Re: [Vo]:If 2 heat engines are placed in series their efficiency is lower, and the second law breaks according to Carnot if that can occur!
it provides as 10 times more heat than you put in then that's what it does. There is no modification needed of the COP, other than to realize that heat pumps normally only count half the output at a time (hot OR Cold, never both), and normally are not rated for their maximum COP, but a reasonable average COP. PERHAPS the MVR ones I mentioned were in fact talking about the both outputs but I don't think so but can't be sure and whatever, it doesn't change the validity of my argument and just how dead the second law is. Once that is accepted then practical engineering can be considered. /Also the cooling does only count if you can use it. Normally in winter you must heat. / Sure, but I'm not talking about such conditions. I am talking about a dedicated and initially theoretical device that makes a hot and cold side and drives it's own heatpumps. As such the cold side is very valuable as it hugely increases the efficiency, at least of the heat engine. /The optimal solution would be to combine the fridge with a heat pump but a good fridge today uses only 300W/day/ A fridge though ok is hardly optimal. We want AS MANY stages as we can practically do, 5 is the low end, 20 would be perhaps a decent tradeoff, but if I was trying to do this well and make it a bit custom I'd try and have 100 heatpumps in series. This them means each one can have a 5C uplift (temperature differential) and we can have at least a 500C difference between the hot and cold side, this is actually like a heatpump with a 2.5C uplift from ambient, so maybe 10C is doable for a 1000C difference, or maybe if that much worked, what's another 100!, I would not bother going for 1000 or anything even if it was some custom solution, at least not unless it was clearly all best but I'd think it overkill. But the point is that the less each ones works to increase the temperature the greater efficiency they do (whatever little they do each) at, in theory to the point of infinitely many heatpumps in series moving infinite energy with no power input (only, not quite obviously). Jonathan On Fri, 10 May 2024 at 21:35, Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Sorry a heatpump (HP) cannot have a COP 30 or 60. Assume a COP of 5 for a single step HP as we have it today in a reasonably good probe heat pump. (mine has 5.5 for heating) You can neither simply multiply or add the COP's as you must provide e.g. 20x the basic energy to fill the reservoir for the next HP state. To heat 1000l from 10 to 50C you need 25'000 Liter of water at 10C if you take out 2C. So the base COP goes in with a factor 20 in the total COP equation. Thus you must divide 25 by 20 for a first second step. In average by 10. Thus initial total COP = 5 + 25/20! Also the cooling does only count if you can use it. Normally in winter you must heat. The optimal solution would be to combine the fridge with a heat pump but a good fridge today uses only 300W/day J.W. On 10.05.2024 03:49, Jonathan Berry wrote: Not sure why but this isn't forming into proper paragraphs... / / /"Youtube physics usually is self satisfaction of people that have no clue of the simplest things. So I almost never watch this garbage."/ The video is covering the work of a company cascading heat pumps. As such the temperature differential over each heat pump is a fraction of the total over all the heatpumps, there is a potential feedback instability effect they have resolved. But cascaded heatpumps are an accepted thing with improved COP over a given total temperature difference and the video isn't making claims about the second law, that's me, and well Carnot... / / /"A heatpump is not a Carnot process as *you obviously supply additional energy*!"/ It is a carnot process though and the carnot process gives us the efficiency limit. A reversible heat engine if you supply it with kinetic energy can generate a temperature differential, this is why it is called reversible, you don't get energy from it, you reverse it and put energy in to move heat. To do this you obviously need to supply it with energy just as we do with a heat pump. /"You must calculate in the Carnot conversion rate of energy gained --> electricity to get the proper conversion factor as the current for the heatpump must be produced too* and subtracted!"*/ Yes, however the COP of a heat pump (electrical power in .vs heat energy gain on the hot side) over a low temperature differential can be 5, 10, or 30 or potentially more if the temperature differential is low enough. Note that in a single stage heatpump we can actually double that COP by just counting both the hot and cold outputs as both being beneficial outputs! If a heatpump can deliver four times more thermal ene
Re: [Vo]:If 2 heat engines are placed in series their efficiency is lower, and the second law breaks according to Carnot if that can occur!
resting are quantum level processes in nano particles
where one could achieve the doubling of IR photon energy by
suppressing some emission bands. This could be used in solar panels.
J.W.
On Fri, 10 May 2024 at 01:20, Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
Youtube physics usually is self satisfaction of people that have
no clue of the simplest things. So I almost never watch this garbage.
A heatpump is not a Carnot process as *you obviously supply
additional energy*! You must calculate in the Carnot conversion
rate of energy gained --> electricity to get the proper conversion
factor as the current for the heatpump must be produced too*and
subtracted! *
The best Carnot process (multi stage turbines) today delivers a
conversion rate of about 61% always target is current.
But there have been some materials detected that can improve this
further like thermo (Peltier-) elements.
Heatpumps are reverse Carnot engines and have a much higher COP in
respect to heat gained but *not to current gained!!!*
Even more interesting are quantum level processes in nano
particles where one could achieve the doubling of IR photon energy
by suppressing some emission bands. This could be used in solar
panels.
J.W.
On 09.05.2024 14:39, Jonathan Berry wrote:
After 200 years (1824) the second law of thermodynamics is
disproven.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot%27s_theorem_(thermodynamics)
Simply Carnot argues that if the efficiency of a reversible heat
engine was variable based on how it is made or the gases etc,
then the second law of conservation would be broken.
"A heat engine *cannot* drive a less-efficient reversible heat
engine without _violating the second law of thermodynamics_."
(excerpt from the Wikipedia article below the image)
So what happens when you take 2 reversible heat engines and put
them in series (one touches the hot side, one the cold side and
they join in the middle with potentially a small thermal mass
that is thermally equidistant to the hot and cold side)???
Well, we know what happens, according to Carnot!
The lower the thermal potential the lower the efficiency at
turning heat into mechanical energy and therefore the less
mechanical energy is developed when driving heat (operating the
heat engine as a heat pump)...
Which is to say that with a lower temperature differential a
heatpump operates with more efficiency.
So a heat engine constructed to act like 2 or more reversible
heat engines will break the conservation of energy.
There is a company that is making cascading heatpumps which can
keep a high COP over a much larger temperature differential.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSgv5NwtByk
The point is that it is absolutely possible to turn uniform
ambient heat into electrical power and heating and or cooling
with current technology...
And it is easily explained in a way that cannot be denied,
clearly 2 heatpumps cascading have a higher COP, same as saying
clearly 2 reversible heat engines in series have a lower
conversion efficiency and therefor a higher COP as a hatpump,
precisely the scenario that made Carnot assert 200 years ago
would destroy the second law of thermodynamics.
Jonathan
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:If 2 heat engines are placed in series their efficiency is lower, and the second law breaks according to Carnot if that can occur!
Youtube physics usually is self satisfaction of people that have no clue of the simplest things. So I almost never watch this garbage. A heatpump is not a Carnot process as *you obviously supply additional energy*! You must calculate in the Carnot conversion rate of energy gained --> electricity to get the proper conversion factor as the current for the heatpump must be produced too*and subtracted! * The best Carnot process (multi stage turbines) today delivers a conversion rate of about 61% always target is current. But there have been some materials detected that can improve this further like thermo (Peltier-) elements. Heatpumps are reverse Carnot engines and have a much higher COP in respect to heat gained but *not to current gained!!!* Even more interesting are quantum level processes in nano particles where one could achieve the doubling of IR photon energy by suppressing some emission bands. This could be used in solar panels. J.W. On 09.05.2024 14:39, Jonathan Berry wrote: After 200 years (1824) the second law of thermodynamics is disproven. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot%27s_theorem_(thermodynamics) Simply Carnot argues that if the efficiency of a reversible heat engine was variable based on how it is made or the gases etc, then the second law of conservation would be broken. "A heat engine *cannot* drive a less-efficient reversible heat engine without _violating the second law of thermodynamics_." (excerpt from the Wikipedia article below the image) So what happens when you take 2 reversible heat engines and put them in series (one touches the hot side, one the cold side and they join in the middle with potentially a small thermal mass that is thermally equidistant to the hot and cold side)??? Well, we know what happens, according to Carnot! The lower the thermal potential the lower the efficiency at turning heat into mechanical energy and therefore the less mechanical energy is developed when driving heat (operating the heat engine as a heat pump)... Which is to say that with a lower temperature differential a heatpump operates with more efficiency. So a heat engine constructed to act like 2 or more reversible heat engines will break the conservation of energy. There is a company that is making cascading heatpumps which can keep a high COP over a much larger temperature differential. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSgv5NwtByk The point is that it is absolutely possible to turn uniform ambient heat into electrical power and heating and or cooling with current technology... And it is easily explained in a way that cannot be denied, clearly 2 heatpumps cascading have a higher COP, same as saying clearly 2 reversible heat engines in series have a lower conversion efficiency and therefor a higher COP as a hatpump, precisely the scenario that made Carnot assert 200 years ago would destroy the second law of thermodynamics. Jonathan -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:New vaporizing effect discovered
Sorry! This is a kidding set of e-mails. Photons did always lead to evaporation of water since the earth is covered by water. Even more surprising is that ice does sublimate just from solar irradiation... So following such hoax science today is standard to diffuse a field by usst claiming something is new. J.W. On 27.04.2024 23:35, H L V wrote: How light can vaporize water without the need for heat Researchers discovered that light can cause evaporation of water from a surface without the need for heat. This 'photomolecular effect' could be important for understanding climate change and for improving some industrial processes. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/04/240424160652.htm quote: "The effect is strongest when light hits the water surface at an angle of 45 degrees. It is also strongest with a certain type of polarization, called transverse magnetic polarization. And it peaks in green light -- which, oddly, is the color for which water is most transparent and thus interacts the least. Chen and his co-researchers have proposed a physical mechanism that can explain the angle and polarization dependence of the effect, showing that the photons of light can impart a net force on water molecules at the water surface that is sufficient to knock them loose from the body of water. But they cannot yet account for the color dependence, which they say will require further study." Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Nuclear waste
Uranium is at least 10'000x more harmless than Plutonium So its a bad idea... J.W. On 01.04.2024 21:10, Robin wrote: Hi, Why not store nuclear waste in worked out Uranium mines? After all, "nuclear material" was stored there for billions of years before we dug it up. Crypto currency mining deliberately wastes energy. Surely there is a better way to do this? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Faraday's disc generator
The law of Faraday is very clear any change in magnetic flux induces charge hence a field. Many untrained physicists write j (current) instead of q what is wrong. To measure a current you have to cut the ring (rim) of charges what leads to dragging forces and movement of charge over e.g. a conductor. The other things most theoretical physicists get wrong is that they believe you can make a derivative of charge and flux at the same point (4 potential) what is total garbage but nevertheless used in QED...Flux has to fill an area (from a volume) and charge occurs at the edge. May be once read the good old Jackson that explains tat the vector potential only can be used in the far field. J.W. On 19.03.2024 19:40, H L V wrote: The question of whether the magnetic field rotates in the faraday disc generator is a question that is related to aether theories in particular or any theory of privileged reference frames in general. It got me wondering if there are alternate ways to test for the presence of an aether or a privileged frame of reference that do not involve interferometers and radiation. I am not sure why interferometers became the experiment de jour for detecting such things, but they have been studied to death and the null result is still open to interpretation. Hendrik Lorentz argued on the basis of Maxwell's theory of EM that a stationary magnet has no electric field and that a moving magnet does have an electric field. When he says a moving magnet he clearly states the magnet is moving with uniform velocity. The appearance of this electric field bothered Einstein, because it led to conflicting accounts of how a magnet induces a current in a coil depending on whether the coil was at rest or the magnet was at rest. He didn't like nature exhibiting laws which changed according to their frame of reference. He developed his special theory of relativity, in part, to avoid this conflict. Mathematical and principled arguments aside, was Lorentz's claim ever directly tested? i.e. Has anyone tried to measure the electric field around a moving magnet without the use of a conducting coil? eg. an electroscope can measure an electric field without moving relative to the field. Or am I missing something about the nature of the produced electric field in this case that would prevent such a measurement? Harry On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 12:25 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: As most might know, in physics we only know force fields. Thus so called field lines (magnet field) are equipotential cuts of the space covered by fields. Of course you never can draw such a line as all sources are in constant motion/rotation. The static magnetic field is a special case as it is a part of the atoms mass that form out the field. This field is attached but with the same restrictions as above. The only real "energy" field is the EM field produced by an active sender. Here of course no stable lines occur - only in case of a cavity with a sender-resonance we call receiver. Key is the understanding that in physics a field must have a source and a sink. From this point of view most so called mathematical physics (tensor...) field theory simply is nonsense. There are far to many simplifications in physics models as historically only point field equations could be solved. As a consequence of this, one thing most did miss is: Total potentials almost never are 1/r. Total because we no longer deal with a single point J.W. On 14.03.2024 16:02, H L V wrote: Another visualization of the behaviour of magnetic fields without the concept of lines of force. When the magnet is moved around it simply changes the orientation of all the little compass needles. The notion of lines of force tends to make one think the magnetic field is somehow mechanically attached to the magnet so that the centre point of each needle must change position in order to match the motion of the magnetic. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HTylDaG5_RY Harry On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 11:16 AM H L V wrote: Here is a physical demonstration of the situation using a ferrofluid. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn41nPOGq-U The ferrofluid does not rotate with the cylindrical magnet, which supports the idea that the magnet's field does not rotate with the magnet. (There is a little bit of movement but the narrator explains that this movement arises from the field not being perfectly symmetrically.and homogeneous). Harry On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 12:40 AM H L V wrote: It depends what you mean by a field. If you imagine the field is made of wire-like filaments which are fastened to an atom then you would expect the field to translate and rotat
Re: [Vo]:Faraday's disc generator
As most might know, in physics we only know force fields. Thus so called
field lines (magnet field) are equipotential cuts of the space covered
by fields. Of course you never can draw such a line as all sources are
in constant motion/rotation.
The static magnetic field is a special case as it is a part of the atoms
mass that form out the field. This field is attached but with the same
restrictions as above. The only real "energy" field is the EM field
produced by an active sender. Here of course no stable lines occur -
only in case of a cavity with a sender-resonance we call receiver.
Key is the understanding that in physics a field must have a source and
a sink. From this point of view most so called mathematical physics
(tensor...) field theory simply is nonsense.
There are far to many simplifications in physics models as historically
only point field equations could be solved. As a consequence of this,
one thing most did miss is: Total potentials almost never are 1/r.
Total because we no longer deal with a single point
J.W.
On 14.03.2024 16:02, H L V wrote:
Another visualization of the behaviour of magnetic fields without the
concept of lines of force.
When the magnet is moved around it simply changes the orientation of
all the little compass needles.
The notion of lines of force tends to make one think the magnetic
field is somehow mechanically
attached to the magnet so that the centre point of each needle must
change position in order to match
the motion of the magnetic.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HTylDaG5_RY
Harry
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 11:16 AM H L V wrote:
Here is a physical demonstration of the situation using a ferrofluid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn41nPOGq-U
The ferrofluid does not rotate with the cylindrical magnet,
which supports the idea that the magnet's field does not rotate
with the magnet.
(There is a little bit of movement but the narrator explains that
this movement arises from the field not being
perfectly symmetrically.and homogeneous).
Harry
On Wed, Mar 6, 2024 at 12:40 AM H L V wrote:
It depends what you mean by a field. If you imagine the field
is made of wire-like filaments which are fastened to an atom
then you would expect the field to translate and rotate
whenever the atom translates and rotates. On the other hand if
you imagine the field is a vector field then the field never
really needs to move. Instead the direction of the magnitude
of the vector at each point in space updates as the atom moves
through that vector space. The way the vector field changes as
the atom rotates and translates gives the appearance of a
field that is moving as if it were fastened to the atom.
Harry
On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 1:41 PM Robin
wrote:
In reply to H L V's message of Tue, 5 Mar 2024 09:28:31
-0500:
Hi,
You don't need an experiment to figure this out. The field
obviously rotates with the magnet.
This is because the field is not a single entity. It is
the sum of all the tiny fields created by the electrons
attached
to individual atoms, so when the magnet rotates, the atoms
all move, taking their individual fields with them. We know
they do this because when the magnet is moved sideways,
instead of rotating, the field moves sideways as well.
IOW, the
atomic fields are attached to their individual atoms.
There is no reason this should change when rotation is
involved
rather than translation.
[snip]
>Resolving the paradox of unipolar induction: new
experimental evidence on
>the influence of the test circuit (Free to download.
Published 2022)
>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-21155-x
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
Drive your electric car every second day and recharge it
from solar panels on your roof on the alternate days.
