Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

The world is threatened when the likes of Norman Borlaug are replaced by
immigrants from India, that his green revolution created despite his
warnings about the need for birth control, and then proceed to take over
key positions in the Iowa government, where Borlaug was from, that make
decisions directing funding away from workable technologies for the green
revolution and toward fellow immigrants from India who are given plumb jobs
pursing unworkable technologies that are given empty awards in the name of
Norman Borlaug.

And, yes, that happened right here in Shenandoah, IA, not a mile from where
I type this.

But you don't care about the world.

You care about your moral vanity.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> So now, settlers are hippies. It might actually explain why you see
> yourself (or whoever group you feel belonging to) to feel threatened. When
> you are a willing immigrant, you do more to overcome difficulties. This is
> obvious. The old ones become lazy and xenophobic.
>
>
> 2015-09-19 15:24 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
>> for Automatic Cleanup! (jabow...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule
>> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Ftoken%3DYVvchE2oDVgxgJ0anX5SXqhe8NA0yRc5RQdLSAzVuICSMz26gaqut8W1IPN8gRB7HbsWoMyZNN25gRca%252BDGBsX4rqQPtfovMeFPSK5XWvLoKXEW3jhmdhamt1nHdQQnLNm8CmHn1MBk%253D%26key%3DEAhVYMr4VnxKX%252BrYXkjllJMouYgUVfH94OQoMt1KoZo%253D_serial=22697444536_rand=1793395280_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>> | More info
>> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=22697444536_rand=1793395280_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>>
>> What zombie talk!  That which doesn't exist cannot be destroyed but it
>> can, of course, destroy that which does exist and therefore justice
>> dictates that it should be destroyed despite it not existing.
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

What zombie talk!  That which doesn't exist cannot be destroyed but it can,
of course, destroy that which does exist and therefore justice dictates
that it should be destroyed despite it not existing.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> US is primarily made by immigrants, which was occupied by murdering the
> original cultures. Also, many of those "immigrants" were brought against
> their own will. So, it is illogical to think of anything as "american
> culture". Even more so because the organizational basis of US it is that it
> should be diverse, at least in terms of laws. Thus, US is characterized as
> a federation.
>
> I see that american culture, even looking from a foreign country, is no
> culture at all. It is at most a standard laid upon the upper middle classes
> and repeated over and over by the local media as it were true. So, there is
> not even a target to menace. Even more the boyin question is certainly
> potentially helping the quality of life of people who live in US, as many
> immigrants of brown skin,  than over 99% of those with "native" stock.
>
> 2015-09-19 14:53 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> 60 million children of pioneer US stock do not exist due to the real
>> increase in cost of family formation imposed on the baby boom generation,
>> and that demographic vacum is being filled by foreigners hostile to the
>> culture that founded the US -- all as a result of US Federal government
>> policies.
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

The US is a settler culture, not an immigrant culture.

A settler culture has a primary relationship with nature and secondary
relationship with society.  The loss of this culture is what is destroying
science and technology and replacing it with theocracy as evidenced, not
only by the treatment of theory as superior to experiment, but by the loss
of fundamental technical advances ever since the Immigration and
Nationality Act of 1965 initiated the replacement of the Nation of Settlers
with the Nation of Immigrants.

The notion that this replacement is "justified" by some version of history
in which the Settlers were responsible for various social injustices is
puerile.  If there is a need for justice, let's address that forthrightly
by, for example, turning lands and sovereignty back over to the descendants
of Amerindian tribes and by reparations for slavery -- not this
interminable mealy mouthed mass hysteria rationalizing whatever happens to
be fashionable.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 1:24 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote:

> What zombie talk!  That which doesn't exist cannot be destroyed but it
> can, of course, destroy that which does exist and therefore justice
> dictates that it should be destroyed despite it not existing.
>
> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> US is primarily made by immigrants, which was occupied by murdering the
>> original cultures. Also, many of those "immigrants" were brought against
>> their own will. So, it is illogical to think of anything as "american
>> culture". Even more so because the organizational basis of US it is that it
>> should be diverse, at least in terms of laws. Thus, US is characterized as
>> a federation.
>>
>> I see that american culture, even looking from a foreign country, is no
>> culture at all. It is at most a standard laid upon the upper middle classes
>> and repeated over and over by the local media as it were true. So, there is
>> not even a target to menace. Even more the boyin question is certainly
>> potentially helping the quality of life of people who live in US, as many
>> immigrants of brown skin,  than over 99% of those with "native" stock.
>>
>> 2015-09-19 14:53 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>>
>>> 60 million children of pioneer US stock do not exist due to the real
>>> increase in cost of family formation imposed on the baby boom generation,
>>> and that demographic vacum is being filled by foreigners hostile to the
>>> culture that founded the US -- all as a result of US Federal government
>>> policies.
>>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

The "outrage" is certainly normative.  But then so is mental illness during
mass hysteria.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> But, I think not being outraged by this kind of situation must be a sign
> of a mental illness. Of course, someone may be very busy with something
> else and not bother with this.
>
> 2015-09-19 14:00 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
>> for Automatic Cleanup! (jabow...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule
>> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Ftoken%3DVdGfNGADGOz6XpMzJnZQZa1UfeBuJJd5joxT%252FcJ9mB9LkXHqV7%252BNGKudAr1zcje53%252B%252FJZxeNnOI41HJaDZg3dn0Z1LYzKlsqA9CH0R5GUnEFRREdQrgcufb4rJK1NJImvYQqpRA070U%253D%26key%3DsO0C4SeaZTaJRTEY07vuuxwkS7oHJzDP5NnRjs0Q1VA%253D_serial=22696993430_rand=1139442096_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>> | More info
>> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=22696993430_rand=1139442096_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>>
>> Your logic is as flawless as the rest of the "outrage".
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> James, have you stop beating your wife? Yes or No?
>>>
>>> 2015-09-19 1:16 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is
>>>> eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (jabow...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule
>>>> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Ftoken%3D9heIGTeEhiHk01QLqHQzvnwTn6gjtOwYhhYy0S3VGTy6CGG0yeEAQYd0Jl3FQMaQay3e%252FkFzXkCMHWd7uuZbHnvcJZTrYWN7rXwhamygJxte5jjOHSTL60ui7wfN6rMuFE%252BcX98Eios%253D%26key%3Doys3rke50YJberPdwNef4bmm18abKPm76nWdc0tmBZs%253D_serial=22691065549_rand=1792184720_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>>>> | More info
>>>> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=22691065549_rand=1792184720_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>>>>
>>>> What physical precautions did they take that indicates they thought it
>>>> was a bomb rather than a hoax device?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

60 million children of pioneer US stock do not exist due to the real
increase in cost of family formation imposed on the baby boom generation,
and that demographic vacum is being filled by foreigners hostile to the
culture that founded the US -- all as a result of US Federal government
policies.  How many movies about that genocide have been made?   Clue:  Not
even as many as movies as there are about the communist exterminations of
close to the same amount that took place decades earlier and much further
away -- less than ten total.

People are hardly aware of the communist exterminations let alone what the
US government did to its own founding people -- who were supposed to be
sovereign as a people.

200+ movies have been made about the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis as
old as the commnist genocides and people are all about "compassion" for
Jews.

Sure it is "natural" to react with "compassion" to images that are
projected directly to our visual cortex and not even given the distance of
a story teller's oration -- bypassing our critical faculties.

That kind of "compassion" is, when invoked by mass media, mass hysteria.
People like you have no place in public life.

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It is normative because feeling compassion for this case is the usual. I
> am not sure how things are in the US for this case, but I didn't need any
> push of media, other than reading a headline, to feel sorry. Not feeling
> anything is psychopathy.
>
> 2015-09-19 14:38 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> The "outrage" is certainly normative.  But then so is mental illness
>> during mass hysteria.
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Daniel Rocha - RJ
> danieldi...@gmail.com
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

Your logic is as flawless as the rest of the "outrage".

On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 2:06 AM, Daniel Rocha <danieldi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> James, have you stop beating your wife? Yes or No?
>
> 2015-09-19 1:16 GMT-03:00 James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com>:
>
>> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
>> for Automatic Cleanup! (jabow...@gmail.com) Add cleanup rule
>> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Ftoken%3D9heIGTeEhiHk01QLqHQzvnwTn6gjtOwYhhYy0S3VGTy6CGG0yeEAQYd0Jl3FQMaQay3e%252FkFzXkCMHWd7uuZbHnvcJZTrYWN7rXwhamygJxte5jjOHSTL60ui7wfN6rMuFE%252BcX98Eios%253D%26key%3Doys3rke50YJberPdwNef4bmm18abKPm76nWdc0tmBZs%253D_serial=22691065549_rand=1792184720_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>> | More info
>> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=22691065549_rand=1792184720_source=stf_medium=email_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD_content=001>
>>
>> What physical precautions did they take that indicates they thought it
>> was a bomb rather than a hoax device?
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

Ahmed Mohamed, His Clock, and the Curious Turn of Events
<http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/09/18/2244251/ahmed-mohamed-his-clock-and-the-curious-turn-of-events>
164
<http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/09/18/2244251/ahmed-mohamed-his-clock-and-the-curious-turn-of-events>
Posted by timothy <http://www.monkey.org/~timothy/> on Friday September 18,
2015 @03:48PM from the but-don't-make-a-pop-tart-gun dept.
New submitter poity <http://slashdot.org/~poity> writes:After the news
first broke of the 9th grader getting cuffed
<http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/15/09/16/0339206/9th-grader-may-face-charges-after-homemade-clock-mistaken-for-bomb>
for
scaring school officials with what turned out to be a digital clock, Ahmed
Mohamed has experienced a surge of popular support — hailed as a genius and
a hero
<http://www.theverge.com/2015/9/16/9336259/nerds-support-ahmed-muhamed>,
with college scholarships, internship offers, and even an invitation to the
White House
<http://news.slashdot.org/story/15/09/16/2035259/obama-invites-texas-teen-to-white-house-after-bomb-clock-incident-at-school>
by
President Obama himself. Now, amid rumors of possible racial discrimination
lawsuits against the school and local police, some people have begun to
more deeply scrutinize the details of the case, especially on the tech side
with regard to the homemade clock in question
<http://www.wired.com/2015/09/heres-bomb-clock-got-ahmed-mohamed-arrested/>.
Recently, a writer at the creative site Artvoice posted a remarkable
analysis of Ahmed's clock project
<http://blogs.artvoice.com/techvoice/2015/09/17/reverse-engineering-ahmed-mohameds-clock-and-ourselves/>,
which raises new questions about the case and the manner in which people
and the media alike have reacted.The linked analysis posits that Ahmed's
clock started out as another clock, rather than a box of parts, and Ahmed
can be said to have repackaged rather than "invented" a wholly new clock,
but acknowledges that "none of us were there and knows what happened."
Twitter <http://slashdot.org/#>Facebook <http://slashdot.org/#>LinkedIn
<http://slashdot.org/#>Google+
<http://plus.google.com/share?url=http://yro.slashdot.org/story/15/09/18/2244251/ahmed-mohamed-his-clock-and-the-curious-turn-of-events>


On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Lawrence de Bivort <ldebiv...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Good thing Sailer isn't hallucinating or mind-reading here!
>
> Hmm. His dad ran for Sudanese president. How suspicious!
>
> Hmmm. Kid builds a clock and this means he is…demonizing the West!
>
>
> On Sep 18, 2015, at 12:31 PM, James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Keep providing payoffs in terms of moral authority and social status for
> this kind of behavior and you are going to keep getting more of it:
>
>
> Steve Sailer: I’m sure you’ve heard about the Sudanese Muslim immigrant
> kid in Texas who was arrested for bringing his home made electronic clock
> to school where Islamophobes worried that it was a time bomb beeping in his
> backpack. A reader points out that the kid’s dad is a publicity hound who
> routinely returns to Sudan to run for President and engages in other PR
> stunts
>
> S Sailer: If Ahmed were so smart, he’d know the difference between
> creating a circuit and stripping the guts from a manufactured clock. His
> dad helped him “make” this, and dad helped to make this “project” look as
> questionable as possible, within the realm of plausible deniability.
> Whatever agenda he’s advancing, it just further demonizes western society,
> and reminds us all to be guilty for how racist we all are.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Probably not.  But just in case, I will not bring something that looks
>>> vaguely like a bomb to my place of work.
>>>
>>
>> What if your place of work is a high school dedicated to teaching
>> engineering?!? I cannot think of a more appropriate thing to bring than an
>> electronics project. No one on the staff there would have thought this is a
>> bomb. It will not look "vaguely like a bomb" to them.
>>
>> This is like saying you should not bring a hammer to a construction site.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

Keep providing payoffs in terms of moral authority and social status for
this kind of behavior and you are going to keep getting more of it:


Steve Sailer: I’m sure you’ve heard about the Sudanese Muslim immigrant kid
in Texas who was arrested for bringing his home made electronic clock to
school where Islamophobes worried that it was a time bomb beeping in his
backpack. A reader points out that the kid’s dad is a publicity hound who
routinely returns to Sudan to run for President and engages in other PR
stunts

S Sailer: If Ahmed were so smart, he’d know the difference between creating
a circuit and stripping the guts from a manufactured clock. His dad helped
him “make” this, and dad helped to make this “project” look as questionable
as possible, within the realm of plausible deniability. Whatever agenda
he’s advancing, it just further demonizes western society, and reminds us
all to be guilty for how racist we all are.



On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Eric Walker  wrote:
>
>
>> Probably not.  But just in case, I will not bring something that looks
>> vaguely like a bomb to my place of work.
>>
>
> What if your place of work is a high school dedicated to teaching
> engineering?!? I cannot think of a more appropriate thing to bring than an
> electronics project. No one on the staff there would have thought this is a
> bomb. It will not look "vaguely like a bomb" to them.
>
> This is like saying you should not bring a hammer to a construction site.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:The Ahmed Mohamed case and distrust of experts

[James Bowery]

What physical precautions did they take that indicates they thought it was
a bomb rather than a hoax device?



On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> James Bowery <jabow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The real reason the police were called in:
>>
>
> [ref. fake bomb statute]
>
> No, that is not the reason. The police were called in because the teacher
> and principal thought it was a real bomb. That is what they accused the kid
> of having.
>
> You need to read the published accounts carefully.
>
> Later they said it was because of that statute.
>
> That statute would not apply in any case, because he never said or
> insinuated it was a bomb, and anyone with knowledge of electronics who
> glances at it can see it is not a bomb.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fw: [teslafy] Sept 7th and the flux capacitor principle.

[James Bowery]

Actually, there is a legitimate use of the term "flux capacitor" in regards
to the potentials description of electromagnetism:

E = -∇Φ-∂A/∂t

implies that off the null of a dipole antenna (where there is supposedly no
"field") there is a flux in the vector potential (∂A/∂t) that, because it
is off the null, is without curl.  The oscillating E field in this region,
because it has no accompanying magnetic (∇ × A = B) field, contains no
energy.  How can this be?  It would appear that space itself becomes a kind
of dynamic capacitor consisting only of E-field flux that somehow cancels
out its energy content.

Weird.

On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 12:33 PM, Harvey Norris  wrote:

>
> Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
>
>
> On Monday, September 7, 2015 11:51 AM, "harv...@yahoo.com [teslafy]" <
> tesl...@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> (Reposting for margin error, original message is cut off on borders)
> Everyone knows about the "Back to the Future" series of movies. In the
> third one Doc, the inventor of the flux capacitor goes back in time to
> 1885, and on one timeline dies in a gunfight, where his tombstone has
> todays date of Sept 7.
>
>
> *https://www.google.com/search?q=Doc's+Tombstone+picture+on+Back+to+the+Future+3=1280=574=isch=T1w5GZIAW_K-tM%253A%253B0wjzGlzWktrvHM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.sciencefictionarchives.com%25252Fen%25252Fcollections%25252F26%25252Foriginal-emmett-brown-s-tombstone-christopher-lloyd-from-back-to-the-future-iii=iu=m=T1w5GZIAW_K-tM%253A%252C0wjzGlzWktrvHM%252C_=1=__tdLhujZb5IWOrNZNhUFQGE5lhN8%3D=0CCcQyjdqFQoTCPj9kemN5ccCFcGNDQodtJ8Aog=tJvtVfjTNMGbNrS_gpAK#imgrc=T1w5GZIAW_K-tM%3A=__tdLhujZb5IWOrNZNhUFQGE5lhN8%3D*
> 
>
>
>
> How weird is it then that the real inventor of the flux capacitor was also
> born today on Sept 7, 1955!
>
>
> *https://www.flickr.com/photos/harvich/4138926072/in/dateposted-public/*
> 
>
>
>
> From almost 5 years ago...
>
>
> *Video records from 10/21/10 , Mystery of the water cap electrode removal *
>
>
>
>
> *https://youtu.be/FAc3jQziicc* 
>
>
>
> One may remember the mystery of cap sharing. If we store energy in a
> capacitor, and then attempt to redistribute that original energy by
> connecting another equal capacitor in parallel; when we measure the new
> amount of stored energy we find that half of it is gone! With a set of flux
> capacitors this should not be true, although I never specifically did that
> experiment. But it follows by logic that if every changing electric field
> produces a ninety degree made counterpart magnetic field, if we put another
> large coil around that changing electric field; we can retrieve this so
> called missing energy. The missing energy is not in the resistance of the
> connection wires in the split cap experiment as some apologetic
> commentators would note. In fact those "save the science" folks would be
> aghast to the fact that no electrical input is made to the field of the
> alternator in these demos, but it is lighting a neon tube! For specifics of
> getting more out then the amount taken see; Video Records from 10/21/10/
> Magnification of 4th coil ending current via capacitive induction
>
>
> *https://youtu.be/ho-SUqBTrpk* 
>
>
> __._,_.___
> --
> Posted by: harv...@yahoo.com
> --
> Reply via web post
> 
> • Reply to sender
> 
> • Reply to group
> 
> • Start a New Topic
> 
> • Messages in this topic
> 
> (2)
> Visit Your 

Re: [Vo]:Richard Oriani dies

[James Bowery]

The story of Nature's rejection of his timely replication of F left a
deep scar in the history of science and indeed civilization.

On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I regret to announce that cold fusion research Prof. Richard Oriani died
> on August 11, 2015. He was 95 years old. See:
>
>
> http://www.startribune.com/obituaries/detail/95363/?fullname=richard-a-oriani
>
> He was a great scientist and a fine person.
>
> We have a number of his papers in the library.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's E-Cat patent granted

[James Bowery]

Since patents are, by law, to be disclosure sufficient that those skilled
in the art can realize beneficial use based solely on the patent
disclosure, it seems the MFMP should now be in a position to realize
beneficial use or, failing that, challenge Rossi's patent.

On Tue, Aug 25, 2015 at 11:39 AM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

 Thanks Mats for the heads up.  I think this is very important news.
 He gives quite a few new details about the E-Cat
 Interesting that Rossi says that lithium hydride is the fuel and nickel
 the catalyst

 Adrian Ashfield

Re: [Vo]:about the newest E-Cat and some info for Aug 19, 2015

[James Bowery]

Its very hard to explain why you're mad, even if you're not mad. -- Pink
Floyd

On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com
wrote:

 ...You know of course that when being crazy one is the last one to see
 that. That is if your craziness does not turn out well, as then you become
 a genius.

 Best Regards ,
 Lennart Thornros

 www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
 lenn...@thornros.com
 +1 916 436 1899
 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648

 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a
 commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM

 On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Exceptionally good news postponed indefinitely but things happen:

 http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/08/much-ado-around-e-cat-x.html


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

Re: [Vo]:Listening to gravity

[James Bowery]

I've heard the hum in the mountains outside of Waushougal, WA but cannot
necessarily attribute it to that location as I've also heard it other
places.

My working hypothesis I'm suffering from occasional venous hum
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venous_hum (not really suffering as it
isn't annoying when it happens -- just curious).

On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 10:16 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 In the past, the phenomenon of “the hum” has been reported on here.

 One location where it is heard is Taos, NM. Not everyone can hear it, and
 those that can are so annoyed by it that they usually move somewhere else.
 There are dozens of sites around the globe where a small percentage of
 people can hear “the hum”.

 The source of this is unexplained… until now J

 The hum is most likely the holographic noise made by gravity waves. This
 noise was discovered in the LIGO/Gravity wave experiments which is ongoing
 . The noise is in the 40 – 130 Hz range. A good slide show on this is 
 “Holographic
 Noise” by Craig Hogan of Fermilab.

 *http://astro.fnal.gov/Retreat/Retreat0409/hogan.pdf*
 http://astro.fnal.gov/Retreat/Retreat0409/hogan.pdf

 These guys go so far as to suggest that our Universe is a 2-D hologram…
 which kinda fits the theme that comes up from time-to-time here – that our
 reality is essentially nothing more than a VR computer program, with some
 imperfections (ala several cult films).

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:19 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


 True the SPLC could not have acted as a legal person as it did not exist,
 but its antecedents certainly did exist in the form of the natural person
 who comprised it and then proceeded . . .


 You said they had hundreds of millions of dollars.


 I said they have, in the present tense, hundreds of millions of dollars.


 But they did not have any money in 1968, when you allege they masterminded
 an assassination. They had no money or influence, except among a small
 group of people working in civil rights. They were just a couple of
 threadbare lawyers and a book publisher. Such people do not mastermind the
 assassination of a world famous Nobel Prize winner. Or, if they do, the
 police catch them.


I suspect a wide range of parties that had the means (not necessarily
financial), motive (possibly including financial) and opportunity
(insiders/infiltrators of MLK's Poor People's Campaign
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People%27s_Campaign).  Aside from the
antecedents of the SPLC, there is Nixon, who briefly promoted a debilitated
form of a citizen's dividend but then instituted affirmative action
instead, is a suspect in this regard.

