small towers and dishes 
that will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE network that people 
can connect to with their cellphones and smartphones."


https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/ 



In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between 
towers, and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones 
too.


It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of 
magnitude.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[MJ]

"small towers and dishes" ?  Will the plane be stationary?

Mark Jordan


On 05-Aug-16 17:28, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

Thanks -- that makes sense.

On 08/05/2016 02:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that 
can support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar 
powered, and when launched, it will create a 50-km communications 
radius for up to 90 days, beaming a signal down to the people in that 
area. This signal will be received by small towers and dishes that 
will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE network that people can 
connect to with their cellphones and smartphones."


https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/ 



In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between 
towers, and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones 
too.


It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of 
magnitude.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

Thanks -- that makes sense.

On 08/05/2016 02:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that can 
support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar 
powered, and when launched, it will create a 50-km communications 
radius for up to 90 days, beaming a signal down to the people in that 
area. This signal will be received by small towers and dishes that 
will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE network that people can 
connect to with their cellphones and smartphones."


https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/

In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between 
towers, and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones too.


It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of magnitude.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

What's your point, Russ?

Stringing fibre costs a bunch.  This is supposed to reach areas where 
that hasn't been done and where the funds to do it don't exist.  As 
such, it solves a real problem which really exists; it's not just some 
conspiracy dreamed up by the capitalists.


The alternative is satellite networks.  Planes like this may not be 
cheap to develop and deploy but satellites are even more not cheap.


On 08/05/2016 04:21 PM, Russ George wrote:


Communications costs are already an order of magnitude lower than 
those in the USA in many countries of the world, without any strange 
new technology. The cost of modern cellular communications in high 
priced nations is proven to be purely a factor of capitalist greed, it 
has nothing to do with the cost to provide the service.


*From:*Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Friday, August 5, 2016 11:26 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that can 
support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar 
powered, and when launched, it will create a 50-km communications 
radius for up to 90 days, beaming a signal down to the people in that 
area. This signal will be received by small towers and dishes that 
will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE network that people can 
connect to with their cellphones and smartphones."


https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/

In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between 
towers, and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones too.


It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of magnitude.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Russ George]

Communications costs are already an order of magnitude lower than those in the 
USA in many countries of the world, without any strange new technology. The 
cost of modern cellular communications in high priced nations is proven to be 
purely a factor of capitalist greed, it has nothing to do with the cost to 
provide the service. 

 

From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 5, 2016 11:26 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

 

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that can support 
staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar powered, and when 
launched, it will create a 50-km communications radius for up to 90 days, 
beaming a signal down to the people in that area. This signal will be received 
by small towers and dishes that will then convert it into a Wi-Fi or LTE 
network that people can connect to with their cellphones and smartphones."

 

https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/

 

In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between towers, and it 
also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones too.

 

It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of magnitude.

 

- Jed

 

Re: [Vo]:the Apgar score of the newborn IH Counterclaims document (i)

[Jed Rothwell]

You seem to forget that Rossi started this fight. If Rossi had not filed
the lawsuit, there would be no dispute. I.H. was willing to ignore him and
write off the $11 million. I do not think they were planning to sue him.
Granted, they were planning to publish the ERV report eventually. Once they
publish, every rational person will agree the test was a farce, and there
was no anomalous heat. That will make Rossi look bad. But he will survive,
because there are many irrational people.

This is not a war or a moral crusade. This is just Rossi scheming to extort
money. He should have kept the $11 million and gone on to Sweden where he
is planning to defraud a new group of "investors."

- Jed

[Vo]:the Apgar score of the newborn IH Counterclaims document (i)

[Peter Gluck]

still waiting for the birth, to be continued (the blog) tomorrow

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/08/aug-5-2016-lenr-war-apgar-score-of.html

all my best wishes ,

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

[Vo]:Fwd: wow

[Frank Znidarsic]

-Original Message-
From: Robert Vargo 
To: Frank Znidarsic 
Sent: Fri, Aug 5, 2016 10:52 am
Subject: wow



Elon Musk: Tesla’s Model 3 factory could look like an alien warship - The 
Washington Post



  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
Elon Musk: Tesla’s Model 3 factory could look like an alien warship - The W...
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

Ah, here we are:

"With Aquila, we've designed a new aircraft architecture, one that can
support staying in the air for months at a time. Aquila is solar powered,
and when launched, it will create a 50-km communications radius for up to
90 days, beaming a signal down to the people in that area. This signal will
be received by small towers and dishes that will then convert it into a
Wi-Fi or LTE network that people can connect to with their cellphones and
smartphones."

https://code.facebook.com/posts/993520160679028/building-communications-networks-in-the-stratosphere/

In other words, the airplane replaces the infrastructure between towers,
and it also allows for smaller towers. Probably cheaper ones too.

It says they want to reduce communication costs by an order of magnitude.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

I read the text but I didn't watch the video (hate videos for 
information transfer), so maybe this is answered there -- but are we 
really sure this is supposed to communicate with /endpoints/ (cell 
phones, desktops, whatever)?  Technologically, it would be far easier -- 
and still useful -- if it were set up like the InternetAnywhere solution 
they've been pushing in Canada (which is satellite based).  You need a 
fixed downlink but you don't need 500 miles of cable to be strung from 
the nearest city before you can hook up.  That's important in Canada, 
where the northern population is very sparse.