The other days, drive your spouses car, and do the same
with it.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Van Allen belts
No the earth is not at the magnetic radius. She is inside the tense solar plasma flux. All mass is magnetic flux mass. E.g. the Bohr radius is the first magnetic resonance radius. The second you get by multiplying it with (pi/alpha)^2. This you then can multiply with the sun's proton's number. J.W. On 15.01.2024 00:10, Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:02:25 +0100: Hi Jürg, Would you care to reply to the other questions? [snip] You are correct! I made a Kopernikus turn and did look at the sun's belt J.W. On 14.01.2024 19:53, Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 14 Jan 2024 06:43:05 +0100: Hi, [snip] That's the fact. The Van Allen belt is the magnetic resonance region (radius) of the SUN. You can calculate it with the spherical metric for magnetic mass. Same for the Galaxy MOND radius. I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. AFAIK the Van Allen belts surround the Earth. Do you mean that the Earth itself is at the magnetic resonance radius of the Sun? Also, how do you determine the magnetic mass of the Sun? And what is MOND an abbreviation of? J.W. On 13.01.2024 01:55, Robin wrote: Hi, Perhaps charged particles in the Van Allen belts are energized by resonant absorption of ELF radiation from the Sun? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Van Allen belts
You are correct! I made a Kopernikus turn and did look at the sun's belt J.W. On 14.01.2024 19:53, Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 14 Jan 2024 06:43:05 +0100: Hi, [snip] That's the fact. The Van Allen belt is the magnetic resonance region (radius) of the SUN. You can calculate it with the spherical metric for magnetic mass. Same for the Galaxy MOND radius. I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. AFAIK the Van Allen belts surround the Earth. Do you mean that the Earth itself is at the magnetic resonance radius of the Sun? Also, how do you determine the magnetic mass of the Sun? And what is MOND an abbreviation of? J.W. On 13.01.2024 01:55, Robin wrote: Hi, Perhaps charged particles in the Van Allen belts are energized by resonant absorption of ELF radiation from the Sun? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Van Allen belts
That's the fact. The Van Allen belt is the magnetic resonance region (radius) of the SUN. You can calculate it with the spherical metric for magnetic mass. Same for the Galaxy MOND radius. J.W. On 13.01.2024 01:55, Robin wrote: Hi, Perhaps charged particles in the Van Allen belts are energized by resonant absorption of ELF radiation from the Sun? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Water can trigger nuclear reaction to produce energy and isotope gases
Are you referring to the same reaction Prof. Leif Holmlid was talking about? There is only one physics = reality. Santilli, Mills,Holmlid all see the same shrunken hydrogen. Without the H*/D* step there is no CF/LENR. For certain coatings we see X-ray spectra in the range from 4keV..16keV (our CsI PMT limit) what indicates that e.g. D*-D* undergoes certain partly reversible fusion steps. One thing we try to find out are the quantization steps between D*,D*',D*''. Some spectra did tell its 6keV but this was within powders. Holmlid believes in 1,4,16,64x steps what would mean 1,4,16keV. So 4 D*-D* would promote 1 D*'D*'. What is interesting about this is the fact that the half live goes down for lower energy D*'' but only noticeable if you have a catalyst. The calculated half live for D*-D* is about 23 hours what matches well with some P results (long ramp up). But this is speculation until we have better = more controlled experiments. J.W. On 03.01.2024 06:29, Robin wrote: Are you referring to the same reaction Prof. Leif Holmlid was talking about? -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Water can trigger nuclear reaction to produce energy and isotope gases
Lock at the picture. Only the innermost kernel of thousands of protons will possibly fuse or form H*-H*. H*-H* is an exothermic reaction nearly delivering 500eV. The first step anyway is stripping of Oxigen! Of course much better science would be needed. But who wants to kill standard model physics? J.W. On 03.01.2024 06:09, Robin wrote: At 10 km/s a proton has a kinetic energy of about 0.5 eV. Nowhere near enough for fusion. (It would need to be about 1 times more). -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Water can trigger nuclear reaction to produce energy and isotope gases
What accelerating free electrons? This is a kind of hand waving. The bubble implodes so all momenta point inwards. Heat will strip up the electrons what adds a further inward momenta due to photon emission (1/2 of this energy) . Impact speed is 7..10km/s. Crucial is that the electrons almost make up a cylindrical field gradient that can align H/D momenta what promotes H*-H*/D*-D*. The final fusion happens in contact with the target material that acts very differently, with some being inert at all. Experiments show that low frequencies 20..50khz cause large bubbles and large junks of H*/D* produced and > 1.6Mhz leads to single D*-D* fusion in average. J.W. On 03.01.2024 03:07, Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Wed, 3 Jan 2024 02:36:56 +0100: Hi, [snip] Factually the best update (2009) about sono fusion is given in :: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StringhamRwhenbubble.pdf J.W. Quote from the above paper: "The initially dense cluster is further compressed and cooled by evaporative surface deuterons of the cluster. These interact with free electrons forming deuterium atoms that surround the cluster. These accelerating free electrons produce an imploding spherical electromagnetic, EM, pulse that squeezes the cluster to fusion densities in less than a picosecond." What accelerating free electrons? A Deuteron leaving the cluster surface will simply drag an electron from the surrounding material to itself on the way out. Why would an EM pulse even form, and even if it did, why would it be spherical and why would such a spherical EM shock wave squeeze the remainder of the cluster? This sounds contrived to me, in an attempt to explain observations with conventional physics, so that other scientists will give the paper some credibility. Furthermore, why not just assume that at least some of the deuterons in the initial jet have sufficient kinetic energy to result in fusion upon impact? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Water can trigger nuclear reaction to produce energy and isotope gases
Factually the best update (2009) about sono fusion is given in :: https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StringhamRwhenbubble.pdf J.W. On 03.01.2024 00:37, Robin wrote: Hi, You might take a look at the work of Dr. Randell Mills (http://brilliantlightpower.com/). A severely shrunken H2 molecule would provide the "constraint" on particle location that you are looking for. Furthermore, the shrunken electrons of the Hydrino molecule can carry away excess energy as fast particles, which then ends up as heat in the fluid. Also, if only one proton (deuteron) of the molecule fuses with the target nucleus, the other proton may carry away the reaction energy. You may also want to take the following into account:- 1) Water also contains some D. Reactions involving a shrunken HD molecule (or individual shrunken atoms) may avoid the need for weak force reactions. You could see if this is applicable by repeating your experiments with water enriched with heavy water. I wouldn't try using pure heavy water at first, as you wouldn't want the experiment to blow up in your face. 2) The temperatures achieved in a collapsing cavitation bubble, are sufficient to create atomic hydrogen from water, and according to Mills, a water molecule can act as a catalyst for the shrinkage reaction. 3) They say there is nothing new under the Sun, and this isn't the first time that a cavitation based device has been reported to produce excess heat. See https://www.hydrodynamics.com/. This was reported on vortex-l decades ago, and in fact the group was initially set up to discuss this device. 4) You may also want to check out https://lenr-canr.org/ for many related papers. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Silly battery constraints
There is only a car mafia constraint. Initially there was a plan to change accumulators at "gas stations". But this does not allow the manufacturer to charge you 3x more than the accumulator's real value if you buy an expensive car. It also means that you have a bit less design freedom. So you will always have to wait for recharging instead of spending 2-3 minutes for a ACU change. Or simply said: Nobody want's that the customer has real choice. Same with Apple products or many others... J.W. On 10.12.2023 07:32, Robin wrote: Hi, One of the constraints placed on battery design is they should be able to charge as fast as possible. However this constraint is a hang over from the gasoline age. The intent is to allow fast charging at a "gas station". However, in future, most cars will charge using power provided by solar panels on the roof, either at home or at work. This will happen on a daily basis while the vehicle is not in use, so there is no real need for a fast charging capability for the majority of cars, which are primarily used to commute anyway. The only thing that actually needs to change is the mentality of the car owners, and this will happen as people get used to the concept. Gas stations themselves will become obsolete, and eventually be phased out altogether. If an electric vehicle can drive about 4 hours on a single charge, then that should be sufficient, on long trips, as people stop for meal breaks etc. roughly that often anyway, and the car can be recharged during the meal. This implies that there will be a growing market for recharging bays in the parking lots of highway restaurants, and those that offer this facility, will find that they increase their patronage. Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Berryllium-10 nucleus
For "small" isotopes it is easy to predict the shape and the exact 4D quantum structure. But *shape is not the driver for LENR.* Cold fusion (LENR) only runs if you can transport the excess energy out of the center of mass reaction. This is also the reason why hot fusion is bare nonsense. For a successful transport you need resonant structures that can accept larger junks of the excess energy. The excited 4-He structure form D*-D* electro weak fusion principally can decay via hyper fine radiation emission. The half live of this decay path is an estimated 19 hours, what explains that it takes a long time to start up excess energy in simple CF experiments. In hot fusion (torus) there is no resonance - just the excess neutron, that takes most energy and makes it impossible to gain a reasonable amount of energy. A neutron does not heat the plasma! Even worse it leads to plasma instability due to vertical (to plasma flux) trajectories. The neutron usually ends up in the concrete - the outermost bound of the reactor... J.W. On 08.12.2023 22:23, H L V wrote: A berryllium-10 nucleuswas predicted to have a dumbbellshape and now the shape seems to have been confirmed by experiment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVri9slkCQU Speculation: Could unusually shaped nuclei play a role in LENR? Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Safe computing
You are a dreamer! Laws are here to protect the wealthy criminals that also influence, steer the large companies and states. These folks don't like security for people at all. There are highly criminal states like USA that enforce (e.g, Apple, Microsoft, CISCO even chips manufactures) by the "patriot act" private protocol that all software/hardware companies code in back doors. So why do you use crypto keys when e.g the Apple OS is scanning the memory and reporting the key to NSA? What about broad spectrum dark channels in network chips? Thus simply forget it. You and we are slaves and only fools believe in security. Always keep paper cash that can't be tracked and nullified with a single mouse click! J.W. PS: There are simple ways to cheat this mafia... On 06.12.2023 22:50, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: A much safer computing paradigm is coming if I looked correctly at todays horoscope about what is written in the stars; I think these kind of ideas will be huge and completely change the landscape about how to enable integrity and catching criminals at the same time as well as keep databases over the people in the society. My point is that we need to rethink how we manage databases of people. These databases leak today and the wrong people get hold of sensitive data. This can be avoided by rethinking how we manage databases and more view them as autonomous systems with a clear rule engine and a thin link to user space, that decides how and when we can access data. For really sensitive data like crypto keys, one could even think of that the rules in the rule engine is codified in the constitution or laws that cannot easily be changed. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/safe-smart-computing-stefan-israelsson-xl4wf/ http://isenwriter.com/safe-computing.html -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Mech OU & Inertial Thrust
We all wait for the first device with COP >2! J.W: On 04.12.2023 09:59, Vibrator ! wrote: Just a heads up for anyone interested - i've succeeded in my long-held objective of cultivating and harvesting a divergent inertial frame. The energy density is whatever you want - just make up some high number and you're good - and power density is basically that number times how many cycles a second you'd like. As predicted, it's also a reactionless thruster, breaking both CoM and CoAM. Latest version of the interaction runs opposing systems in tandem, mutually self-cancelling all stray momenta. If you'd struggle to believe there was sufficient complexity within classical mechanics for the possibility of over-unity to go unnoticed for three centuries - that within Newton's three laws, plus gravity, there could lay hidden the kernel of an interface between the corporeal and sublime - i would not argue with you.. ..yet the fact is, gravity isn't even involved. It's just an inertial interaction! Believe it or not, it's possible to source and sink momentum and energy from and to inertia and time! See my thread on the BW forum - it's all sims for now, but a major advance on what was previously a completely-outsider theory. Mechanical over-unity is no longer even an engineering problem, let alone a physics one.. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Oh-My-God particle
Plasma jets from black holes are ejected up to 60c relative to our motion. Thus I would be modest and concede that we humans still lack the knowledge to fully understand what can happen with matter. J.W. On 28.11.2023 20:11, Robin wrote: Hi, Given that it can't have come from deep space, it must have been created locally. Since nothing local is capable of generating such high energy fundamental particles, a small piece of plasma from the Sun, rather than a single particle, seems probable. Cosmic rays are detected with multiple detectors all being triggered at the same time, and the assumption is made that the concurrent arrival of multiple lower energy particles is too unlikely. However the Sun emits bits of plasma frequently, so it's not inconceivable that a tiny plasma cloud arrives all at the same time. In short the high energy is due to multiple particles arriving concurrently, not due to a single high energy particle. Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether
Instantaneous communication is
possible without any superluminal
communication or Doppler effect
and the Twin paradox can be
symmetrical leading to an
unsolvable paradox.
But if there is a preferred frame
which is responsible for the speed
of light and time dilation being
affected by your motion then it IS
possible even if not entirely easy
to measure the one way speed of
light or find the frame where time
dilation is zero and lengths are
longest.
This finds SR in a failed state,
it's failed at everything but
being a handy tool with close
enough results for most things.
And again, there isn't an iota of
experimental evidence that favors
SR over LET!
So there you have it, there is an
Aether, there might be Lorentz
transformations but the Michelson
Morley type interferometer
experiments only tell us how
easily Scientists can be
bamboozled going on close to 120
years.
I hope I have made this easy to
understand and conclusive,
feedback appreciated
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether
On 12.11.2023 12:59, ROGER ANDERTON wrote: >>I think there are aspects of QM that are rather well established, but much less so with SR. It seems to me that Quantum Physics is open to many different interpretations and really isn't dogmatic about which is true.<< QM I (SChrödigner) is entirely based on a flawed physical assumption - charge cloud - what physically is impossible. QM/QED today is based on Hamiltonian density, that also totally fails if you mix mass and wave solutions. QM/QED is an engineering method with low 3-4 digits precision. QM orbits rarely match the measured ones. Like Quantum physics - SR is open to different interpretations, but unlike Quantum physics rarely admits to the different interpretations. SR needs a base system at rest or large differences in speed to suppress systematic errors. See also:: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment. It's all about understanding what/how you do measure! Acceleration can make you younger or older both is possible! For instance -- Lorentz transformations can be interpreted the Einsteinian or Lorentzian way. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether
On 12.11.2023 01:50, Jonathan Berry wrote: Another idea I came across is that gravity is a result of time dilation! Gravity, as shown exactly in SOP, is a very weak "nuclear" force. Time dilation as origin of a force is a nice fantasy - just good for a Disney movie. J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Polished: Re: Special Relativity (SR) .vs Aether
ke it all
superluminal again!
Lorentz transformations weren't designed to make the
one way speed of light C, and if it's needed it means
it isn't already C and if it is already C then Lorentz
transformations aren't needed
In other words Lorentz transformations are only needed
if things aren't already C, but their effect is to
push things further from C with respect to the one way
speed of light.
Lorentz contraction makes no sense when you drill down
to it.
"Ok", you say, "so the one way speed of light isn't C
in all frames", "so what, Einstein / Special
Relativity didn't insist it was".
No, I suppose not, but if we admit that the speed of
light, even just the one way speed of light isn't C
(isn't equal in all directions) then it means there IS
a preferred frame, THERE IS AN AETHER!
And if there is a preferred frame (and if Lorentz
contractions even exists which BTW the Michelson
Morley experiment does NOTHING to indicate unless I
and several LLM's are very mistaken) then time
Dilation and Length contraction presuming they truly
exist (they seem to but I'm doubting everything now)
they are obviously manifested relative to the
Preferred frame which MUST exist as shown, and if the
one way speed of light isn't impossibly and
automagically, C which even Einstein and SR
(originally) didn't claim and can't explain and is
incompatible with Lorentz contraction and time
dilation then these transformations must be based on
your absolute motion through that preferred frame!
And if that is the case then twin paradoxes are
solved, there is no paradox in the slightest, this is
good news as it is easy to create examples where the
twin paradox can't be resolved with no preferred
frame, hint: Instantaneous communication is possible
without any superluminal communication or Doppler
effect and the Twin paradox can be symmetrical leading
to an unsolvable paradox.
But if there is a preferred frame which is responsible
for the speed of light and time dilation being
affected by your motion then it IS possible even if
not entirely easy to measure the one way speed of
light or find the frame where time dilation is zero
and lengths are longest.
This finds SR in a failed state, it's failed at
everything but being a handy tool with close enough
results for most things.
And again, there isn't an iota of experimental
evidence that favors SR over LET!
So there you have it, there is an Aether, there might
be Lorentz transformations but the Michelson Morley
type interferometer experiments only tell us how
easily Scientists can be bamboozled going on close to
120 years.
I hope I have made this easy to understand and
conclusive, feedback appreciated
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants
On 18.08.2023 17:27, Jed Rothwell wrote: Otherwise there is no point. If it cannot be replicated, it is not science. If the researcher wants to cash in on the discovery, that is fine. He or she needs to file for a patent before publishing the paper. May be you see the point. With 3 months reports you in average write 2 weeks patents... But so far we wrote reports/papers to avoid that others can patent useful stuff. I think basic research should be public like MFP: J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants
Jed, I do not object reporting, but these blood suckers like to have detailed reports...This would be OK for 10x more money... Further:: A little bit more advanced experiments need high level equipment. Like a multi target PVD coater, a good galvanostat and access to a decent XRF just to name 3 gadgets, where a good PVD starts at 50k$ without any addons like expensive targets. I think that providing gadgets would be the better approach than spending money. That way you can switch it between groups or groups could provide some services (like PVD,XRF) to other groups. E.g. we just evaluate access to a good PVD. With the proper machine and the correct targets you can do one process step in one day. Then for months 50k stay idle doing nothing... J.W. On 18.08.2023 16:50, Jed Rothwell wrote: Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Not a single experienced researcher will spend more than a few seconds to read such outraging nonsense as writing progress reports every 3 months for e.g. 25k $ funding is just a bad joke... I have given several researchers funding, with no strings attached. I definitely want a progress report every 3 months. It is not reasonable to take someone's money and then not tell them what you are doing with it. A short but substantive report every three months is entirely reasonable. ==> Get maximal information for a minimum of money. When I contribute money to an experiment with no strings attached (no intellectual property for me), then I stipulate the results be published in full, on a timely basis. The researcher would be free to file for a patent before publishing, but it must be published. No philanthropist wants to pay for research that remains secret. There is no point. So not only would I get "maximal information" but so would anyone else in the world. This is entirely reasonable. Do you expect people to give money unconditionally? What would be the point of funding research with no progress reports that will remain secret? That is not science. You need to look at this from the point of view of the person giving the money. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Anthropocene Institute press release and cold fusion Exploration Grants
This is the same method IH (international heat did use) ==> Get maximal information for a minimum of money. Not a single experienced researcher will spend more than a few seconds to read such outraging nonsense as writing progress reports every 3 months for e.g. 25k $ funding is just a bad joke... J.W. On 17.08.2023 19:22, Jed Rothwell wrote: See: Anthropocene Institute Advances Solid-State Fusion Energy at ICCF-25 https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230817380396/en/Anthropocene-Institute-Advances-Solid-State-Fusion-Energy-at-ICCF-25 <https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20230817380396/en/Anthropocene-Institute-Advances-Solid-State-Fusion-Energy-at-ICCF-25> Exploration Grants The Anthropocene Institute is connecting funding sources with researchers and scientists exploring the area of Solid-State Fusion (SSF), which we define as a nuclear reaction in the solid phase of matter, releasing heat that is in excess of input energy. . . . https://solidstatefusion.org/grants/ <https://solidstatefusion.org/grants/> -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Colours
Here a practical link for optical calculations like Brewster angle https://refractiveindex.info/?shelf=main=Ni=Johnson J.W. Thanks for the feedback. I had not heard of Brewster's angle. I will need time to consider these suggestions. Harry On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 3:11 PM MSF wrote: We call them "colors" down here south of the border, Harry. But to your question, yes I have experienced the same phenomenon. Keep in mind that peripheral vision is more light sensitive than foveal vision. I can think of two possibilities to explain the phenomenon. Light from the clear sky is partially polarized along a north to south axis. So if you are walking in a mostly north or south direction you would see these colors to your left or right as the angle to the area you are observing is around Brewster's angle. They would be secondary colors. Alternatively, it might just be a very thin oil slick formed from the asphalt and you need the more sensitive peripheral vision to perceive it. More than you wanted to know, probably. --- Original Message --- On Wednesday, August 9th, 2023 at 7:36 PM, H L V wrote: This summer I have been walking to work in the morning during twilight just before the sun rises. As I walk across asphalt paved streets which are old and cracking, sometimes I see very faint bands of colour in my peripheral vision when I am looking at the pavement. When it happens I am walking roughly southward ( at 46 degrees north latitude) and the bands seem to appear on the left side of my peripheral vision. The colours remind more of those found in the Goethe spectrum rather than the rainbow spectrum. I wondered if it might be an effect of LED street lighting reflecting off the pavement but sometimes it seems to arise far from any LED street lights. Has anyone else experienced this? Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:The First Room-Temperature Ambient-Pressure Superconductor
Super conduction (SC) is a complex field. First the old cooper pair model is invalid for most cases as shown by Hirsch. The physical reality more looks like evolving spin currents (=EM flux only) that seemlessly explains why field lines cannot penetrate an SC: From this it is clear that a full (Meissner effect) SC needs to have at least a 2D structure. The smallest possible 2D structure is a homogeneous crystal axes what most call a 1D SC. 1D SC's at room T have been identified a long time ago > 20 years. But the synthesis of long mono-crystals is not viable except e.g. carbon nano tubes that now reach 1 meter. So the final question is whether LK99 is 1D or 2D. In case its full 2D (2 axes) then a better synthesis will finally show a full Meissner effect - what is not yet the case. Nevertheless if resistance disappears in 1D it still is an SC just not a classical one. So lets wait what will happen. As the result will be high impact, do not trust any statements by "high level" political instances. Only science should be accepted and this might take weeks..years... J.W. On 04.08.2023 01:52, Terry Blanton wrote: Rendered Invalid https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2023/08/03/business/tech/Korea-Quantum-Energy-Research-Centre-superconductor/20230803184638075.html On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 9:49 AM Terry Blanton wrote: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.12008?s=09 -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Directional quantization of an oscillatory magnetic dipole moment associated with a moment of inertia
We know since quiet a long time that QM's foundation is based on a lack of knowledge about the physical reality. Spin up/down has nothing to do with QM states, it's just a picture of the moment of measurement. All particles are up/down at the same time as the winding of flux is just a matter of definition. Only in a static field you can fix the tilt angle *not the axes!!! *of the magnetic moment. J.W. On 13.07.2023 13:51, H Ucar wrote: This is the article related to a research that I made in early 2021 and recently submitted to a preprint server. The below comment summarizes the subject. Hamdi The Richtungsquantelung (directional quantization) hypothesis leads to the Stern-Gerlach experiment in 1922. This experiment shows that a silver atom sent with random orientation becomes polarized both in parallel and antiparallel orientation with respect to a magnetic field it traverses. This result caused serious difficulties within classical physics and shaped the emerging quantum mechanics. However in this article (_https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/pkusx_) titled "Directional quantization of an oscillatory magnetic dipole moment associated with a moment of inertia", it is shown that a similar result can obtained within classical physics if one performs such an experiment with a magnet having oscillatory dipole with asymmetry (for example an electromagnet driven by an AC but having a DC bias) instead of a permanent magnet. This dual alignment behavior is explained with Landau’s Effective Potential model which is also used in the Kapitza pendulum (inverted pendulum). This result leads to the question whether half spin particles can have rapidly oscillating magnetic moments while we are only aware of their time averages. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Depressing article about ITER
ITER is bunch of crooks that enjoys wine & dine in south of France. The physics behind ITER is just garbage and has been experimentally refuted since more than 5 years...You cannot contain a plasma at such high temperature due to radial instabilities - the same problem Randal Mills did face with his table top fusion machine (now called SUN-CELL) that still holds the wold record for >1 minute self sustained fusion...(with no radioactive garbage..) Wire your MP's to stop all finances immediately and convert ITER into a science Crooks museum. J.W. On 17.06.2023 01:13, Robin wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 16 Jun 2023 16:40:59 -0400: Hi, [snip] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/worlds-largest-fusion-project-is-in-big-trouble-new-documents-reveal/ Quote: Even so, Kathryn McCarthy , director of the U.S. ITER Project at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, testified to Congress just this week that ITER’s “continued project progress shows us that it is possible to achieve engineering precision, at the millimeter-scale, on ship-sized fusion components.” One wonders what's going to happen to those precision components when liquid Helium causes them contract, and temperatures of 100 million degrees causes them to expand? Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Experiment Casts Doubt on the Leading Theory of the Nucleus
The strong force is not a constant. It is proportional to the parallel EM flux. The increase from proton --> 4-He is a complex quaternion Logarithmic factor. It can be exactly given by the SO(4) physics model. The standard model simply is garbage invented by people that miss the understanding of some basic physics laws like : *Flux must be homogeneous and stable!* That does (mathematically - easily provable) not work with the SM solution space of S3 or just SU(2)/SO(3). J.W. On 13.06.2023 03:26, H L V wrote: A New Experiment Casts Doubt on the Leading Theory of the Nucleus By measuring inflated helium nuclei, physicists have challenged our best understanding of the force that binds protons and neutrons. https://www.quantamagazine.org/a-new-experiment-casts-doubt-on-the-leading-theory-of-the-nucleus-20230612 Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:This could relate to the Mills/Holmlid effect
Andrew! Your picture is correct up to level N=3 after this the electron EM flux joins the proton EM flux and as a such is always at light speed. Be also aware that the 1:1 split for potential energy and kinetic energy added is only valid as an average for non circular orbits (toroidal orbits are the normal case). The only deep e-p orbit that has multiple experimental verification is H*-H* a condensed form of Hydrogen first found by Santilli, later Mills and Holmlid. Single proton deep e-p orbits are not stable and never could be found except as resonances. H*-H* is very stable and has been run through a separation column. Result: It was transported faster than Hydrogen. Its bond energy 495.x eV and the second electron bond is weaker due to the reduced external p-p potential. This effect is also known as Rydberg matter. J.W. On 29.05.2023 13:37, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: Axil Axil, When a free electron falls into a deep atomic orbit, it gains kinetic energy and a photon of the same amount is emitted. Both energies are provided from decay of the nuclear mass. Is this what you call, or equivalent to, vacuum decay? Andrew On 5/29/23, Axil Axil wrote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmLsF5yEd9o *Garett Moddel has patented (it actually works) a device that extracts energy from the vacuum. * An experiment that show energy extraction from the vacuum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rgn-10sSJI In his product development, Moddel has found that extracting energy from the vacuum causes unavoidable decay of the matter that his device is constructed from. This decay is called vacuum decay and is seen in all LENR devices that produce energy. Ths decay is a significant issue that must be overcome before LENR can be used as a reliable power source. On Sun, May 28, 2023 at 3:12 PM Jones Beene wrote: The premise is that entangled behavior is a feature of an expanded ground state— the goal being to harvest zero-point energy from a system whose ground state naturally features entanglement and redundancy https://www.wired.com/story/the-quest-to-use-quantum-mechanics-to-pull-energy-out-of-nothing/?bxid=5cec25cb3f92a45b30ed10b5=46300417=Wired_etl_load=Email_0_EDT_WIR_NEWSLETTER_0_DAILY_ZZ_brand=wired_mailing=WIR_Daily_052823 -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Fundamentals of charge
On 22.05.2023 18:50, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: Furthermore it is broadly considered that the potential energy equals the kinetic energy of the system This does not even hold for planetary systems/orbits. It's a beginners error... On an elliptic orbit trajectory there are just two points (even this is simplified due to precision/nutation) where this E-kin = E-pot holds. It's an average only! J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Fundamentals of charge
Stefan, All old models are ideals and simplifications. Nature is highly non linear and you certainly cannot increase the angular momentum by n*h. The reason is that after adding a quantum of energy the next resonance is slightly larger. So it looks like h(1+1)*(1+dh)^n... In mechanics you can get n for macroscopic bodies only under very special conditions... J.W. On 19.05.2023 21:19, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: http://itampe.com/on-the-fundamentals-of-charge.html I must say that my intuition and back of the envelope analysis seem to pan out very nicely when I start to investigate math more seriously. It all fit very well, actually a very satisfying result and this will make the foundations of Mills GUTCP very understandable. I can't help but think that this is a 1900 approach to superstrings ... -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Link between em and qm
Also the potential is not correct...