I alleged only that SPLC and other organizations that took over MLK's
_true_ legacy of promoting a race-neutral citizens' dividend, assassinated
that legacy by promoting, instead, Title VII.  That assassination was far
worse than putting a bullet through MLK's head.

That the SPLC then went on to collect hundreds of millions in endowments
paying their executives hundreds of thousands a year would not only be
forgivable but laudable if they had, instead, actually denounced Title VII
and instead gotten MLK's citizen's dividend passed as the solution to
southern poverty.  That true legacy of MLK would have addressed the ills
not only of capitalism, but the ills of communism that was responsible for
an order of magnitude more deaths than Jews that died at the hands of the
Nazis.

There is no word for the people who assassinated the legacy of MLK in the
DSM, because it has removed the word psychopath and replaced it with the
mere sociopath.

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:22 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


 The SPLC may or may not have been directly involved in the assassination
 but it is clear they had the means, motive and opportunity.


 With a time machine, not doubt. MLK was assassinated in 1968. The SPLC
 was founded in 1971.


 True the SPLC could not have acted as a legal person as it did not exist,
 but its antecedents certainly did exist in the form of the natural person
 who comprised it and then proceeded . . .


 You said they had hundreds of millions of dollars.


I said they have, in the present tense, hundreds of millions of dollars.

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

Gilder's ideas in this latest book may be fresh, but his career is far from
it -- including some very stale ideas such as supply side economics
(which even some of its major proponents eventually admitted was
destructive to the middle class that Gilder supposedly championed from his
early days as an author) and being a major participant in the DotCon era
bubble.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Mats Lewan m...@matslewan.se wrote:

 I’ve always had doubts about economists understanding of how technology
 influences and changes the world and the society over time, and
 consequently also its financial and monetary realities.



 Renowned economist and author, George Gilde, has written the book *‘A
 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money’*, which is
 discussed by Ray Kurzweil in this piece:




 http://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-renowned-economist-and-author-george-gilders-new-information-theory-of-money



 I think it brings out some fresh ideas on the failure of established
 economic theory.



 Personally I’m particularly interested in the aspect of Bitcoin with a
 fixed amount of money supply, making it similar to gold. Potentially this
 could be an important feature if the value of human work drops to zero
 through automation and the value of products and services falls drastically
 for the same reason. It could be what makes Bitcoin or some similarly
 designed crypto currency a winner.



 Note that Kurzweil points out to Gilde that supply of gold is not
 guaranteed to remain fixed, in the prospect of efficient transmutation
 technology. A refined algorithmic crypto currency might be more
 future-proof, although, as Kurzweil writes: *“I have concerns about the
 validity of bitcoin’s mining algorithm, and the extent to which this can
 ultimately be algorithmically subverted.”*





 Mats

 www.animpossibleinvention.com

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

Quoting Gilder's book preview In economist Milton Friedman’s famous
equation MV=PT...

Gilder should learn to use Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher#Monetary_economics

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:53 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Gilder's ideas in this latest book may be fresh, but his career is far
 from it -- including some very stale ideas such as supply side economics
 (which even some of its major proponents eventually admitted was
 destructive to the middle class that Gilder supposedly championed from his
 early days as an author) and being a major participant in the DotCon era
 bubble.

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Mats Lewan m...@matslewan.se wrote:

 I’ve always had doubts about economists understanding of how technology
 influences and changes the world and the society over time, and
 consequently also its financial and monetary realities.



 Renowned economist and author, George Gilde, has written the book *‘A
 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money’*, which
 is discussed by Ray Kurzweil in this piece:




 http://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-renowned-economist-and-author-george-gilders-new-information-theory-of-money



 I think it brings out some fresh ideas on the failure of established
 economic theory.



 Personally I’m particularly interested in the aspect of Bitcoin with a
 fixed amount of money supply, making it similar to gold. Potentially this
 could be an important feature if the value of human work drops to zero
 through automation and the value of products and services falls drastically
 for the same reason. It could be what makes Bitcoin or some similarly
 designed crypto currency a winner.



 Note that Kurzweil points out to Gilde that supply of gold is not
 guaranteed to remain fixed, in the prospect of efficient transmutation
 technology. A refined algorithmic crypto currency might be more
 future-proof, although, as Kurzweil writes: *“I have concerns about the
 validity of bitcoin’s mining algorithm, and the extent to which this can
 ultimately be algorithmically subverted.”*





 Mats

 www.animpossibleinvention.com

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

Quoting Gilder's book preview Wealth is created by learning curves that
result from millions of falsifiable experiments in entrepreneurship...

Gilder's attempt to impress us with his ability to pedantically parrot
Popperian dogma confuses experiment with hypothesis.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Quoting Gilder's book preview In economist Milton Friedman’s famous
 equation MV=PT...

 Gilder should learn to use Wikipedia:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher#Monetary_economics

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:53 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Gilder's ideas in this latest book may be fresh, but his career is far
 from it -- including some very stale ideas such as supply side economics
 (which even some of its major proponents eventually admitted was
 destructive to the middle class that Gilder supposedly championed from his
 early days as an author) and being a major participant in the DotCon era
 bubble.

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Mats Lewan m...@matslewan.se wrote:

 I’ve always had doubts about economists understanding of how technology
 influences and changes the world and the society over time, and
 consequently also its financial and monetary realities.



 Renowned economist and author, George Gilde, has written the book *‘A
 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money’*, which
 is discussed by Ray Kurzweil in this piece:




 http://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-renowned-economist-and-author-george-gilders-new-information-theory-of-money



 I think it brings out some fresh ideas on the failure of established
 economic theory.



 Personally I’m particularly interested in the aspect of Bitcoin with a
 fixed amount of money supply, making it similar to gold. Potentially this
 could be an important feature if the value of human work drops to zero
 through automation and the value of products and services falls drastically
 for the same reason. It could be what makes Bitcoin or some similarly
 designed crypto currency a winner.



 Note that Kurzweil points out to Gilde that supply of gold is not
 guaranteed to remain fixed, in the prospect of efficient transmutation
 technology. A refined algorithmic crypto currency might be more
 future-proof, although, as Kurzweil writes: *“I have concerns about the
 validity of bitcoin’s mining algorithm, and the extent to which this can
 ultimately be algorithmically subverted.”*





 Mats

 www.animpossibleinvention.com

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

Quoting Gilder's book preview Average American households incomes and net
worth...

Gilder's ignorance of the importance of median (or even mode) as opposed to
average of these variables might be written off as a mere mental typo were
it not for the fact that choosing average over median (or even mode) favors
the further centralization of wealth that he was a party to under supply
side economics -- a policy that not only contributed to the destruction of
the middle class but also to the demographic collapse of the Nation of
Settlers in the US.  That demographic collapse is prosecutable as genocide.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:12 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Quoting Gilder's book preview Wealth is created by learning curves that
 result from millions of falsifiable experiments in entrepreneurship...

 Gilder's attempt to impress us with his ability to pedantically parrot
 Popperian dogma confuses experiment with hypothesis.

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Quoting Gilder's book preview In economist Milton Friedman’s famous
 equation MV=PT...

 Gilder should learn to use Wikipedia:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher#Monetary_economics

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 7:53 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Gilder's ideas in this latest book may be fresh, but his career is far
 from it -- including some very stale ideas such as supply side economics
 (which even some of its major proponents eventually admitted was
 destructive to the middle class that Gilder supposedly championed from his
 early days as an author) and being a major participant in the DotCon era
 bubble.

 On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Mats Lewan m...@matslewan.se wrote:

 I’ve always had doubts about economists understanding of how technology
 influences and changes the world and the society over time, and
 consequently also its financial and monetary realities.



 Renowned economist and author, George Gilde, has written the book *‘A
 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money’*, which
 is discussed by Ray Kurzweil in this piece:




 http://www.kurzweilai.net/ask-ray-renowned-economist-and-author-george-gilders-new-information-theory-of-money



 I think it brings out some fresh ideas on the failure of established
 economic theory.



 Personally I’m particularly interested in the aspect of Bitcoin with a
 fixed amount of money supply, making it similar to gold. Potentially this
 could be an important feature if the value of human work drops to zero
 through automation and the value of products and services falls drastically
 for the same reason. It could be what makes Bitcoin or some similarly
 designed crypto currency a winner.



 Note that Kurzweil points out to Gilde that supply of gold is not
 guaranteed to remain fixed, in the prospect of efficient transmutation
 technology. A refined algorithmic crypto currency might be more
 future-proof, although, as Kurzweil writes: *“I have concerns about
 the validity of bitcoin’s mining algorithm, and the extent to which this
 can ultimately be algorithmically subverted.”*





 Mats

 www.animpossibleinvention.com

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

Martin Luther King Jr.'s final advice, before he was assassinated, was to
follow Henry George's advice to attack poverty directly with a citizen's
dividend.  They shot MLK because he proposed a race-neutral approach to
souther poverty and if there is one thing the Souther Poverty Law Center
cannot abide, it is something that would reduce their race-baiting
fear-mongering with which they extort money from wealthy Jews that fear
US-based neo-Nazi holocaust.

A deal was cut with guys like Jesse Jackson and the SPLC to keep the
emphasis on racial preferences under affirmative action rather than a
citizen's dividend so they could continue to pound on working class
southern whites as the scapegoats for social ills.  Gilder is basically
just keeping up the conservative side of that false dilemma by promoting
socialization of the cost of protecting property rights so the rich get
richer.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:48 PM, Chris Zell chrisz...@wetmtv.com wrote:

 I recall that the notion of a basic guaranteed income actually came up
 during the Nixon administration.  They kicked around the idea of getting
 rid of the whole welfare establishment and just hand out cash instead.
 Reagan also observed the huge expense of welfare as opposed to the actual
 benefits getting to the recipients.

 I don't know how such an arrangement comes into being while we suffer
 under the opposite condition of most wealth being tightly centralized.  How
 does this change without violence or revolution against the oligarchs?
 We're gonna need a miracle.

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Martin Luther King Jr.'s final advice, before he was assassinated, was to
 follow Henry George's advice to attack poverty directly with a citizen's
 dividend.  They shot MLK because he proposed a race-neutral approach to
 souther poverty and if there is one thing the Souther Poverty Law Center
 cannot abide . . .


 They did not shoot him. One person did. There was no conspiracy.


Mrs. Coretta Scott King welcomed the verdict, saying , “There is abundant
evidence of a major high level conspiracy in the assassination of my
husband, Martin Luther King, Jr. And the civil court's unanimous verdict
has validated our belief. I wholeheartedly applaud the verdict of the jury
and I feel that justice has been well served in their deliberations. This
verdict is not only a great victory for my family, but also a great victory
for America. It is a great victory for truth itself. It is important to
know that this was a SWIFT verdict, delivered after about an hour of jury
deliberation. The jury was clearly convinced by the extensive evidence that
was presented during the trial that, in addition to Mr. Jowers, the
conspiracy of the Mafia, local, state and federal government agencies, were
deeply involved in the assassination of my husband. The jury also affirmed
overwhelming evidence that identified someone else, not James Earl Ray, as
the shooter, and that Mr. Ray was set up to take the blame. I want to make
it clear that my family has no interest in retribution. Instead, our sole
concern has been that the full truth of the assassination has been revealed
and adjudicated in a court of law… My husband once said, The moral arc of
the universe is long, but it bends toward justice. To-day, almost 32 years
after my husband and the father of my four children was assassinated, I
feel that the jury's verdict clearly affirms this principle. With this
faith, we can begin the 21st century and the new millennium with a new
spirit of hope and healing.” - See more at:
http://www.thekingcenter.org/assassination-conspiracy-trial#sthash.9vJnTrqr.dpuf

 If there were one, the SPLC would never in a million years have anything
 to do with it.

 The SPLC may or may not have been directly involved in the assassination
but it is clear they had the means, motive and opportunity.

They are not in favor of poverty.


Your naivete is touching.  They are documented sociopaths enjoying hundreds
of millions in endowments from their donor base that they psychologically
torment by keeping poor blacks and poor whites at each others' throats.

Re: [Vo]:A 21st Century Case for Gold: A New Information Theory of Money.

[James Bowery]

On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 4:46 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


  If there were one, the SPLC would never in a million years have anything
 to do with it.

 The SPLC may or may not have been directly involved in the assassination
 but it is clear they had the means, motive and opportunity.


 With a time machine, not doubt. MLK was assassinated in 1968. The SPLC was
 founded in 1971.


True the SPLC could not have acted as a legal person as it did not exist,
but its antecedents certainly did exist in the form of the natural person
who comprised it and then proceeded to do everything _except_ advocate
Martin Luther King Jr's race-blind solutions to poverty among southerners
of all races.  The SPLC simply finished the job of assassinating MLK's
legacy and replacing it with their own race-baiting extortion racket.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Do_We_Go_from_Here:_Chaos_or_Community

Re: [Vo]:Coal mining industry in steep decline

[James Bowery]

The original libertarians in the US -- the 1800s frontier libertarians like
Lysander Spooner, understood legitimate government as a mutual insurance
company.  An insurance company operating as government would charge an
insurance premium for the protection of property rights.  This is
essentially a wealth tax.  Moreover, as a mutual insurance company, not
only would the territory be protected under a collective defense --
rendering immigration restriction a natural function -- but dividends would
be paid to the members, and those dividends would function as an
unconditional basic income thereby rendering virtually all social goods a
natural function of local communities so endowed.

Then the Austrian School of Economics that came along in the 20th century
shot the original libertarian movement in the head, execution style,
totally denying any kind of collective right to territorial protection
(open borders) and totally socializing the cost of protection of property
rights.  This is why Ron Paul and Rand Paul don't stand a chance of being
elected as libertarians.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 10:04 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 I find it interesting to view this entire process as an interesting game
 in how humans go about redistributing units of wealth across the planet.



 The entire process, the mechanisms currently installed to initiate “wealth
 distribution” has become so incredibly convoluted and obfuscated
 (intentionally so, I might add) that it’s easy to lose site of the fact
 when you really boil this process down to its most primal level, it’s just
 about how one individual, group, or organization goes about getting (or
 stealing if they can get away with it)  more gummy from their neighbor.
 It’s all based on an illusion that there are a fixed number of gummy bears
 in the BIG POT. As such it behooves you to acquire as many gummy bears as
 you can before your neighbor does the same to you. Well… we are competitive
 creatures by nature. On a monthly basis, I play a board game called “Game
 of Thrones” with my friends. It's based on the popular George R.R. Martin
 books and spin-off TV series. I feel fortunate if I can make it through the
 afternoon without my cattle being raped.



 It is perhaps naive of me to believe this but it remains my hope that as
 our society continues to evolve in the direction a highly networked,
 responsive global civilization more and more of the population will begin
 to clearly see the abject hypocrisy and injustice all these little gummy
 bar games we now perform against each other does. We will begin to see how
 such self-serving injustices induce great harm upon on vast swatches of
 society and end up needlessly devaluing many of their ability to make
 incalculable contributions to the common good.



 I suppose I sound like an evil socialist, or worst, a communist. However,
 in my view, as technology, robotics, and AI continues to advance, robbing
 many of us of our jobs and identities, it may turn out to be the case that
 some form of high-tech modernized communism that revolves around enforced
 distribution of goods and services amongst all the population will
 eventually be recognized as the fairest and most humane. It will ensure the
 fact that we all get the essential basics of what need in order to survive
 in a modern civilization. It will ensure that all of society benefits, and
 not just those who know how to play the Game of Thrones game board better
 than their neighbor. If not, I will probably end up being repeatedly raped
 along with my cattle.



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 OrionWorks.com

 zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:The Land of Fire and Ice

[James Bowery]

The land of fire and ice is emitting steamy news.
http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/07/17/icelandic_scientist_may_have_found_solution_to_glob/

News | Iceland Monitor | Fri 17 Jul 2015 | 12.00 GMT
?subject=Icelandic%20scientist%20may%20have%20found%20solution%20to%20global%20energy%20crisis%20-%20Iceland%20Monitorbody=http%3A%2F%2Ficelandmonitor.mbl.is%2Fnews%2Fnews%2F2015%2F07%2F17%2Ficelandic_scientist_may_have_found_solution_to_glob%2F
Share
157
Icelandic scientist may have found solution to global energy crisis
[image: Scientist Sveinn Ólafsson.]
http://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/frimg/8/24/824886.jpg

Scientist Sveinn Ólafsson. Photo: Árni Sæberg

Scientist Sveinn Ólafsson believes he has, in collaboration with a Swedish
chemist, come up with a way to generate energy with low energy nuclear
reactions. A detailed description of the process is explained in
Morgunblaðið newspaper today. This important discovery could offer an
endless and cheap source of energy for all humankind.

These results were published in The International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319915016018 on
Wednesday and further experiments have already begun. Cold fusion means
the fusion of hydrogen isotopes into helium. In the fusion process, energy
is released as a kinetic energy of a particle of heat, says Ólafsson who
believes he has found a forward path to solve the global energy crisis.

Ólafsson says that his Swedish colleague, Leif Holmild, has researched the
fusion process for ten years. In late year 2013, Ólafsson approaced Holmild
following the publication of a scientific article by the Swedish chemist.

The topic was the fusion of hydrogen isotopes into helium with the help of
a laser. As the laser requires energy this process does not crease any
surplus energy.

Simply put, Ólafsson believed that the Rydberg matter catalyser used in
Holmild‘s experiment could be used to fuse the hydrogen isotopes into
helium without the laser. But this catalyser is the reason for 25 years of
reported cold fusion phenomena. Subsequently, Ólafsson and Holmild
continued the experiment without the laser and then discovered that process
released energy.

Twenty-six years ago, the scientists Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons,
announced that their apparatus seemed to have produced cold fusion. The
results were disputed.

Scientists who worked on cold fusion were discredited,“ says Ólafsson. If
our method works on a large scale it could contribute to the solution of
the global energy crisis.

Further information on cold fusion can be seen on the following links:

http://coldfusionnow.org/

http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/

Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...

[James Bowery]

How many counter examples to your hypothesis do you need before you at
least admit there may be more than one cause of dying coral reefs?

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 12:56 PM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 How many dead fish do we have to have and dead birds falling from the sky
 to have before you sparkies understand your mistake?

 http://darkmattersalot.com/2014/01/12/florida-2/

 On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 The radar RF signal is not being rectified by the water into a DC
 current like your chart is assuming.  The signal is actually reflected from
 the surface layers with extremely small penetration.   The pulse rate has
 nothing to do with the high frequency RF reflection behavior for a typical
 installation.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Tue, Jul 7, 2015 9:50 am
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...

  Low frequency pulse.

  Also, we are not communicating with the marine life and coral reef, the
 evidence is mounting that 2 terrawatts of effective isotropic radiated
 power (EIRP) in a local area scattered by the overhead atmosphere is mildly
 shocking the marine life through electromagnetic induction and conduction
 through the salt water near the surface as it grounds out into the ocean.
 You can't fool mother nature sort of thing.

  Here is a model of induced electrical currents in seawater surface
 around just one ship's antennas.  Now imagine 27 high power coastal based
 radars/antennas and 45 warship radars/antennas in one area.


 http://darkmattersalot.com/2015/05/14/how-cousteau-and-noaa-killed-the-reef/


Effects of Electrical Current* on the Body [3]
 http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2002-123/2002-123f.html#end3  *Current*
 *Reaction*  1 milliamp Just a faint tingle.  5 milliamps Slight shock
 felt. Disturbing, but not painful. Most people can “let go.” However,
 strong involuntary movements can cause injuries.  6-25 milliamps (women)†
 9-30 milliamps (men) Painful shock. Muscular control is lost. This is
 the range where “freezing currents” start. It may not be possible to “let
 go.”  50-150 milliamps Extremely painful shock, respiratory arrest
 (breathing stops), severe muscle contractions. Flexor muscles may cause
 holding on; extensor muscles may cause intense pushing away. Death is
 possible.  1,000-4,300 milliamps (1-4.3 amps) Ventricular fibrillation
 (heart pumping action not rhythmic) occurs. Muscles contract; nerve damage
 occurs. Death is likely.  10,000 milliamps (10 amps) Cardiac arrest and
 severe burns occur. Death is probable.









  On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 8:43 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Low pulsed frequency is a contradiction in terms.

  On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:01 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Except low pulsed frequencies


 On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, James Bowery  jabow...@gmail.com wrote:



  On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:42 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
 zeropo...@charter.net wrote:

  This is primarily meant for fellow Vort, ChemEng (Stewart), but
 some others may have an interest…

 Stewart, I think I may have a cause for your hypothesis re: a link
 between our modern radar systems and the dying of coral reefs…

   ...
 Time to break out the tin-foil hats???


  No need.  Salt water shields against EM penetration.

Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...

[James Bowery]

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:42 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 This is primarily meant for fellow Vort, ChemEng (Stewart), but some
 others may have an interest…



 Stewart, I think I may have a cause for your hypothesis re: a link between
 our modern radar systems and the dying of coral reefs…

...

 Time to break out the tin-foil hats???


No need.  Salt water shields against EM penetration.

Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...

[James Bowery]

Low pulsed frequency is a contradiction in terms.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:01 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Except low pulsed frequencies


 On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:42 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 This is primarily meant for fellow Vort, ChemEng (Stewart), but some
 others may have an interest…



 Stewart, I think I may have a cause for your hypothesis re: a link
 between our modern radar systems and the dying of coral reefs…

 ...

 Time to break out the tin-foil hats???


 No need.  Salt water shields against EM penetration.

Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...

[James Bowery]

Thanks for the numbers.

This should be relatively straight forward to test:

Set up two salt water aquariums supporting comparable coral populations.
Run them for a year or so to see they are stable.  Then subject one of them
to low frequency EM radiation.