The downlinks could be pretty cheap -- 15 miles is a lot closer than a 
typical satellite distance.  Set up the downlinks with free hotspots and 
you can get a great deal of coverage with a lot less technical 
difficulty than you'd have trying to fly a full-blown cell phone tower.  
And the planes, incidentally, may be out of range of most cell phones.  
I'd think 15 miles would be really pushing it for receiving a signals 
from hand held devices, unless the plane has humongous high-gain 
antennas on it.


Also note that cell phone /tower /antennas can be optimized for planar 
broadcast, which means all their energy is going into a minimal area, 
and best case, falloff could be roughly 1/r rather than 1/r^2.  These 
planes will be broadcasting into a cone, which isn't so nice, and 
they're going to be dealing with 1/r^2 signal falloff for sure.  (That's 
the downbound link, of course -- the geometry presumably doesn't affect 
the difficulty of receiving signals from users nearly as much.)


On 08/05/2016 11:15 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Stephen A. Lawrence > wrote:

I suppose it's not actually WIFI . . .


I think it is cell phone technology, not WiFi. Cell phone towers use a 
lot of power, so I do not know how this will work. The aircraft will 
communicate with one-another and with ground stations using lasers.



If they really draw 5 kw (as per the last paragraph), well, that's
impressive on the one hand (7 horsepower or thereabouts is not
much for keeping a plane up) but on the other hand, the solar
panels need to put out more than twice that much if it's going to
stay up 24 hours . . .


The panels + batteries on this machine produce and store enough 
electricity to keep it going 24 hours a day. Output is 5 kW but the 
panels produce more than that.


The plan is to slowly fly up much higher than commercial aircraft, and 
then loiter over one spot of 3 months or so. Then another aircraft 
will take up station while this one is brought down for maintenance.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

Eric Walker  wrote:


> In addition to technical considerations, there are two social
> considerations: (1) it might be unnerving for some (most?) populations to
> have a plane perpetually aloft that is owned by a private company that
> could be carrying out reconnaissance or collecting data for its own
> purposes; (2) in unstable areas those planes probably look like excellent
> target practice for anyone with some stingers lying around.
>

They will fly at "60,000 and 90,000 feet, above commercial air traffic and
weather . . ." That is far above stingers or other conventional
anti-aircraft weapons.

The 5 kW figure is for the aircraft engines. More power will be needed for
the communication equipment.

I do not think anyone will worry about reconnaissance. You can look at the
thing and see it is not equipped with recon equipment such as cameras.
Recon is done quite effectively with satellites, which cover everywhere,
and which cannot be stopped.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:

I suppose it's not actually WIFI . . .
>

I think it is cell phone technology, not WiFi. Cell phone towers use a lot
of power, so I do not know how this will work. The aircraft will
communicate with one-another and with ground stations using lasers.



> If they really draw 5 kw (as per the last paragraph), well, that's
> impressive on the one hand (7 horsepower or thereabouts is not much for
> keeping a plane up) but on the other hand, the solar panels need to put out
> more than twice that much if it's going to stay up 24 hours . . .
>

The panels + batteries on this machine produce and store enough electricity
to keep it going 24 hours a day. Output is 5 kW but the panels produce more
than that.

The plan is to slowly fly up much higher than commercial aircraft, and then
loiter over one spot of 3 months or so. Then another aircraft will take up
station while this one is brought down for maintenance.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:The Seventh Segment Signal

[Jones Beene]

It may be worth noting that “hole superconductivity” may end up being broader 
than Hirsch’s theory. For instance, Hirsch mentions “ring current” several 
times in his many papers, which is somewhat of a middle ground between electron 
and hole superconductivity. In fact, he tries to explain everything under one 
banner, but I have yet to find a coherently worded explanation which placates 
all the possibilities. 

These views on room temperature superconductivity come together in LENR, at 
least at the low end of the temperature scale – and when aromatic catalysts are 
involved. They are probably not relevant to Parkhomov or high temperatures.

This is particularly interesting to me since phenanthrene has been mentioned by 
Hirsch and others in the context of both ring current and hole 
superconductivity. However, I agree with Mark that Bremsstrahlung is unlikely 
from either type and would be self-quenching. Nevertheless, moderately fast 
electrons are possible so long as high temperature is avoided. 

Moreover, the advent and maintenance of RTSC (localized as ring current) would 
serve to explain why some types of LENR are difficult to pull off at the low 
end of the temperature scale (such as in Craven’s NI-Week demo). The experiment 
must find the narrow region of temperature where a localized Meissner effect 
can coexist with optimized proton exchange and H3+ formation. This range 
probably peaks about 100° but finding it could be more meaningful than the high 
temperatures of the Parkhomov experiment, since self-sustaining heat is 
possible. 