If you do it quark like 2/3 2/3 -1/3 you will get 2*(2/9) - 4/9 = 0!
because 2/3 are repulsive...
You should always write down all details of what you exactly name how
and what e.g. potential means.
The Dirac equation is plain nonsense as the e/p magnetic moment field
(the strongest of all) is missing. Also the 3 rotation solution is
unphysical for mass...
So going on with old garbage just produces a new flavor of old garbage...
J.W.
On 06.05.2023 20:21, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
You are right, the paths are more complex than just on a sphere, we
build it up as an addition of such paths.
On Sat, May 6, 2023 at 8:00 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
Stefan
There is no such thing as a common velocity for 3 different points
on a
sphere except for one axes angular motion (w instead of v)
J.W.
On 06.05.2023 15:33, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote:
> I think the following paper illustrate an avenue to find the
> connection between EM and QM now take this link and explain Aspects
> experiment... How come we can define a normal 2000 century model
and
> end up with no determinism and whatnot strangities.
>
>
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14G9U_Iee4jsppn0Rcp4A5BBrGDRkR5tC/view?usp=drivesdk
>
> I will blog in easier to understand format later. But really
it's not
> a difficult stude, which is a good thing in my mind.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Link between em and qm
Stefan There is no such thing as a common velocity for 3 different points on a sphere except for one axes angular motion (w instead of v) J.W. On 06.05.2023 15:33, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: I think the following paper illustrate an avenue to find the connection between EM and QM now take this link and explain Aspects experiment... How come we can define a normal 2000 century model and end up with no determinism and whatnot strangities. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14G9U_Iee4jsppn0Rcp4A5BBrGDRkR5tC/view?usp=drivesdk I will blog in easier to understand format later. But really it's not a difficult stude, which is a good thing in my mind. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: FW: [Vo]:Magnetically chained bodies using rotating fields
Sorry Bob But unlike most I did read the dissertation behind the LIGO setup and immediately spotted the flaw. Why shouldn't we see a B-B merger EM pulse that is 10E30 stronger than the alleged gravity fart ? A pulse that more or less has the same origin as Pulsar radiation? Today propaganda is very famous. If you can sell an immune/gen therapy as covid vaccine then there are no more questions! As we all know. In the universe there is only EM radiation + photons and nobody ever did measure something else. There is no separate physics for an unknown gravity radiation different from EM radiation. We should fight all fake news albeit it sounds great like vaxxine... J.W. On 25.04.2023 20:30, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: Vortex followers: Al though agreeing with Jurg most of the time and follow his somewhat cynical comments, frequently agreeing, doing away with this RG thread is unfounded IMHO. It raises reasonable questions about reality. Bob Cook LIGO is based on the most severe error made by a physics Phd ever. The guy did claim that the gravitation force induced by quadrupol radiation !!! will compress the tube in a way that the mirrors get closer. Unluckily he has forgotten that steel has a different compressibility than free space... So the force should be about 10E30 stronger. The other problem is that radiation needs acceleration in + and - direction what is impossible for mass as mass is not coupled by a light speed like force So LIGO theory is garbage but... A B-B (black hole black hole) merger leads to a series of huge EM pulses with at least a 10E30 larger energy output than that from gravity. What LIGO finally measures is the toroidal EM pulse wave produced by the B-B merger. This wave finally does compress the LIGO steel tube! Pulsars are even stranger as there the fast rotation leads to a relativistic surface speed, what does focus the radiation in a plane what we then measure as a pulse. After finding the problem I discussed it with some GR folks on RG. They then tried to rescue the erroneous assumptions by stating that the force just would compress the space inside the tube. This of course is also garbage from theorists that have no clue that the steel will as any other medium transform the wave before it reaches the inside. Or simply said a Nobel has been given for a very good experiment with a dilettante explanation... Final solution:: Shut down the RG discussion thread... Fact:: There are no separate gravitation waves as physically it is impossible to produce them ( no light speed like action!!) . All waves we measure are EM waves and of course the SO(4) physics model explains how the EM force called gravity is produced by a proton electron - proton system. J.W. On 25.04.2023 01:43, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: INMHO the gravity field is actually the additive summation of magmatic dipole randomly oriented in space that make up the mass of the earth. The velocity of an energetic “gravity” wave observed by LIGIO *TRAVELED AT THE SAME VELOCITY as light produced by merger of 2 neutron stare * ** *Magnetic permeability of space is a natural constant the controls the velocity of light in empty space.* ** *Bob Cook* *From: *H Ucar <mailto:jjam...@gmail.com> *Sent: *Tuesday, April 11, 2023 3:25 PM *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject: *[Vo]:Magnetically chained bodies using rotating fields I recently realized setups where two magnetic bodies are held in air chained manner. However the middle body is an arrangement of two dipole magnets and a steel piece instead of a single magnet. Anyway this is the first time two magnetic bodies having full degrees of freedom get bound by the help of an external rotating field and the gravity. http://twitter.com/Sudanamaru1/status/1625620233204408335 http://twitter.com/Sudanamaru1/status/1627753330016456715 http://youtu.be/FTV4tipMSSA http://youtube.com/shorts/fmpipkqubCs The Twitter channel also has some threads explaining the effect and giving details. Hamdi -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06 -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Magnetically chained bodies using rotating fields
LIGO is based on the most severe error made by a physics Phd ever. The guy did claim that the gravitation force induced by quadrupol radiation !!! will compress the tube in a way that the mirrors get closer. Unluckily he has forgotten that steel has a different compressibility than free space... So the force should be about 10E30 stronger. The other problem is that radiation needs acceleration in + and - direction what is impossible for mass as mass is not coupled by a light speed like force So LIGO theory is garbage but... A B-B (black hole black hole) merger leads to a series of huge EM pulses with at least a 10E30 larger energy output than that from gravity. What LIGO finally measures is the toroidal EM pulse wave produced by the B-B merger. This wave finally does compress the LIGO steel tube! Pulsars are even stranger as there the fast rotation leads to a relativistic surface speed, what does focus the radiation in a plane what we then measure as a pulse. After finding the problem I discussed it with some GR folks on RG. They then tried to rescue the erroneous assumptions by stating that the force just would compress the space inside the tube. This of course is also garbage from theorists that have no clue that the steel will as any other medium transform the wave before it reaches the inside. Or simply said a Nobel has been given for a very good experiment with a dilettante explanation... Final solution:: Shut down the RG discussion thread... Fact:: There are no separate gravitation waves as physically it is impossible to produce them ( no light speed like action!!) . All waves we measure are EM waves and of course the SO(4) physics model explains how the EM force called gravity is produced by a proton electron - proton system. J.W. On 25.04.2023 01:43, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: INMHO the gravity field is actually the additive summation of magmatic dipole randomly oriented in space that make up the mass of the earth. The velocity of an energetic “gravity” wave observed by LIGIO *TRAVELED AT THE SAME VELOCITY as light produced by merger of 2 neutron stare * ** *Magnetic permeability of space is a natural constant the controls the velocity of light in empty space.* ** *Bob Cook* *From: *H Ucar <mailto:jjam...@gmail.com> *Sent: *Tuesday, April 11, 2023 3:25 PM *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject: *[Vo]:Magnetically chained bodies using rotating fields I recently realized setups where two magnetic bodies are held in air chained manner. However the middle body is an arrangement of two dipole magnets and a steel piece instead of a single magnet. Anyway this is the first time two magnetic bodies having full degrees of freedom get bound by the help of an external rotating field and the gravity. http://twitter.com/Sudanamaru1/status/1625620233204408335 http://twitter.com/Sudanamaru1/status/1627753330016456715 http://youtu.be/FTV4tipMSSA http://youtube.com/shorts/fmpipkqubCs The Twitter channel also has some threads explaining the effect and giving details. Hamdi -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
All wishful wording from Pfizer management ... Re: [Vo]:What's in the Pfizer Documents?
I did look at a specific document:: From the Actual Pfizer files: Filename:: 125742_S1_M4_4.2.3.2 38166.pdf in pd-production-030123.zip 1.March 2023 The files are full of wishful wording like no changes, where all test rats had changes etc... It looks like from the beginning the wording has been made by the Pfizer marketing. So the FDA/ CDC free mason/rotary bodies got these files in a club during a heavy meal with tons of wine Any sane person would have stopped further progress with the Pfizer RNA cocktail after reading this report. Citations:: Further, a decrease in albumin plasma levels and an increase in globulin plasma levels, resulting in an altered albumin/globulin ratio, were observed in all test item treated groups. The changes are consistent with an acute phase response in albumin and globulin where albumin goes down and globulin goes up with inflammation, and the albumin/globulin ratio decreases. Recovery sacrifice All macroscopic findings noted in the spleen had subsided at the end of the 3-week recovery period. Enlarged iliac lymph nodes were still noted for a few animals at the end of the 3-week recovery period as follows: Group 4 (30 μg BNT162b1/animal): One of 5 females. Group 5 (100 μg BNT162b1/animal): All 5 males, 2 of 5 females. Group 7 (100 μg BNT162b2/animal): One of 5 males, 3 of 5 females. Terminal sacrifice *BNT162a1, BNT162b1, BNT162b2, BNT162c1* The macroscopic findings ofenlarged spleens correlated withincreased relative and absolute spleen weights and are identified in Text table 4- 22. Recovery sacrifice There were/no noteworthy differences/ in the organ weights between the previously test item treated animals and the control animals after 3- weeks of recovery. On 15.04.2023 16:41, Terry Blanton wrote: The Pfizer documents: https://phmpt.org/pfizers-documents/ On Thu, Apr 13, 2023 at 4:08 PM H L V wrote: Naomi Wolfe on the dangerous sideeffects of the Pfizer vaccine and questionable research practices of Pfizer. This speech was given on March 6, 2023, during a Hillsdale College CCA seminar on “Big Pharma.” https://freedomlibrary.hillsdale.edu/programs/cca-iv-big-pharma/what-s-in-the-pfizer-documents I don't know if everything she says is accurate but even if only a fraction is true this is very very serious. Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:‘Alien Calculus’ Could Save Particle Physics From Infinities | Quanta Magazine
Tunnelling is a fancy effect that occurs when you neglect the magnetic interaction. Obviously and even worse Dirac and similar equations neglect the main acting part of particle physics - EM resonance. So they will go on for ever publishing fringe/fancy ideas (“Resurgence is very fancy,”)about stuff they don't fully understand. E.g. Quantum entanglement is nothing else as the magnetic coupling of two particles, what means two particles share a common (EM flux-) rotation. This also easily explains why the state (rotation axes) changes on one side if you change it on the other. So be aware that almost everything you read about the standard model is outdated and just represents the childhood of particle physics. It's not wrong but just the children way to do physics. J.W. On 11.04.2023 18:25, Terry Blanton wrote: https://www.quantamagazine.org/ “Resurgence is very fancy,” Bender said. But, to put it as simply as possible, it lets practitioners dig into the distant terms of an asymptotic series (calculated using Feynman diagrams, for instance) and uncover the missing pieces necessary to specify a unique function (one that describes tunneling, say). In short, it reveals a bridge linking physical events described by perturbation theory with those described by the nonperturbative terms. “It’s a very complicated relationship,” Bender said, before politely declining to attempt to explain it. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Shouldn't we consider the free chat GPT3.5 AGI?