PS:  What I mean contraction in terms is that pulse implies high
frequency components and, indeed, is usually illustrated by time
differential on a square wave to filter out the low frequency components.
However, your point is well taken -- a short duration transmission of a
high power low frequency signal will penetrate salt water -- with a very
drastic reduction in power with depth, as your numbers show.

On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 8:50 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Low frequency pulse.

 Also, we are not communicating with the marine life and coral reef, the
 evidence is mounting that 2 terrawatts of effective isotropic radiated
 power (EIRP) in a local area scattered by the overhead atmosphere is mildly
 shocking the marine life through electromagnetic induction and conduction
 through the salt water near the surface as it grounds out into the ocean.
 You can't fool mother nature sort of thing.

 Here is a model of induced electrical currents in seawater surface around
 just one ship's antennas.  Now imagine 27 high power coastal based
 radars/antennas and 45 warship radars/antennas in one area.


 http://darkmattersalot.com/2015/05/14/how-cousteau-and-noaa-killed-the-reef/


 Effects of Electrical Current* on the Body [3]
 http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2002-123/2002-123f.html#end3*Current*
 *Reaction*1 milliampJust a faint tingle.5 milliampsSlight shock felt.
 Disturbing, but not painful. Most people can “let go.” However, strong
 involuntary movements can cause injuries.6-25 milliamps (women)†
 9-30 milliamps (men)Painful shock. Muscular control is lost. This is the
 range where “freezing currents” start. It may not be possible to “let 
 go.”50-150
 milliampsExtremely painful shock, respiratory arrest (breathing stops),
 severe muscle contractions. Flexor muscles may cause holding on; extensor
 muscles may cause intense pushing away. Death is possible.1,000-4,300
 milliamps (1-4.3 amps)Ventricular fibrillation (heart pumping action not
 rhythmic) occurs. Muscles contract; nerve damage occurs. Death is 
 likely.10,000
 milliamps (10 amps)Cardiac arrest and severe burns occur. Death is
 probable.









 On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 8:43 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Low pulsed frequency is a contradiction in terms.

 On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 7:01 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:

 Except low pulsed frequencies


 On Tuesday, July 7, 2015, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:



 On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 1:42 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 This is primarily meant for fellow Vort, ChemEng (Stewart), but some
 others may have an interest…



 Stewart, I think I may have a cause for your hypothesis re: a link
 between our modern radar systems and the dying of coral reefs…

 ...

 Time to break out the tin-foil hats???


 No need.  Salt water shields against EM penetration.

Re: [Vo]:Comment on MFMP retest

[James Bowery]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 8:04 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 *From:* James Bowery

 Ø  I must have misunderstood what you just said because hydrinos are ash,
 not fuel, so the reaction will stop.



 There is a progressive range of 137 stable fractional levels (Rydberg
 multiples) which hydrogen electron orbitals can assume, according to Mills’
 theory – each one more energetic than the one before. None of them are the
 functional equivalent of ash, even the last.


In the Millsian theory the functional equivalent of ash is context
dependent:  a catalyst with energy transition equal (to what precision?)
to that of the fractional Rydberg state transition.

That was the source of my comment about ash.

Re: [Vo]:Re: Single-catalyst water splitter from Stanford produces clean-burning hydrogen 24/7

[James Bowery]

And from the abstract for Measuring Propagation Speed of Coulomb Fields
http://arxiv.org/abs/1211.2913:

As a matter of fact the Liénard-Weichert retarded potential leads to a
formula indistinguishable from the one obtained assuming that the electric
field propagates with *infinite velocity*.



On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 12:44 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:

   Eric--

 I was taught many years ago that the energy bands are determined by
 quantum mechanics of the semiconductor, a coherent system of particles with
 electrons occupying discrete energy levels in that system.  There is no
 electrical wave that spreads throughout the semiconductor.  It happens
 instantaneously, if a new electron enters the system—no delay.

 If someone has an experiment that can sheds lighti on this question, I
 would be interested,

 Bob



  *From:* Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
 *Sent:* Sunday, June 28, 2015 8:05 PM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: Single-catalyst water splitter from Stanford
 produces clean-burning hydrogen 24/7

   On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com
 wrote:

 In my concept elements of a system—a QM system—are entangled and act
 coherently and instantaneously.  Any two systems whose elements couple in
 any way constitute a coherent, although weakly coupled system.  For
 example, introduction of an electron into a semiconductor instantaneously
 changes the  energy level of every other electron in that semiconductor no
 matter their distance from the new electron just introduced.


 This seems mistaken.  I would have expected there to be a wavefront for
 the propagation of the new Fermi level along the semiconductor at some
 speed up to the speed of light in a vacuum following upon the stimulation
 of an electron.  Also, I believe a typical semiconductor system has so many
 electrons at so many energy levels that it is no longer useful to think of
 it as a quantum mechanical system -- hence the treatment of the band
 structure as a set of continuous ranges.  Is this understanding incorrect?

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:Comment on MFMP retest

[James Bowery]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 9:00 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  ...If this reaction depends on a population of fractional hydrogen or f/H
 – which is “below ground state hydrogen” often called the hydrino state,
 and which is a very strong contender for the gain which is witnessed –
 then that active material will remain in the reactor after pumping away H2.
 It will have become magnetically bound to the nickel- even when all the
 gaseous hydrogen is removed from the reactor.

 Thus, thermal gain will continue – which will lead MFMP to assume that
 their calibration was in error – when in fact the error is simply in the
 assumption that eliminating hydrogen gas will de-fuel the reactor.

I must have misunderstood what you just said because hydrinos are ash, not
fuel, so the reaction will stop.

Re: [Vo]:OT: TIME - Dutch City Plans to Give Residents a Universal 'Basic Income'

[James Bowery]

They aren't testing the best argument for unconditional basic income -- an
argument put forth by Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute
in his book In Our Hands
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-in-our-hands_105549266790.pdf,
which is that a key ecological aspect of the UBI is that _everyone_ in the
society receive it because then, and only then, does _everyone_ know that
_everyone else_ is in a position to deliver the consequent social goods --
social goods now under the control of the welfare state.

This human ecological condition is not being created by the cited
experiment and therefore its failures to elicit the desired social
conditions cannot be attributed to a failure of the UBI.

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 OT, sort of.



 This topic has been discussed here at length in the past. Nice to see that
 the Netherlands is now seriously looking into the matter.



 http://time.com/3938210/dutch-basic-income/?xid=newsletter-brief



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.orionworks.com

 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly

[James Bowery]

There is the bulk calorimetry demanded by true believers in the popular
interpretation of physical theory.

One possible way:

Go to Walmart.  Buy an above-ground swimming pool for a few hundred bucks.
Install it in a basement or anywhere the temperature can be controlled to
within a degree or so.  Fill it.  Turn on the filter pump to circulate
water.  Put the apparatus in it.  Use the supplied cover to cover it and
thereby lessen evaporative losses.  Let it stand until the water comes to
thermal equilibrium with the environment.  Run the experiment recording the
time profile of the water temperature and the integrated electric power
input (including the water pump power).  If the integrated electric power
input is less than the temperature at the end of the experiment, it is
anomalous heat.  Otherwise, run a calibration (blank or control) experiment
(ie: with no fuel) in which the water temperature is thermostatically
controlled to the temperature profile of the first experiment.  Again,
integrate the electrical power input (including the water pump power).  If
this integrated power input is greater than the integrated power input of
the original experiment, it is anomalous heat.

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 2:23 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Jones, I am concerned that no one has been able to overcome the claims of
 skeptics that liquid water escapes with the steam and therefore confuses
 the measurement.  We need to come up with a dummy proof method that ensures
 that the steam leaving the system is pure.  That may be a challenge that
 someone will accept which will advance our testing art.  Also, at the same
 time it will silence much of the skeptic chatter.

 The question about the accuracy of the amount of heat entering the fuel
 from the induction source remains.  As the fuel melts, etc. it is very
 likely that its conductivity is going to dramatically change.  Who will be
 able to get a calibrated measure of something that changes continuously by
 it nature?  If you assume 100% of the electrical power from the mains is
 deposited within the core then no one can argue with you.  On the other
 hand, if you calibrate that 50% efficiency is expected then you will not
 hear an end to their complaining.

 Of course, if you get 200%  true excess power as measured at the core,
 then you might not report excess heat if using the conservative approach.
 What are you attempting to prove?  Who do you want to convince?  How you
 answer those questions indicates your commitment to the industry.

 If, on the other hand you use standard electrical heating then there is
 much less open to misunderstanding.  You do not need to estimate that less
 than 100% of the accurately measured input power is getting to the system.
 After that measurement choice is taken you can concentrate upon the
 calorimeter technique and art.  Fortunately accurate calibration of these
 devices can be achieved by the addition of resistive heating elements.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Mon, Jun 15, 2015 1:52 pm
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly

  *From:* David Roberson
 Ø
 Ø   Jones, my main concern with the induction cook top is the
 mismatch between the heating coil and the typical shape of the fuel cores. If
 researchers change the form factor of the fuel into a planar design, which
 sure seem possible, then that issue can be somewhat resolved
 Yes
  Ø   The problem of determining the amount of heat actually deposited
 within the core is a very big one and so far I see no way around it.
  With calorimetry, it’s all about proper calibration. You have said that
 yourself.
 Do you have a problem with boil-off calorimetry, in general? Some do, but
 in my experience, the inherent error always makes the gain seem less than
 it is and never more.
  Ø   Note that the ugly would not be so had the Lugano team used a
 calibrated calorimeter.
  Exactamundo!
 And unfortunately – this ugly failure convinces skeptics (and many
 reasonable observers) that Rossi would not permit proper calibration
 because he knew the gain was going to be less than he had been claiming …
 or worse – that his contract with IH was contingent upon showing a more
 substantial gain than was possible with this setup.


   Jones

 Personally, I would rather see a dozen experimenters seeing COP of 1.5, if
 it is fully repeatable, than one flawed Lugano experiment claiming twice
 the COP. As the Thomas Clark report makes clear, Lugano/Levi was
 unprofessional and completely unscientific -- (it is the “ugly” of this
 Subject heading.)

Re: [Vo]:The good, the bad and the ugly

[James Bowery]

There is an engineering cost trade off between the length of the experiment
(hence integral of power) and the volume of water.  For the definitive long
duration bulk calorimetry tests people demand.  At a few weeks duration (as
apparently Rossie was forced to do by his potential customers) we're
dealing in GJs anomalous heat.

Do the arithmetic.

The smaller the volume of water, the larger the temperature change over the
course of the experiment and this can confound your efforts to get
isothermal conditions in the water's contact with the external surfaces.
Agreed, if the floor temperature changes much, even if you control the room
temperature, it will affect the measurements substantially.   You can
address that by placing the pool on an insulating bed made of styrofoam.
Controlling the room's air temperature really isn't that big of a deal.
Humidity is handled by the supplied pool cover -- very little air exchange
occurs if you cover the 4 or 5 1 holes and tighten the cord.

A rough estimate of the energy required for 1C change in such a pool
http://www.walmart.com/ip/39264346:

(15ft/2)^2*pi*48in;calorie/ml/deltaK;deltaK?joules
http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/
([{([{15 * foot} / 2]^2) * pi} * {48 * inch}] * [{calorie / (milli*liter)}
/ deltaK]) * deltaK ? joule
= 8.3802985E7 joules


On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


 Go to Walmart.  Buy an above-ground swimming pool for a few hundred
 bucks.  Install it in a basement or anywhere the temperature can be
 controlled to within a degree or so.  Fill it.  Turn on the filter pump to
 circulate water.  Put the apparatus in it.


 Based on my experiences with hot tubs and the like, I think this would be
 an inaccurate method. In testing, I think you would find that losses vary a
 great deal from things like room temperature, floor temperature, humidity,
 the placement of the cover over the pool and so on. I recommend a much
 smaller body of water in a better insulated container.

 - Jed

[Vo]:Sort of on-topic question about electrolysis and anodic chemistry

[James Bowery]

Let's say you have a solution of NaCl and place an anode and a cathode into
it.  Ordinarily you'll get chlorine evolving at the anode and hydrogen at
the cathode.

What if you sealed the anode in (insulating) polyvinyl chloride?  Would the
PVC convert to chlorinated polyvinyl chloride and liberate hydrogen gas
there as well?

I mean Cl- ions are being attracted to the positive electric potential of
the anode even through its surface is not conducting, and quoting the Wikipedia
article on CPVC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorinated_polyvinyl_chloride production:


Chlorinated Polyvinyl Chloride (CPVC) is PVC (polyvinyl chloride) that has
been chlorinated via a free radical chlorination
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_radical_halogenation reaction. This
reaction is typically initiated by application of thermal or UV
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultraviolet energy utilizing various
approaches. In the process, chlorine
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chlorine gas
is decomposed into free radical
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_(chemistry) chlorine which is then
reacted with PVC in a post-production step, essentially replacing a portion
of the hydrogen in the PVC with chlorine.

Re: [Vo]:Parkhomov doctored his data

[James Bowery]

There are standards for dealing with missing data.  See Imputation
(statistics) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imputation_%28statistics%29.
Unfortunately, if one deals with missing data properly it takes one beyond
those standards into the realm of universal artificial intelligence
http://www.hutter1.net/ai/uaibook.htm -- a relatively new field where few
statisticians have overcome their fear to tread.  Google is heading full
bore into UAI with its recent $500M purchase of Deep Mind (although you
won't find any open admission that they are pursuing Hutter's AIXI -- it is
apparent they are doing so from Shane Legg's Singularity Summit
presentation he gave prior to founding Deep Mind
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6umr1OP8uo).

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 I have to agree in principle with a lot of what Jed and Dave have to say
 on the matter. It baffles me that anyone would insert clippings of
 previously recorded data over missing gaps. I’m assuming Parkhomov
 performed this action because he didn’t think it was that big of a deal,
 but that’s just a guess on my part. It’s my understanding that Parkhomov
 inserted previously recorded data that he believed would more or less
 represent with what the actual data readings would have revealed if he had
 been able to record data during the missing moments. Unfortunately
 performing such an action pretty much violates one of the most fundamental
 principles of collecting data scientifically  objectively, without
 personal bias involved. Inserting token data serves no useful purpose. The
 lessor evil of performing such an action is that it obfuscates the accuracy
 of the real data. The greater evil is that it immediately calls into deep
 question the integrity of the individual as well as his data.



 Parkhomov does appear to understand the fact that what he did was not a
 smart thing to have done. He states ...It, of course a great sin and I
 sincerely repent.



 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WWEtKZHVvczhsakk/view



 Parkhomov further states:



  I send you the Excel file with the data obtained during experiment on
 which pauses

  in registration of temperature are designated by admissions of rows.

  Once again I admire your sharp observation and high professionalism.

  I hope that this incident won't make the attitude towards me and my
 researches hostile.

 

  Alexander Parkhomov



 I think we should not lose site of the fact that Parkhomov seems to want
 to make amends. Offering to send the unedited Excel file was the right
 thing to do. A charlatan or quack would have initiated evasive maneuvers. I
 certainly don’t get the impression Parkhomov attempted to dodge the
 confrontation once the duplicated artifacts were brought to his attention.
 Nor do I get the impression Parkhomov was at any time deliberately trying
 to manipulate the outcome of his results. The whole affair strikes me as an
 innocent action. Stupid, but an innocent action nevertheless.



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.orionworks.com

 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:OT: New Book on the Wright Brothers, by David McCullough

[James Bowery]

It is easy to underestimate the impact of the Kelly Act in all of this
history.

*The Kelly Act of 1925 (Contract Airmail Act)
http://web.bryant.edu/~ehu/h364proj/sprg_98/bolduc/act1925.htm*

The Kelly Act of 1925 was provoked by the vision of *Juan Trippe*
http://web.bryant.edu/~ehu/h364proj/sprg_98/bolduc/trippe.htm*.* He used
his Yale influence to persuade a fellow Yale friend, Congressman Clyde
Kelly (chairman of the House Post Office Committee), to introduce an act
that would open the flying of airmail to private contractors. The Kelly Act
put commercial aviation firmly in private hands, averting any prospect that
this industry would grow as an arm of the state. This act authorized the
U.S. Post Office Department to sign contracts with private companies for
carrying the mail at rates ranging up to $3 per pound, rates that amount to
government subsidies for airlines. It is this act that ultimately enables
the airline industry to evolve.

Likewise the impact of the Launch Services Purchase Act of 1990 about which I
testified before Congress in 1991
http://web.archive.org/web/20081212071704/http://www.geocities.com/jim_bowery/testimny.htm.
It is likely that Lori Garver (then head of the National Space Society and
generally favoring NASA launch technology development) would not have
changed her orientation to favor commercial launch technology
development, thereby
enabling SpaceX
http://spacenews.com/36673exit-interview-a-brief-conversation-with-outgoing-nasa-deputy-administrator/,
were it not for the battle we fought to get the LSPA passed.


On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com wrote:


 at time of Wright brothers, US tried to catch the bandwagon by creating
 NACA, but probably state agency are no more adapted to modern innovation.
 we see with DoE.


 The NACA was formed in 1915. By that time European aviation was getting
 massive amounts of war funding. The U.S. did not catch up until after the
 war. After 1918, the NACA did an excellent job, and by the mid-1930s the
 U.S. dominated the industry, especially civilian aviation.

 Orville Wright was a permanent member of the NACA Board. He was very shy
 and seldom commented. Historians say that Wilbur made more intellectual
 contributions to the invention, and he was a superb writer. Orville made
 many practical contributions. He also came up with the movable vertical
 tail, which was the last step in 3-axis control. They were both superb at
 engineering physics.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:OT fountain of youth?

[James Bowery]

True religion -- religion without quotation marks -- must incorporate sex
which includes death as part of our billion year heritage as multicellular
organisms.  There is, however, a conflict between the evolution of
eusociality (as in  insects and civilizations) and sex manifest in the
ultimate expression of eusociality in parasitically castrated sterile
castes in, for example, ants, bees and termites as well as naked mole rats.


People think the distinction between social and eusocial evolution is
merely a zoological curiosity, but the man who is perhaps the world's
foremost authority on eusociality has written his magnum opus declaring
eusociality to be The Social Conquest of Earth
http://longnow.org/seminars/02012/apr/20/social-conquest-earth/.  No one
who cares about the biosphere and preservation of its diversity can
responsibly ignore his warning.



On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Geez, that's pretty grim!   Are you a part of some death cult?

 There's a lot of great ways a law respecting society can ensure a fresh
 evolution of ideas.   Death doesn't have to be one of them.

 On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.com wrote:


 We the death of each individual an irreplaceable world is lost. In
 particular when we are talking about creative and productive people that
 could contribute for centuries to the better of mankind.


 Yeah? What makes you think the creative productive people would be
 preserved? No way! It would be the wealthy and brutal people. If we had
 this in the 20th century, Stalin would still be in charge of Russia. J.
 Gould and the other robber barons would still be running Wall Street. The
 Kim family would run North Korea forever.

 In cold fusion, opponents such as Huizenga would make policy for the next
 500 years, and they would never allow research. Young people would never be
 able to contribute, or even grow up. Even James Watt became an impediment
 to progress at the end of his life.

 Death leads to turnover. It gives young people with fresh perspectives a
 chance. Most great science is done by young people. If the old scientists
 never get out the way, new ideas will never be published.

 I agree with Max Planck. Death is sad for the individual, but it is a
 blessing to society, and it is essential.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:OT fountain of youth?

[James Bowery]

The reason people are hysterical about death, including religious from the
Abrahamic to Transhumanism, is because civilization is dysgenic and in a
dysgenic society every death is a loss of Creation.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 9:46 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:


 You know, if we could find a way to the stars, then suddenly, there's
 plenty of room for anyone who has ever lived, and anyone who wants to
 live forever.


 Naah, that just shoves the problem off into the future. See Asimov, The
 Last Question:

 http://www.multivax.com/last_question.html

 Besides, old people are not likely to travel so we we would end up having
 them clutter up the earth, like the old people who are left in rural
 districts in Japan after the young people moved to the big cities. That is
 depressing, let me tell you!

 The older I get, the less patience I have for old farts. Especially people
 in science such as Huizenga and Park. I agree with Max Planck that progress
 in science occurs funeral by funeral.

 A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and
 making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die,
 and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.


 We need to be rid of old people, to give young people their turn. Death is
 as essential to social evolution as it is to biological evolution.

 It is essential to technology as well. James Watt was a gifted engineer
 and he made some of the greatest contributions to technology in history,
 but when he got old he held up progress. He insisted that steam cylinders
 should be kept at low pressure for safety. He had great authority and
 people stuck to his recommendations. After he died, Young Turks began
 building high pressure cylinders, which reduced the weight of steam
 engines, and improved the power to weight ratio. Without that, they could
 not have made things like steam locomotives.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:OT fountain of youth?

[James Bowery]

Death awareness is different from survival instinct.  It is death awareness
that allows we humans to make value judgements like the one you made about
the structure of scientific revolutions, and act on those values.

On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:56 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The reason people are hysterical about death . . .


 . . . is the same reason all animals are. It is the instinct of self
 preservation. Even cockroaches are terrified of death. If they were not,
 predators would have hunted them to extinction eons ago.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:VIDEO: Stan Szpak LENR Co-deposition

[James Bowery]

Thanks, Ruby.  Given their high reproducibility and general quality the
likelihood that they prematurely discounted Ni-H in their work is low.  The
situation does demand disquisition.

On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:07 PM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote:

  I got a message from Pam Boss on your question of nickel codeposition
 James:

 We did do an experiment that plated Ni on a cathode in contact with CR-39.
 We got no tracks in the CR-39. We also saw that the Ni did not load with D.

 and

 would have to check my notebooks. I do recall a Ni-H2O plating that gave
 no results. And, as I said, there was no outgassing when the current was
 turned off indicating that Ni does not load electrolytically. I’ve been
 told you have to be at high temperatures to get H or D to load into Ni.