From: Mark Jurich 

The radiation extends above 0.511 MeV in Trace #7 and this doesn't seem to fit 
with Hirsch's Theory (i.e., Hole Superconductivity as described in DOI: 
10.1088/0953-8984/19/12/125217 ).  Perhaps if the electrons were heavy 
(dressed) it could be valid.  I would need to take a closer look.

Also, I don't see Hirsch justifying Brems during creation of HSC, but a peak @ 
0.511 MeV.

... I'm just glancing over things right now, so I may chime back.

- Mark Jurich

-- Original Message --
From: "Axil Axil" 

The x-radiation seen in the MFMP experiment called the "seventh segment signal" 
may have been caused by the initiation of "hole superconductivity" when the 
meissner effect expels electrons from the center of the superconducting 
material thereby producing x-rays through Bremsstrahlung. Also when the Hole 
superconductor is quenched, the same process produces electron collapse into 
the center of the dying superconductor also producing Bremsstrahlung.

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 9:19 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:


> I'm also pretty amazed at the concept of solar powering the things.  If
> they really draw 5 kw (as per the last paragraph), well, that's impressive
> on the one hand (7 horsepower or thereabouts is not much for keeping a
> plane up) but on the other hand, the solar panels need to put out more than
> twice that much if it's going to stay up 24 hours, which means they're
> looking at a minimum of something like 15 square meters of solar panels,
> assuming something like 50% efficiency (and assuming it's high noon for 12
> hours every day).  That sounds like a lot.
>

In addition to technical considerations, there are two social
considerations: (1) it might be unnerving for some (most?) populations to
have a plane perpetually aloft that is owned by a private company that
could be carrying out reconnaissance or collecting data for its own
purposes; (2) in unstable areas those planes probably look like excellent
target practice for anyone with some stingers lying around.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

There are some parts I really don't understand.  From the text article,

" the plan is to create a drone system that acts as /*floating wifi 
routers*/ to bridge the internet gaps on the ground"


Wifi routers, 15 /miles/ up in the sky?  What kind of wifi card do you 
need in your system to throw your signal that far? (Water cooled cell 
phones, maybe?)


I suppose it's not actually WIFI, and they're using an analogy on the 
assumption that the reader wouldn't understand what's actually being 
done, but none the less I found that pretty seriously unclear.


I'm also pretty amazed at the concept of solar powering the things. If 
they really draw 5 kw (as per the last paragraph), well, that's 
impressive on the one hand (7 horsepower or thereabouts is not much for 
keeping a plane up) but on the other hand, the solar panels need to put 
out more than twice that much if it's going to stay up 24 hours, which 
means they're looking at a minimum of something like 15 square meters of 
solar panels, assuming something like 50% efficiency (and assuming it's 
high noon for 12 hours every day). That sounds like a lot.




On 08/05/2016 09:59 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Solar airplanes have been a useless tour de force up until now. This 
one is intended to provide internet service to parts of the world that 
do not have it, such as Africa. This airplane will fly for months.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOez_Hk80TI

http://www.realclearlife.com/2016/08/05/facebooks-dream-of-internet-everywhere-gains-momentum/

Needless to say, this would be far easier and cheaper with cold fusion.

- Jed

[Vo]:Facebook solar airplane

[Jed Rothwell]

Solar airplanes have been a useless tour de force up until now. This one is
intended to provide internet service to parts of the world that do not have
it, such as Africa. This airplane will fly for months.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOez_Hk80TI

http://www.realclearlife.com/2016/08/05/facebooks-dream-of-internet-everywhere-gains-momentum/

Needless to say, this would be far easier and cheaper with cold fusion.

- Jed

[Vo]:How to blow $3.5 billion

[Jones Beene]

How to blow at least $3.5 billion on nuclear fusion and get far less gain
that Holmlid's laser experiment costing 10,000 times less. 

One picture says it all . another Big Fizzix fail.

http://www.wired.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Lasers2-932x699.jpg

Worst of all, LLNL will not attempt to replicate Holmlid. presumably the
embarrassment of success would be too great.

Re: [Vo]:The Seventh Segment Signal

[Mark Jurich]

The radiation extends above 0.511 MeV in Trace #7 and this doesn't seem to fit 
with Hirsch's Theory (i.e., Hole Superconductivity as described in DOI: 
10.1088/0953-8984/19/12/125217 ).  Perhaps if the electrons were heavy 
(dressed) it could be valid.  I would need to take a closer look.

Also, I don't see Hirsch justifying Brems during creation of HSC, but a peak @ 
0.511 MeV.

... I'm just glancing over things right now, so I may chime back.

- Mark Jurich

-- Original Message --
From: "Axil Axil" >
To: "vortex-l" >
Sent: 8/4/2016 10:19:44 PM
Subject: [Vo]:The Seventh Segment Signal

The x-radiation seen in the MFMP experiment called the "seventh segment signal" 
may have been caused by the initiation of "hole superconductivity" when the 
meissner effect expels electrons from the center of the superconducting 
material thereby producing x-rays through Bremsstrahlung. Also when the Hole 
superconductor is quenched, the same process produces electron collapse into 
the center of the dying superconductor also producing Bremsstrahlung.