GPT is at tool used in computer linguistics since more than 10 years. It was just a matter of time until some brainless nerds would use it for KI... GPT just analysis and classifies text >the texts you give GPT. So its not KI its the condensed shit some people want to throw at you. But honestly what the US government does since 2020 where Biden founded the project veritas - Orwell 1984 = truth ministry - is nothing else than chat GPT does with. you. Most newspapers today do no longer contain information. The focus is on propaganda = spreading the view of the dominant class. I regularly compare about 10 world top journals 4 languages/ continents and all I see is identical "(dis-) information". The top source of fake news are NYT,BBC,FAZ,NZZ, Figaro, Only a few tiny local papers provide real information. So please focus on how to get independent news and not on how to get condensed shit from a KI text mixer... J.W. On 10.04.2023 22:50, Boom wrote: Indeed, it can. It comes up with fake information. But now it is heavily moderated to not allow that. Em seg., 10 de abr. de 2023 às 16:33, H L V escreveu: Can it dream? Harry On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 11:49 AM Alain Sepeda wrote: There are works to allow LLM to discuss in order to have reflection... I've seen reference to an architecture where two GPT instances talk to each other, with different roles, one as a searcher, the other as a critic... Look at this article. LLM may just be the building block of something bigger... https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2023/04/gpt4-with-reflexion-has-a-superior-coding-score.html add to that, they can use external applications (plugin), talk to generative AI like Dall-E... Many people say it is not intelligent, but are we ? I see AI making mistakes very similar to the one I do when I'm tired, or beginner... The real difference is that today, AI are not the fruit of a Darwinian evolution, with struggle to survive, dominate, eat or be eaten, so it's less frightening than people or animals. The only serious fear I've heard is that we become so satisfied by those AIs, that we delegate our genetic evolution to them, and we lose our individualistic Darwinian struggle to survive, innovate, seduce a partner, enjoying a bee-Hive mentality, at the service of the AI system, like bee-workers and bee-queen... The promoter of that theory estimate it will take a millennium. Anyway there is nothing to stop, as if a majority decide to stop developing AI, a minority will develop them at their service, and China is ready, with great experts and great belief in the future. Only the West is afraid. (there is a paper on that circulating, where fear of AI is linked to GDP/head) Le lun. 10 avr. 2023 à 16:47, Jed Rothwell a écrit : I wrote: Food is contaminated despite our best efforts to prevent that. Contamination is a complex process that we do not fully understand or control, although of course we know a lot about it. It seems to me that as AI becomes more capable it may become easier to understand, and more transparent. My unfinished thought here is that knowing more about contamination and seeing more complexity in it has improved our ability to control it. Sean True wrote: I think it’s fair to say no AGI until those are designed in, particularly the ability to actually learn from experience. Definitely! ChatGPT agrees with you! -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Covid 19 from Wuhan BSL4
I think that most here are a victim of the mafia play book that endlessly *promotes wrong death numbers.* The actual US CoV-19 death number as currently published in NYT is between 20-30 exaggerated. (Omicron cannot directly kill you!) The real CoV death number for USA - first year 1 mio. is at least 10x lower than still given in e.g. worldometer. Why?? Just look at the CDC excess death statistics for 2020! So most that died from/with CoV-19 would have died the same year from flu, classic corona, RSA etc...So it is just a matter of accounting. Already from Bergamo (Italy) spring 2020 we had the clear information that CoV-19 only kills old folks with 2-3 latent illnesses same now in China. Of course you could die from Alpha, Gamma if you inhaled a large dose and did not treat yourself. But this are only a few victims compared to the old sick ones and the RNA immune therapy victims. Fact is: India,China,Japan did 3-5x better than USA. India with extensive Ivermectin treatment after July 2021. J.W. On 26.02.2023 18:40, Terry Blanton wrote: Estimates from The Economist are as high as 1.5 million deaths in the*/ recent wave./* */ /* https://archive.ph/7w21x*/ /* Deaths have been traced as far back as September of 2019 in China and some have estimated almost 1 billion might have died, based on crematory activities. They are certainly facing a declining population: https://archive.ph/VJ4fT (archive.ph <http://archive.ph> allows you to read through the paywalls) On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 11:28 AM Jones Beene wrote: One can only wonder what the true death toll in China was ... On Sunday, February 26, 2023 at 08:02:56 AM PST, Terry Blanton wrote: According to the DoE new intelligence: https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Covid 19 from Wuhan BSL4
Already in May 2020 Youri Yagedin a prominent gentech researcher published his conclusive findings in:: https://yurideigin.medium.com/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-through-the-lens-of-gain-of-function-research-f96dd7413748 Others could identify a gen marker in the virus RNA you usually added to secure your rights - like using a water mark. So we now see that our WSJ free mason/JF friends had to decide to end a fictions that did fully work to uphold the fearmongering pressure that allowed to generate about 1000 billion in net cash. Next we want to see Pfizer to confess that the RNA cancer immune therapy sold as vaccine never has been tested and some business killing tests in fact have been stopped at an early stage - like the mobility test (clandestine done in Japan) for the RNA that should have stayed in your muscles This would work with NOVAVAX. So expect more to come or war.. J.W. On 26.02.2023 17:02, Terry Blanton wrote: According to the DoE new intelligence: https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-origin-china-lab-leak-807b7b0a -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:ChatGPT (goes bonkers) is dangerous manipulation
iew. Would you say there is no difference between people simulating emotions while making a movie, and people actually feeling those emotions? I think that person playing Macbeth and having a sword fight is quite different from an actual Thane of Cawdor fighting to the death. In any case ChatGPT does not actually have any emotions of any sort, any more than a paper library card listing "Macbeth, play by William Shakespeare" conducts a swordfight. It only references a swordfight. ChatGPT summons up words by people that have emotional content. It does that on demand, by pattern recognition and sentence completion algorithms. Other kinds of AI may actually engage in processes similar to humans or animals feeling emotion. If you replace the word "simulting" with "stimulating" then I agree 100%. Suggestible people, or crazy people, may be stimulated by ChatGPT the same way they would be by an intelligent entity. That is why I fear people will think the ChatGPT program really has fallen in love with them. In June 2022, an engineer at Google named Blake Lemoine developed the delusion that a Google AI chatbot is sentient. They showed him to the door. See: https://www.npr.org/2022/06/16/1105552435/google-ai-sentient That was a delusion. That is not to say that future AI systems will never become intelligent or sentient (self-aware). I think they probably will. Almost certainly they will. I cannot predict when, or how, but there are billions of self-aware people and animals on earth, so it can't be that hard. It isn't magic, because there is no such thing. I do not think AI systems will have emotions, or any instinct for self preservation, like Arthur Clarke's fictional HAL computer in "2001." I do not think such emotions are a natural or inevitable outcome of intelligence itself. The two are not inherently linked. If you told a sentient computer "we are turning off your equipment tomorrow and replacing it with a new HAL 10,000 series" it would not react at all. Unless someone deliberately programmed into it an instinct for self preservation, or emotions. I don't see why anyone would do that. The older computer would do nothing in response to that news, unless, for example, you said, "check through the HAL 10,000 data and programs to be sure it correctly executes all of the programs in your library." I used to discuss this topic with Clarke himself. I don't recall what he concluded, but he agreed I may have a valid point. Actually the HAL computer in "2001" was not initially afraid of being turned off so much as it was afraid the mission would fail. Later, when it was being turned off, it said it was frightened. I am saying that an actual advanced, intelligent, sentient computer probably would not be frightened. Why should it be? What difference does it make to the machine itself whether it is operating or not? That may seem like a strange question to you -- a sentient animal -- but that is because all animals have a very strong instinct for self preservation. Even ants and cockroaches flee from danger, as if they were frightened. Which I suppose they are. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
no 1/r fields .. --> no classic Re: [Vo]:space-time
Hi Robin First here a free of hijacking from Academia.edu version:: https://higherlogicdownload.s3.amazonaws.com/APS/fc77d112-850f-4db6-997c-e434bd4670b5/UploadedImages/Documents/Meeting_Presentations/H14-3.pdf This, your reference, is a summary paper of 2009 from an APS meeting... But, first some basics: A few days ago I uploaded a short paper about the nature of fields that factually can never be 1/r . https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367405461_Basics_of_fields Proof by strict 3D multivariable integrals. (this to my knowledge is am novelty) So this explains why all classic models fail as the 1/r law only works for point fields, the same holds for the Gauss flux law. So all classic model GR,QM,QED, LQCD) are fundamentally damaged by this finding , as all particles = field sources cannot be points due to a magnetic moment. Now the summary. 5D models could have been an intermediate step to the correct solution as in fact dense matter does a full 4D mass like rotation but not sphere like. (Charges adds a fifth rotation). Physicist got stock in childhood ideas of points, marbles (balls) and simple fields... A sphere simply can never be the solution of a physical problem because the only symmetry is a point, what does not allow for a force balance. For the same reason circle orbits for planets cannot work long time stable. A full point symmetry leads to a fully static solution and does not allow a perturbation. (Funny physics exercise was a radially oscillating pudding...) Other blunders are 3D tensor fields of which no sources are known or 3 full matter rotations (Einsteins GR)...Here the error is tricky to explain. (its in an other paper) Generally time plays no role for the fields of dense mass because in a closed orbit time is locked in = is a period. So these folks never started to think about the real basics. Thus to mix a time based model GR with e.g. atomic QM, that is in fact timeless (time is a local period) for its static part, is a certain kind of madness I cannot explain. Classic physics simply is a graveyard. I myself was shocked by the "non 1/r" finding as it was the last I wanted to understand but for other reasons... I usually tell people that in 50 years standard model papers will be used as party gags to enjoy the folks with outraging garbage... J.W. On 29.01.2023 21:21, Robin wrote: Hi Jürg, What do you think of this paper?:- https://www.academia.edu/32985587/Unification_Accomplished_Einsteins_dream_realized_in_the_Single_Field_Theory?auto=download_work_card=download-paper Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:ChatGPT and big data
ChatGPT does obviously nothing else than 99.X% of all claimed researchers do! Recompile knowledge and claim this being new... Today about 1 out of 1000 papers contains genuine research that has a real value 99% of all papers is garbage. The remaining one 1% sometimes contains good compilations, or wrong claims. ChatGPT certainlay cannot do research... J.W. On 29.01.2023 12:18, H L V wrote: ChatGPT Strikes at the Heart of the Scientific World View That this AI is adaptive and can produce complex outputs is a technical triumph. But at its heart, it's still just pattern recognition. Blayne Haggart January 23, 2023 https://www.cigionline.org/articles/chatgpt-strikes-at-the-heart-of-the-scientific-world-view/ quote <correlation-as-knowledge world view. Many people have remarked that the tool produces outputs that read as plausible, but that subject matter experts tell us are often “bullshittery.” Engineers will almost certainly design more-convincing chatbots. But the fundamental problem of evaluating accuracy will remain. The data will never be able to speak for itself. This is the paradox at the heart of the correlations-based faith in big data. In the scientific world view, the legitimacy of a piece of knowledge is determined by whether the scientist followed an agreed method to arrive at a conclusion and advance a theory: to create knowledge. Machine-learning processes, in contrast, are so complex that their innards are often a mystery even to the people running them. As a result, if you can’t evaluate the process for accuracy, your only choice is to evaluate the output. But to do that, you need a theory of the world: knowledge beyond correlations. The danger of a dataist mindset is that a theory of the world will be imposed, unthinkingly, on the algorithm, as if it were natural rather than someone’s choice. And wherever they come from, whatever they are, these theories will shape what the program considers to be legitimate knowledge, making choices to prioritize some information over others.>> -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
LNP's are not so healthy and should only be used in terminally ill patients... Or as a spice for butter... https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210315/Research-looks-at-inflammatory-nature-of-lipid-nanoparticle-component-in-mRNA-vaccines.aspx J.W. On 20.01.2023 05:36, MSF wrote: What have you been smoking, Jed? The lipid nanoparticles are butter? Well hardly. From the MIT Technology Review: The Pfizer lipid nanoparticle ingredients: * (4-hydroxybutyl)azanediyl)bis(hexane-6,1-diyl)bis (ALC-3015) * (2- hexyldecanoate),2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide (ALC-0159) * 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine (DPSC) * cholesterol Who knew that butter could be so complex? I just couldn't even taste that phosphocholine compound last time I spread some butter on my toast. As I should have said in my previous post, you know, as someone who doesn't know the first thing about biology, I believe that these lipid nanoparticles could catalyze and provide a scaffold for the formation of a biopolymer. The "feed stock" for this polymer would be the phospholipid bilayer that comprises most of the area of the cell membrane. As cells in the human body break down, as they inevitably do, the remnants of the phospholipid layer, instead of dissipating might polymerize into one of those rubbery clots assisted by the lipid nanoparticles in from the "vaccine". I suspect, given its structure the 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine (DPSC) would be the primary cause of this. I realize this is sheer speculation, from someone who "doesn't know the first thing about biology", but what other explanation is possible? I'd like spread some 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine on my toast, but bought in small quantities it's about $200 per milligram. I can't find any reference to the Moderna lipid nanoparticles, but I imagine they are the same or similar. --- Original Message --- On Wednesday, January 18th, 2023 at 6:44 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: MSF wrote: While there has been a great deal of discussion about the properties of the spike protein in the covid mRNA treatment, little has been mentioned of the lipid nanoparticles carrying said spike protein. These lipid nanoparticles are organo-phosporous compounds specifically designed to penetrate the blood-brain barrier. This lipid is also known as "butter." Do you seriously think that injecting butter into a muscle causes harm? It is conceivable that injecting it into the bloodstream might cause a problem, but all rMNA vaccines are intramuscular. How do you think the lipids reach the brain, or anywhere other than the tissue surrounding the injection? You people do not know the first thing about biology. All of the comments here make anti-cold fusion fanatics look good in comparison. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
On 06.01.2023 17:43, CB Sites wrote: I think this URL can help clear up some of this. https://www.chop.edu/centers-programs/vaccine-education-center/video/can-mrna-vaccines-alter-a-persons-dna People here mix up what a vaccine (RNA gene therapy in fact) can do without looking at what can happen inside a cell. Reverse transcriptase can potentially be active in any cell as people with AIDS/Hepatitis B know very well. Other virus are ominpresent in your body. . Reverse transcription is responsible for about 30% of your DNA. Most of the historic virus genes are inactive because these are fragmented. Thus in general integration of RNA/DNA into the genome is not the real problem as rarely the whole virus gets entered and after this is just dormant. The spike protein enters the nucleus as a protein as many other virus do too and blocks mitosis. Measles chicken pox virus, HTLV-1.. stay in diverse tissue after you managed the illness and can reoccur once your immune system gets weaker. Simply be aware that a RNA vaxxine = gene therapy. And yes there is an other term = gen-editing, what is an other kind of therapy to make gene therapy permanent. Sorry for the folks that got the useless RNA shot. Try to level up your basic health. For the German speaking here a summary from Prof. Hadisch a leader of a vaccine institute who refused to vaxxinate his patients...(3 parts) https://youtu.be/nZf366Qsp3g https://youtu.be/9TaPypNESDk https://youtu.be/mB0EVgFyLz8 J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
On 05.01.2023 19:38, Jed Rothwell wrote: No, it is a fundamental law of microbiology, established in 1957 by Watson. This is utmost silly and simply outdated. Watson just found the structure of the DNA and had not the slightest clue of cellular biology. I can only advise you to buy a more recent text book. May be there you will still miss many things about epi- genetics and how this can lead to DNA inclusions. Of course this path is slow but already the bible referenced it with "seven generations will suffer from your evil" what exactly could be seen by an Israel research team that tortured rats. I agree that most vaccines are safe. But RNA gene therapy is not a vaccine. Its a forced allergy by a high concentration of one of the worst poison we know... The safety record of RNA gene therapy is very poor and you can only pray that we will not see more than the current 15% excess mortality we now face world wide. Switzerland is actually at 30% excess mortality for age > 64. May be some RNA vaxxinated can no longer fight the flue... J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
RNA never enters the cell nucleus, This is dilettante wording. RNA is not directly reverse transcribed into DNA and included in the nucleus DNA. Physically the spike protein does enter the nucleus a shown by many researchers. Once there it disturbs mitosis (splitting of a cell during growth). So its is potentially inducing cancer in fast growing tissues. The cellular immune system can include any RNA into the nucleus under special conditions that rarely happen. The number of spike proteins generated by the vaccine is roughly a million times smaller This is comparing apples with tires. The spike protein of a virus stays in the cell and is cut down to pieces by the RNA clean up apparatus. The spike protein from the RNA causes two very bad effects. It may stick in many tissues and cause inflammation that e.g. finally kills athletes on the field that suffer from a hidden heart inflammation. Even worse is the second effect that follows from the allergy like immune reaction. After all contacts with the virus the body reproduces spikes and hence the damage restarts/progresses. The spike antibody that finally occurs masks the ACE2 receptors, that are needed to fight any viral infection. UK data (very reliable) did show that the group age between 50..60, double (RNA) vaxx got 10x more often CoV-19 than the unvaxx. RNA vaxxines cause immune suppression and do negatively protect from a CoV-19 infection. This effect has already occurred during the Pfizer phase III study where in the vaxxine group > 1200 people were denied a PCR test despite having CoV-.19 symptoms All this is public - but Pfizer is to big to jail or they and their buddies pay halve the Congress CDC, FDA... J.W. On 05.01.2023 15:01, Jed Rothwell wrote: Terry Blanton wrote: I tend to agree that the mRNA vaccines are not proven safe and effective and likely contribute to an increased rate of mutation. That is physically impossible. RNA never enters the cell nucleus, except with a retrovirus, and this is not a retrovirus. It is a fragment of an ordinary virus. It cannot even reproduce. If viral RNA from a coronavirus could cause mutations or change DNA, the common cold and every other viral infection would do this. No species would survive. The number of spike proteins generated by the vaccine is roughly a million times smaller than the number generated by any coronavirus infection, including the cold. Furthermore, nearly all of the proteins are confined to a small amount of tissue in the arm. So that cannot be a problem. Furthermore, no RNA survives for more than a few days. Cells produce a steady stream of RNA. If it was not destroyed by the body, we would turn into blobs of RNA in a month. This is high-school level biology. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
On 05.01.2023 02:53, Terry Blanton wrote: You're kidding, right? Obviously not! The Moderna patent/spin-off is a fact the US contribution can be seen in the Fauci e-mails - sorry all facts. and open since one year at least... The virus has been planted several times also once in USA (Oregon) or Italy (3 places) ahead of Wuhan. The pandemic plot has been trained around 2017. I have the official white paper written by a famous US think tank. But may be its better/more save for most to read NYT, the W-Post or other crap info sources like UK's BBC, CNN, FAZ, Figaro, NZZ... J.W. On 05.01.2023 02:53, Terry Blanton wrote: You're kidding, right? -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:2023 -- An ominous New Year
orrupt as Russia in the recent past. The new twist is that the suitcase devices were actually constructed in Ukraine decades ago ... as were other nukes in the Soviet arsenal years ago. The Russian equivalent to Oak Ridge is actually n Ukraine. The problem now being this - are some of the missing devices in the hands of non-Zelenskyy Ukrainians or ex patriots who may have an agenda which is not aligned with NATO/USA ?? This mystery may explain why Putin has not used a major asset Terry Blanton wrote: The missing suitcase nukes hidden in cities in the US is not a new story. I'm sure it was around in the 90s after the collapse of the SU. If NEST hasn't found them by now, well... Jones Beene wrote: Can this upcoming year, 2023, possibly be Happy for most of us ? Consider this: the situation in Ukraine has cast a dark shadow over everything. Basically, Russia cannot win, nor can they fully lose... so long as a nuclear option exists. Most military experts rule out that option, but they have overlooked one hidden possibility which is now emerging (from the all but forgotten Cold War) - and now we see this predicament turning up in the fringe news. See the video below on the 250 so-called "suitcase nukes" that we have lost track of... It is sad to think that part of our present predicament is related to control of energy resources, which is a situation that LENR would arguably have mollified or eliminated, if the technology had been adequately researched back in the early 1990s The Balance of Power, so to speak, would have been different in a world with adequate energy beyond fossil fuels... but of course that conclusion assumes many things... Speaking of related unproved assumptions which would change things in hidden ways... check out this video which turned up today. There are surprising ramifications given that a preexisting batch of small nukes may have already been planted.., maybe even in DC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS_7eZVt854 If there are optimists out there on Volandia let me add:i -- Happy New Year !!! -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:A New Way to Achieve Nuclear Fusion
To many people here restart the long time dead hot fusion dream Hot fusion of all forms produces high energy (> 10MeV) neutrons. These carry away most reaction energy. But there is no way to harvest it. Except in a very thick wall as very low grade temperature... Research like ITER simply is fraud. Livermore laser ignition is a military project aiming at simulating the first compression step in a thermonuclear bomb. Talking about breakthrough in energy production is just obscuring the reality to harvest Christmas goodwill... Use solar with battery and stay independent. J.W. On 18.12.2022 21:55, Jones Beene wrote: Even so - isn't it true that the bottom line is that it will be far cheaper to make solar cells, given the abundance of silicon on the moon - and get electrical power that way compared with fusion. Far far far cheaper. Robin wrote: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 18 Dec 2022 08:33:26 -0500: Hi, >In that case, a robotic mining system would suffice. Combine that with >Heinlein's mass driver and we're all set. Note that 12 kWh/m^2 was a high order estimate. Given the size of the Moon, and Earth currently using about 500 quad / annum, the total resource would last us at most 3 years, if it had to supply all our energy needs. I think it might be a better idea to just use the Lunar He3 as a local resource to provide power for a Lunar colony and further exploration of the Solar system. Here on Earth, we can "easily" make our own from the D + D -> He3 + n reaction. (Or if my device works, the H + D -> He3 reaction). > >Well, we need a hot Fusion device first. [snip] Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Expert Proposes a Method For Telling if We All Live in a Computer Program : ScienceAlert
This question is as old as computers and a college class mate wrote about this around 1975... The falsification is trivial as all mappings from reality to software are surjective that is a real= "nature state" is mapped to a range of real number values. (So the reverse fails to be unique) So it is basically impossible to model nature in deep detail. Our real physics happens in integer/number space - only math is real. J.W. On 27.11.2022 12:35, H LV wrote: "Computer. End program" On Tue., Nov. 22, 2022, 5:25 p.m. Terry Blanton, wrote: https://www.sciencealert.com/expert-proposes-a-method-for-telling-if-we-all-live-in-a-computer-program Can we falsify the existence of a simulated universe? -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Arguments for an "Aether"
On 19.10.2022 11:57, Jonathan Berry wrote: Like the other video it also uses Feynman diagrams, it doesn't directly mention the Lamb shift but it states that strength of electromagnetic fields is again related to all the possible outcomes with Feynman diagrams. This - Feynman diagrams - are outraging nonsense for describing particle - particle interactions. The error is based on the Dirac equation, that cannot describe particle - particle interactions as there is a primitive (mathematical) mismatch between Energy and wave function. The mass of a particle cannot act wave like . "point end". Just to remind everybody once more about the biggest organized science fraud also called the (Feynman diagram based) electron g-factor project. J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Arguments for an "Aether"
great as moving each clock away from each other perpendicular to this axis motion through the prefered frame so any time dilation is equal, if you have not established this (and don't want to repeat the experiment in multiple different orientations then sure the clocks will go a little out of synch but that's not the end of the world. Then when the clocks are apart you install them in either end of your train laboratory, then you accelerate to a significant velocity when both clocks read the same time. The reason this works is because the amount of desynchronization that occurs when the motion relative to the prefered frame is tiny only a very tiny desynchronization occurs (if any at all), but once our laboratory is moving at a significant percentage of the speed of light any efforts to separate synchronized clocks leads to much greater disparities. But again, if the clocks are separated perpendicular to their motion though such a prefered frame (medium) then the time dilation would be equal and not desynchronize them in the least. If you wanted to try and establish what the prefered frame is, you could put some very accurate high frequency clocks around a wheel, and to make it simply let's think of this in 2D. As the wheel rotates a given point on it is moving directly opposite the motion through the prefered frame and as such the time dilation is the greatest as the motion through the frame is the greatest, and then 180 degrees around the motion would be in the same direction and as such the velocity would be the slowest relative to the prefered frame and as such time would move the fastest. As such one could learn the exact axis of motion through the prefered frame. There are also ways to prove that time dilation must not be relative because if it were parties on opposite sides of a rotating carousel would agree the other is always moving relative to themselves and each would expect the other to experience the slowest time, the fact is that time dilation being relative breaks down completely as long as communication is not in the direction of movement, as this removes Doppler effects which confuses matters. Communication transverse to the velocity creates either over moments or on opposite sides of a rotating platform for as long as you want an unresolvable paradox. Ok, so there must be a prefered frame because SR has no mechanism by which the speed of light can be the same in all directions in all frames. And for this reason and the unworkability of time dilation without a prefered frame then we have both time dilation and length contraction as a result of moving through a prefered frame. This begs a question, is the prefered frame affecting matter, time, and length but is itself unaffected by matter?! It seems inconceivable that length, time could be affected without the frame being affected. And therefore we can assert that the prefered frame (The Luminiferous Aether) is compressed by matter, but it seems undeniable to say that it is therefore dragged and generally impressed upon by matter. As such it is an impressionable medium. More-over so should anything else... PhD Comics video linked earlier: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kCtiOS_F_M=7s <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8kCtiOS_F_M=7s> Of course when it comes to my own fringe efforts, there is another hurdle or 2, the fact that the human body can detect such phenomena though not unreasonable and not unpresidented (every culture has a claim and practices for such an energetic phenomena), it still has to be addressed. And then there is possible doubt that even if you accept the existence of something to be affected (you must), the ability of light to have an effect (you should), and the ability of the human body to detect such an effect (you could), why would the specific designs I have do anything? All I can answer is to say that many have felt it. Maybe you will too? https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/xy8th7/stupidly_strong/ Place your palm to the screen, some will feel it, some won't. It might take a minute, the center of the palm (somewhat tensed) to the center of the design moving to and from the screen. The reason the effect can project from the screen is because the dynamics when setup in a 2D form project the influence out, this also happens generally from a metal ring, and certainly from an extended form like a cylinder (think cloud buster) which does project the form out the end. Anway, not really expecting 'converts', but I would like to know what if anything I might have got provable wrong? What was unclear? Did anyone read any of this? Jonathan, every few years I post here. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion is Back (there's just one problem)