  Regarding the lithium, Jones, I asked Did this team consider the lithium
 as an energy-producing element in this scenario?

 She responded, We did Pd/D co-dep using KCl instead of LiCl.
 We still got tracks. Mel Miles’ co-dep formulation does not have LiCl
 in the plating solution. He still got heat.  Doubt that Li is involved.

 so I guess the nickel wasn't successful with either the H2O or D2O
 or it would have been pursued more

 Now, I wonder why it wasn't successful??? Oi!

 Ruby

 On 4/12/15 2:00 PM, James Bowery wrote:

 Its rather maddening that they got thermal runaway in 3 out of 10 trials
 in a very simple set up using *light* water and palladium but they never
 thought to replace the palladium salts with *nickel* salts to* codeposit
 nickel* rather than palladium.

  Or did they and they simply did not talk about it?

 On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote:

  I made a new movie called Following Nature's Documents Stan Szpak LENR
 Co-deposition (18:28):

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxBJjWzlKl0

  --
 Ruby Carat
 Eureka, CA USA
 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 www.coldfusionnow.org
 lenrexplained.com




 --
 Ruby Carat
 Eureka, CA USA
 1-707-616-4894
 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 www.coldfusionnow.org
 lenrexplained.com http://www.lenrexplained.com

Re: [Vo]:VIDEO: Stan Szpak LENR Co-deposition

[James Bowery]

Its rather maddening that they got thermal runaway in 3 out of 10 trials in
a very simple set up using *light* water and palladium but they never
thought to replace the palladium salts with *nickel* salts to* codeposit
nickel* rather than palladium.

Or did they and they simply did not talk about it?

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote:

  I made a new movie called Following Nature's Documents Stan Szpak LENR
 Co-deposition (18:28):

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxBJjWzlKl0

 It is taken from video interviews conducted in January 2015 with Dr.
 Stanislaw Szpak, Dr. Frank Gordon, and Dr. Melvin Miles, former Navy
 scientists and engineers who researched the anomalous effects in deuterated
 systems using the co-deposition technique.  It will also play at the
 ICCF-19 conference next week.

 It is not of the viral sort, but a good intro into what the co-dep
 situation was all about.

 I've had alot of fun making these movies, and I hope you like it.

 Ruby

  --
 Ruby Carat
 Eureka, CA USA
 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 www.coldfusionnow.org
 lenrexplained.com

Re: [Vo]:VIDEO: Stan Szpak LENR Co-deposition

[James Bowery]

Here is where they start talking about the thermal runaways
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxBJjWzlKl0t=663.

On Sun, Apr 12, 2015 at 4:00 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Its rather maddening that they got thermal runaway in 3 out of 10 trials
 in a very simple set up using *light* water and palladium but they never
 thought to replace the palladium salts with *nickel* salts to* codeposit
 nickel* rather than palladium.

 Or did they and they simply did not talk about it?

 On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 9:25 PM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote:

  I made a new movie called Following Nature's Documents Stan Szpak LENR
 Co-deposition (18:28):

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxBJjWzlKl0

 It is taken from video interviews conducted in January 2015 with Dr.
 Stanislaw Szpak, Dr. Frank Gordon, and Dr. Melvin Miles, former Navy
 scientists and engineers who researched the anomalous effects in deuterated
 systems using the co-deposition technique.  It will also play at the
 ICCF-19 conference next week.

 It is not of the viral sort, but a good intro into what the co-dep
 situation was all about.

 I've had alot of fun making these movies, and I hope you like it.

 Ruby

  --
 Ruby Carat
 Eureka, CA USA
 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 www.coldfusionnow.org
 lenrexplained.com

[Vo]:Does Velocity Per Electric Potential Provide an Intuitive Key to Maxwell's Law?

[James Bowery]

The broad survey of alternate formulations of Maxwell's Law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%27s_equations#Alternative_formulations
(which
I use in preference to Maxwell's Equation(s)) shows an interesting
pattern:

In every non-homogeneous formulation, the right hand side shows some
expression of the current field times the permeability of free space.
Moreover, most of the left hand sides involve the magnetic vector potential.

Both sides of these equations have the same physical dimensions as the
magnetic vector potential.   By inverting the dimensions of both sides, one
may express the critical physical dimension of Maxwell's Law as:

velocity per electric potential

This has intuitive meaning worth contemplating.

Derivation:

The vector potential has dimension:

momentum per charge

In cgs units (gramm = gram as mass as opposed to force in one gravity):

gramm*cm/(s*coulomb)

The permiability of free space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permeability times current has
dimension:

current electric potential time per (current length)

In cgs units:

amps*volts*sec/(amps*cm)

The amps cancel:

volts*sec/cm

Subjecting the two sides to a dimensional analysis calculator
http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/:

gramm*cm/(s*coulomb)?volt*s/cm
(gramm * [centi*meter]) / (second * coulomb) ? (volt * second) /
(centi*meter)
= 1E-7 volt*s/cm

In other words, the dimensions of these two units-based expressions match,
with only a constant of proportionality difference.

Examining the right hand side, the not-so-intuitive ratio s/cm has the
inverse dimension of velocity, so we can reconsider Maxwell's Law
reformulated in terms of a left hand side which is the inverse of the
vector potential, and the right hand side which is:

(s*coulomb)/(gramm*cm)?(cm/s)/volt
(second * coulomb) / (gramm * [centi*meter]) ? ([centi*meter] / second) /
volt
= 1E7 (cm/s)/volt

So we see (cm/s)/volt or velocity per electric potential is not only a
relatively intuitive dimension -- it is central to formulations of
Maxwell's Law.

Re: [Vo]:Does Velocity Per Electric Potential Provide an Intuitive Key to Maxwell's Law?

[James Bowery]

I'm not at all convinced that the proper intuition of speed per electric
potential should be in terms of the speed of the propagation of electric
potential.

Having said that...

(2012) Experimental measurement of electric field propagation indicates
that it may be instantaneous:

Measuring Propagation Speed of Coulomb Fields
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1211.2913v1.pdf
We have found that, in this case, *the measurements are compatible with
an instantaneous propagation of the field*. We believe that this intriguing
result needs a theoretical explanation in addition to the Feynman
conjecture or the naive hypothesis of instataneous propagation.


(2000) Here is a contradicting experiment showing finite speed:

Coulomb interaction does not spread instantaneously
http://cds.cern.ch/record/468803/files/0010036.pdf

The experiment is described which shows that Coulomb interaction spreads
with a limit velocity and thus this kind of interaction cannot be
considered as so called “instantaneous action at a distance”


On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 I've been thinking on potential fields again myself. So odd to think an
 electrostatic scalar field could travel instantaneously, but there's some
 argument for it, and seemingly some experimental evidence, and potentials
 are WEIRD. Just look at Ahranov-Bohm Effect.

 On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:38 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The broad survey of alternate formulations of Maxwell's Law
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell%27s_equations#Alternative_formulations
  (which
 I use in preference to Maxwell's Equation(s)) shows an interesting
 pattern:

 In every non-homogeneous formulation, the right hand side shows some
 expression of the current field times the permeability of free space.
 Moreover, most of the left hand sides involve the magnetic vector potential.

 Both sides of these equations have the same physical dimensions as the
 magnetic vector potential.   By inverting the dimensions of both sides, one
 may express the critical physical dimension of Maxwell's Law as:

 velocity per electric potential

 This has intuitive meaning worth contemplating.

 Derivation:

 The vector potential has dimension:

 momentum per charge

 In cgs units (gramm = gram as mass as opposed to force in one gravity):

 gramm*cm/(s*coulomb)

 The permiability of free space
 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_permeability times current has
 dimension:

 current electric potential time per (current length)

 In cgs units:

 amps*volts*sec/(amps*cm)

 The amps cancel:

 volts*sec/cm

 Subjecting the two sides to a dimensional analysis calculator
 http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/:

 gramm*cm/(s*coulomb)?volt*s/cm
 (gramm * [centi*meter]) / (second * coulomb) ? (volt * second) /
 (centi*meter)
 = 1E-7 volt*s/cm

 In other words, the dimensions of these two units-based expressions
 match, with only a constant of proportionality difference.

 Examining the right hand side, the not-so-intuitive ratio s/cm has the
 inverse dimension of velocity, so we can reconsider Maxwell's Law
 reformulated in terms of a left hand side which is the inverse of the
 vector potential, and the right hand side which is:

 (s*coulomb)/(gramm*cm)?(cm/s)/volt
 (second * coulomb) / (gramm * [centi*meter]) ? ([centi*meter] / second) /
 volt
 = 1E7 (cm/s)/volt

 So we see (cm/s)/volt or velocity per electric potential is not only a
 relatively intuitive dimension -- it is central to formulations of
 Maxwell's Law.

Re: [Vo]:New web page Andrea-Rossi.com

[James Bowery]

I, of course, meant world-wide patent disclosure.

And, no, of course he hasn't disclosed in a patent or otherwise.  If he'd
disclosed we'd know about it.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The video at the andrea-rossi.com site:

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzZmPkBqaJ0#t=81

 states a blatant faleshood -- to wit that Rossi distributed his protocol
 to the world.  If he'd done that, there would have been no excuse for
 denying him a patent.


 I do not understand what you mean. If he had distributed his protocol to
 the world, he would not be able to get a patent. Unless he filed for patent
 first, I guess. Anyway, he is not distributed it as far as I know.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:New web page Andrea-Rossi.com

[James Bowery]

The video at the andrea-rossi.com site:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzZmPkBqaJ0#t=81

states a blatant faleshood -- to wit that Rossi distributed his protocol to
the world.  If he'd done that, there would have been no excuse for denying
him a patent.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 See:

 http://andrea-rossi.com/


 http://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/index.php/Thread/1132-New-web-page-Andrea-Rossi-history/

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

In an experiment where replication is everything, it takes a pretty
compelling reason to deviate from the exact protocol and the justification
for such deviation should be carefully documented prior to the experimental
run.

Where is this documentation for the justification for departure
from Parkhomov's protocol?

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 11:02 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I think estimations of the gas pressure inside the dogbone reactor tube at
 failure are probably substantial over-estimates.  We don't really know how
 much volume was displaced by the Ni, so the volume estimate for the chamber
 is probably only accurate +100%/-50%.  The volume of the system can and
 should be measured prior to start of the experiment.  This can be done with
 a calibrated piston plumbed into the system.  Decrease the volume by 1cc
 using the piston and see how the pressure changes.

 Second, there is a hot volume and a cold volume, but only one pressure.
 Third, we don't know what is happening chemically inside the hot chamber.
 Sure there is decomposition, but there are probably also other hydride
 formations occurring at that pressure and temperature (note that there was
 added zirconium).  Perhaps there was even ammonia formation which would
 reduce the pressure; and this could condense in the cold side.  Fourth, the
 LiAlH4 weight added is probably only known +/- 20%.

 The summary is we really won't know what the pressure profile was in this
 experiment and we won't know until it is carefully measured.  There is no
 real point to the wild speculation.  It will just have to be measured.

 On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 9:47 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  Yes, that is the good news - that the compression fitting works, and if
 the problem relates to thermal stress, there is an easy way to fix that
 also.

 To minimize thermal stress – the heater wire could be “feathered in”
 from both ends, when it is wound so that there is an intermediate zone
 of heat which is less than the fully wound wire, but greater than the
 unheated zone. The idea is to spread out the areas of highest
 temperature gradient, to reduce thermal stress.

 *From:* *Bob Higgins* rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com

 Ryan Hunt reports that the failure mode was NOT the compression fitting
 giving way under pressure - the fitting remained intact.  This experiment
 was of the easier Parkhomov design, posted previously where the seal was
 made with a compression fitting, in this case with the use of a soft
 aluminum ferrule at the suggestion of Alan Goldwater.  Alan's tests
 suggested the compression fitting would hold and it did!  \

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

Looking at the BANG video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A
starting at 2:29, it seems likely that the sound track is behind the video
track.

Why?

Because the events of 2:29 to 2:30 include a clear mechanical displacement
of the right end of the tube that goes so far as to mechanically displace
the red-stripped device in the extreme upper right of the video frame --
all before the BANG.  It seems likely that this mechanical displacement was
the actual BANG event with the sound coming nearly a second later.

Given that disparity, it seems pretty likely that any change in the heat
profile during 2:29 to 2:30 is the result of the breach, not its cause.

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The devil is in the details. IMHO, the primary cause of the failure was
 not pressure related. When the video of the event is viewed at 1/4 speed,
 at 2.29 a white spot caused by high heat buildup first appears in the field
 of scarlet near the point of failure. This bit of evidence shows that the
 power produced at 2.29 is greatly increasing. This overheat reaction is not
 caused by a short circuit in the heater element because the power is steady
 at that time. As 2:29 progresses the white spot grows in size.

 The area of white expands throughout the 2.30 timeframe and at the end of
 that time period, the power to the heater surges as the heater begins to
 short out. The exploding sound occurs at the end of 2:30. The area of white
 is at its maximum at the end of 2.30 and begins to return to scarlet
 stating at 2:31 as hydrogen is venting from the tube. The power going
 through the heater is at its maximum at 2:32 until 2.34. The power is
 minimized at 2:35. The heater is completely shorted at 2:55 with 0 current
 flow.

 There is a fration of a second starting at 2:29 before the tube fractured
 as marked by the sound of explosion near the end of 2:30  when high heat is
 building up at the point of failure. The hydrogen detection instrument
 sounds produced by venting hydrogen does not begin until 2.30 after the
 sound of the explosion. This failure was caused by explosive overheating.

 On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 4:12 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

  Jones Beene wrote:

 If the failure was only pressure-related, it would happen near the middle of
 the cavity, which is the region of least structural strength against internal
 pressure - but since the failure (apparently) happened at almost exactly the
 place where the temperature gradient would be maximized – that explanation
 seems to fit the circumstances.

 I find it far more likely to be determined by a defect in the Al2O3 tube. 
 The ceramic is very brittle.
 I have had those thermocouple tubes break for no apparent reason when 
 inserting them in a furnace.
 They also require handling with reasonable care.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

The video frame of the BANG has 3 different video streams merged into
different sections of the frame.

It is likely that the video stream containing the VI display was in sync
with the audio and the video stream of the white hot dogbone was ahead of
the audio stream as well as the video stream containing the VI display.

Yes, if this is the case, someone _really_ screwed up this video - very
badly.

On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The VI display held stead at 79.7 until the instant of the bang when it
 changed instantly to 76.9. the other field also changed in like sequence.
 This tells me that the sound and video is in sync. These two indicators are
 electrical flows to the heater coil. The heat suffered a shock at bang
 onset.

 On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 6:04 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Looking at the BANG video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A
 starting at 2:29, it seems likely that the sound track is behind the video
 track.

 Why?

 Because the events of 2:29 to 2:30 include a clear mechanical
 displacement of the right end of the tube that goes so far as to
 mechanically displace the red-stripped device in the extreme upper right of
 the video frame -- all before the BANG.  It seems likely that this
 mechanical displacement was the actual BANG event with the sound coming
 nearly a second later.

 Given that disparity, it seems pretty likely that any change in the heat
 profile during 2:29 to 2:30 is the result of the breach, not its cause.

 On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The devil is in the details. IMHO, the primary cause of the failure was
 not pressure related. When the video of the event is viewed at 1/4 speed,
 at 2.29 a white spot caused by high heat buildup first appears in the field
 of scarlet near the point of failure. This bit of evidence shows that the
 power produced at 2.29 is greatly increasing. This overheat reaction is not
 caused by a short circuit in the heater element because the power is steady
 at that time. As 2:29 progresses the white spot grows in size.

 The area of white expands throughout the 2.30 timeframe and at the end
 of that time period, the power to the heater surges as the heater begins to
 short out. The exploding sound occurs at the end of 2:30. The area of white
 is at its maximum at the end of 2.30 and begins to return to scarlet
 stating at 2:31 as hydrogen is venting from the tube. The power going
 through the heater is at its maximum at 2:32 until 2.34. The power is
 minimized at 2:35. The heater is completely shorted at 2:55 with 0 current
 flow.

 There is a fration of a second starting at 2:29 before the tube
 fractured as marked by the sound of explosion near the end of 2:30  when
 high heat is building up at the point of failure. The hydrogen detection
 instrument sounds produced by venting hydrogen does not begin until
 2.30 after the sound of the explosion. This failure was caused by explosive
 overheating.

 On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 4:12 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net
 wrote:

  Jones Beene wrote:

 If the failure was only pressure-related, it would happen near the middle 
 of
 the cavity, which is the region of least structural strength against 
 internal
 pressure - but since the failure (apparently) happened at almost exactly 
 the
 place where the temperature gradient would be maximized – that explanation
 seems to fit the circumstances.

 I find it far more likely to be determined by a defect in the Al2O3 tube. 
 The ceramic is very brittle.
 I have had those thermocouple tubes break for no apparent reason when 
 inserting them in a furnace.
 They also require handling with reasonable care.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

So the short answer is that rather than not thinking to hook up the
pressure sensor, the they thought to not do so given the exigencies of
their particular situation.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I wouldn't call that bizarre, I would call that a sense of
 self-preservation kicking in.

 Remember that these fellows have come together for only a limited time to
 run these experiments.  It could be that the appropriate plumbing was not
 readily available to hook up the pressure sensor in a way that did not open
 up a large gas volume.  The volume inside the Parkhomov alumina tube is
 really small.  Maintaining that small volume is important to generate the
 high pressures as the LiAlH4 decomposes.  To use the long tube (so as to
 get the compression fitting away from the heat), almost all of the volume
 must be filled with alumina rod and then what is connected on the end to
 the compression fitting must also be minimum volume.  Otherwise, the
 pressure measured would not be representative of what it was inside
 Parkhomov's reactor.  I am working on plumbing to make such measurements
 using 1/16 stainless tubing having a 0.006 bore with appropriately small
 other fittings to minimize the dead gas volume in the plumbing.

 What I particularly don't like about just using a cap on the end is that
 the really high pressure is likely to remain even after the reactor cools
 to room temperature.  How do you bleed out the gas to open the tube safely?

 My objective is to measure the pressure over the course of the reaction,
 have a way to capture the product gas in a sample cylinder for analysis,
 and have a way to bleed off any remaining pressure when cool.

 Bob Higgins


 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 2:41 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
 is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
 up the pressure sensor.

 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bob Greenyer https://disqus.com/by/bobgreenyer/  Obvious
 http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/06/live-video-feed-from-mfmp-feb-5th-experiments-planned/#comment-1838945044
 • 40 minutes ago
 http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/06/live-video-feed-from-mfmp-feb-5th-experiments-planned/#comment-1838958558

 The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The
 core was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.

 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

 -mi



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



 The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the PSI read out
 in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:
 orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

  Short segment showing the explosion.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_Afeature=youtu.be

  Craig

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

Bizarre that they would think to hide behind an explosion shield -- which
is rational given prior pressure excursions -- but would not think to hook
up the pressure sensor.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Bob Greenyer https://disqus.com/by/bobgreenyer/  Obvious
 http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/06/live-video-feed-from-mfmp-feb-5th-experiments-planned/#comment-1838945044
 • 40 minutes ago
 http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/06/live-video-feed-from-mfmp-feb-5th-experiments-planned/#comment-1838958558

 The pressure sensor was not connected. this can be seen visually. The core
 was shown in pictures earlier in the evening on Facebook.

 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

 -mi



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



 The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the PSI read out
 in the video, which never reaches 1.0.



 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

  Short segment showing the explosion.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_Afeature=youtu.be

  Craig

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

I believe they should check their sensor.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 Do you believe the sensor, or your eyes?

 -mi



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Friday, February 06, 2015 10:42 AM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project



 The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the PSI read out in
 the video, which never reaches 1.0.



 On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

  Short segment showing the explosion.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_Afeature=youtu.be

  Craig

[Vo]:Dogbone BANG Geiger Counter Spiked

[James Bowery]

Watch the Dogbone BANG run https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_A in
HD to see these data points.

Geiger counter readings:
6:14:13, 8e-6
6:16:46, 9e-6
6:17:15, 3.3e-4
a few seconds later BANG

The pressure went down initially from 0.7 to 0.5 the back up to 0.9 but at
no point did the PSI exceed 1.0 so if that was measuring the build up of
gas pressure energy, there wasn't enough to do anything like what we saw.
It might have been a rapid conflagration of LiH coming in contact with
atmospheric O2 if there was a breach just prior to the BANG but there was
no indication of such a breach that I could see.

Re: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

[James Bowery]

The pressure release hypothesis is inconsistent with the PSI read out in
the video, which never reaches 1.0.

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 12:39 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 At 2:29/2:30 into the short segment posted by Craig, it looks like the
 right-side end-plug, or whatever is sticking out that end, blows out.  And
 I use that term specifically since one also sees some hint of a pressure
 release.  Whether that release is at an appropriate level is apparently
 debatable...
 -mark iverson

 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Friday, February 06, 2015 9:25 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:Dog Bone Project

 Good show,

 Thanks, Craig.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

  Short segment showing the explosion.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDfRaDY2R_Afeature=youtu.be

  Craig

Re: [Vo]:Investigation by NC Department of Health into IH/Rossi/Vaughn/etc

[James Bowery]

Who has standing to ask?  IH is privately held
http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=245130378
.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Someone has to contact JT Vaughn now and find out if he was misquoted.
  Either that or Rossi has gone totally crazy.

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
  wrote:

 Boom!