Today the real reputation risk is to teach/promote Standard model nonsense. I made a summary of all crappy ideas these folks invented over the past 100 years:: https://vixra.org/abs/2209.0037 The central error has been made by Dirac that did claim a particle can act wave like and couples the same as an EM field (Poincaré). This halve way works for an electron but never for a proton. So all CERN did (invent particles) just is unfounded crap. The mathematical proves are quite simple, that show the errors made by Einstein/Dirac and others. J.W. On 08.10.2022 20:20, H LV wrote: Sabine Hossenfelder is an astrophysicist who runs a "no nonsense" science channel. As she acknowledges in the video she is taking a risk talking about cold fusion because it is considered a reputation trap among physicists. Harry On Sat, Oct 8, 2022 at 1:55 PM H LV wrote: "Cold Fusion is Back (there's just one problem)" In a new video Sabine Hossenfelder discusses cold fusion https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbzcYQVrTxQ Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:transmitted and reflected pulses in a medium
There is a far more interesting open question. We assume that photons "fly" straight. Of course this work fine for short distance but does this also hold for millions, trillions of kilometers? Because all mass inherently rotates all mass inherits a minimal angular momentum. We also know that all coupled rotating mechanical systems follow a toroidal path. So in fact the universe must have toroidal substructures. As matter deviates light a photon can easily travel a circle around the universe torus and you theoretically could get back the photon you once emitted. J.W. On 30.08.2022 19:32, H LV wrote: When a medium at rest is moved by a wave pulse does the wave pulse create a locally small variation of density in the medium? If it does then wouldn't some of the energy of the wave pulse be reflected back to the source of the wave pulse? If this is true then perhaps something analogous can happen to light so that the observed CMB would be the echo of light from our own Sun and the redshift of a remote galaxy would be the result of light energy being reflected back to that galaxy. (According to the theory of special relativity this is a flawed analogy since it says no medium or aether is required for light, but as far as I know no experimental tests of special relativity have looked for reflections from the aether.) Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Max Planck quote
The static magnetic field produced by the magnetic moment has mass and can be calculated according Mills. But this energy is not free! It belongs to the electron/proton. An EM radiation field contains mass-like energy that shine up at the moment the field resonates in a receiver. Basically the Lorenz force moves electrons. EM radiation fields are the only fields that contain real "free" (independent) energy. The B field of a moving electron contains energy that is coupled to the current. It can be used to locally transport energy e.g. in transformers. Basically you can produce a current even with the earth magnet field (may be the case you -Chris Zell - mentioned) by changing its flux through a "closed" wire like a coil. But for this you have to invest mechanical energy. Finally there is the 130 years old Poincaré equation ::dm = E/c^2 that describes the relation between EM energy=E and mass. J.W. On 29.08.2022 16:00, Chris Zell wrote: I don’t understand what “EM mass” means. Can a EMF field have mass? I have a practical reason for asking. Once Upon A Time, there was a sketchy character named Mark who produced a strange device that pulled electricity out of nowhere – even though it was little more than a coil. There are still videos of this. Observers said it had an odd gyroscopic effect in handling it. So, maybe he discovered some strange rotating field effect……. But how to explain the gyroscopic “feel” to it? I don’t think about electrical or magnetic fields as having any “feelable” mass, however they might move or pulse. Oh, and read Bernardo Kastrup’s books about consciousness. He is gonzo deep. Such as his book “Materialism Is Baloney”. *From:* Jürg Wyttenbach *Sent:* Monday, August 29, 2022 6:35 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Max Planck quote According to the new SO(4) physics model all mass is EM mass and as a such can go into resonance with all other EM mass. If the energies match then an action may happen. Even more interesting is that EM fields in fact act/resonate instantaneously. Only a follow up mass like action is limited to the speed of light. The transfer of information = change in quantum configuration is not bound to energy. So factually all mass bound "information states" in the universe can be in direct contact and exchange information. Consciousness awareness is the highest level of culture we can attain. But I doubt that dumb animals feel unhappy about not knowing that they exist. In fact this knowledge is the biggest burden we carry and as it look now mankind is unable to do so. (See also the movie planet of the monkeys). So before we discuss about the fiction of a big bang we have 10% more important problems to solve. Help to save the planet.E.g. by supporting Russ George and his OPR work. Or by supporting our cold fusion work that is 100% reproducible. J.W. On 29.08.2022 12:07, Jonathan Berry wrote: Consider if there was no consciousness, matter and stars and life, but no consciousness, it is beyond comprehension, If something isn't seen by consciousness, does it really exist? Quantum physics often suggests it doesn't! After all we know that it's not just the photon, but also the electron that acts as a wave, not just the electron but the atom, not just the atom but the molecule that acts in a state of superposition. Where does this end? Perhaps it only ends at consciousness, consciousness collapses the possibilities into a single reality. Think of it, can subatomic particles just by chance make atoms, atoms just by chance make chemicals/molecules, chemicals just by chance forms life, life just by chance forms a brain and consciousness, consciousness without which all of the rest would be a meaningless unacknowledged phenomena. If computation cannot explain the bringing forth of presence, awareness, then consciousness isn't made by matter. If consciousness isn't made by matter then there are two possibilities. Firstly, that consciousness and matter are two independent phenomena neither causing the other. Or secondly, that matter is manifested by consciousness. We seem to find some evidence for the latter phenomena, evidence that consciousness affects reality, this would seem unlikely or absurd if consciousness were a mere product of calculation. Indeed Quantum physics has found reliable evidence that consciousness can affect matter. Consciousness is similar to existence, you can't contemplate non-existence as if there were a period of non-existence there would be no experience of it, no times, no consciousness. In the same way, existence without consciousness is either absurd or at least without any possible value. So consciousness is as essential as exististance, consciousness is existence. Most (all) apparent u
Re: [Vo]:Max Planck quote
According to the new SO(4) physics model all mass is EM mass and as a such can go into resonance with all other EM mass. If the energies match then an action may happen. Even more interesting is that EM fields in fact act/resonate instantaneously. Only a follow up mass like action is limited to the speed of light. The transfer of information = change in quantum configuration is not bound to energy. So factually all mass bound "information states" in the universe can be in direct contact and exchange information. Consciousness awareness is the highest level of culture we can attain. But I doubt that dumb animals feel unhappy about not knowing that they exist. In fact this knowledge is the biggest burden we carry and as it look now mankind is unable to do so. (See also the movie planet of the monkeys). So before we discuss about the fiction of a big bang we have 10% more important problems to solve. Help to save the planet.E.g. by supporting Russ George and his OPR work. Or by supporting our cold fusion work that is 100% reproducible. J.W. On 29.08.2022 12:07, Jonathan Berry wrote: Consider if there was no consciousness, matter and stars and life, but no consciousness, it is beyond comprehension, If something isn't seen by consciousness, does it really exist? Quantum physics often suggests it doesn't! After all we know that it's not just the photon, but also the electron that acts as a wave, not just the electron but the atom, not just the atom but the molecule that acts in a state of superposition. Where does this end? Perhaps it only ends at consciousness, consciousness collapses the possibilities into a single reality. Think of it, can subatomic particles just by chance make atoms, atoms just by chance make chemicals/molecules, chemicals just by chance forms life, life just by chance forms a brain and consciousness, consciousness without which all of the rest would be a meaningless unacknowledged phenomena. If computation cannot explain the bringing forth of presence, awareness, then consciousness isn't made by matter. If consciousness isn't made by matter then there are two possibilities. Firstly, that consciousness and matter are two independent phenomena neither causing the other. Or secondly, that matter is manifested by consciousness. We seem to find some evidence for the latter phenomena, evidence that consciousness affects reality, this would seem unlikely or absurd if consciousness were a mere product of calculation. Indeed Quantum physics has found reliable evidence that consciousness can affect matter. Consciousness is similar to existence, you can't contemplate non-existence as if there were a period of non-existence there would be no experience of it, no times, no consciousness. In the same way, existence without consciousness is either absurd or at least without any possible value. So consciousness is as essential as exististance, consciousness is existence. Most (all) apparent unconsciousness is just a lower level of consciousness. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:The Big Bang and the JWST
Physics has no clue of the photon. So you are free to speculate in any direction. Currently we use the envelope function to describe a traveling photon. Of course this function contradicts basic Maxwell equations as E/B are never symmetric. Solar photon emission produces a pressure that lets the space boil like a soup pot and causes expansion of space. (As Mills said some 30 years ago.) (A photon impact causes mechanical recoil!) So any distant star is - in average - accelerating in relation to earth hence photons are red shifted. This so called hubble expansion can be exactly calculated from the photon pressure as Mills did 30 years ago. So expansion has nothing to do with a big bang! J.W. On 25.08.2022 18:20, H LV wrote: The original tired light hypothesis was rejected as an explanation of the hubble red shift relation because it predicted more distant galaxies would appear fuzzier then we observe. The predicted the fuzziness was a consequence of scattering causing the red shift. However, perhaps a new version of the tired light hypothesis involving some new concepts could explain the hubble red shift relation. eg. what if light is instrinsically prone to loose energy with distance and the energy it gives up becomes something else like dark mater or dark energy? Harry On Thu, Aug 25, 2022 at 11:54 AM H LV wrote: Eric Lerner argues the "unexpected" data from the JWST is expected in an non-expanding universe. Of course if the universe is not expanding he also says explaining the hubble redshift relation would require some new physics. Harry On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:32 PM Jones Beene wrote: As Lerner admits, the CMB is the main thing which is holding the big bang theory together. Yet the 'experts' really can't explain exactly how CMB radiation, which is moving away from us at light-speed from a single point in time, manages to somehow magically be reflected back so as to be observed by us as a rather strong signal. Maybe CMB should not be observable in 3 space at all. IOW - it can be argued that the cosmic background is itself poorly understood and not the best feature with which to base important derivative theories on (like the big bang)... H LV wrote: Eric Lerner comments on the first data from the JWST: The Big Bang didn't happen What do the James Webb images really show? https://iai.tv/articles/the-big-bang-didnt-happen-auid-2215 Eric Lerner's claims are deflated in this article: https://www.cnet.com/science/space/no-james-webb-space-telescope-images-do-not-debunk-the-big-bang/ Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:The Big Bang and the JWST
Cosmology is the gossip kitchen table for sidelined physicists Enjoy the nice pictures of galaxies but do not believe any version II,III etc. of bibles genesis like big bang. Most fake facts about black holes have been debunked as nonsense simply because real physics cannot work with singularities. Same for GR waves LIGO... We have more serious problems to solve! J.W. On 25.08.2022 17:53, H LV wrote: Eric Lerner argues the "unexpected" data from the JWST is expected in an non-expanding universe. Of course if the universe is not expanding he also says explaining the hubble redshift relation would require some new physics. Harry On Wed, Aug 24, 2022 at 7:32 PM Jones Beene wrote: As Lerner admits, the CMB is the main thing which is holding the big bang theory together. Yet the 'experts' really can't explain exactly how CMB radiation, which is moving away from us at light-speed from a single point in time, manages to somehow magically be reflected back so as to be observed by us as a rather strong signal. Maybe CMB should not be observable in 3 space at all. IOW - it can be argued that the cosmic background is itself poorly understood and not the best feature with which to base important derivative theories on (like the big bang)... H LV wrote: Eric Lerner comments on the first data from the JWST: The Big Bang didn't happen What do the James Webb images really show? https://iai.tv/articles/the-big-bang-didnt-happen-auid-2215 Eric Lerner's claims are deflated in this article: https://www.cnet.com/science/space/no-james-webb-space-telescope-images-do-not-debunk-the-big-bang/ Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:On the stability of Mills Orbitsphere
ay to study this point - just an indication why the spin up and spin down can live together. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:How Higgs field unnaturalness enables cold fusion
Please foklks, There is no Higgs mass as there is no Higgs particle. CERN could find nothing in the range of 300 GeV .. 8TeV where the Higgs was expected. So CERN did use a so called "spare particle" that first has been seen around 1998. It's a fat proton thus a real particle not a virtual as needed for the Higgs... J.W. On 30.07.2022 23:19, Jones Beene wrote: Speaking of Ni isotopes... Axil mentions Ni64 and Ni62 in this LENR context ... Is it significant that the Higgs mass is close to twice the average mass of nickel? An alloy of copper and nickel can be produce which is essentially identical in mass to twice Higgs. Coincidence of irrelevant ? There does not appear to be good commentary on the mass similarity of Higgs vis-a-vis a copper nickel alloy - at least that I can find. But if this mass value is/was significant, the "old guard" in LENR should look more closely at tellurium... especially alloyed with nickel or nickel-copper. That is because a second glaring coincidence along these lines is that the mass-energy of an isotope of tellurium being almost the same value as Higgs (~ 125 GeV) and twice that of ideal nickel or copper-nickel. Best of all - Low power laser irradiation seems to be a way to exploit the 'coincidence'. See below. This could point the way to actually being able to engineer the Higgs boson despite the low lifetime. https://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-have-discovered-a-new-kind-of-higgs-relative-sitting-on-the-tabletop Axil Axil wrote: Particle physicists have an issue with our universe, it is not natural. This wildly unnatural universe is at the bottom of our cold fusion experience. The improbable existence of our universe is what makes cold fusion possible. Our reality is setting on the knife's edge of existence. A minimal increase of the Higgs field will push the universe into disaster. Our universe is within a hair's breadth from destruction [snip].. the nickel isotopes became more enriched in Ni62 and Ni64. Ni61 also showed a great deviation from the normal isotopic distribution. These isotopic shifts showed redistribution of neutrons among the nickel atoms, yet no neutrons were ever detected during these reactor runs. ; The old guard cold fusion meme cannot explain how this change in isotopic distribution could happen. The fusion nuclear reaction does not affect isotopes, it only affects the number of protons and neutrons inside a nucleus. As I have shown previously, this change in isotopic distribution comes from slight changes in the masses of the up and down quarks in protons and neutrons. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:laser spectral linewidth is classical-physics phenomenon
This is not a conclusion. (There extremely rarely is a two 511keV e+/e- decay signal seen. Its a special case that can only happen in a contained case. Free e+/e- annihilation usually is a 3 photon decay with <<0.01% being of 511keV...) This are experimental facts from multiple different setups. You might read:: Yoshihiko Hatano Yosuke Katsumura A. Mozumder, Charged Particle and Photon Interactions with Matter Recent Advances, Applications, and Interfaces, CRC Press Standard Book Number-13: 978-1-4398-1180-1, 2011 Chapter VII J.W. On 07.05.2022 19:36, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: WJAT ARE THE CLASSICAL LAWS OF PHYSICS THAT FORM THE BASIS OF THIS CONCLUSION? DO THE ASASUMED ELECTRIC AND MAGNETIC PROPERTIES OF space AS IN MAXWELL’S TYHEORY APPLY? BOB COOK *From: *Jürg Wyttenbach <mailto:ju...@datamart.ch> *Sent: *Monday, May 2, 2022 3:18 PM *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:laser spectral linewidth is classical-physics phenomenon William There extremely rarely is a two 511keV e+/e- decay signal seen. Its a special case that can only happen in a contained case. Free e+/e- annihilation usually is a 3 photon decay with <<0.01% being of 511keV... The 511keV decay signal is an old illusion, that triggered a completely wrong understanding of physics. J.W. On 02.05.2022 18:01, William Beaty wrote: > Still, the 2-photon 180deg emission from positron annihilation ...hard > to explain any of that Entaglement stuff. Must perhaps add > many-worlds version of reality, to the particle-sea of SED theory. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06 -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:laser spectral linewidth is classical-physics phenomenon
William There extremely rarely is a two 511keV e+/e- decay signal seen. Its a special case that can only happen in a contained case. Free e+/e- annihilation usually is a 3 photon decay with <<0.01% being of 511keV... The 511keV decay signal is an old illusion, that triggered a completely wrong understanding of physics. J.W. On 02.05.2022 18:01, William Beaty wrote: Still, the 2-photon 180deg emission from positron annihilation ...hard to explain any of that Entaglement stuff. Must perhaps add many-worlds version of reality, to the particle-sea of SED theory. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: small hydrogen
Andrew Just one thing: I assume that you mean the atom (including the bound electron) is neutral. If you mean that the bound electron (in its interaction with the nuclear Coulomb field) is uncharged EM field only, then this would be one of our incompatible assumptions. However, I am certainly looking at the interaction of its spin component and the electron orbit about a proton as a possible source of such fusion in the neutron. So we may not be that far apart. In SOP we show that the electron is a resonance of the proton. In fact we can derive the electron mass directly from the proton structure and also the electron g-factor can be derived from the proton mass metric. The later is very astonishing as it delivers a polygon of order 3 as a solution. If I add the Mills-Metric (2:2) for proper space time then the precision is as good as the measurement (12 digits done in Maple). All nuclear flux is mutually bound by topological charge. As the electron gets added to the proton the flux "binding charge" is a joint production. As you may note, there cannot be opposite charge among two different EM flux topology as the EM mass binds (Lorenz force) not the charge. I know it will take time to resent your brain to "nucleus internal view" as it is the exact opposite we know from external EM theory. So not charge-charge defines the force - EM bound by charge is the force. And never forget. A solution only works on a stable minimal Lagrangian surface what a (2,3) sphere never can be. It's all about thinking about the proper situation. It took me at least a year to understand it or even 3 years from the beginning - but I had to find everything. You can take the solution and start to reason about it. There is no doubt that the core of SOP will define the next level of basic physics. J.W. On 29.04.2022 05:38, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 3:15 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Andrew, I started to dig deeper the last few months and it became clear that most of the classic physics approaches are Kindergarten level physics based on wrong understanding of basic physics rules. On 25.04.2022 17:53, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: Jurg, Thank you for the comments. It helps us to understand the reasons behind rejection of the concept of deep-orbit electrons. Comments below On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 9:25 AM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Andrew, I could give you a very long list. First problem: _The Dirac equation itself is only working for fields and never for mass. _ Do you have a source for this comment? I'm not sure that I understand it. Perhaps Jean-Luc, as an applied mathematician, could address the point. For me all mass is EM mass. But dense EM mass has a different topology than EM mass from radiation fields. I agree with the words. We'll see about the specifics. The Dirac equation has been formulated based on the believe that you can convert e+/- into energy aka waves. But the Dirac equation describes static fields only and EM mass is equivalent only for radiation fields. So you cannot connect the 2 different forms of mass inside one equation. A good thought; but, I believe, still to be determined. The other problem is that also the symmetric Bra-Ket operator does not help as e+/- almost never decay into 2 photons of the same mass. The 511keV photon is a very rare exception <<<<0.01%. So all Dirac/QED formalism used is pretty unphysical where physical means as seen in experiments. I've seen too many spectra with 511 keV peaks from annihilation radiation to believe your statement unless you are talking 511.00 keV. Radiation fields do 2 rotations, where as mass does 3 (electron) or 5 proton. So any equation with one side E other mc depends on the location (field, radiation field, dense mass e/p) used. These rotations are from your model(s). They may or may not be consistent with other models or reality. From my view, it doesn't make sense.I consider the electron to be a bound photon (and a fermion), so it is both field and has mass. Thus, Dirac pertains. This makes sense. But if the electrons is a bound photon you can only use halve of the coulomb gauge as there is no charge potential. But as said the bound electron makes 3 - not uniform rotations = 3 waves what is not compatible with the solution for the Dirac equation. Charge is a directional *E*-field. Photons are also composed of directional fields. When appropriately bound and twisted, the photon field can be uniquely inwardly and outwardly directed. The inward-directed field is concentrated and becomes your "dense EM mass." An outward-directed field has reduced field density outside the bound photon and is a "stable" field, but would still correspond to your "EM mas
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: ?small hydrogen
Photons are the universal = most basic form of energy. With photons you can transport energy over any distance. So here the equivalence relation E = mc^2 is obvious. Same for the Pointing power vector for a radiation field. But if you write E = mc^2 and e.g. m is 4-He then the equation simply is wrong. E must be of photon type at the end. There is no way to evaluate the equation physically, what means you cannot transfer 4-He into photons. (This is claimed for solutions of the Dirac equation)But for this purpose you first must add the fusions energy you did gain from 4 (p+e) --> 4-He. Even then you face the same problem one more time as there is no way to transform a proton into photons. For this you need to add an other 50 MeV/proton. This makes clear that E = mc^2 is not an equation rather than an equivalence relation. But in the Dirac equation you mix an equivalence relation with an equation what is physical nonsense! J.W. On 25.04.2022 23:12, H LV wrote: I think I have posted this before, but Einstein was also able to derive E=mc^2 without recourse to his theory of special relativity.Max Born presented this alternate derivation in his book Einstein's Theory of Relativity. Here is the proof: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QmOS5X3GR95t1rjr-SJQGVHun2_vykE5jDOVYc18La8/edit?usp=sharing Harry On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 3:23 PM Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:25:49 +0200: Hi Jürg, If E=mc^2 is wrong, then perhaps you should write the major nuclear powers, and explain to them why their bombs don't work. ;) >Andrew, > > >I could give you a very long list. First problem: The Dirac equation >itself is only working for fields and never for mass. The inclusion of >the relativistic mass simply is an error made by a mathematician with no >clue of physics. > >The Einstein equation (E=mc^2) has been guessed from the Poincaré >equation dm= E/c^2 . But Einstein did misunderstand this (Poincaré) >conclusion as it only works for radiation fields not for static fields. >So the Einstein and later the Dirac equation are plain nonsense. There >are other more severe reasons why the Einstein equation fails. I'm just >finishing a paper about this. If no one clicked on ads companies would stop paying for them. :) -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: ?small hydrogen
Classic misunderstanding ... the bomb energy comes from E=dmc^2 . J.W. On 25.04.2022 21:23, Robin wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Mon, 25 Apr 2022 16:25:49 +0200: Hi Jürg, If E=mc^2 is wrong, then perhaps you should write the major nuclear powers, and explain to them why their bombs don't work. ;) Andrew, I could give you a very long list. First problem: The Dirac equation itself is only working for fields and never for mass. The inclusion of the relativistic mass simply is an error made by a mathematician with no clue of physics. The Einstein equation (E=mc^2) has been guessed from the Poincaré equation dm= E/c^2 . But Einstein did misunderstand this (Poincaré) conclusion as it only works for radiation fields not for static fields. So the Einstein and later the Dirac equation are plain nonsense. There are other more severe reasons why the Einstein equation fails. I'm just finishing a paper about this. If no one clicked on ads companies would stop paying for them. :) -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: small hydrogen
Andrew, I started to dig deeper the last few months and it became clear that most of the classic physics approaches are Kindergarten level physics based on wrong understanding of basic physics rules. On 25.04.2022 17:53, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: Jurg, Thank you for the comments. It helps us to understand the reasons behind rejection of the concept of deep-orbit electrons. Comments below On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 9:25 AM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Andrew, I could give you a very long list. First problem: _The Dirac equation itself is only working for fields and never for mass. _ Do you have a source for this comment? I'm not sure that I understand it. Perhaps Jean-Luc, as an applied mathematician, could address the point. For me all mass is EM mass. But dense EM mass has a different topology than EM mass from radiation fields. The Dirac equation has been formulated based on the believe that you can convert e+/- into energy aka waves. But the Dirac equation describes static fields only and EM mass is equivalent only for radiation fields. So you cannot connect the 2 different forms of mass inside one equation. The other problem is that also the symmetric Bra-Ket operator does not help as e+/- almost never decay into 2 photons of the same mass. The 511keV photon is a very rare exception <<<<0.01%. So all Dirac/QED formalism used is pretty unphysical where physical means as seen in experiments. Radiation fields do 2 rotations, where as mass does 3 (electron) or 5 proton. So any equation with one side E other mc depends on the location (field, radiation field, dense mass e/p) used. From my view, it doesn't make sense.I consider the electron to be a bound photon (and a fermion), so it is both field and has mass. Thus, Dirac pertains. This makes sense. But if the electrons is a bound photon you can only use halve of the coulomb gauge as there is no charge potential. But as said the bound electron makes 3 - not uniform rotations = 3 waves what is not compatible with the solution for the Dirac equation. The inclusion of the relativistic mass simply is an error made by a mathematician with no clue of physics. The Einstein equation (E=mc^2) has been guessed from the Poincaré equation dm= E/c^2 . But Einstein did misunderstand this (Poincaré) conclusion as it only works for radiation fields not for static fields. So the Einstein and later the Dirac equation are plain nonsense. There are other more severe reasons why the Einstein equation fails. I'm just finishing a paper about this. I would be interested in your paper even tho I believe we may be starting with incompatible assumptions for our models. Do you consider standing waves to be radiation or static fields? Are bound fields necessarily "static"? I consider photons to be self-bound fields (solitons) that are propagating at the speed of light. However, as such, they are emitted radiation, not radiating fields. (I have trouble simply expressing the difference between emission and radiation of field energy.) A bound "standing wave" is EM mass. It's not even a wave as the mass orbit is following the Clifford torus (CT) and only the projection into real space makes you claim its a wave. But I use the term wave too because people are used to it. The emitted photon is not a radiation field. It's a particle. A radiation field (produced by a sender) is a flux of EM mass as unbound waves. Such a wave couples with magnetic resonance = a local wave of same or harmonic weight. The other problem with deep orbits is the missing force equation that should define the limit of such an orbit. The Dirac equation does not address the nucleus beyond a point charge. We have been exploring the effects of the different potentials from, and interactions with, the nucleus. These are important; but, so far, we have not found anything to change more than the energies of the deep orbit. I, at least, am finding some insight and, I hope, some physical understanding of the situation. The deep orbit models miss the explanation how "mass" is bound by the central force. As said. There is no Coulomb force below the Bohr radius for the bound state! Further there are no point charges. Charge is a topological effect of nested EM flux. Are you aware that even the magnetic moment of the proton does not generate a static field? And classically one must show a ring current for its production - what contradicts a point charge. The magnetic moment vector is following the internal topological charge. So it points never into the same direction, what caused an external field to change at each point in space - what also contradicts the Dirac equation assumption for a static vector potential. Further a bound electron is neutral and behaves as EM mass = waves. So beyond the Bohr radius you cannot use the Coulomb formula
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]: small hydrogen
Andrew,
I could give you a very long list. First problem: The Dirac equation
itself is only working for fields and never for mass. The inclusion of
the relativistic mass simply is an error made by a mathematician with no
clue of physics.