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 10:38 AM, Lewan Mats mats.le...@nyteknik.se
 wrote:

  I contacted David Crowley, Manager of the Radioactive Materials Branch
  at N.C. Department of Health and Human Services, and asked a few questions
 about the document published by GW.



 Here’s his answer:



 - - - - -



 Mr. Lewan,



 The report posted to www.freeenergyscams.com is in fact a copy of an
 original report from my office.  Please note that the allegation number
 should be labeled 2015-01 instead of 2014-01 because the investigation was
 the first one finalized in 2015.  Anything stated within the report
 findings was in context to an allegation investigation of radioactive
 material being utilized in North Carolina.



 The investigators documented what was said and observed.  They reported
 what was communicated to them by Mr. Vaughn, but left out additional
 descriptive language that followed the statement of credibility.



 We have no further information to share about the alleger.



 Thank you for your inquiry.



 David Crowley

 N.C. Department of Health and Human Services

 Manager, Radioactive Materials Branch – Division of Health Service
 Regulation

 5505 Creedmoor Rd, First Floor, Raleigh, NC 27612

 1645 MSC, Raleigh NC 27699-1645

 Phone: 919-814-2303

 david.crow...@dhhs.nc.gov

 www.ncradiation.net

 www.ncdhhs.gov/dhsr/



 - - - -

 Mats

 www.animpossibleinvention.com





 *Från:* Ian Walker [mailto:walker...@gmail.com]
 *Skickat:* den 5 februari 2015 19:20
 *Till:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Ämne:* Re: [Vo]:Investigation by NC Department of Health into
 IH/Rossi/Vaughn/etc



 Hi all

 As has been noted on Ecatworld in a post by US_Citizen71

 http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/02/04/rossi-responds-to-publication-of-inspection-report/
 and as many thought from the disjointed ambiguous and odd phrasing in
 the letter as well as missing pages, the letter appears to be a Photoshop
 job.
 https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxCBtZoq-VqLd1VOd3dVS2pRWGM/view

 Kind Regards walker



 On 5 February 2015 at 16:03, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

  I wrote:



   I have no idea why J. T. Vaughn said what he said, but I expect he
 did say it. I do not think he is the sort of person who lies. Perhaps they
 are fed up with Rossi?



 I do not know who said what to whom, but let's go over this statement
 again:


 Mr JT Vaughn stated .. that Mr Rossi did not appear credible
 (paraphrase)

 Imagine an inspector from the State of South Carolina were to call me on
 the phone and ask: regarding this fellow Rossi, does he have any
 credibility with the scientific mainstream? I would say no, he doesn't.
 I might add that he has not published anything, he says controversial
 things, and he has a checkered past. I think it is obvious to anyone that
 he does not appear credible.



 I think some of Rossi's claims are probably true. Others I think are
 exaggerated or mistaken. He certainly has a credibility problem. I was
 hoping the second Elforsk test would settle the issue once and for all but
 unfortunately I do not think it has.



 If Vaughn said something like that, I don't see how anyone can criticize
 it.



 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Investigation by NC Department of Health into IH/Rossi/Vaughn/etc

[James Bowery]

Why would a government official word things in such in a way that is
obviously biased to serve the open agenda of the querent, Gary Wright?

One Rossi-favorable interpretation is that this NC State official is
attempting to cover his ass with the Federal bureaucrats in charge of
nuclear matters who, the history of the physics establishment shows,
clearly share in Gary Wright's agenda?

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yeah, not a big deal when your partner says you have no credibility to a
 government rep.


 He does not have credibility. No one disputes that. Why are you making
 such a big deal about it?

 I assume the statement was not only paraphrased but taken out of
 context. It was probably something like: He does not have credibility with
 the scientific community, but we have reason to believe his claims are
 true.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Investigation by NC Department of Health into IH/Rossi/Vaughn/etc

[James Bowery]

Your conspiracy jibe was gratuitous.  My comment took into account your
explanation and provided the obvious reality that the government is a
political animal.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:

 HM  careful james, I think you're starting to buy into this mass
 conspiracy thing.

 The government is EXTREMELY touchy about anything that could involve
 nuclear materials because of terrorism.   They probably said he wasn't
 credible because they wanted to explain why they weren't following up on
  it further.

 Analog's view is interesting for sure, though I think he's fooling himself
 if he thinks that his perspective is anymore probable than the idea that
 Vaughn just got misquoted.

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why would a government official word things in such in a way that is
 obviously biased to serve the open agenda of the querent, Gary Wright?

 One Rossi-favorable interpretation is that this NC State official is
 attempting to cover his ass with the Federal bureaucrats in charge of
 nuclear matters who, the history of the physics establishment shows,
 clearly share in Gary Wright's agenda?

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yeah, not a big deal when your partner says you have no credibility to a
 government rep.


 He does not have credibility. No one disputes that. Why are you making
 such a big deal about it?

 I assume the statement was not only paraphrased but taken out of
 context. It was probably something like: He does not have credibility with
 the scientific community, but we have reason to believe his claims are
 true.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Investigation by NC Department of Health into IH/Rossi/Vaughn/etc

[James Bowery]

Yes it was gratuitous because there is no necessary implication of
collusion when people share an agenda.  They can come to the shared agenda
through the equivalent of crowd hysteria -- which is what the vast majority
of politics consists of.  Now, there may be a few individuals like Lewis
and Koonin who are particularly adept at manipulating crowds -- and they
might have colluded in a criminal conspiracy to trigger a stampede at the
Spring 1989 APS meeting in Maryland, but the rest is primarily herd
instinct.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
wrote:

 It's not gratuitous at all.   To lie like that to support other people who
 are lying while representing the government is a crime.   When a group of
 people commit a crime together, it's called a conspiracy.


 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:33 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Your conspiracy jibe was gratuitous.  My comment took into account your
 explanation and provided the obvious reality that the government is a
 political animal.

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
  wrote:

 HM  careful james, I think you're starting to buy into this mass
 conspiracy thing.

 The government is EXTREMELY touchy about anything that could involve
 nuclear materials because of terrorism.   They probably said he wasn't
 credible because they wanted to explain why they weren't following up on
  it further.

 Analog's view is interesting for sure, though I think he's fooling
 himself if he thinks that his perspective is anymore probable than the idea
 that Vaughn just got misquoted.

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 3:36 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why would a government official word things in such in a way that is
 obviously biased to serve the open agenda of the querent, Gary Wright?

 One Rossi-favorable interpretation is that this NC State official is
 attempting to cover his ass with the Federal bureaucrats in charge of
 nuclear matters who, the history of the physics establishment shows,
 clearly share in Gary Wright's agenda?

 On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote:

 Yeah, not a big deal when your partner says you have no credibility to
 a government rep.


 He does not have credibility. No one disputes that. Why are you making
 such a big deal about it?

 I assume the statement was not only paraphrased but taken out of
 context. It was probably something like: He does not have credibility 
 with
 the scientific community, but we have reason to believe his claims are
 true.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Bill Gates Sponsoring Palladium-Based LENR Technology

[James Bowery]

 Solar is another area where Gates sees promise for scientific
 breakthroughs. He singled out the solar chemical research of Nate Lewis
 from Caltech http://nsl.caltech.edu/energy.html


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gates-weighs-in-on-energy-environment/

On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

  Bill Gates Sponsoring Palladium-Based LENR Technology

 Tuesday December 23, 2014 14:20

 Low energy nuclear reactor (LENR) technology, and by extension palladium,
 is attracting the attention of one of the richest men in the world and a
 pioneer inventor of new technology.
 ..

 In a recent visit to Italy, billionaire business man, investor and
 inventor Bill Gates said that for several years he has been a believer in
 the idea of LENR, and is a sponsor of companies developing the technology.

 Excerpt... read more at:

 http://www.kitco.com/ind/Albrecht/2014-12-23-Bill-Gates-Sponsoring-Palladium-Based-LENR-Technology.html

Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26

[James Bowery]

People are conflating advances in hardware with advances in software.
Software has been stuck in the dark ages for decades and as a result has
metastasized to fill whatever capacity Moore's Law has provided with
linear, at best, advance in utility.  For many day-to-day operations the
responsiveness of systems like MS Windows has actually decreased.

There are real advances in software but they're generally buried in the
noise.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 2:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 Hi Steven,
 Hope you and the catz are staying warm and dry...

 I guess my point was more of a general observation... I have long thought
 it interesting that Darwinian theory ala 'survival of the fittest' could be
 applied equally well to a localized population of animals and to something
 as large as an entire human civilization.  Fully agree with your comment
 about ISIS/ISIL, and I will add that probably all religions have had their
 'embarrasing' eras of fanatical followers, and that by the time that era
 ends, much pain and suffering will have occurred.  The cycle will likely
 continue until the consciousness of the majority of the human population
 gets raised considerably... I think you ought to cut the Christians a bit
 if slack since they were sounding the warning about the fanatical side of
 Islam long ago, and the liberals used every opportunity to label them as
 racists/bigots.

 -mark


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 10:18 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel
 silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich
 Murray 2015.01.26

  Steven:
  Societies without some form of moral code, a shared sense of right and
  wrong, usually don’t last long…

 Hi Mark,

 Agreed. But in the meantime, they can do a lot of damage and cause much
 pain and suffering before they implode. The real irony is that most believe
 they are truly following the highest moral code of all. I'm thinking of
 ISIS as an example.

 Again, I don't disagree with your point. However, is the point you are
 making in regards to Kurzweil's belief systems or is that my belief system
 you are referring to?

 Or something else?

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26

[James Bowery]

Yeah, well I worked at the facility that developed the first supercomputer
and the software was the pre-Internet social networking system called PLATO
after which I was hired to architect the first mass market electronic
newspaper and, from that position, developed an unpartiioned 64-bit version
of network addressing that was unfortunately crowded out by the partitioned
IP address.  In that position my colleagues included David P. Reed (UDP
inventor) as well as John Backus whose Turing Award Lecture was on the need
for what he called Formal Functional Programming as a means of formalizing
parallel processing.  My effort at that time and since has been a
relational, rather than functional, approach to programming since functions
are degenerate relations -- and that led to my final days as a computer
professional at HP's Internet Chapter 2 project circa 2000 when I hired
perhaps the only guy in the world with the requisite background with
Principia Mathematica to take Russell's Relation Arithmetic a step closer
to resolving an enormous range of problems with the foundations of computer
science.  That one guy was nearly shut out of being hired to do that work
because he was a US citizen, and therefore did not qualify for H-1b status
-- which was what I was told I had to hire from.

I was such a racist bigot that I told them I would resign if I couldn't
hire this US citizen.

The only thing more nauseating than a Church Lady is a morally vain
anti-racist in a world where software technology is regressing so that
Silicon Valley can be turned foreign invasion force.

More than 62% of programmers in Silicon Valley are now foreign born and
they imposed the atavistic software technologhy knowns as Java on the
Fortune 500 along with nepotistic hiring.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:28 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
wrote:

 Hi James,

 There are several Vorts who make a living doing software, and I as one
 (mostly embedded stuff) agree for the most part with your comments.
 Hardware designers (and I lump together logic / CPU / circuit designers)
 have much better tools (which are software!) than software designers… a
 modern CPU with tens/hundreds of millions of transistors can be
 designed/simulated/validated with excellent accuracy.  Software tools are
 not nearly as advanced, although they are moving in that direction.
 Another is that the pressure of very short development cycles prevents
 software teams from taking considerable time to come up to speed on the
 more sophisticated software design tools, like model-driven development.

 -mark



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Tuesday, January 27, 2015 12:42 PM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel
 silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich
 Murray 2015.01.26



 People are conflating advances in hardware with advances in software.
 Software has been stuck in the dark ages for decades and as a result has
 metastasized to fill whatever capacity Moore's Law has provided with
 linear, at best, advance in utility.  For many day-to-day operations the
 responsiveness of systems like MS Windows has actually decreased.



 There are real advances in software but they're generally buried in the
 noise.



 On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 2:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
 wrote:

 Hi Steven,
 Hope you and the catz are staying warm and dry...

 I guess my point was more of a general observation... I have long thought
 it interesting that Darwinian theory ala 'survival of the fittest' could be
 applied equally well to a localized population of animals and to something
 as large as an entire human civilization.  Fully agree with your comment
 about ISIS/ISIL, and I will add that probably all religions have had their
 'embarrasing' eras of fanatical followers, and that by the time that era
 ends, much pain and suffering will have occurred.  The cycle will likely
 continue until the consciousness of the majority of the human population
 gets raised considerably... I think you ought to cut the Christians a bit
 if slack since they were sounding the warning about the fanatical side of
 Islam long ago, and the liberals used every opportunity to label them as
 racists/bigots.

 -mark


 -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net]
 Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2015 10:18 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel
 silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich
 Murray 2015.01.26

  Steven:
  Societies without some form of moral code, a shared sense of right and
  wrong, usually don’t last long…

 Hi Mark,

 Agreed. But in the meantime, they can do a lot of damage and cause much
 pain and suffering before they implode. The real irony is that most believe
 they are truly following the highest moral code of all. I'm thinking

Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26

[James Bowery]

Yes, the advances in neural machine learning are real but in substance they
have been around for decades and are now emerging having been submerged in
the noise.  For instance, read Jürgen Schmidhuber's timeline of deep
learning http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/firstdeeplearner.html going
back to 1991.   Although I had the highest performing neural image
processor as of 1990 (3e9 connections per second multisource image
segmentation, Neural Engines Corp of La Jolla presented at the IJCNN in San
Diego) my important contribution was circa 2005
http://prize.hutter1.net/#history setting up an AI competition based on
Schmidhuber's colleague, Marcus Hutter's notion of universal artificial
intelligence driven by Ockham's Razor (Kolmogorov Complexity).  Hutter's
criterion has now been adopted by the singularity folks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6umr1OP8uo.

Having said that, there are still important advances that are submerged in
the noise -- not the least of which is Relation Arithmetic
http://www.boundary.org/bi/articles/Relation-arithmetic_Revived_v3.pdf
(which, btw, subsumes quantum theory hence quantum information systems) and
even in neural systems, there is insufficient attention being paid to
Hecht-Nielsen's Confabulation Theory
http://r.ucsd.edu/Cogent%20Confabulation.pdf.

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


 For many day-to-day operations the responsiveness of systems like MS
 Windows has actually decreased.


 That is because they keep adding bells and whistles. It is feature-itus
 run amok. When I installed recent versions of Windows I went through and
 turned off a bunch of features and it went back to working quickly again.
 The features that slow down my computer the most are ones that display all
 kinds of useless clutter on the screen. I think Windows was going slowly
 because of a bottleneck between the CPU and the screen display, rather than
 bad programming *per se*. It may be a problem on my computer in
 particular, because it has an old, 2-port screen display card attached to
 two large screens.



 There are real advances in software but they're generally buried in the
 noise.


 I think there must have been some astounding advances in software
 recently, judging by the results at places like Google and IBM. I mean, for
 example:

 * Self driving cars. Many experts predicted this would take another 20
 years, but here they are, and they are reportedly safer than human drivers.

 * Google's uncanny ability to recognize faces, which is beginning to
 exceed the human ability.

 * Google's ability to translate documents. This is still way behind human
 abilities, but it is far ahead of where the technology was 10 years ago.

 * The Watson computer and its superhuman ability to win at Jeopardy and
 diagnose diseases.

 They could not have done these things with hardware alone. Nor do I think
 they could do them by brute force methods. Watson and the Google-Plex are
 MPP computers, so however difficult it is to write MPP software, apparently
 they are making progress in doing it.

 Google has published papers describing its MPP techniques.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26

[James Bowery]

All boolean functions (meaning all programs) can be parallelized to only 2
gate delays.  The problem is your computer ends up with more gates than
there are elementary particles in the universe.

A good deal of real computation consists of, in essence, decompressing a
compressed form of the the answer.  The difficulty of writing MPP software
is essentially attempting to decompress the compressed form of the answer
(ie: the program and its inputs) prior to run time so it maps on to your
parallel architecture.

To make software maintainable, you start out with the minimal description
-- the Ockham's Razor version -- so that you don't introduce extraneous
complexity to the program specification.  The rest, as they say, is
expansion of the Kolmogorov Complexity and there is just no getting around
the fact that you have a _lot_ of serial work in that process.

On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 8:00 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:


 Architectures that attempt to hide this problem with lots of processors
 accessing local stores in parallel are drunks looking for their keys under
 the lamp post.


 I disagree. The purpose of a computer is solve problems. To process data.
 Not to crunch numbers as quickly as possible. The human brain is many
 orders of magnitude slower than any computer, and yet we can recognize
 faces faster than just about any computer, because the brain is a massively
 parallel processor (MPP). Many neurons compare the image to stored images
 simultaneously, and the neurons that find the closest match come to mind.
 Many data processing functions can be performed in parallel. Sorting and
 searching arrays has been done in parallel since the 1950s. Polyphase sort
 methods with multiple processors and mag tape decks were wonderfully fast.

 It is difficult to write MPP software, but once we master the techniques
 the job will be done, and it will be much easier to update. Already,
 Microsoft Windows works better on multi-processor computers than single
 processor models. Multiprocessor also run voice input programs much faster
 than single processors.

 A generation from now we may have personal computers with millions of
 processors. Even if every processor were much slower than today's
 processors, the overall speed for many classes of problems will be similar
 to today's supercomputers -- which can solve problems hundreds of thousands
 to millions of times faster than a PC or Mac. They will have the power of
 today's Watson computer, which is to say, they will be able to play
 Jeopardy or diagnose disease far better than any person. I expect they will
 also recognize faces and do voice input better than any person.

 There may be a few esoteric problems that are inherently serial in nature
 and that can only be solved by a single processor, but I expect most real
 world can be broken down into procedures run in parallel. Of course the
 breaking down will be done automatically. It is already.

 Before computers were invented, all large real world problems were broken
 down and solved in parallel by large groups of people, usually organized in
 a hierarchy. I mean, for example, the design of large buildings or the
 management of corporations, nations or armies.

 The fastest data processing in the known universe, by a wide margin, is
 biological cell reproduction. The entire genome is copied by every cell
 that splits. This is a parallel process. The moment a strand of DNA is
 exposed to solution, all of new bases begin match up simultaneously. DNA is
 also by far the most compact form of data storage in the known universe,
 and I predict is the most compact that will ever be found. I do not think
 subatomic data storage will ever be possible. All the human data now
 existing can be stored in about 7 ml of DNA.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26

[James Bowery]

This is nonsense.

In microcomputer architecture there is something known as the radius of
control, which is bounded by the distance that can be traversed by a signal
from a processing unit to memory and back.  That feedback time is, even in
some hypothetical all-optical computer, limited by the speed of light.
Light travels one foot per nanosecond or thereabouts.  So if you had
wafer-scale optical computing you could support radius of control at a
cycle time of about 1GHz.  This is a hard limit -- very hard.

I've attacked this computation limit as directly as just about anyone with an
analog mutex crossbar circuit that keeps main memory access on chip
http://jimbowery.blogspot.com/2013/04/a-circuit-minimizing-multicore-shared.html.
This is critical because as soon as you go off chip you suffer orders of
magnitude slowdown in your primary control cycle.

Architectures that attempt to hide this problem with lots of processors
accessing local stores in parallel are drunks looking for their keys under
the lamp post.


On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Rich Murray rmfor...@gmail.com wrote:

 doubling speed every 2 years for decades more, Intel silicon photonics now
 revolutionizing data centers, Michael Kassner: Rich Murray 2015.01.26
 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2015/01/doubling-speed-every-2-years-for.html


 [ See also:

 exponential information technology 1890-2014 10exp17 more MIPS per
 constant 2004 dollar in 124 years, Luke Muehlhauser, Machine Intelligence
 Research Institute 2014.05.12: Rich Murray 2014.12.27

 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2014/12/exponential-information-technology-1890.html


 since 1890, increase by 10 times every 7.3 years --

 since 1950 -- 2014 = 64 years, with about 10exp13  times more =
 10,000,000,000,000 times more per device, from vacuum tubes to multicore
 processors -- increase by 10 times every 5 years per constant 2004 dollar.


 CSICON -- Murray's Law -- Eternal Exponential Expansion of Science: Rich
 Murray 1997.04.05, 2001.06.22, 2011.01.03

 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2011/01/csicon-murrays-law-eternal-exponential.html
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rmforall/message/102]



 http://www.techrepublic.com/article/silicon-photonics-will-revolutionize-data-centers-in-2015/


 NETWORKING http://www.techrepublic.com/topic/networking/
 Silicon photonics will revolutionize data centers in 2015

 By Michael Kassner http://www.techrepublic.com/search/?a=michael+kassner
  January 23, 2015, 11:23 AM PST

- Email Alert

 http://www.techrepublic.com/article/silicon-photonics-will-revolutionize-data-centers-in-2015/?tag=nl.e101s_cid=e101ttag=e101ftag=TRE684d531#
- RSS http://www.techrepublic.com/rssfeeds/topic/networking/


- Comments

 http://www.techrepublic.com/article/silicon-photonics-will-revolutionize-data-centers-in-2015/?tag=nl.e101s_cid=e101ttag=e101ftag=TRE684d531#postComments
- Save
- Facebook0
- Twitter0
- Linkedin0
-
- More

 Data centers are morphing into computing singularities, albeit large ones.
 Silicon photonics will hasten that process. The reason why begins with
 Moore's Law.

 [image: siliconphotonics012815.jpg]
  Image courtesy of Intel

 Gordon Moore's prediction known as Moore's Law
 http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/history/museum-gordon-moore-law.html 
 --
 The number of transistors incorporated in a chip will approximately double
 every 24 months. -- has been uncanny in its accuracy since he made it in
 April 1965. That didn't stop pundits from saying Moore's Law
 http://www.computerhistory.org/semiconductor/timeline/1965-Moore.html had
 a nice run, but like all good things, it was coming to an end. The pundits'
 prediction was erroneous, thanks to Intel (the company Moore co-founded).
 The reason is light, or more accurately photons.
 The problem photons overcome

 [image: gordonmooreintel.png]
 Gordon Moore
  Image courtesy of Intel
 Moore's Law requires scientists and engineers to continually figure out
 how to pack larger quantities of transistors and support circuitry into
 chips. It's a challenge, but not as difficult as figuring out what to do
 about the by-products of shoving electricity through an ever-more dense
 population of chips: heat buildup, current leakage, and crosstalk between
 adjacent wire traces.

 Multi-core technology
 https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/frequently-asked-questions-intel-multi-core-processor-architecture
  breathed
 new life into Moore's Law, but only for a short time. Using copper wires to
 transmit the digital information becomes the limiting factor. This MIT
 Technology Review 2005 article
 http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/404358/intels-breakthrough/explains
 why copper wires were no longer good enough. The problem is that
 electrical pulses traveling through a copper wire encounter electrical
 resistance, which degrades the information they carry, states author
 Robert Service. As a result, data bits traveling through copper must be
 

Re: [Vo]:Dark wires in glowing reactor ?

[James Bowery]

Hydrinos are practically noble gases -- chemically inert.  There is some
reason to believe that the very smallest may be small enough to mask the
coulomb barrier so those would be dangerous if they activated the wrong
nuclei.

On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:27 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 Hydrogen in the DDL is greatly reduced in diameter so that it cannot be
 contained by the ceramic - and the isomer atoms would diffuse through the
 alumina (which is a dielectric) as soon as they are formed.


 These hydrinos sound quite dangerous.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:Re: QM rant

[James Bowery]

See Goedecke's 1964 paper.

On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe 
stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:

 The thing this is a mystery, How come you get so good and accurate results
 from both the theories, if you are correct they would be an epsilon appart
 and the first
 thing theoretical physics should do is to try understand this epsilon and
 be able to deduce it, i tried, and could not find that epsilon. Mills is
 going head to head with
 QM and is claiming that much of the exactness of QM is an illusion and a
 result of bad physics e.g they picked some terms in an asymptotic expansion
 and dropped
 others just to fit to the measured data. Mills can be right or not.
 However for high energy physics, probably the Standard Model is more exact
 cause it is a data fir with so
 many unknowns. It is a shame that we don't have a serious heated debate
 between nobell lauriates and Mills regarding these matters, it would be a
 great show. In stead
 there is a speaking nothing. My take on this is therefore that Mills is
 right. QM is a datafit to reality, quite useful if you don't extrapolate.
 Mills model is more physical, but maybe
 not developed fully, so I would expect a new Einstein to show up and find
 corrections to MIlls theory more than saying that QM and the standard model
 is superior.

 Also, Once upon the time, a curious figure came up and showed his neat
 calculations, he could estimate the astronomical observations with 6
 digits. Nah, the lauriates said,
 our method, that is so complex and well developed, fits with 7 digits,
 experimental observations triumph theory, you go away! And Keppler went
 back. The telling is that the
 old ones needed to die off until science could appreciate good reason and
 beautiful simplicity. It's maybe even worse today.

 On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 Quantum mechanics applies to fundamental particles. A special case of QM
 applies to hydrinos in the same why that a special case of QM applies to
 cooper pairs of electrons,  CQM is analogous to super conductor theory.
 Care in thinking must be applied to applying this sort of theory.
 Mis-application of theory when such a hierarchy of theory exists is easy to
 do.

 Mills would do better is he says that CQM is a special case of QM in the
 same why that Newtonian physics is a special case of general relativity.
 Mills is wrong to reject QM whole cloth as invalid to be replaced by CQM.
 In this he has a problem in the way he thinks.


 On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Stefan Israelsson Tampe 
 stefan.ita...@gmail.com wrote:

 The hydrino is a variant of the hydrogen atom. It is never claimed by
 Mills to be a fundamental particle. Hence it needs so low energy so that
 you can maintain the bound
 You can't find it using collisions of high energy, which is where most
 bucks these days is targeted at. If you knock the hydrino you will get a
 proton and an electron. So to find
 a antihydrino you need to cool down a produced anti proton and an anti
 electron and reach a hydrino state, which you need some chemical reaction
 to achieve because the
 cool down system would go to the normal anti hydrogen su you need to
 create a bunch of anti compounds and do chemistry with them. Good luck with
 that.

 On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 5:38 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The lack of proof that anti-hydrinos exist tells me that the hydrino is
 not a fundamental particle but a quasi-particle produced under the
 interactions of other multiple electrons. This is also true for cooper
 pairs of electrons. A fundamental particle always has an anti-particle.
 This hydrino quasi-particle is produced under special multiple electron
 interactions and is also not a fundamental particle. Hydrinos are a special
 case produced in condensed matter. They are not produced as virtual
 particles because they have no associated anti-particle.

 LENR exists in a special state of condensed matter and energy where
 multiple interactions among electrons acting in a special way exists. The
 same is true for hydrinos, they are quasi-particles, a special state of
 matter like the SPPs, not fundimental.

 On Sun, Jan 11, 2015 at 10:19 AM, pjvannoor...@caiway.nl wrote:

   Hello Stefan

 I couldnt agree more with what you say. It is really strange that
 almost nobody
 is looking into the theory of R.Mills. I presented Mills theory a few
 years ago to
 a Nobel price winner in the Netherlands. He got angry.

 Somehow Quantum Physics took the wrong way. It was really at the start
 of the first formula
 to describe the atom with the Quantum theory where they went wrong.
 They couldnt explain the stability of the atom in a classic way  and
 Bohr postulated
 the stability of the atom. Mills found the solution to that problem.
 He proposed that the electron is a shell of current which
 is flowing in such a way that there are solutions to the Maxwell
 equations who correspond to the stable
 quantum levels 

Re: [Vo]:Judgement deadline for CFsn 1/1/2015

[James Bowery]

-- Forwarded message --
From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com
Date: Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: fx-discuss: NiLENR
To: fx-disc...@ideosphere.com


I created the claim to test the Bayesian relationship to CFsn as a way of
further testing the meta-claim that Ideosphere does what its founder(s)
claim:

The Idea Our policy-makers and media rely too much on the expert advice
of a self-interested insider's club of pundits and big-shot academics.

IMHO, Ideosphere, by judging CFsn (and now likely NiLENR) False, has
failed perhaps its most definitive test.

On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Neal Gafter n...@gafter.com wrote:

 The NASA work is solid enough to prove the Science without looking at
 Rossi's demos. The engineering is still some ways off though.

 The claim says Cold fusion of hydrogen in nickel *can *produce over 10
 watts/cc net power

 Can. Not has. The clear wording of the claim does not require a
 demonstration.

 On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 3:44 PM, chrisran.bma e-mail 
 chrisran@virgin.net wrote:


 If you read something else to get more in deep you would know the
 researchers confirmed Rossi didn't interfere with the experiment.

 
 https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-e-cat-cold-fusion-or-scientific-fraud-624f15676f96
  The controls were laughable. It wasn't an independent test.

 If you presume fraud anyway, there is no control enough to satisfy you.


 You honestly believe it is or even could be real???

 Have you seen

 http://newenergytimes.com/v2/sr/RossiECat/Andrea-Rossi-Energy-Catalyzer-Investigation-Index.shtml

 crandles




On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Claim CFsn - Cold Fusion http://ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=CFsn
 Category: *Science  Technology:Physics*bid 0, ask 2, last 2Owner:0, Bank
 (i...@ideosphere.com)Judge:306, SMWinnie (smwin...@yahoo.com)created:
 1994/09/23due date:TBDThe Claim

 Cold fusion of deuterium in palladium can produce over 10 watts/cc. net
 power at STP (standard temperature and pressure). Cold fusion is discussed
 on the fusion newsgroup news:sci.physics.fusion.

 Judge's Statement

 Judgment will be entered on CFsn on or before January 1, 2015.

 I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent
 to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the
 precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which
 follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and
 applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's
 owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he
 ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES
 or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will
 post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the
 judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post.

Re: [Vo]:Judgement deadline for CFsn 1/1/2015

[James Bowery]

The claim was judged false.  I now have the lowest score on ideosphere.com.

On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 2:55 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Claim CFsn - Cold Fusion http://ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=CFsn
 Category: *Science  Technology:Physics*bid 0, ask 2, last 2Owner:0, Bank
 (i...@ideosphere.com)Judge:306, SMWinnie (smwin...@yahoo.com)created:
 1994/09/23due date:TBDThe Claim

 Cold fusion of deuterium in palladium can produce over 10 watts/cc. net
 power at STP (standard temperature and pressure). Cold fusion is discussed
 on the fusion newsgroup news:sci.physics.fusion.

 Judge's Statement

 Judgment will be entered on CFsn on or before January 1, 2015.

 I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent
 to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the
 precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which
 follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and
 applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's
 owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he
 ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES
 or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will
 post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the
 judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post.

[Vo]:Judgement deadline for CFsn 1/1/2015

[James Bowery]

Claim CFsn - Cold Fusion http://ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=CFsn
Category: *Science  Technology:Physics*bid 0, ask 2, last 2Owner:0, Bank (
i...@ideosphere.com)Judge:306, SMWinnie (smwin...@yahoo.com)created:
1994/09/23due date:TBDThe Claim

Cold fusion of deuterium in palladium can produce over 10 watts/cc. net
power at STP (standard temperature and pressure). Cold fusion is discussed
on the fusion newsgroup news:sci.physics.fusion.

Judge's Statement

Judgment will be entered on CFsn on or before January 1, 2015.

I will judge based on the intent of this claim, if I perceive such intent
to be obvious. If such intent is ambiguous I will judge on the basis of the
precise wording. If both are ambiguous, I will look for a solution which
follows IF/FX precedent insofar as such precedent is apparent to me and
applicable to the claim. I will seek the guidance of the claim's
owner/author in interpreting the claim. It's his or her question - s/he
ought to get the answer sought. If I believe this claim to have met a YES
or NO condition, and if I believe judgement will be controversial, I will
post a prospective judgement to fx-discuss and forestall entering the
judgement for a comment period to be announced in the post.

Re: [Vo]:Why smart people defend bad ideas

[James Bowery]

Idiocy.

Science is driven by experiment over argument.

When you insist on contaminating every human ecology with every other human
ecology you violate a central tenant of science:  controlled
experimentation.

When failures occur under cirumstances of enforced contamination you are
left with nothing but confusion.  You learn nothing from your failures.
Indeed, you learn nothing from your successes.

The conceit that conversation or discourse or discussion can be the
appeal of last resort in testing truth is something only humans who are
deluded by words could conceive of.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 11:49 AM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why smart people defend bad ideas

 http://scottberkun.com/essays/40-why-smart-people-defend-bad-ideas/

 excerpt:
 The second stop on our tour of commonly defended bad ideas is the
 seemingly friendly notion of communal thinking. Just because everyone in
 the room is smart doesn’t mean that collectively they will arrive at smart
 ideas. The power of peer pressure is that it works on our psychology, not
 our intellect. As social animals we are heavily influenced by how the
 people around us behave, and the quality of our own internal decision
 making varies widely depending on the environment we currently are in.
 (e.g. Try to write a haiku poem while standing in an elevator with 15 opera
 singers screaming 15 different operas, in 15 different languages, in
 falsetto, directly at you vs. sitting on a bench in a quiet stretch of open
 woods).


 That said, the more homogeneous a group of people are in their thinking,
 the narrower the range of ideas that the group will openly consider. The
 more open minded, creative, and courageous a group is, the wider the pool
 of ideas they’ll be capable of exploring.

 Some teams of people look to focus groups, consultancies, and research
 methods to bring in outside ideas, but this rarely improves the quality of
 thinking in the group itself. Those outside ideas, however bold or
 original, are at the mercy of the diversity of thought within the group
 itself. If the group, as a collective, is only capable of approving B level
 work, it doesn’t matter how many A level ideas you bring to it. Focus
 groups or other outside sources of information can not give a team, or its
 leaders, a soul. A bland homogeneous team of people has no real opinions,
 because it consists of people with same backgrounds, outlooks, and
 experiences who will only feel comfortable discussing the safe ideas that
 fit into those constraints.If you want your smart people to be as smart
 as possible, seek a diversity of ideas. Find people with different
 experiences, opinions, backgrounds, weights, heights, races, facial hair
 styles, colors, past-times, favorite items of clothing, philosophies, and
 beliefs. Unify them around the results you want, not the means or
 approaches they are expected to use. It’s the only way to guarantee that
 the best ideas from your smartest people will be received openly by the
 people around them. On your own, avoid homogenous books, films, music,
 food, sex, media and people. Actually experience life by going to places
 you don’t usually go, spending time with people you don’t usually spend
 time with. Be in the moment and be open to it. Until recently in human
 history, life was much less predictable and we were forced to encounter
 things not always of our own choosing. We are capable of more interesting
 and creative lives than our modern cultures often provide for us. If you go
 out of your way to find diverse experiences it will become impossible for
 you to miss ideas simply because your homogenous outlook filtered them out.
 ​​

 ​Harry​

Re: [Vo]:Re: The MFMP replication effort live on youtube.

[James Bowery]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Randy Mills rmi...@blacklightpower.com [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] 
societyforclassicalphys...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 7:51 AM
Subject: Re: [SocietyforClassicalPhysics] a mixture of nickel and lithium
aluminum hydride
To: societyforclassicalphys...@yahoogroups.com 
societyforclassicalphys...@yahoogroups.com

...I think that it is a mistake to use a hydrogen porous vessel for a
hydrino reaction.

On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 4:48 AM, pjvannoor...@caiway.nl wrote:

   Probably at that temperature the hydrogen will leak very fast through
 the cell even if it is sealed properly

 Peter v Noorden

  *From:* Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 *Sent:* Wednesday, December 31, 2014 5:36 AM
 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:The MFMP replication effort live on youtube.

  Based on analysis of Lugano and Parkhomov work, excess heat begins at
 about 950C.  The MFMP dogbone core was measured to be over 1200C and no
 excess heat was found.  The likely suspect is that the glue used to seal
 the reactor tube failed, allowing a leak of the H2 when the LiAlH4
 decomposed.  The experiment was shut down because going higher in
 temperature risked burnout of the dogbone heater coil and the excess heat
 should already have been seen at a lower temperature than the 1200C core
 temperature that was achieved.

 Ryan Hunt is going to try again.  We will try to contact Parkhomov to ask
 what cement he used to seal his reactor. We are also looking at ways to
 test the seals that we make.

 Bob Higgins

 On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  CB Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote:


 Wow,  Replication fails.   They had the dog bone so hot the steel
 stand holding it was white hot.  But power in was equal to power out.   No
 radiation.



   I have a hunch that was too hot. As the proverbial shaggy dog was too
 shaggy, since we are using dog-related images here.

 - Jed

[Vo]:Mourning zunzun.com's passing

[James Bowery]

zunzun.com is gone due to its owner, James Phillips, going partially blind
and therefore being unable to maintain it. For those who never used
zunzun.com (probably everyone reading this) it let you paste a bunch of
rows of text, each containing two (or even 3) numbers, into a text box, and
then it provided a best function fit with full statistics. I used it a
_lot_ because it was one of the two most useful online tools I've ever
found: the most useful being Calchemy, a units calculator that does
automatic solving by dimensional analysis
http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/, and even it has been degraded
from what it once was.

People just don't seem to 'get' really good tools.

Re: [Vo]:Mills critical critiques on LENR: a mixture of nickel and lithium aluminum hydride

[James Bowery]

Quite aside from the business consequences of his comments, my perception
of Mills is that the failure of the LENR community to take his theory more
seriously -- particularly given the LENR community's theoretic poverty --
is bad science, independent of the quality of the empirical work of the
LENR community.

If his theory is as coherent, all encompassing and supported by experiment
as he believes it is, then his contempt for the LENR community's ignorance
of it -- particularly given the dominant culture's hostility to it -- is
quite understandable.

On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

  Mills recently had more uncomplimentary things to say about recent LENR
 research. See SCP thread:



 a mixture of nickel and lithium aluminum hydride



 See thread:




 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/topics/4274






 *



 A poster, James Bowery, brought up a discussion about Alexander
 Parkhomov's recent work. James posted:



  Alexander Parkhomov, a Russian scientist:

  http://www.researchgate.net/profile/A_Parkhomov

 

  claims he has replicated Rossi's E-Cat using a mixture of nickel and

  lithium aluminum hydride.

 

  He provides an English translation of his report:

 

 
 http://www.e-catworld.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Lugano-Confirmed.pdf

 

  In his replication, he measures heat output by completely boiling off a
 fixed amount of

  water rather than inferring power output via infrared camera.  He
 reports no radioactivity or energetic gammas.



 Randy's initial reply:



  How does he know what is in the Ecat cell?  LiAlH4 + Ni as a hydrogen

  dissociator run at elevated temperature is disclosed in my patents.

  They are filed in Russia.



 James Replied:



  A few people have been speculating for some time that Rossi's E-Cat

  nickle-based catalytic system was actually a takeoff of

  Hydrocatalysis Power Corp's nickle-based catalytic technology.

 

  One might further speculate that Dr. Parkhomov took that seriously enough

  to look into the BLP Russian patent filings involving LiAlH4 + Ni.



 Randy's follow-up reply:



  In general, I have found the rogues left in that bogus cold fusion field
 are

  very poor at science, self deluded, or dishonest.  Telling is that I was

  flamed when I published on a catalytic reaction involving light hydrogen

  and nickel, and now it is the main event.  Of course, no one admits to my

  work.  Shameful.  Good luck to them getting light hydrogen to fuse or
 undergo

  a nuclear reaction.

 

  None the less I think that it is a mistake to use a hydrogen porous
 vessel

  for a hydrino reaction.




 *



 Obviously there is no love lost between Dr. Mills and the loosely
 associated LENR community - at least it would seem from Dr. Mills' POV. Of
 particular interest to me, Dr. Mills states (and also complains that) he
 had once been flamed when he published work on ... a catalytic reaction
 involving light hydrogen and nickel, and now it is the main [LENR] event.
 Mills initially seems to be saying that he finds many LENR researchers to
 be, in his opinion,  very poor at science, self deluded, or dishonest.
 But then he follows up with the comment that he had been flamed and that
 no on admits to [his prior] work. IMO, that would seem to contradict
 Mills' prior claim that he finds LENR research to be a bogus science filled
 with some dishonest researchers. I tend to think Mills makes such
 statements primarily for strategic BLP business reasons rather than wanting
 to make an honest effort to discuss any underlying scientific content of
 the latest LENR data. From Mils' POV, they are unwelcomed distractions.



 IOW, Move along, move along... nothing to see here.



 I would add, it's an understandable position any CEO might take for
 strategic BLP business reasons - primarily to maintain control over their
 RD plans. But from the perspective of pursuing scientific inquiry...it
 stinks.



 Comments?



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.orionworks.com

 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Mills critical critiques on LENR: a mixture of nickel and lithium aluminum hydride

[James Bowery]

Its not clear that he owes everything to Fleischmann  Pons.  If they had
not published, he might well have developed his theory from his original
motivation, which was high temperature superconductivity.  Given fractional
Rydberg states its clear that their pusuit would be a new source of
energy.  While it is certainly no fault of Fleischmann  Pons, it may even
be the case that Mills would have marketed an energy technology years
earlier if they had not published and triggered hysterical opposition from
the authorities.

Stolper's book on Mills
http://www.amazon.com/Genius-Inventor-controversy-historical-contemporary/dp/1419643045
has passages such as that concerning high-temperature superconductivity on
p105:

Mills began the sustained work on his reformulation of quantum theory in
the fall of 1988, when he became interested in high-temperature
superconductivity.  He wondered whether it would be possible at room
temperature.


He soon found that he couldn't get a grip on the problem with standard
quantum mechanics... In Anderson's opinion, superconductivity needed an
entirely new theory.  Mils carried that opinion to its logical extreme,
which was further than any other investigator of superconductivity cared to
go:  develop a new quantum theory, not just a new theory of
superconductivity



On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Sigh . . . I had forgotten what a jerk Mills can be.

 He owes everything to Fleischmann  Pons -- as do we all. If they had not
 published, he never would have thought to do his first experiments.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Russian scientist reports replicating hot-cat excess heat

[James Bowery]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium_aluminium_hydride

The melting (decomposition) point of LiAlH4 is 150C.

This means that after the first heating, the 2 moles of H2 are liberated as
gas for every mole of LiAlH4.

Presumably the LiAl forms an amalgam.

On Sat, Dec 27, 2014 at 10:09 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:


 Of interest is the temperature chart:

 http://i.imgur.com/gWF7z9y.png



 Where the reactor temperature remains elevated for 8 minutes after power
 is cut.


 Heat after death! Notice how quickly the temperature falls after the heat
 stops. That sure indicates an energy source. It could be conventional I
 suppose, but I doubt there is much fuel.

 This is temperature hysteresis. In other words, energy release hysteresis.
 The cell wants to remain at the same temperature, like a piece of burning
 wood that is disturbed and then returns to burning at the same rate.
 Because the shape of the wood and the rate of fuel release is the same. I
 believe Stan Pons was the first person to describe this.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:OK - what did we predict last year?

[James Bowery]

we?

On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Frank Znidarsic fznidar...@aol.com
wrote:

 1. Andrei Rossi would have a commercial product.
 2.  Gas would be $5 a gallon.
 3.  Jed said something about robots?  I cant remember what?
 4.  2014 would be the year of cold fusion.


  Tell me how badly did we get it.
 Will next year be any closer?

  Frank

Re: [Vo]:Bill Gates Sponsoring Palladium-Based LENR Technology

[James Bowery]

The quasi-quote of Bill Gates is news.  Is Kitco a reliable news source,
given the market in Pd that it represents?  Is this click-bait or real news?