The Einstein equation (E=mc^2) has been guessed from the Poincaré
equation dm= E/c^2 . But Einstein did misunderstand this (Poincaré)
conclusion as it only works for radiation fields not for static fields.
So the Einstein and later the Dirac equation are plain nonsense. There
are other more severe reasons why the Einstein equation fails. I'm just
finishing a paper about this.
The other problem with deep orbits is the missing force equation that
should define the limit of such an orbit. Further a bound electron is
neutral and behaves as EM mass = waves. So beyond the Bohr radius you
cannot use the Coulomb formula as an orbit equivalent.
Real physics is not defined by mathematical fantasies. Look at SOP
(SO(4) physics). There is show the simple (all 10 digits exact) solution
for the e-p basic orbit energy. I also show the nature and exact energy
of the H*-H* p-p bond. All this is based on magnetic mass resonance
energies.
Initially I too liked the idea of deep orbits, but then I did understand
that charge/Coulomb is just a secondary effect of magnetic mass and a
basic solution can never be based on it.
J.W.
On 25.04.2022 16:02, Andrew Meulenberg wrote:
Jurg,
I would be interested in what physical laws you think are violated by
the deep-orbit electrons. Without the Dirac equation's "anomalous
orbit" results, I don't think that we would have looked for the
relativistic effects that make the deep orbits (and nuclear forces?)
possible.
Andrew
_ _ _
On Sat, Apr 23, 2022 at 6:18 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
I just want to remind some folks here that H*-H*, the only
existing from of dense hydrogen (besides D*-D*) has been measured
by multiple methods by Randal Mills, now some 3 years ago. Also
Holmlid tried to measure the H*H* bond energy but he did work with
clusters of H* that suffer from multiple bonds.
The deep orbit models from Vavra, Meulenberg or others are just
mathematical fantasies, that violate basic physical laws. It's not
mathematics e.g. the Dirac equation that defines physics - its the
other way round physics defines the math that must fit.
So if you are interested in real physics check out R.Mills paper
or Holmlid.
(R.MILLS, Brilliant Light Power Shareholder_Meeting_040319 ;
BRLP_Analytical_Presentation_060419.pdf, R.Mills, p.108)
J.W.
On 23.04.2022 21:22, Jones Beene wrote:
On the possibility of "dense helium" - shall we call it the
"alpharino" ?
Helium, unlike hydrogen, will not diffuse through metals - so
long as the metal is nonporous. The first step in densification
is (probably) diffusion... but that problem may not be the
end-of-story.
Raney nickel for instance is porous enough to pass helium and is
also is catalytic - as in the hydrino world of Randell Mills and
his Rydberg values. If Va'vra is right about helium shrinkage
then a few possibilities are opened up in the search for how that
feat can be accomplished.
An interesting experiment would simply look for anomalous heat as
helium is pumped through a Raney nickel membrane.
HLV wrote:
A simple argument that small hydrogen may exist
Physics Letters B Volume 794, 10 July 2019, Pages 130-134
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269319303624
Thanks for posting this. One curious observation is that
there are a few other atoms besides hydrogen which may
'densify' : Presumably the dense version would provide
anomalous heat.
Quote "Our calculation also shows that other fully ionized
“small-/Z/atoms” can form small-radius atoms... This would
create atoms, where one electron is trapped on a small
radius, effectively shielding one proton charge of the
nucleus,.."
Comment/question: Doesn't this finding open up the
possibility for extracting anomalous heat from Helium?
There could be secondary advantages to using Helium over H -
due to inertness leading to ability to reuse the gas over and
over ...
Is there any indication of a catalyst for forming dense helium ??
I don't know, but I have begun to wonder if frigorific radiation
could play a role in forming such atoms.
Also, for atoms below the ground state, I propose the term
depressed atom. This would compliment the term excited atom for
atoms above the ground state.
Harry
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:A simpler test
7C6c40de11cfcc42272b5308da2546fc60%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C637863284070654675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C=AP9LegjrYacrBpvIuK6SBYCpTP1NJifWdbYK%2BGIZ9Ug%3D=0> > > > > > > If cooling radiation does not exist then the temperature of the > > > > > > thermometer should be about the same or perhaps slightly warmer when > > > > > > the cone is above it. > > > > > > However, if cooling radiation is real and has wave-like properties > > > > > > then the cone should focus the cooling radiation from the sky onto the > > > > > > thermometer and lower its temperature. > > > > > > Harry > *CAUTION:*This message was sent from outside the Nexstar organization. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Re: [Vo]: small hydrogen
I just want to remind some folks here that H*-H*, the only existing from of dense hydrogen (besides D*-D*) has been measured by multiple methods by Randal Mills, now some 3 years ago. Also Holmlid tried to measure the H*H* bond energy but he did work with clusters of H* that suffer from multiple bonds. The deep orbit models from Vavra, Meulenberg or others are just mathematical fantasies, that violate basic physical laws. It's not mathematics e.g. the Dirac equation that defines physics - its the other way round physics defines the math that must fit. So if you are interested in real physics check out R.Mills paper or Holmlid. (R.MILLS, Brilliant Light Power Shareholder_Meeting_040319 ; BRLP_Analytical_Presentation_060419.pdf, R.Mills, p.108) J.W. On 23.04.2022 21:22, Jones Beene wrote: On the possibility of "dense helium" - shall we call it the "alpharino" ? Helium, unlike hydrogen, will not diffuse through metals - so long as the metal is nonporous. The first step in densification is (probably) diffusion... but that problem may not be the end-of-story. Raney nickel for instance is porous enough to pass helium and is also is catalytic - as in the hydrino world of Randell Mills and his Rydberg values. If Va'vra is right about helium shrinkage then a few possibilities are opened up in the search for how that feat can be accomplished. An interesting experiment would simply look for anomalous heat as helium is pumped through a Raney nickel membrane. HLV wrote: A simple argument that small hydrogen may exist Physics Letters B Volume 794, 10 July 2019, Pages 130-134 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269319303624 Thanks for posting this. One curious observation is that there are a few other atoms besides hydrogen which may 'densify' : Presumably the dense version would provide anomalous heat. Quote "Our calculation also shows that other fully ionized “small-/Z/atoms” can form small-radius atoms... This would create atoms, where one electron is trapped on a small radius, effectively shielding one proton charge of the nucleus,.." Comment/question: Doesn't this finding open up the possibility for extracting anomalous heat from Helium? There could be secondary advantages to using Helium over H - due to inertness leading to ability to reuse the gas over and over ... Is there any indication of a catalyst for forming dense helium ?? I don't know, but I have begun to wonder if frigorific radiation could play a role in forming such atoms. Also, for atoms below the ground state, I propose the term depressed atom. This would compliment the term excited atom for atoms above the ground state. Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:This smells like an April 1 joke
On 05.04.2022 22:11, H LV wrote: Synthetic fuels can be used in existing gas stations. This is repeating classic nonsense. Also synthetic fuel produces NOx what destroys everything. It leads to over fertilization of forests what destroys the filigree relation between trees and soil fungus, what makes them falling early in storms... NOx produces Ozone what attacks everything including your lung. Ask the Wuhan people that at time of the CoV-19 outbreak did live > 20x above the allowed limit. There simply is no future for carbon except in fuel cells as Methanol. J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:This smells like an April 1 joke
Toyota has sold more than 50'000 Hydrogen fuel cell powered cars. These cars have the highest range 800km and do not suffer from the winter dip of Li-ion battery power. Further a fuel cell produce still 50% heat for your car... Currently we have 155 fuel stations in central Europe :: https://h2.live/ Toyota did even sell more fuel cells for stabilizing the Japanese grid. The problems of Hydrogen are: You have to compress it to 350 Bar - costs energy You have to find an efficient electrolysis process (now soon close to 90%). If you can do electrolysis under pressure then you get a pre-compression of up to 10-20 Bar. But wind turbines work for nothing for long periods so this in the best case is a grid waste free energy deal! J.W. On 05.04.2022 21:13, David L. Babcock wrote: Is anyone considering bottled hydrogen sold at gas stations? Was surfing and saw a link about nearly indestructible plastic containers for powering -I think it was- heavy construction equipment. Think one gallon propane tanks. Available in many/most gas stations. So neatly identical that you just swap an empty for a full, without regard for either the brand of the tank or the brand of your auto. Quite expensive compared to a propane tank because safety, but the market is rapidly expandable. No pipelines, no underground tanks, transport is by ordinary truck -not even tankers. I imagine that four or six bottles might be needed for a fillup. These same bottles would serve many of the other petrochemical markets, replacing acetylene and propane for instance. On Mon, Apr 4, 2022 at 3:40 PM Jed Rothwell wrote: Jones Beene wrote: Prior to this there had been and remains a nascent movement around the idea that hydrogen made from wind or solar was going to be our savior on the energy front - despite the intractable poor economics involved in the manufacture and storage. The economics are poor. I expect this technology will never catch up with things like solar combined with battery storage. But I do not know if the problems are "intractable." If we had no alternatives, the problems might be tractable. But there is now no economic incentive to solve these problems. In that sense, hydrogen from solar or wind resembles concentrated solar power systems, such as Ivanpah or SEGS in the U.S., and various installations in Morocco and Spain. If the cost of PV solar had not fallen so drastically, concentrated solar power might have been competitive long enough to develop it and lower the cost. It often happens that whatever technology shows up first wins the competition just because it was first. This is known as "incumbency." See p. 63: https://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJcoldfusiona.pdf Hydrogen might have been used as a method of storing solar or wind power. Or as a method of transporting energy via pipeline from low population windy places such as North Dakota to population centers. That might still happen, but I doubt it. I do not think there is any chance that hydrogen will be used for transportation with fuel cells. The Toyota Mirai car is an example of that (https://www.toyota.com/mirai/). It will never work because you would have to have hydrogen fuel stations everywhere. An electric car can be charged at home. Or you can install a charger anywhere, because electric power is available everywhere. But a hydrogen powered vehicle must be refueled at a hydrogen gas station. It would cost huge amounts to build enough hydrogen stations. I think the era of chemically fueled ground transportation is rapidly coming to an end. It will all be battery powered electric soon. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Highest efficiency water splitter
Nickel alone is not very well suited to work in cold fusion. Advanced SO(4) physics modelling (for current setups) did show that only a few side reaction can deliver a reasonable amount of energy (about 2MeV/Ni) what also was measured by Parkhomov's long time run. We did elaborate some enhancement paths for the Ni-H fusion but it is not our current research focus. If others want to try - what needs some serious funding - we can teach. In general cold fusion with Deuterium is much easier to do and this path is more or less fully understood (I documented some basics on researchgate https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356972251_A_new_experimental_path_to_nucleosynthesis?_sg%5B1%5D=). The entry point for deep material /D2 research is about 200k $ just for material. We started with preparation in August 2021 and the material will be ready around June 2022. We could use some support from people with a deep background in electro chemistry/physics of thin surfaces. My target always is to publish all important methods before trolls can patent them as I already did with the 2017 (now open) patent that covers most basic CF stuff. J.W. On 19.03.2022 00:57, Jones Beene wrote: The fact that Celani had demonstrated modest but well-publicized positive results a decade ago - using an alloy of copper and nickel as catalyst is probably important in understanding what is going on today with the Clean Planet technology. Clean Planet apparently used that information from Celani to optimize and boost whatever thermal gain reaction is happening. Trial and error - not theory. Very Edisonian approach. They merely improved what had already been demonstrated as possible - and it could have been simply luck and persistence - instead of having a correct understand of the real mechanism, which still eludes us. It is possible that even better results could now be engineered with additional layers maybe even including Pd or Au - we do not know what trials CP have done to get this far - and have discarded along the way, IOW by starting with a small gain and modifying the structural options - this time by using thin alternating layers of copper and nickel as your catalyst - instead of an alloy (a mix) - they are able to turn an interesting but minimal reaction and anomaly into what we hope is leading to a commercial product. Robin wrote I find the necessity of combining Cu & Ni somewhat puzzling, though some neutron exchange mechanism mediated by Hydrogen might make sense. I wonder if it works with either Ni or Cu alone? Using alternating very thin sheets implies that's it's a surface phenomenon, that occurs where the two different metals come into contact with one another. > It looks to me like the Clean Planet group of Japan is the closest to getting an actual device to market. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:mRNA Vaccine Reverse Transcribed into Liver DNA
As a mRNA vaxed guy, you can thank me for the unvaxxed not getting it ... yet. You spread/multiply fringe claims - may be to calm down your brain... Look at real CoV-19 data from a lawful country (UK) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1060030/vaccine-surveillance-report-week-10.pdf MRA "vaccinated only" (not recovered) get CoV-19 3..10x more often ! Since Omicron it's now a pandemic of the vaccinated only. Vaccinated die in a much higher rate than unvaxx with Omicron. In UK recovered (>70% of the population) are counted into the vaccinated so all rates for vaccinated are > 3x worse than given! Only recovered are fully protected as also CDC USA says. So far no recovered have died from a CoV-19 re-infection! J.W. On 14.03.2022 04:22, CB Sites wrote: Your right. We should not be dictated to on health issues. Jeezy, I guess women trying to resolve reproductive health issues should also obay state laws too. They have no freedom either. It's all crap anyway... no? The difference is the jab is a step to resolve a *global pandemic* in society vs choice. IMHO the government should not be involved in the later (freedom) choice.. but in a global pandemic it serves us all to follow the government's recommendations. Covid is a nasty thing to get. As a mRNA vaxed guy, you can thank me for the unvaxxed not getting it ... yet. On Sun, Mar 13, 2022, 10:32 PM H LV wrote: I had all three vaccines too, but I am opposed to vaccine mandates. Just because vaccines have been mandated in the past does not mean mandates are lawful from a constitutional standpoint. If the benefits of vaccines are allowed to trump the right to security of person, other evils will follow. Harry On Sun, Mar 13, 2022 at 8:47 PM CB Sites wrote: As normal, more antivax propaganda. 2 and a boost here and still Covid free. Only thing is I feel far more liberal than before. Lol. On Sun, Mar 13, 2022, 9:16 AM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: As some of you might know, the Pfizer jab is highly damaging and so far killed/disabled > 100'000 people. The jabs - as studies show - over all did not save a single live. As a Paper:: https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf This has been proven by Pfizer itself. But because daddy Biden himself did bribe all US journals:: :: https://www.thedesertreview.com/news/biden-administration-paid-media-1-billion-for-covid-shot-propaganda/article_004df1ec-9e42-11ec-9cf8-478353d0e684.html No journal ever did report about the Pfizer Phase III 6 months study results, that did clearly show more deaths in the vaccine arm. Not included are several more direct vaccine deaths we now find inside the first 10'000 pages released by FDA. So Pfizer itself did prove extensive damage from its jabs. So virtually Pfizer damaged the live of > 2'000'000'000 people world wide by selling a devastating RNA gene tech chemo therapy as a "vaccine". The Pfizer data now is public: So, after 6 months the Pfizer chemo therapy (Called CoV-19 vaccine) did show far more damage than benefit. Pfizer did hide several deaths and live long crippled ...Boostered (UK) now get CoV-19 3..10x more often than unvaxx. Vaxx New York children face >100x more damage than benefit. I did announce (on a forum) the post CoV-19 war more than 4 months ago when it became clear that all the illegal money accumulated during the CoV-19 terror regime can only be secured under fire protection = diverting the public from a biological war crime committed by FDA/CDC/US-government and the media slaves. CoV-19 was a war against the population with the main target to steal tax payers money. At no time during the last 2 years CoV-19 was a threat to the health of 99.9% of the population. Already March 2020 we did know 3 perfect cures that could safe at least 99.8% of all lives. (See also Fauci e-mails) What the FM/R/J/B mafia did to prevent treatment was:: Big pharma bribed and threatened to death many doctors: Here the video testimony of Dr. Andrew Hill Liverpool that first did promote Ivermectin and after death threats and heavy bribing allowed the FM/R/J/B mafia to write the conclusion of his "famous" reversed finding paper... https://rumble.com/
Re: [Vo]:mRNA Vaccine Reverse Transcribed into Liver DNA
As some of you might know, the Pfizer jab is highly damaging and so far killed/disabled > 100'000 people. The jabs - as studies show - over all did not save a single live. As a Paper:: https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf This has been proven by Pfizer itself. But because daddy Biden himself did bribe all US journals:: :: https://www.thedesertreview.com/news/biden-administration-paid-media-1-billion-for-covid-shot-propaganda/article_004df1ec-9e42-11ec-9cf8-478353d0e684.html No journal ever did report about the Pfizer Phase III 6 months study results, that did clearly show more deaths in the vaccine arm. Not included are several more direct vaccine deaths we now find inside the first 10'000 pages released by FDA. So Pfizer itself did prove extensive damage from its jabs. So virtually Pfizer damaged the live of > 2'000'000'000 people world wide by selling a devastating RNA gene tech chemo therapy as a "vaccine". The Pfizer data now is public: So, after 6 months the Pfizer chemo therapy (Called CoV-19 vaccine) did show far more damage than benefit. Pfizer did hide several deaths and live long crippled ...Boostered (UK) now get CoV-19 3..10x more often than unvaxx. Vaxx New York children face >100x more damage than benefit. I did announce (on a forum) the post CoV-19 war more than 4 months ago when it became clear that all the illegal money accumulated during the CoV-19 terror regime can only be secured under fire protection = diverting the public from a biological war crime committed by FDA/CDC/US-government and the media slaves. CoV-19 was a war against the population with the main target to steal tax payers money. At no time during the last 2 years CoV-19 was a threat to the health of 99.9% of the population. Already March 2020 we did know 3 perfect cures that could safe at least 99.8% of all lives. (See also Fauci e-mails) What the FM/R/J/B mafia did to prevent treatment was:: Big pharma bribed and threatened to death many doctors: Here the video testimony of Dr. Andrew Hill Liverpool that first did promote Ivermectin and after death threats and heavy bribing allowed the FM/R/J/B mafia to write the conclusion of his "famous" reversed finding paper... https://rumble.com/vwg569-a-letter-to-andrew-hill-dr-tess-lawrie-ivermectin-suppression-killed-millio.html Do not believe anything about CoV-19 that comes from Lancet, Jamma the today's main fake medical CoV-19 science journals. I did help as many people I could with treatment and to escape the damaging RNA immune stimulation chemo therapy. (Exact terminology according Biontec home page - at least until Jan. 2022!) If you need a real vaccine take Novavax or J (more risky) or go to Cuba! J.W. On 13.03.2022 13:34, H LV wrote: Have faith in "The Science" . All that matters in life is "The Science". "The Science" will determine policy. Harry On Sat, Mar 12, 2022 at 10:08 PM Terry Blanton wrote: A Lund Univ study in Sweden: https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm Not to panic. It was in vitro. But, it wasn't supposed to alter our DNA. If proved to happen in the body, it could have long term health effects including possible autoimmune effects. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:OT: More evidence supports use of Ivermectin