On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

  Bill Gates Sponsoring Palladium-Based LENR Technology

 Tuesday December 23, 2014 14:20

 Low energy nuclear reactor (LENR) technology, and by extension palladium,
 is attracting the attention of one of the richest men in the world and a
 pioneer inventor of new technology.
 ..

 In a recent visit to Italy, billionaire business man, investor and
 inventor Bill Gates said that for several years he has been a believer in
 the idea of LENR, and is a sponsor of companies developing the technology.

 Excerpt... read more at:

 http://www.kitco.com/ind/Albrecht/2014-12-23-Bill-Gates-Sponsoring-Palladium-Based-LENR-Technology.html

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:


 Why would it incentivise crime?? It would incentivise work.


 This is all predicated on there not being enough jobs.
 So some people are going to have to make do with just the insufficient
 universal income.


  After a while I think the US would join Europe in making the 35 hour week
 mandatory (meaning if you work more than that you have to get overtime
 pay). This would open up still more jobs.


This would undo one, perhaps the, primary benefit of Unconditional BI:

Disintermediation of the government's welfare state aparatus.

In order to more completely disintermediate the government, a
liquid-valuation net asset tax would have to replace not only taxes on
economic activity, but the regulatory behemoth that intervenes in the
operation of the free market -- regulation that thereby opens the
government to regulatory capture by crony capitalists as well as other
forms of bureaucratic corruption.  You could do away with anti-trust laws
and too big to fail so we have to regulate you excuses for government
intervention -- replacing them with the tax on liquid-valuation of net
assets distributed as a citizen's dividend under the UBI.

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

The AI Menace, which is an increasingly popular topic (see Elon Musk
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/27/elon-musk-artificial-intelligence-ai-biggest-existential-threat
and Stephen Hawking
http://news.discovery.com/tech/robotics/artificial-intelligences-hawkings-fears-stir-debate-141206.htm)
is, and has been for a long time, utterly over-shadowed by the NI Menace
or natural intelligence menace.  Long before an AI takes off and starts
solving the problem in total disregard for human well-being, we will have
natural intelligence solving the problem with total disregard for other
humans, using artificial intelligence to solve the problem of
neutralizing the business risks from other humans.  Indeed, we are
already far along that road.



On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
wrote:

 I don't like redistribution of income but there won't be any alternative
 once jobs disappear.

 You don't know that. People may find unique ways to solve their problems.

 Pretending that things will just muddle along somehow could be dangerous
 as the US has drifted towards becoming a police state in recent years and
 economic upheaval that is unprepared for might make things worse.

 I don't believe you can fundamentally make things better by threatening
 people with violence. Every time we pass a law and include people in our
 plans, who don't want to be included in our plans, we have to threaten them
 with violence, or they'll simply opt-out. It's this fundamental shift
 towards institutionalized violence which may be creating the police state.
 When government is simple, and threatens violence only for fundamental
 breeches of security, then we live in a society which has very little
 institutionalized violence. The more power the state assumes, in order to
 try to solve problems which may not even exist, the more violence it must
 incorporate into its very institution.

 Craig

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

Physical reality provides, to first order, a 2 dimensional biosphere of
limited surface area.  The 3 dimensional solar system provides a first
order unlimited pie but to second order, even it is limited.

Given the actual behavior of governments and corporations within the
biosphere, anti-immigration and anti-government sentiments are entirely
rational.  If you want your first-order approximation of limitless utopia,
you need to include in your postulates a solar-centric civilization -- not
as an after-thought but as a prerequisite.

You are talking to a guy who has done more than you will ever hope of doing
to achieve not only solar centric civilization but increasing the
biosphere's carrying capacity by 20-fold with algae cultivation, so don't
try to play more cornucopian than thou with me.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Randy Wuller rwul...@freeark.com wrote:

 You are all missing the point.  We are transitioning from the economics of
 scarce resources to unlimited resources.  When you apply economic policies
 designed for the allocation of scarce resources to an economy of unlimited
 resources you artificially limit the pie.  That is what we are doing
 today.  No one has to share what they have, everyone can have more. The pie
 can literally be as big as we want it to be, just stop artificially
 restricting its growth.



 This nonsense of limits is pervasive, people are anti-immigration because
 they think the immigrant is taking a piece of their part of the pie, people
 are anti-government because they think the government is taking a piece of
 their part of the pie, people are against social programs because they
 think it is taking a piece of their part of the pie and it goes on and on
 and on.  All this does is prevent the pie from growing for everyone, it is
 rather comical if it weren’t so sad.  It is like a golfer trying to fix a
 slice, the more he tries to hit it left (for a right hander) the more he
 slices.  Only when he starts trying to hit it in the direction of the slice
 does he fix the swing.



 In the past we allocated the pie based on a person’s contribution to the
 limited pie.  But today, we are transitioning to a world where no one will
 contribute meaningfully to the pie and the pie will ultimately have no
 limits.  If you limit a person’s share of the pie under those  facts, most
 would get none of the unlimited pie society is capable of distributing and
 you artificially limit the pie.  Since Money is simply a measure of the pie
 and since the pie will transition to an unlimited pie in the future, we
 need to transition Money also to unlimited growth.  Everyone thinks that
 will create inflation since more money chasing a fixed number of goods just
 causes the price to go up.  That is old thinking and completely wrong in
 the world without limits. Today more money just causes the pie to expand.
   Why limit a money supply for an unlimited pie and refuse to allocate the
 money to people when fewer and fewer contribute anything to the pie’s
 growth?



 It is antiquated thinking and fear which is responsible for a lack of
 progress today.



 Ransom



 *From:* Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:45 AM

 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?



 Yes, James there are problems ahead. However I think we can handle
 artificial intelligence as well. Not without sacrifice and a time of
 accommodation paired with fear. You know how automobiles in England a
 little over 100 years ago had to have a person walking ahead announcing an
 automobile is coming. We have progressed. Mankind will be able to progress
 even further, but it is good to make arrangements so that there is not a
 new automobile just appearing, when time comes we can reduce restrictions
 and reap the benefits.

 I agree with Dave. There are enormous possibilities opening up in front of
 us. There is already enough of the basic needs available  for everyone. As
 I see it there are a few possible ways to handle that. We can hoard it and
 use it for lesser cause than keep people alive and productive.

 We can say that if people less fortunate want something of our surplus we
 can ask them to give us something back.

 We can share .

 I believe keeping the surplus just because we can will cause conflict and
 no good for our economy. In addition others will suffer.

 I believe  we will find that people less fortunate will recent that and
 provide a minimum as a protest. A little bit as people participating  as
 workforce do that just for the paycheck.

 I believe that sharing the essentials will give us people motivated to
 reach joint future goals. Who wants to sit and feed your self for many
 years without accomplish anything for yourself or anyone else? I doubt
 there are many. No not all will be productive in an effective way but those
 who will (the majority) will provide a lot because of an inner motivation
 not a fear 

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

Actually, I know that you were no where to be found when I was testifying
before Congress on the Launch Services Purchase Act of 1990 that was the
seminal move toward launch service privatization and I also know that the
economic studies that try to demonstrate that immigration is not resulting
in centralization of wealth and destruction of the middle class are flawed
in the extreme as well as being bought and paid for.  Anti-government
sentiments are embodied in the launch services privatization movement, of
which part you are apparently a johnny-come-lately, so it makes little
sense that you would be so pro-government.

The unconditional basic income is an anti-government measure:  it
disintermediates the entire welfare state.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Randy Wuller rwul...@freeark.com wrote:

 Mr. Bowery,  You don’t even know me. And I seriously doubt you have done
 any more than I have on the Solar Centric issue. The anti-immigration and
 anti-government sentiments are idiotic and only when those silly notions
 are slowly dumped in the trash can of obsolete ideas will we be able to
 institute policies that will allow some progress.  Until then these ideas
 are counterproductive.  I do agree we need a solar centric society , it is
 why I led a lobby group on the subject for many years.



 Ransom



 *From:* James Bowery [mailto:jabow...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 1:31 PM
 *To:* vortex-l

 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?



 Physical reality provides, to first order, a 2 dimensional biosphere of
 limited surface area.  The 3 dimensional solar system provides a first
 order unlimited pie but to second order, even it is limited.



 Given the actual behavior of governments and corporations within the
 biosphere, anti-immigration and anti-government sentiments are entirely
 rational.  If you want your first-order approximation of limitless utopia,
 you need to include in your postulates a solar-centric civilization -- not
 as an after-thought but as a prerequisite.



 You are talking to a guy who has done more than you will ever hope of
 doing to achieve not only solar centric civilization but increasing the
 biosphere's carrying capacity by 20-fold with algae cultivation, so don't
 try to play more cornucopian than thou with me.



 On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Randy Wuller rwul...@freeark.com
 wrote:

 You are all missing the point.  We are transitioning from the economics of
 scarce resources to unlimited resources.  When you apply economic policies
 designed for the allocation of scarce resources to an economy of unlimited
 resources you artificially limit the pie.  That is what we are doing
 today.  No one has to share what they have, everyone can have more. The pie
 can literally be as big as we want it to be, just stop artificially
 restricting its growth.



 This nonsense of limits is pervasive, people are anti-immigration because
 they think the immigrant is taking a piece of their part of the pie, people
 are anti-government because they think the government is taking a piece of
 their part of the pie, people are against social programs because they
 think it is taking a piece of their part of the pie and it goes on and on
 and on.  All this does is prevent the pie from growing for everyone, it is
 rather comical if it weren’t so sad.  It is like a golfer trying to fix a
 slice, the more he tries to hit it left (for a right hander) the more he
 slices.  Only when he starts trying to hit it in the direction of the slice
 does he fix the swing.



 In the past we allocated the pie based on a person’s contribution to the
 limited pie.  But today, we are transitioning to a world where no one will
 contribute meaningfully to the pie and the pie will ultimately have no
 limits.  If you limit a person’s share of the pie under those  facts, most
 would get none of the unlimited pie society is capable of distributing and
 you artificially limit the pie.  Since Money is simply a measure of the pie
 and since the pie will transition to an unlimited pie in the future, we
 need to transition Money also to unlimited growth.  Everyone thinks that
 will create inflation since more money chasing a fixed number of goods just
 causes the price to go up.  That is old thinking and completely wrong in
 the world without limits. Today more money just causes the pie to expand.
   Why limit a money supply for an unlimited pie and refuse to allocate the
 money to people when fewer and fewer contribute anything to the pie’s
 growth?



 It is antiquated thinking and fear which is responsible for a lack of
 progress today.



 Ransom



 *From:* Lennart Thornros [mailto:lenn...@thornros.com]
 *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 11:45 AM


 *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
 *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?



 Yes, James there are problems ahead. However I think we can handle
 artificial intelligence as well. Not without sacrifice and a time

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com
wrote:

 James, the solar system has to be recognized for many reasons and I have
 heard nobody trying to exclude that.


You misunderstand what I mean by prerequisite.

When there is a frontier to be settled, the political economics of
immigration are radically different.  By radically I mean it literally in
the sense of the root of the political economy in land rent during the
opening of a frontier bears virtually no relationship to the political
economy of a settled territory.

People who deny the importance of economic rent in a closed-frontier
setting are participants in the centralization of wealth and destruction of
the middle class.  This centralization of wealth creates the equivalent of
welfare queens that enjoy the legal protections of their property rights
without paying for those protections.  Taxing income doesn't do it as
income is not the same as wealth.

The anarcho-capitalist model, if intellectually honest, will admit the
equivalent of property insurance premiums paid to the entity that enforces
property rights before it will admit anything akin to paying taxes on
economic activity.

That's why, subsequent to my successful work on launch service
privatization (circa 1991) http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/testimny.htm,
I advocated a net asset tax and unconditional basic income (circa 1992)
http://ota.polyonymo.us/others-papers/NetAssetTax_Bowery.txt.

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

The proposal
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-in-our-hands_105549266790.pdf
from the conservative thinktank American Enterprise Institute's scholar
Charles Murray is worded as follows:

Henceforth, federal, state, and local governments shall make no law nor
establish any program that provides benefits to some citizens but not to
others.  All programs currently providing such benefits are to be
terminated. The funds formerly allocated to them are to be used instead to
provide every citizen with a cash grant beginning at age twenty-one and
continuing until death. The annual value of the cash grant at the program’s
outset is to be $10,000.


So your 300M population is too high and your $15,000 is as well.

On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 10:09 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Did you stop to make an estimate of the amount of money being distributed
 if this scheme is implemented?  A quick figure is 300,000,000 x 15,000 =
 4.5 trillion bucks!  The entire GDP of the US in 2014 was 17.4 trillion
 dollars.  It appears that a tax rate of about 40% of the GDP would be
 required just to give out that much money, not counting defense, and all
 the other required government functions.

 From the budget numbers I found on wikipedia it looks like the total tax
 taken in by the government would at least double in order to cover the
 distribution.  I suspect that the burden upon the economy would be too
 great to sustain anywhere near the amounts we are considering.

 Perhaps someone can check my figures and see if they make sense.  I am in
 favor of some type of system, but the numbers need to be reasonable.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Wed, Dec 10, 2014 10:07 pm
 Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

   Jed,

 You suggested our country should pay our citizens somewhere in the
 neighborhood $10,000. The idea would be that the amount, being modest would
 only be enough to pay for the bare necessities - but not enough to actually
 live on unless groups got together and roomed together in a dwelling to
 split the rent/mortgage, and/or to get jobs. I came to a similar conclusion
 myself some time ago. We can quibble about how much might be considered a
 minimum guaranteed income everyone should be entitled to get, but I get the
 idea. Personally, I think I'd make guaranteed minimum income base closer to
 $15,000.

 I'm still not sure about what kind of jobs such citizens would be willing
 to take. You think few if any would be willing to work at minimum wage. I'm
 not so sure about that. I think there might be some would still work at a
 minimum-wage job because they know it would nevertheless supplement their
 guaranteed base income. I'm also assuming such individuals might be
 somewhat disadvantaged (perhaps physically or mentally) in some way and
 would feel they might not be capable of getting any kind of a better paying
 job. That said, I also hope the vast majority would feel financially
 capable of looking for a far more satisfying jobs that pay a decent wage to
 supplement their guaranteed income base.

 And, yes, the conservative sectors of our countries would most likely blow
 a gasket. Why? Just because they think it's wrong!!! It might help their
 blood pressure if we could find out how much the government might save
 through the dismantling and streamlining of a number of welfare programs
 that currently cost billions of dollars to fund each year. I assume many
 government hand-out programs would no longer be necessary to be funded, or
 certainly not at the level they are currently maintained at. Indeed, it
 might turn out to be cheaper. If the cost saving concept could get through
 a conservative mindset I think they would quickly capitulate and start
 claiming it was their idea all along. In any case, problem solved.

 Hopefully more and more countries will start experimenting with this
 guaranteed income program, and hopefully we will soon see additional
 evidence that suggests doing so actually benefits society far more than
 fearing it will drain the coffers of the country and/or lead to
 hyperinflation.

 As for me, I look forward to doing new kinds of work in my retirement. It
 will be nice to be paid to do what I want to work on.

 Regards,
 Steven Vincent Johnson
 svjart.orionworks.com
 zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:OT: what if everybody got free cash?

[James Bowery]

On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 5:06 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

 I expect the major difficulty here to try it would be the GOP, but
 logically that does not make sense.


From the conservative thinktank, The American Enterprise Institute comes a
proposal to replace the welfare state with basic income
http://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-in-our-hands_105549266790.pdf
.


The only time basic income was ever even tested on a limited scale in the
US was under the much maligned administartion of GOP president Nixon.

No, the biggest impediment, by far, to anything that bypasses the corrupt
welfare state is the Democratic Party which treats civil service jobs in
that bureaucracy as political spoils delivered via community organizers
that deliver votes to the Democrats:



 Speech by President Richard Nixon
http://www.abelard.org/briefings/nixon_speech_guaranteed_income_citizens_wage.php

Good evening my fellow Americans:

As you know, I returned last Sunday night from a trip around the world—a
trip that took me to eight countries in 9 days.

The purpose of this trip was to help lay the basis for a lasting peace,
once the war in Vietnam is ended. In the course of it, I also saw once
again the vigorous efforts so many new nations are making to leap the
centuries into the modern world.

Every time I return to the United States after such a trip, I realize how
fortunate we are to live in this rich land. We have the world's most
advanced industrial economy, the greatest wealth ever known to man, the
fullest measure of freedom ever enjoyed by any people, anywhere.

Yet we, too, have an urgent need to modernize our institutions—and our need
is no less than theirs.

We face an urban crisis, a social crisis-and at the same time, a crisis of
confidence in the capacity of government to do its job.

A third of a century of centralizing power and responsibility in Washington
has produced a bureaucratic monstrosity, cumbersome, unresponsive,
ineffective.

A third of a century of social experiment has left us a legacy of
entrenched programs that have outlived their time or outgrown their
purposes.

A third of a century of unprecedented growth and change has strained our
institutions, and raised serious questions about whether they are still
adequate to the times.

It is no accident, therefore, that we find increasing skepticism—and not
only among our young people, but among citizens everywhere—about the
continuing capacity of government to master the challenges we face.

Nowhere has the failure of government been more tragically apparent than in
its efforts to help the poor and especially in its system of public welfare.

TARGET: REFORMS

Since taking office, one of my first priorities has been to repair the
machinery of government, to put it in shape for the 1970's. I have made
many changes designed to improve the functioning of the executive branch.
And I have asked Congress for a number of important structural reforms;
among others, a wide-ranging postal reform, a comprehensive reform of the
draft, a reform of unemployment insurance, a reform of our hunger programs,
a reform of the present confusing hodge-podge of Federal grants-in-aid.

Last April 21, I sent Congress a message asking for a package of major tax
reforms, including both the closing of loopholes and the removal of more
than 2 million low-income families from the tax rolls altogether. I am glad
that Congress is now acting on tax reform, and I hope the Congress will
begin to act on the other reforms that I have requested.

The purpose of all these reforms is to eliminate unfairness; to make
government more effective as well as more efficient; and to bring an end to
its chronic failure to deliver the service that it promises.

My purpose tonight, however, is not to review the past record, but to
present a new set of reforms—a new set of proposals—a new and drastically
different approach to the way in which government cares for those in need,
and to the way the responsibilities are shared between the State and the
Federal Government.

I have chosen to do so in a direct report to the people because these
proposals call for public decisions of the first importance; because they
represent a fundamental change in the Nation's approach to one of its most
pressing social problems; and because, quite deliberately, they also
represent the first major reversal of the trend toward ever more
centralization of government in Washington, D.C. After a third of a century
of power flowing from the people and the States to Washington it is time
for a New Federalism in which power, funds, and responsibility will flow
from Washington to the States and to the people.

During last year's election campaign, I often made a point that touched a
responsive chord wherever I traveled.

I said that this Nation became great not because of what government did for
people, but because of what people did for themselves.

This new approach aims at helping the American people do 

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion in Huffington Post

[James Bowery]

My response:

The article contains a ludicrously understated assessment of the situation:

Indeed, several physicists are skeptical of these results precisely
because they appear to contravene physical law.

Here's reality: Within a mere 5 weeks of the March 1989 press conference by
Pons and Fleischmann, virtually all physicists joined together in a united
front that was not only skeptical but prepared to destroy the careers of
anyone who so much as attempted to replicate the work of Pons and
Fleischmann. This despite the fact that the full experimental protocol had
yet to be published and despite the fact that when published the
experimental protocol clearly showed a minimum of 6 weeks preparation were
required to sufficiently load the Pd with Deuterium.

The preamble to the DoE's 1989 cold fusion review panel's report reads:

Ordinarily, new scientific discoveries are claimed to be consistent and
reproducible; as a result, if the experiments are not complicated, the
discovery can usually be confirmed or disproved in a few months. The claims
of cold fusion, however, are unusual in that even the strongest proponents
of cold fusion assert that the experiments, for unknown reasons, are not
consistent and reproducible at the present time. However, even a single
short but valid cold fusion period would be revolutionary. --Norman Ramsey

Dr. Norman Ramsey Jr., Nobel laureate and professor of physics at Harvard
University was the only person on the the 1989 Department of Energy cold
fusion review panel to voice a dissenting opinion. Ramsey insisted on the
inclusion of this preamble as an alternative to his resignation from the
panel. The committee acquiesed because he was its co-chair and the only
Nobel laureate on the committee.

Dr. Ramsey's condition has been fulfilled hundreds of times over the last
quarter century and there has been absolutely no acknowledgement by the APS
of its crime. See
Los Alamos nuclear chemist Ed Storms's peer reviewed paper published in the
German counterpart of the British Nature:

Status of Cold-Fusion (2010)

http://coldfusionnow.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/StormsEstatusofcoa.pdf

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 7:05 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 See:


 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-h-bailey/low-energy-nuclear-reacti_b_6189772.html

Re: [Vo]:How to bring people around...

[James Bowery]

There are two characteristics that eliminate the vast majority of the
population from any possibility of recognizing the reality of LENR:

1) Understanding how fundamental to the veracity of scientific fact is the
distinction between experiment and argument/theory.

2) Being willing to look seriously at something that risks social censure
for doing so.

Even if the presenter can resist putting forth their pet theory -- thereby
obscuring the distinction in #1 for presentees who might otherwise be
willing to look at experiments --  there isn't much you can do about either
of these characteristics.  People either have what it takes or they don't
and very few do.