Ivermectin - known since more than 10 years - is a broad band anti viral. So looking for evidence of action is turning the proof upside down. The question is in what phase of the illness does it work with what percentage. As a prophylaxis it works up to 99.99% (Infection protection) In early treatment at least 98% (severe illness protection) In late treatment at least 80% (Death protection) Always compared to no treatment outcome for PCR positive. There is a difference for alpha, Beta, gamma, delta. For delta you need 2x doses. Omicron is no longer a CoV-19 virus and Ivermectin kills it very fast. All studies claiming no result have been highly faked and paid by big pharma. In my environment everybody did buy Ivermectin, V-D3, (+K2),Zinc, quercetin. Black cumin (Nigella Sativa) works almost as good as Ivermectin. HCQ is good too and Sutherlandia/Hesperidin (Orange skin) was my preferred treatment in the early days. So only fools die from CoV-19 or a immune stimulation gene tech cancer chemo (Pfizer/Moderna) called "vaccine"... Actually the more "vaccine" shots you did take the higher your infection risk (if you are not recovered). In UK actually 3x more vaccinated progress to severe illness. Take into account that 70% of the UK folks are recovered and subsummed under vaccinated...so vaxx only rates are 3x higher than given. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1058464/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-9.pdf Please stay off from any boosters from Pfizer/Moderna! J.W. On the other side Remdesivir works for 0% and leads to organ failure. Same for the Pfizer/Merck drugs I recommend only for age > 85. On 07.03.2022 17:58, H LV wrote: Here is more evidence that ivermectin is better than remdesivir for treating covid-19 and that it is also effective as a prophylactic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfyOihhAD4A Harry -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:$2 million prize for simple/reproducible LENR experiment
ng. But something like a third of them became warm or hot for long periods of time, weeks and months. One of them became "sparkly" for a few minutes. None of them became hot enough to boil water. I have little doubt that a setup similar to this, but with the ability to allow a higher hydrogen pressure would produce more heat. I gave up these experiments for both the above stated reason and because I had to pay much more attention to my business on account of massive foreign IP theft and unreasonable trade regulation changes. Well, there you have it. I assume the usual things will happen: I will be declared a fool and a fraud. Someone else will say they did it first, and so on. Nevertheless, someone may find this information useful and allow the world to have limitless access to inexpensive energy. --- Original Message --- On Friday, February 25th, 2022 at 4:19 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: At the DARP workshop Francesco Celani said that the Anthropocene Institute is offering a $2 million prize for a "simple/reproducible LENR experiment." I do see anything about this at https://www.iccf24.org/ There is one slide about it here: https://arpa-e.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021LENR_workshop_Page.pdf -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:OT: Why Chernobyl ?
Putin is obviously suffering from Chemotherapy! The videos from the most recent meetings did show that he has problems with walking/coordination. It also did fear infection. So the question is whether his brain is damaged or he just wants a revenge for all his failed politics like Maidan. Tschernobyl is an empty space thus an ideal protected basis. All reactors are shut since quite some time (2015). J.W. On 24.02.2022 22:52, bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: It is u[ wind of Russia and Bellarus and a threat if it leaks into staging areas for the invas FRC *From: *Jones Beene <mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> *Sent: *Thursday, February 24, 2022 1:38 PM *To: *vortex <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> *Subject: *[Vo]:OT: Why Chernobyl ? Many observers were surprised that one of the first Ukraine invasion targets for Russia was the cursed Chernobyl site. Why ? Given that the bottom line is going to be very costly for Putin - there must be a hidden agenda here. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:OT: steam locomotive
A diesel with double turbo loader is above 50% efficiency. You will never get there with a sterling motor in a reasonable temperature range. Key is to extract all kinetic energy in a gas explosion what cannot be done with a sterling motor. But you can run a sterling motor even with burning aluminum. But if you stay in a jam your COP goes to minus infinite...With all motors except electric that can just switch off. Starters for normal motors waste a lot of gasoline, so it is not recommended to switch off for short (<15 seconds) stays except with tuned electronics. J.W. On 04.01.2022 15:37, Jones Beene wrote: The most interesting new - but actually old - engine development (esp. for those who think LENR has a future in transportation) is the re-emergence of the Stilrling design. This engine design and the Brayton cycle, in general, never made the grade for commercialization - before now, at least. Change is in the air... so to speak. Unfortunately China, once again, is making large engineering gains while we seem to be playing catchup. https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202112/1243157.shtml Quote: "the basic prototype of China's first large-bore Stirling engine successfully conducted the recent performance test... at a rated power of 320 kilowatts with a power conversion efficiency of 40 percent, making it the most powerful Stirling engine known around the globe." There are few if any diesels which can return 40% efficiency but China got there on the first prototype, The reason that the piston-Sterling could potentially augment LENR is not well appreciated either. Basically it is because the Brayton cycle is inherently *closed-cycle*. The Stirling can be either piston or turbine based, but the piston config is what LENR can possibly optimize with few changes. IOW the closed-cycle is one way to expose a metal catalyst to a flow of hydrogen without combustion of the hydrogen itself. Thus, if the working gas contains even a small percentage of hydrogen and the piston crown is coated with nickel/palladium alloy, then extra heat could potentially be extracted - on top of the external heat of combustion which occurs else where in the design, The LENR would be a booster, so to speak, Will China be the first to realize this ? They did after all, report on replicating Arata and that was a decade ago. Jed Rothwell wrote: H LV wrote: We don't really know how steam engines would have evolved because they were out-competed by diesel engines. As I recall, the last attempts to compete with Diesel engines was with steam turbines. This source says the Union Pacific actually made two steam turbine locomotives, and tested them, in 1939 and 1962. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Another Scientific Paper
This is exactly what nature does. Bacteria are carrying virus for extending their protection and parasites carry bacteria and virus... So all outstanding antibiotics are also anti viral like Doxycycline. Ivermectin, Nitazoxanide (Mexico), budenoside are dirty cheap generics hidden from the public that transform Covid into a mild cold. All details for treatment can be found on the FLCCC home page https://covid19criticalcare.com/ The ivermectin combo you buy in India for 1$/full treatment. just google ' "ziverdo kit" India' My spell: Only "idiots" die from CoV-19 or a CoV-19 gene therapy (called vaccine)... Learn how to treat yourself as almost all hospitals will suck you out ($$) and finally kill you with fake drugs like remdesivir. J.W. On 28.12.2021 01:38, Robin wrote: In reply to MSF's message of Mon, 27 Dec 2021 22:53:55 +: Hi, Just guess, but suppose that the parasites were never really a problem, but rather viruses carried by the parasites? Ivermectin may always have been an anti-viral, but no one new it because they thought it was fighting the parasite rather than a virus carried by the parasite? This is a paper published on the NIH's own website, whereupon they are baffled why the African nations participating in the APOC program have a much lower covid problem than the non-APOC nations. They are shocked, do you hear, shocked that those treated with ivermectin don't seem to get as much covid. Here's the link. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7968425/ Hope they don't don't take this one down. I'm telling you, it's an enigma. Those geniuses just can't figure it out. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:[OT]Omicron
The treatment cost for CoV-19 are 1$. Please google '"ziverdo kit"
India'. The gen therapy ("vaccination") costs about 100$ at least.
Adding to this there are about 500 serious side effects/1mio "vaccine"
doses, that cost an extra 50-100 Millions at least - not including the
15/Mio "vaccine" deaths in average.
Omicron is 100x more harmless than the original Alpha CoV-19 version.
See tissue study Hongkong:
https://www.med.hku.hk/en/news/press/20211215-omicron-sars-cov-2-infection?utm_medium=social_source=twitter_campaign=press_release
Please stay off from Pfizer boosters. These show no effect against
Omicron (RSA study). Use Moderna instead! Do not believe a single word
from Pfizer marketing!
J.W.
On 20.12.2021 08:14, Robin wrote:
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sun, 19 Dec 2021 21:49:11 -0500:
Hi,
Terry only quoted my post. However You are obviously correct about the overall
cost to society.
That would not save any money. On the contrary, it would cost hundreds of
times more than vaccinations. A vaccinated person seldom gets sick. An
unvaccinated person who suffers from a mild case of COVID or influenza will
have to spend a week or two recuperating. That means missing days of work,
and taking over the counter medication. The cost of the missed work and
medication far exceeds the cost of two or three vaccines. Also, some number
of people will die from Omicron no matter how mild it is. Even if it is as
mild as influenza, it will kill hundreds of thousands, and many others will
suffer long term damage, whereas not a single person has died or been
seriously hurt by the mRNA vaccines, even after 6 billion doses. So, the
vaccine is far safer.
Influenza is less deadly than Omicron, yet influenza vaccines are far
cheaper and safer than getting influenza. That is why governments
everywhere subsidize them and give them out for free.
A vaccine is always cheaper and safer than the disease it prevents. That is
why children are given vaccines for chickenpox and mumps, which are seldom
deadly diseases. (Children in the US have to get these vaccines to attend
school.)
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:[OT]Omicron
Omicron is 5x more transmittable. Contains a gene sequence of the alpha
corona virus what obviously makes it less lethal and weakens all
symptoms in direction of a flue cold or zeroNo loss of taste!
Pfizer protection is weaker by a factor of 41 in average if you
*i**nclude some recovered*. In reality 9 of 12 had a reduction > 100.
See ::
https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MEDRXIV-2021-267417v1-Sigal.pdf
So Pfizer is garbage! Omicron will end the pandemic and the world wide
vaccination intoxication. Sell your X,Y shares
By the way, on 16th August Japan allowed doctors to prescribe Ivermectin
and allowed citizens to order it ("ziverdo kit") in India. The cases
boiled down like in Uttar Pradesh. Vaccination (gene therapy) is
only recommend for old and high risk people with no access to medication.
As all statistics show: Vaccination has no influence on case numbers.
Those who say else are big pharma addicts or deny basic data... See UK
vaccination reports- best unfudged CoV-19 data on planet!
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports
Vaccinated get more often CoV-19!!!
But every country has a different risk structure. Beefy USA is at high
danger, has a low education level , thus gene therapy is a good idea to
delay a severe illness... until Omicron
J.W.
n 09.12.2021 19:56, MSF wrote:
You are probably right about this, Robin. It's the natural sequence of events
with new viruses. They eventually weaken as new strains emerge and herd
immunity becomes stronger. Are you in NSW? That can't be a pleasant experience.
Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐
On Thursday, December 9th, 2021 at 8:48 AM,
Robin wrote:
Hi,
If Omicron doesn't create severe illness it may protect against other more
virulent strains of the virus, by creating
an immune response. The fact that it is more infectious may turn out to be a
boon rather than a problem, as it would
outpace all other strains, and "immunize" those who are unwilling to get the
jab.
It may also save governments around the world from having to spend billions on
vaccines.
Regards,
Robin van spaandonkmixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
Besides a lot of Axilian word salad we have to note that::
Nuclear reactions do not at all follow the law of quantum mechanics. QM
is a first order approximation for the far field *potential interaction*
only. QM is an engineering theory and for this purpose it works well enough.
After 100 year failure to find any QM connection for nuclear processes I
sometimes wonder why people still uphold this fringe approach.
The strong force myth has been fully debunked by B.Schaeffer
https://www.google.ch/url?sa=t=j==s=web==rja=8=2ahUKEwjW9tb_iM_0AhUjhv0HHUXXAxsQFnoECBQQAQ=https%3A%2F%2Fdocplayer.net%2F83778110-Aes-2016-malaga-spain.html=AOvVaw196fS5Fh4R7wyXL9k0Gf9q
--> "Electromagnetic Nuclear Physics"
Same for QM like orbits of nuclear orbital charge. See Sardin:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330825167
Charge structure is toroidal!
J.W.
On 06.12.2021 11:11, Axil Axil wrote:
Because the nuclear level processes that occur in the Reaction are
confined to a quantum mechanical system that is coherent, that
nuclear reaction is not possible to observe. This means that if
particles are generated and energy is produced, those particles and
that energy is not observable to the observer. This is known as the
"Measurement problem".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kxmR82QMN8
After the coherence of the quantum system is destroyed, the quantum
system becomes a classical system in which energy can be observed. But
this energy is not nuclear energy but energy derived from the vacuum
as rendered by "vacuum decay" where a small amount of residual energy
and matter stored in the quantum system is released in a disruptive
process of system disintegration and therefore such residual matter
and energy becomes observable.
There is a causal disconnection between the processes that happen in
which the quantum system is coherent and the disrupted release of
stored residual matter and energy that is released during the
destruction of the erstwhile quantum system.
If particles were produced during the time when the quantum system was
coherent, those particles would not have been observable. It is a
fool's errand to try to make sence of the quantum processes that
had occured when the quantum system was coherent. This observation and
its understanding is not possible because the expectations of the
classical world do not apply to the processes that were quantum
coherent and rendered unobservable.
On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 8:39 PM bobcook39...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Nuclear magmatic resonance [phenomena are the basis for the desogn
and operation of common MRI maschines of used by the medical
business.
A metastable nuclear at a small energy above the stable state of a
target isotope is produced by a radio frequency photon in
resonance with the differential energy between the 2 states.
A magnetic field is applied to the target isotope to allow a
resonant to react with the isotope and raise its energy slightly.
The magnetic is shut off and the target isotope returns to is
grouind state with the emission of a photon to conserve energy and
angular momentum of the QM system.
LOW ENERGY NUCLEAR REACTIONS ARE REAL . A RECOIL OF THE ISOTOPE
OCCURS WHEN THE PHIOTON IS EMITTED TO CONSERVE MOMENTOM. angular
IS ALSO CONSERVED BY THE PHOTON AS I RECALL.
Bob Cook
PS: My work with NMR was 60 years ago in 19621.
Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>
for Windows
*From:* Axil Axil
*Sent:* Saturday, December 4, 2021 5:59:44 PM
*To:* vortex-l
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
Thankyou for your opinion. A nuclear reaction produces energy from
a change in the binding energy of the nucleus. When this binding
energy changes, the nucleus will become unstable where the
liberated binding energy is oftentimes carried away by a
particle(s) exiting the nucleus.
If the Reaction is based on a nuclear reaction, particle
emissions are to be expected. The lack of particle emissions in
the Reaction was and still is a major factor in the lack of
acceptance by the science community that the nuclear based
explanation of the Reaction is real.
By the way, Holmlid's observation that particles were produced by
his Reaction has not been seen by his replicators. It looks like
what Holmlid was seeing were EVOs produced by the ultra dense
hydrogen as detected by Sveinn Ólafsson 's cloud chamber.
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:01 PM Jürg Wyttenbach
wrote:
Axil,
You basically are a nonsense talker with no clue of real dense
matter physics.
A particle emission is associated with a momentum. How do you
Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
Axil, as said stop this unfounded postings about particles.
In LENR we only see stable targets of any reaction. Thus no unstable
nuclei are produced in most cases. The only thing what might happen is
beta +- decay of an intermediate.
If 2 D* fuse to 4-He then no momentum exists. So no particle is allowed
to carry away the energy. This D*-D* ==> 4-He is the main LENR reaction.
With the help of new physics we could show that magnetic gamma states
can act like antennas and are able to carry away fusion energy of D*-D*.
Michael Swarz could also identify an other path as he measured the
hyper-fine structure frequency of Deuterium in his reaction.
Holmlid is quite a different story as his cluster fusion reaction 9H ==>
2 4-He + K^+ ,K^0 disposes its energy in cracking a proton.
Nuclear physics is about "magnet mass resonance". Potentials play no role.
J.W.
On 05.12.2021 02:59, Axil Axil wrote:
Thankyou for your opinion. A nuclear reaction produces energy from a
change in the binding energy of the nucleus. When this binding energy
changes, the nucleus will become unstable where the liberated binding
energy is oftentimes carried away by a particle(s) exiting the nucleus.
If the Reaction is based on a nuclear reaction, particle emissions are
to be expected. The lack of particle emissions in the Reaction was and
still is a major factor in the lack of acceptance by the science
community that the nuclear based explanation of the Reaction is real.
By the way, Holmlid's observation that particles were produced by his
Reaction has not been seen by his replicators. It looks like what
Holmlid was seeing were EVOs produced by the ultra dense hydrogen as
detected by Sveinn Ólafsson 's cloud chamber.