On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Lennart Thornros lenn...@thornros.com
wrote:

 In my experience the 'truth' about LENR cannot be told to any group. One
 need to convince one at a time. Large organization mostly prepare for
 changes by providing information they think people will understand and
 therefore they will see the positive in changes to come. It fails almost
 every time.
  The reason I think you can find in what has been said here about how we
 educate people. In my opinion one should just give the basic and then
 stimulate natural curiosity. The difference is between forcing the concept
 of differential equations on someone interested in biology or have somebody
 interested in biology finding out about differential equations so he better
 can understand biology. I know my idea will not be implemented as it makes
 it hard to administrate - the policies becomes just fluff and no bureaucrat
 can enforce them.
 From having executed many changes I have learnt that the only way is by
 selling the idea to one person and then to another and select people who
 has an interest in effective organisation and to create result. Sooner or
 later (often later) you will get into the snowball effect 2 convinces 2 and
 they then convinces 2 each. It is very hard to sell the LENR concept as it
 is surrounded by unknowns. 80% of the population will not jump to new
 grounds without being sure they land on secure ground.
 I agree that when you can buy a LENR generator at Homedepot then it is
 easy. If the theory was chiseled  in stone then academia could perhaps be a
 factor to help the acceptance.

 Best Regards ,
 Lennart Thornros

 www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
 lenn...@thornros.com
 +1 916 436 1899
 202 Granite Park Court, Lincoln CA 95648

 “Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a
 commitment to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM

 On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 My mentor used to tell me: The best things are invented by those who
 don't know it can't be done.

 Bob Higgins

 On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Beside what you say, there is some common error.

 This is to imagine that education can help people be more rational.
 In fact education is there not only to give tools and informations, but
 also to structure the mind to accept those tools and information.
 This is well explaine by Thomas Kuhn as the notion of paradigm.
 http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/Kuhn.html

 a paradigm is in a way a selective blindness designed to make you focus
 on what works in the paradigm, to avoid losing time money and energy
 looking beside.

 see how the skeptics battle not to prove LENR is wrong, but to save
 money by not searching for it...

 it is a specialization of intelligence.
 as all specialization it have it's domain of validity, and thus the
 domaine where it is an illusion, an error, a tragedy.

 this is why less educate people can, by accident, show more intelligent
 behavior not by their superior IQ or deep intelectual tooling, but because
 they have less tools, and simpler reasoning that allow them to focus on key
 arguments, and not be fooled by inverted clamps and missing gamma.


 among the skeptic I have seen a behavior which is the black an
 white... they prove something is not perfect, then conlude you can ignore
 it, and since nothing is perfect they can ignore all... if precision is not
 good, the the result is null... they don't know what is grey. it is a
 tactic, but also a paradigm as they think in a paradigm where thing have
 some given precision and they cannot think out of that...
 simpler people can adapt their precision and their conclusions, instead
 of dismiss all once the precision is below the standard.

 as I say, LENR will be accepted when a kid of 5 would be able to
 ridicule a PhD who deny reality. not before.

Re: [Vo]:Bill Gates (MS) LENR Cold Fusion- Italy meeting

[James Bowery]

I would believe that the probable outcome circa early 90s but to presume
Gates is so out of touch with the priesthood that after 25 years he is
still unaware of their canon law stretches credulity to the breaking point.

On top of that we have the Lowell Wood connection
http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/17/lowell-wood-and-lenr/ to Gates.  No
I think Gates is finally realizing that his legacy as a humanitarian may be
in jeopardy if he doesn't get out in front of this particular parade and
lead.

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

 I fear Bill Gates will gather up the information from Violante and show it
 to leading physicists in the US. They will tell him that cold fusion does
 not exist according to their theories, so the results must all be wrong.
 That will be the end of that.

 - Jed

Re: [Vo]:New Rossi Patent Appln..publishes Today

[James Bowery]

The patent is invalid.  The catalyst has to be specified in at least a
preferred embodiment.


On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 8:45 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  The USPTO has an 18 month embargo on publication, which is* optional* and
 not required - and they chose not to avail themselves of the delayed
 publication.  That is a strategy choice. You can find this stature online:
 (35 U.S.C. 122 Confidential status of applications)

 The implication is that they want to get the most basic version of the
 device protected and in front of the public immediately if possible.
 These is a very limited scope patent – and could get through, but it may
 not protect very much.

 There is no mention of isotopes or a particular catalyst. This means that
 they cannot protect the use of any catalyst, other than as a trade
 secret, but catch-22 – if the devices is not described well enough so
 that a practitioner “skilled in the art” can make and use it, they are in
 trouble on the basic claim.  This is the so-called “enablement requirement
 ” of 35 U.S.C. 112.

 The purpose of the requirement that the specification describe the
 invention in such terms that one skilled in the art can make and use the
 claimed invention is to ensure that the invention is communicated to the
 interested public in a meaningful way. Thus if MFMP can replicate the device
 for any gain, then Rossi is in a good position.

 *From:* Frank Acland

 Maybe Industrial Heat is using the USPTO's fast track service for this
 one: *http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Track_One.jsp*
 http://www.uspto.gov/patents/init_events/Track_One.jsp

 … why did this patent show up already?  It was only filed in april of
 this year.


* Application Number* * Filing Date** Patent Number*

 61818553May 2, 2013
 61819058May 3, 2013
 61821914May 10, 2013
 Ron Kita  wrote:

 Greetings Vortex-L,


 *http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2Sect2=HITOFFu=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htmlr=1p=1f=Gl=50d=PG01S1=20140326711.PGNR.OS=DN%2F20140326711RS=DN%2F20140326711*
 http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2Sect2=HITOFFu=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htmlr=1p=1f=Gl=50d=PG01S1=20140326711.PGNR.OS=DN%2F20140326711RS=DN%2F20140326711

 Ad Astra,

 Ron Kita, Chiralex

 Doylestown PA



  --

 Frank Acland
 Publisher, *E-Cat World* http://www.e-catworld.com

Re: [Vo]:questions on McKubre cells and AC component

[James Bowery]

Barry Kort's critique may be invaluable because it may open up funding for
cold fusion research. Note that even graduate students replicating cold
fusion research is forbidden.  An honestly skeptical master's thesis
however might not do career damage.  The implied experimental conditions
are relatively inexpensive to reproduce. When I say reproduce I mean
reduced the apparent excess heat.  The area in which these pseudo-skeptics
always fail is to fail to reproduce the excess heat effect in accordance
with their critique of the experiments. The kind of error Barry is talking
about should appear in just about any electrolytic system whether deuterium
or hydrogen based. It should also hear whether it is palladium or nickel
based. It sounds like Barry is close to having a quantitative model. It
should be able to predict quantity of excess heat appearing at various
loading levels. It should be reliable.

On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:25 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 I am in total agreement with the statements from Bob.  In every
 simulation that I have conducted using LTspice the system input power is
 accurately determined by the product of the constant current source DC
 value and the average DC voltage measured at the node of entry.  During my
 testing I used several different models.  In some systems I allowed the
 resistance from the node to ground to vary according to a sine wave model,
 while in others I toyed with square wave forms of variation.

 I also experimented with additional resistive loads connected effectively
 in parallel with the DC entry node.  Both AC and DC connections were tested
 for the external node.  For some testing I simulated a capacitor that was
 capable of virtually shorting out the input voltage variations by absorbing
 most of the AC current being generated by the changing resistance of the
 modeled cell load.

 One interesting observation that I carefully observed to be true was that
 the varying resistance within the cell due to a process such as bubbles
 forming and breaking actually generates AC power that can be coupled away
 from the cell under certain conditions.  This power can be terminated into
 an external load and siphons away some of the input power that is supplied
 by the DC current source.  Under this condition the actual input heating
 power applied to the cell can be less than calculated by an amount equal to
 that which is lost into the coupled load.   This lost power makes the real
 COP greater than what is calculated.  Fortunately, the error is small and
 only present when an external load is coupled to the cell.  There is no
 indication that any significant load capable of absorbing the cell
 generated AC power is present during Dr. McKubre's testing.

 I consider the internal conversion of input DC power into AC power that
 can be transferred away from a cell such as this to be essentially the same
 process as seen during the operation of an RF power amplifier.  In that
 case, the device heats up to a temperature that is determined by the
 difference between the DC input power and the RF output power that leaves
 the system.  The true amplifier heating power will always be slightly lower
 than what you would expect without any RF conversion taking place.  The
 behavior of a class 'A' RF stage serves as an excellent example of what I
 am observing in the simulations.

 Dave


  -Original Message-
 From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sat, Nov 1, 2014 2:42 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:questions on McKubre cells and AC component

  BTW, David Roberson and I have corresponded with Barry Kort about the
 claim that McKubre's measurements were as much as 3% in error due to
 presumption of constant current and average voltage between samples for
 calculation of average power.  The claimed mis-measurement is attributed to
 the changing voltage due to the bubbles in the cell rapidly changing the
 cell resistance and hence cell voltage.  Complicit in the argument is the
 inability of the power supply in constant current mode to adequately slew
 to keep up with the changes in resistance.  Barry claims that reflections
 setup in the the connecting wires as transmission lines causes dissipation
 of the time varying component.

  David and I both did simulations of this setup using SPICE analysis in
 transient simulation mode, which analyzes the circuit from first
 principles.  In my simulation I used a model for a voltage source in a
 feedback configuration with a sense resistor to comprise a current source
 similar to how real power supply current sources are made.  Finite slew
 rate of the voltage was introduced. A lossy transmission line was used
 between the source and a load resistor, that was modeled as having a
 sinusoidally varying resistance (+ a constant).  The simulated results were
 compared to that of an ideal current source driving the same load.  The
 instantaneous power waveform was computed 

Re: [Vo]:questions on McKubre cells and AC component

[James Bowery]

Errata: I'm recovering from an operation on my arm so I'm using voice
recognition to do my typing and it makes error that sometimes I miss.

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 6:37 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 Barry Kort's critique may be invaluable because it may open up funding for
 cold fusion research. Note that even graduate students replicating cold
 fusion research is forbidden.  An honestly skeptical master's thesis
 however might not do career damage.  The implied experimental conditions
 are relatively inexpensive to reproduce. When I say reproduce I mean
 reduced the apparent excess heat.  The area in which these pseudo-skeptics
 always fail is to fail to reproduce the excess heat effect in accordance
 with their critique of the experiments. The kind of error Barry is talking
 about should appear in just about any electrolytic system whether deuterium
 or hydrogen based. It should also hear whether it is palladium or nickel
 based. It sounds like Barry is close to having a quantitative model. It
 should be able to predict quantity of excess heat appearing at various
 loading levels. It should be reliable.

 On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:25 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
 wrote:

 I am in total agreement with the statements from Bob.  In every
 simulation that I have conducted using LTspice the system input power is
 accurately determined by the product of the constant current source DC
 value and the average DC voltage measured at the node of entry.  During my
 testing I used several different models.  In some systems I allowed the
 resistance from the node to ground to vary according to a sine wave model,
 while in others I toyed with square wave forms of variation.

 I also experimented with additional resistive loads connected effectively
 in parallel with the DC entry node.  Both AC and DC connections were tested
 for the external node.  For some testing I simulated a capacitor that was
 capable of virtually shorting out the input voltage variations by absorbing
 most of the AC current being generated by the changing resistance of the
 modeled cell load.

 One interesting observation that I carefully observed to be true was that
 the varying resistance within the cell due to a process such as bubbles
 forming and breaking actually generates AC power that can be coupled away
 from the cell under certain conditions.  This power can be terminated into
 an external load and siphons away some of the input power that is supplied
 by the DC current source.  Under this condition the actual input heating
 power applied to the cell can be less than calculated by an amount equal to
 that which is lost into the coupled load.   This lost power makes the real
 COP greater than what is calculated.  Fortunately, the error is small and
 only present when an external load is coupled to the cell.  There is no
 indication that any significant load capable of absorbing the cell
 generated AC power is present during Dr. McKubre's testing.

 I consider the internal conversion of input DC power into AC power that
 can be transferred away from a cell such as this to be essentially the same
 process as seen during the operation of an RF power amplifier.  In that
 case, the device heats up to a temperature that is determined by the
 difference between the DC input power and the RF output power that leaves
 the system.  The true amplifier heating power will always be slightly lower
 than what you would expect without any RF conversion taking place.  The
 behavior of a class 'A' RF stage serves as an excellent example of what I
 am observing in the simulations.

 Dave


  -Original Message-
 From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sat, Nov 1, 2014 2:42 pm
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:questions on McKubre cells and AC component

  BTW, David Roberson and I have corresponded with Barry Kort about the
 claim that McKubre's measurements were as much as 3% in error due to
 presumption of constant current and average voltage between samples for
 calculation of average power.  The claimed mis-measurement is attributed to
 the changing voltage due to the bubbles in the cell rapidly changing the
 cell resistance and hence cell voltage.  Complicit in the argument is the
 inability of the power supply in constant current mode to adequately slew
 to keep up with the changes in resistance.  Barry claims that reflections
 setup in the the connecting wires as transmission lines causes dissipation
 of the time varying component.

  David and I both did simulations of this setup using SPICE analysis in
 transient simulation mode, which analyzes the circuit from first
 principles.  In my simulation I used a model for a voltage source in a
 feedback configuration with a sense resistor to comprise a current source
 similar to how real power supply current sources are made.  Finite slew
 rate of the voltage was introduced. A lossy transmission line was used
 between the source and a load

Re: [Vo]:Konstantin Meyl's Potential Vortex Departure

[James Bowery]

Why would the act of measurement take the absolute value rather than, say,
the real component of the complex value?

On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 6:44 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:

 If the speed light in a vacuum c had a real and an imaginary components
 too, then the components could vary with motion but
 the measured value would appear constant and correspond to the magnitude
 |c|.

 c = a + ib ,   |c| = sqrt( a^2 + b^2) = constant

 Harry

 On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:45 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 A particularly intriguing notion of Konstantin Meyl's is that a complex
 speed of light is derivable from the conventional interpretation of the
 dielectric coefficient, rendering that conventional interpretation an
 offense against the basic principles of physics:





 http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/2P9_0930-1-piers-extended_field_theory.pdf

 This seems to be his point of departure into fringe physics his
 replacement of the vector potential with his derivation of the potential
 vortex.

[Vo]:Konstantin Meyl's Potential Vortex Departure

[James Bowery]

A particularly intriguing notion of Konstantin Meyl's is that a complex
speed of light is derivable from the conventional interpretation of the
dielectric coefficient, rendering that conventional interpretation an
offense against the basic principles of physics:




http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/2P9_0930-1-piers-extended_field_theory.pdf

This seems to be his point of departure into fringe physics his
replacement of the vector potential with his derivation of the potential
vortex.

Re: [Vo]:Konstantin Meyl's Potential Vortex Departure

[James Bowery]

From a colleague:

I can't help but think this is backwards, and is the more offensive
departure, not from orthodoxy (which always deserves to be challenged) but
from simplicity (Occam) and common sense.  Still, he's not far off the
track because of the close connection between the speed of light and the
ultimate discrete motion -- the imaginary logic value or oscillation, which
is a simple case of complex.



On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Right James. I think his work is very interesting. I'm interested to know
 when someone finally digs into it w/ some technical background and can see
 what is good, and what is bad, about it.

 On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:45 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 A particularly intriguing notion of Konstantin Meyl's is that a complex
 speed of light is derivable from the conventional interpretation of the
 dielectric coefficient, rendering that conventional interpretation an
 offense against the basic principles of physics:





 http://www.k-meyl.de/go/Primaerliteratur/2P9_0930-1-piers-extended_field_theory.pdf

 This seems to be his point of departure into fringe physics his
 replacement of the vector potential with his derivation of the potential
 vortex.

Re: [Vo]:questions on McKubre cells and AC component

[James Bowery]

Could this explain figure 3 in Storms's paper The Status of Cold Fusion
(2010) http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/StormsEstatusofcoa.pdf?

On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Barry Kort on Dr bob blog reported challenging critiques of McKubre
 experiments

 http://www.drboblog.com/cbs-60-minutes-on-cold-fusion/#comment-37932

 maybe some already have the debunking, the correction... i imagien it is
 addressed:



 About a year after CBS 60 Minutes aired their episode on Cold Fusion, I
 followed up with Rob Duncan to explore Richard Garwin’s thesis that McKubre
 was measuring the input electric power incorrectly.

 It turns out that McKubre was reckoning only the DC power going into his
 cells, and assuming (for arcane technical reasons) there could not be any
 AC power going in, and therefore he didn’t need to measure or include any
 AC power term in his energy budget model.

 Together with several other people, I helped work out a model for the
 omitted AC power term in McKubre’s experimental design. Our model showed
 that there was measurable and significant AC power, arising from the
 fluctuations in ohmic resistance as bubbles formed and sloughed off the
 surface of the palladium electrodes. Our model jibed with both the
 qualitative and quantitative evidence from McKubre’s reports:

 1) McKubre (and others) noted that the excess heat only appeared after the
 palladium lattice was fully loaded. And that’s precisely when the Faradaic
 current no longer charges up the lattice, but begins producing gas bubbles
 on the surfaces of the electrodes.

 2) The excess heat in McKubre’s cells was only apparent, significant, and
 sizable when the Faradaic drive current was elevated to dramatically high
 levels, thereby increasing the rate at which bubbles were forming and
 sloughing off the electrodes.

 3) The effect was enhanced if the surface of the electrodes was rough
 rather than polished smooth, so that larger bubbles could form and cling to
 the rough surface before sloughing off, thereby alternately occluding and
 exposing somewhat larger fractions of surface area for each bubble.

 The time-varying resistance arising from the bubbles forming and sloughing
 off the surface of the electrodes — after the cell was fully loaded,
 enhanced by elevated Faradaic drive currents and further enhanced by a
 rough electrode surface — produced measurable and significant AC noise
 power into the energy budget model that went as the square of the magnitude
 of the fluctuations in the cell resistance.

 To a first approximation, a 17% fluctuation in resistance would nominally
 produce a 3% increase in power, over and above the baseline DC power term.
 Garwin and Lewis had found that McKubre’s cells were producing about 3%
 more heat than could be accounted for with his energy measurements, where
 McKubre was reckoning only the DC power going into his cells, and
 (incorrectly) assuming there was no AC power that needed to be measured or
 included in his energy budget model.

 I suggest slapping an audio VU meter across McKubre’s cell to measure the
 AC burst noise from the fluctuating resistance. Alternatively use one of
 McKubre’s constant current power supplies to drive an old style desk
 telephone with a carbon button microphone. I predict the handset will still
 function: if you blow into the mouthpiece, you’ll hear it in the earpiece,
 thereby proving the reality of an AC audio signal riding on top of the DC
 current.

Re: [Vo]:To Arms

[James Bowery]

As am I, Ruby.  This instance was a little different as I posted the first
comment to the article so it was in a position to really drive some of the
pseudo-skeptics over the edge and it looks like it succeeded with Bruce
Perens in a significant way.

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 1:25 AM, Ruby r...@hush.com wrote:



 James, it's just so tiring.
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uai7M4RpoLU

 Let them continue to hallucinate;
 their typing is the only thing keeping the economy going
 while a new infrastructure is being built right under their noses!




 On 10/17/14, 3:37 PM, James Bowery wrote:

 /. just posted a story debunking cold fusion

 Have at it, men and Ruby!

 http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/10/17/2231236/the-
 physics-of-why-cold-fusion-isnt-real



 --
 Ruby Carat
 r...@coldfusionnow.org
 Skype ruby-carat
 www.coldfusionnow.org

Re: [Vo]:$10,000 bet against cold fusion on /.

[James Bowery]

Of course not.  When suckers make bets like this with me I generally at
least demand treasury rates but Bruce was so spontaneous I didn't want to
spoil it.

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Inflation adjusted?

 2014-10-17 23:03 GMT-03:00 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com:

 Bruce Perens just bet me 10,000 to one odds that no credible
 commercially utilized cold fusion by 2024. I of course accepted his
 generous and honorable bet. If only the scum responsible for its
 suppression would put their money where their mouths were. But then, no
 amount of fine can make up for what they've done.

 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5842595cid=48173885




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

Re: [Vo]:$10,000 bet against cold fusion on /.

[James Bowery]

The reason I posted the message here with the title To Arms is that I
perceived this to be a unique opportunity to goad the acolytes of
pseudo-skepticism into laying it on the line.

I was right.

You see /. is one of, if not the most read news blog by techies.  Fusion is
one of a few ultimate techs so it is hard for them not to have strong
opinions about it and since they aren't all scientists they aren't
necessarily going to be buying into the party line.  Some, however, are
sheep and will buy into the party line even though the party is striking at
the heart of their love for technology -- and science for that matter (by
promoting a theocratic regime in which experimental results are blocked
from publication if they would falsify currently fashionable interpretation
of physical theory).  Those sheep take very personally attacks on their
shepherds.


On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:57 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

 ...How did you get someone to bite?  These guys are full of bluster but
 when it comes to putting their money where their mouth is, they are full of
 shit.  Case in point on this forum is Blaze Spinnaker.

 http://intrade.freeforums.org/re-anyone-willing-to-make-a-bet-the-ecat-is-not-real-t31.html



 On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:15 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

 In reply to  James Bowery's message of Fri, 17 Oct 2014 21:03:00 -0500:
 Hi,
 [snip]
 Bruce Perens just bet me 10,000 to one odds that no credible
 commercially
 utilized cold fusion by 2024.

 Cold Fusion, or LENR?


 I of course accepted his generous and
 honorable bet. If only the scum responsible for its suppression would put
 their money where their mouths were. But then, no amount of fine can
 make
 up for what they've done.
 
 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5842595cid=48173885
 Regards,

 Robin van Spaandonk

 http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

[Vo]:To Arms

[James Bowery]

/. just posted a story debunking cold fusion

Have at it, men and Ruby!

http://science.slashdot.org/story/14/10/17/2231236/the-physics-of-why-cold-fusion-isnt-real