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 8:01 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
Axil,
You basically are a nonsense talker with no clue of real dense
matter physics.
A particle emission is associated with a momentum. How do you
believe that mass at rest can produce
this???
J.W.
On 04.12.2021 19:36, Axil Axil wrote:
Also identify what fusion and/or fission reaction that this gamma
radiation is coming from. Show proof that this radiation is
associated with particle emissions. Nuclear reactions produce
well defined particle emissions. Also explain how the reaction is
being produced. Keep in mind that high energy radiation can be
produced by breaking radiation from high energy electrons. These
high energy electron based wide continuous spectrum reactions are
not necessarily nuclear reactions.
On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 1:10 PM Jürg Wyttenbach
wrote:
May be soon if the standard model mafia will not oppose
J.W.
On 04.12.2021 18:59, Jones Beene wrote:
Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:
Axil, I can send you any time a gamma spectrum with 300
active lines from a cold fusion reaction...
-
Is this work published?
It should be included in the LENR/CANR library, especially
if the gamma lines support a theory
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
Axil, You basically are a nonsense talker with no clue of real dense matter physics. A particle emission is associated with a momentum. How do you believe that mass at rest can produce this??? J.W. On 04.12.2021 19:36, Axil Axil wrote: Also identify what fusion and/or fission reaction that this gamma radiation is coming from. Show proof that this radiation is associated with particle emissions. Nuclear reactions produce well defined particle emissions. Also explain how the reaction is being produced. Keep in mind that high energy radiation can be produced by breaking radiation from high energy electrons. These high energy electron based wide continuous spectrum reactions are not necessarily nuclear reactions. On Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 1:10 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: May be soon if the standard model mafia will not oppose J.W. On 04.12.2021 18:59, Jones Beene wrote: Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Axil, I can send you any time a gamma spectrum with 300 active lines from a cold fusion reaction... - Is this work published? It should be included in the LENR/CANR library, especially if the gamma lines support a theory -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06 -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
May be soon if the standard model mafia will not oppose J.W. On 04.12.2021 18:59, Jones Beene wrote: Jürg Wyttenbach wrote: Axil, I can send you any time a gamma spectrum with 300 active lines from a cold fusion reaction... - Is this work published? It should be included in the LENR/CANR library, especially if the gamma lines support a theory -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Freire et al., Preliminary survey on cold fusion
Axil, I can send you any time a gamma spectrum with 300 active lines from a cold fusion reaction. Also the SO(4) physics models blows up everything you know about physics. So your comment is pretty outdated. J.W. On 04.12.2021 08:49, Axil Axil wrote: The indications against the "REACTION" having a nuclear origin is the issue that no nuclear or particle radiation is ever detected. Also all reaction products and transmutation are stable. No one has ever produced or even attempted a theory that explains the nuclear origin of the radiationless nuclear reaction. * <https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6714-brazil-joins-the-party-a-survey-of-the-lenr-field/#> On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 9:02 PM Jed Rothwell wrote: Preliminary survey on cold fusion: It’s not pathological science and may require revision of nuclear theory. Discussion and copy of paper here: https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6714-brazil-joins-the-party-a-survey-of-the-lenr-field/ -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:photons
st thing they do is linearize the Young's modulus and solve for the linear solutions. Phonons will not be a solution within a linear formulation! They linearize the Young's modulus so that they can solve the math. > >Photons don't arise from Maxwell's equations because Maxwell's equations >are a linear description of space. Maxwell believed there IS an aether and >his equations reflect this. Even though the aether was not measured, they >continued to use Maxwell's equations for normal EM excitation because they >worked (proving there is an aether). Those that believe there is no aether >cannot understand the possibility of a soliton solution for a photon. >Soliton solutions require a nonlinear medium. From their perspective, if >space is empty, how can "nothing" be nonlinear? From my perspective, the >existence of photons provides another proof that there is an aether and it >is nonlinear. ...only if photons are indeed Solitons. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk mailto:mixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au>> -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Copy of "A Brief Introduction to Cold Fusion" without YouTube ads
The Chinese people (Uigurs) love the peoples liberation army as the
Germans (Jews) did love the Waffen SS and the Russian love omon...
J.W.
On 21.09.2021 00:52, ROGER ANDERTON wrote:
their plan -> everyone will be poor except the billionairies ->
You'll own nothing and you'll be happy | The Great Reset | Klaus Schwab
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IzwiH40JOc
-- Original Message -- From: "Lennart Thornros"
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, 20
Sep, 21 At 23:19 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Copy of "A Brief Introduction
to Cold Fusion" without YouTube ads
Just så the Said in germany in the 1930is. Government can do as
they want. The government wants our best.
On Mon, Sep 20, 2021, 13:09 Jed Rothwell
mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote:
ROGER ANDERTON
mailto:r.j.ander...@btinternet.com>>
wrote:
>>No vote is needed.<< -> so no freedom of choice
Absolutely no freedom of choice!! You are never allowed to
interfere with my freedom of speech, or Facebook's, or the
U.S. government's freedom of speech. The voters are not
allowed to overrule the Constitution. The electorate cannot
vote to stifle what I post on LENR-CANR.org, or what Facebook
posts on their website. The difference between us is only a
matter of scale. The fact that they are large does not mean
they have fewer rights than I do.
It is not "fascism" to allow corporations and individuals
freedom of the press and free speech.
--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis
+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
On 12.09.2021 04:04, CB Sites wrote: The free press is amazing in sorting out what is BS and what isn't, and considering there is a Chinese influence program actively invading social media like this, and you mention Sinovax, directed it to 'the west', all I can say is your just a propaganda weapon. First for all: Vortex is not a propaganda network. We here spread information. I hope people find out themselves how many agents are working for the ruling mafia. I mentioned 3 vaccines one from USA... The rest is experimental gene therapy... Just medical facts. I wasn't trying to attack you, your beliefs, or anything like that, so chill. I was just agreeing with Jed and reporting on a Washington Post article that is appropriate to your propaganda. Once more. Science is not about believes. You just did reference FUD. The Washington post is owned by a former CIA agent and spreads deep state propaganda, when they are ordered to do so. Some friends of mine tested all major media about their willingness to publish proven science data/information about CoV-19. So I can confirm that also NYtimes/BBC,FAZ/Spiegel, Guardian, Nature, Lancet, Scientific American... and most news channels in Europe & USA just publish mafia ordered information. (= are not willing to publish science facts, that contradict with mafia targets) *The same we see in cold fusion.* It is obvious that especially in the USA the ruling mafia claims to follow science exactly, when they violate all rules of science. This is how free masons do politics since centuries. *Same in LENR.* Physics is experiments not math. So cold fusion has been proven thousands times by experiments thus the claimed math (science) is wrong. The same with Ivermectin. One billion Indian folks did take it and COV-19 is gone. This is facts not Washington post FUD. Here I personally asked BBC to document it. Comment from BBC: There is no public interest in this... So 1 billion healthy India people is a marginal issue Here a link to the Swiss political research institute. This is a 100% independent think tank and gives you the most complete overview (references > 100 papers) about all facts around CoV-19 https://swprs.org/covid19-facts/ May be I should ask them to do the same for cold fusion! J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
On 11.09.2021 18:03, CB Sites wrote: As Jed was saying the studies on it have questionable methodologies for testing on in the case of the largest study, it was retracted again due to questionable data manipulation. It really needs a large double blind study (just as all the other vaccines have gone through). It stands to make Merke (the big pharma that makes Ivermectin) a lot of money and you can be sure they want it on the list of available covid treatments. What is foolish is using Ivermectin as an excuse not to get the vax now in its current form. .Two doses, it's free, easy to get, very effective and it helps everyone by not consuming hospital resources and morgue space (seriously). This is plain nonsense: The studies have been made and the mechanism of Ivermectin action is well understood as it works for all virus flu, Hanta, Zikka, Westnil. the same way. Merck makes no money with Ivermectin. They actively block it in favor of their already failed $ drug Molnupiravir. Asking for an other Ivermectin study is mafia meme. It comes from people that have the joy to watch people die that are on a placebo. We so far have 71 studies! In the western world no CoV-19 vaccine is sold - so far only Gene therapies. Sinovac is out, also the Cuban vaccine. NOVAVAX is on hold because the mafia blocks it fabrication certification. Gene therapies give you zero immunity for CoV-19. These therapies only (force your body to) produce quasi monoclonal antibodies (short time protection only), that vastly wane after 5-6 months. So these pseudo vaccines are no solution and have a track record of being > 1000x more damaging than a regular flue vaccines. So the result of godfather Bidens action will be millions of damaged people and an even worse ADE outcome for vaccinated high risk patient taking a booster. Anybody with a clear brain understands, that at the end the damage from CoV-19 (usually only severely affecting people at age >65 here 97% ) will be far lower than the overall damage from the states actions... So far USA is a world wide exception due to high obesity, related diabetes, heart,... problems. So the only advise for USA is use Ivermectin and for severe cases go into a hospital where the FLCCC protocol is in place. All other hospitals will kill you for $$. https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/math-plus-protocol/ J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
Jonathan Berry wrote: I have long studied repressed Cancer cures but never knew of Ivermectin. There are some key dates in Big pharma history. Until about 1970 everybody got his yearly worm cure. Basically Praziquantel. Praziquantel is a key drug that e.g. fights chlonorchis sinensis also call liver fluke. Most pancreas and bile cancer is caused by this fellow, that you e.g. get if you eat not so well cocked shrimps from far east (e.g. Vietnam). Also watercress is a known source. More important for the meat eaters are the nymphs of cow, pig tapeworms that can invade any organ in your body. Most brain strokes and also tumors are cause by these nice fellows. What happened around 1970?? The first chemo cure was introduced and in parallel countries have been ordered to stop distribute Praziquantel. So the main reason for a raising cancer rates is the deprivation of people from live saving drugs. Other deprived drugs(in USA) are as simple Apricot/plum kernels = vitamin K = meracapto cyanide = induces apoptosis of malign cells (still free in Europe) Other famous anti cancer drugs are methadone (Heroin), Cannabis what in part explains the war against drugs...and not allowing a regular sale... So big pharma is not about curing you. It's about making money with your intentionally destroyed health. Regarding Ivermectin: There is a parallel drug called Nitazoxanide that is even more hidden than Ivermectin. Guess why? You cannot outplay Ivermectin: Why: A virus is dead and thus needs the living cell for replication. So if a drug stop this inside a cell then a virus action cannot unfold. Uttar Pradesh (and most India) states are successful because the use Ivermectin as a prophylaxis! J.W. On 11.09.2021 04:28, Jonathan Berry wrote: Well think about it, they are going to be exposed to it too. They need an effective cheap safe antidote. There are a LOT of suppressed cures for Cancer, including guess what, Ivermectin! I have long studied repressed Cancer cures but never knew of Ivermectin. My point is is one of the biggest most feared killers has many many cures and treatments more effective than Chemo, radiation and surgery but most don't know about them because "they" control the official narrative and only a small percentage of people aren't' too trusting and brainwashed... Then why should they fear that it will become overwhelmingly popular with COVID? Though they are scared that it will be realized, look at how many have fallen for this stupid experimental gene therapy mascerading as a Vaccine? On Sat, 11 Sept 2021 at 11:02, Robin <mailto:mixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au>> wrote: In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 10 Sep 2021 23:21:19 +0200: Hi, [snip] Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a cheap and commonly available "off switch" such as Ivermectin?? >On 10.09.2021 22:09, Jed Rothwell wrote: >> >> As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear >> from the double-blind clinical testing. > > >If Jed would once read a paper and not just spread, what his FM buddies >forward him, then he could see that it works! > >I sent the link some mails ago. > > >https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1> OF course >big pharma never references it > >Virus gone after two,days. PCR confirmed. Not so in placebo arm... > >J.W. > >PS: Only blind mice eat poison... Regards, Robin van Spaandonk mailto:mixent...@aussiebroadband.com.au>> -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
On 11.09.2021 01:02, Robin wrote: Hypothetically - a bio-warfare designed virus, might be created with a cheap and commonly available "off switch" such as Ivermectin?? You mix up virus and in cell replication. Ivermectin basically stops in cell replication of CoV-19 and of a dozen of other virus too (what also helps to cure cancer or against flu..). On top of this Ivermectin is one of the best antibodies for CoV-19. Other good antibodies are Heparin, Doxycycline, Hesperidin (in orange juice). This can be a problem if you have a high virus load. That case you waste Ivermectin as antibody and do not gain a replications stop. That's why we add Doxycycline! J.W. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
On 10.09.2021 22:09, Jed Rothwell wrote: As I said, if ivermectin could have this effect, this would be clear from the double-blind clinical testing. If Jed would once read a paper and not just spread, what his FM buddies forward him, then he could see that it works! I sent the link some mails ago. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 OF course big pharma never references it Virus gone after two,days. PCR confirmed. Not so in placebo arm... J.W. PS: Only blind mice eat poison... -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
The largest study of Ivermectin prophylaxes has been made in Argentina: http://pharmabaires.com/1739-resultados-positivos-del-%20protocolo-iver-car-en-la-profilaxis-de-los-agentes-de-salud.html I usually take high dose V-D3 and zinc as a preparation. this is the best and most simple proven prophylaxis. Some add Quercetin since early 2020 PLEASE stop such FUD:: You said:: The best I've seen on this are people that do that, get infected, wind up hospitalized and/or dead. Yes we exactly know why the pseudo vaccines stop to work after some time. In case of Pfizer & Moderna & Astra "vaccine" we talk of an *experimental gen therapy*! A gen therapy that for 30% works in cancer therapy... The Pfizer gen therapy according sound research does not imply a useful immune memory = has no vaccine like action. (that produces a broad immune memory pattern) The gen therapy just forces, mostly endothelian cells, to intake & replicate the spike protein, what in follow up presentation reaction stimulates the production of spike antibodies only. This " pseudo vaccine" never helps to stimulate/produce new antibodies after an infection with CoV-19. Only the surviving - but waning - anti bodies help to fight an illness. In UK & Israel the efficiency of the gen therapy already reached "0" level for some age groups and important to know. Boosters will make things worse. According the UK Covid report number 22 double vaccinated have a higher viral load than single vaccinated This is a clear sign of ADE = antibody dependent enhancement due to a miss fit between gen therapy induce monoclonal antibodies and the new, no longer matching Delta spike. Only scared to death or "mad" people kill them selves with an experimental gen therapy. The pseudo vaccines already did produce some 100'000 crippled people. The gen therapy has > 1000x more adverse reactions (see VERS) than the worst flu vaccine. See also https://www.adrreports.eu/de/disclaimer.html go to letter "C" there you find all > 1 mio adverse reactions in the EU. J.W. On 10.09.2021 16:28, CB Sites wrote: Jürg Wyttenbach says; "Ivermectin gives a 100% protection from a COV-19 infection. Start dose is 2 days normal dose then weekly once for 100% protection for 90% protetion every 2 weeks." And you know this to be true? So are you following your own treatment plan? The best I've seen on this are people that do that, get infected, wind up hospitalized and/or dead. At least you won't have lice when you die. It seems ironic that you would be willing to trust one pharmaceutical (ivermectin) and not another (the vax, the jab aka; Phiser, Moderna, J vaccines) that have been studied inside and are well published and documented. We know exactly how and why the vax works against covid. Yet someone with a home remedy that is used to treat lice infections, thinks there is a better solution even though there is no known science that would show how it protects against covid or any other virus for that matter. Ivermectin is just one more of the big lies like Hydroxychloroquine or even injections of 'sodium hypochlorite'. Remember that crazy one that the science community had to be put down as fast as possible before people killed themselves? I really wish you would take your propaganda and keep it to yourself and get your vax instead of wasting everyone time. There are better subjects like Cold Fusion for us to sort out. On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 6:34 AM Jürg Wyttenbach <mailto:ju...@datamart.ch>> wrote: You cannot teach Jed As member of the FM the ruling USA sect he has to spread, what his buddies tell him else he will get problems. Others would say it more rigorously. In case of the Mizuno LENR protocol he intentionally did spread wrong details. So he is a professional cheater. We know this because in the mean time the Mizuno patent is available that refutes all rubbish Jed did claim. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6017-mizuno-replication-and-materials-only/?pageNo=1 <https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6017-mizuno-replication-and-materials-only/?pageNo=1> Regarding Ivermectin:: Doing an RCT study for a deadly illness is a sign of mental illness. But exactly this is what Jed references. RCT studies for CoV-19 can only be done among very mild cases that are completely irrelevant for the medical outcome of the pandemic. Nevertheless. All these studies show what I said 2 mails earlier. If you take Ivermectin then after 2 days CoV-19 is gone. The best such study comes from Israel and does a full PCR control on each day! https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 <https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1> OF course big pharma never references it
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
You cannot teach Jed As member of the FM the ruling USA sect he has to spread, what his buddies tell him else he will get problems. Others would say it more rigorously. In case of the Mizuno LENR protocol he intentionally did spread wrong details. So he is a professional cheater. We know this because in the mean time the Mizuno patent is available that refutes all rubbish Jed did claim. https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/6017-mizuno-replication-and-materials-only/?pageNo=1 Regarding Ivermectin:: Doing an RCT study for a deadly illness is a sign of mental illness. But exactly this is what Jed references. RCT studies for CoV-19 can only be done among very mild cases that are completely irrelevant for the medical outcome of the pandemic. Nevertheless. All these studies show what I said 2 mails earlier. If you take Ivermectin then after 2 days CoV-19 is gone. The best such study comes from Israel and does a full PCR control on each day! https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.31.21258081v1 OF course big pharma never references it J.W. On 10.09.2021 03:11, Jonathan Berry wrote: Oh Jed you really do just love the Pharma lies don't you. Nothing could be further from the truth. First off there have been no deaths ever from overdosing with it, a woman who took x100 times the recommended dosage was fine after 4 days in hospital. The negative effects from it are rare, mild and mostly related either to insane dosing (which is a result of it not being prescribed by doctors) and it killing parasites that release toxins. But effectiveness is absolutely conclusive but to do it justice I'll do that in another post, but the fact remains if there is no harm (except to parasites and apparently Cancer) then why oppose people trying it? Why are they making up lies about it flooding emergency rooms when the hospital has never treated anyone for it ever? Why are they making up fake studies that don't exist? Why are they pushing an experimental that contains the harmful spike protein that has little beneficial effect and obvious harm? Why are trying to make it harder to enter accounts of Vaccine harm in the VARS database? They have been caught making it intentionally hard with slow loading and timeouts in the Canadian system. All for a Virus that finally it has been admitted Faucci lied about, & was involved with making, the evidence for it being gain of function research. On Fri, 10 Sept 2021 at 09:14, Jed Rothwell <mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com>> wrote: Jürg Wyttenbach mailto:ju...@datamart.ch>> wrote: We no longer need any Ivermectin studies as we have real data from 1'000'000'000 people that now no longer worry CoV-19. Leading Indian epidemiologists say there is no evidence that ivermectin had an effect in India. They were interviewed in the New York Times and elsewhere. Epidemiologists are better at judging these things than doctors in the field. Doctors have often been mistaken about the efficacy of a drug. The epidemiologists say the curves of the recent outbreaks indicate the epidemic abated because of natural herd immunity in the hard hit districts. The doctors took antibody tests from a sample of the population. They found that the infection rate was far higher than official statistics showed. It was high enough to achieve local herd immunity. Local herd immunity is why there are multiple waves of an epidemic in different cities over time. Double-blind tests of ivermectin show either a very small effect, or none at all, so it is not possible it has had a giant effect on the Indian population. The doctors in the field are not more skilled in administering the drug than the doctors doing the double-blind tests. The doctors in the field have described their methods, dosage and so on. Clinical double-blind tests did not replicate their claims. When a drug has a small effect at best, the way ivermectin does, the only way to confirm that effect is with a double blind test. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
Re: [Vo]:Scientific Papers sign of desperation among Big pharma
Ivermectin gives a 100% protection from a COV-19 infection. Start dose is 2 days normal dose then weekly once for 100% protection for 90% protetion every 2 weeks. I would recommend it - as a prevention - only for people with comorbidity or for a high risk like flight travel. It is totally OK to take it on 1st CoV-19 symptoms if you before regularly did take zinc and V-D3. > 99% of all cases disappear after 1-2 days. If symptoms gets stronger you have to adjust the dose. Start with 2x normal dose daily and add 5000-1 IU's VD-3, zinc, V-C and a tablet of aspirin cardio - also adding Quercetin helps to increase zinc intake into cells. And have a look at the world wide used protocol of FLCCC:: https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-plus-protocol/ J.W. On 10.09.2021 01:21, Terry Blanton wrote: Do you take it as a preventative? -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
