Hi Charlie,
There should be no 2LoT supporters or deniers in science, only people who think
and are capable of admitting they may be wrong occasionally. What you and Paul
say is true, at molecular scales there are indeed thermal gradients, bouncing
basketballs as Paul calls them. I'll ask you
Harry is right of course. Have you never studied high school level nuclear
physics David? Look up the atomic masses!
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 7:16 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Half full or half empty
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel.
The spring biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so
mechanical pressure on the gentle slope of the ratchet
wheel drives the wheel the wrong way where it can rest
against the sharp or even overhanging slope. If the pawl
is then
Hi Michel,
Harry is right of course. Have you never studied high school level nuclear
physics David? Look up the atomic masses!
You are confused about your own gender, let alone can you follow a physics
discussion.
Dave
Charles M. Brown wrote:
On a nanometer scale thermal properties are not uniform even if the
micro and larger scale temperature is uniform. There are emergent
thermal gradients and differences on a nanometer scale scale. Therefore
the Second Law is true but subverted if using nano meter scale
Michel Jullian wrote:
OK thanks Jones, Ron et al. I could have gone on and on like this,
describing encouraging experimental results maybe, raising millions
perhaps, but I'll put an end to my little joke, which was in reality
a challenge to the group's thermodynamics skills, nothing against
Charles M. Brown wrote:
I have not believed that mirrors or lenses could concentrate ambient IR
because optical systems exchanges working angle for magnification, a
situation that doesn't lend to preferential energy transfer. If
experiments have worked anyway, please share the results.
Stephen
If there are violations of the second law waiting to be employed, I
think we can be reasonably sure they won't use either heat pumps or heat
engines as their prime movers.
Not to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think what you meant to say was:
If there are violations of the
Charles M. Brown wrote:
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring
biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on the
gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way where
it can rest against the sharp or even overhanging
Charles M. Brown wrote:
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring
biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on the
gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way where
it can rest against the sharp or even overhanging slope.
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Charles M. Brown wrote:
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring
biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on
the gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way
where it can rest against the
Michel Jullian wrote:
I'll agree with Paul for once, LTSpice is truly excellent, not only
free but also one of the most accurate and fastest Spice
implementations around. A must have for anyone involved in EE.
Graphical interface a bit surprising at first, but quite efficient
when you get used
Paul Lowrance wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Charles M. Brown wrote:
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring
biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on
the gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way
Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen
If there are violations of the second law waiting to be employed, I
think we can be reasonably sure they won't use either heat pumps or
heat engines as their prime movers.
Not to put words in anyone's mouth, but I think what you meant to say was:
If there are
Silly questions, have you made sure there was no heat source (such as yourself)
in the room? Are the walls of the room at the same temperature as the air?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Paul Lowrance [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 3:40 PM
You're welcome, you'll find it here (ltspice/switchercad III)
http://www.linear.com/company/software.jsp
the help file is remarkable too BTW, and if you need a human's help there is a
very helpful ltspice yahoogroup you can subscribe to.
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A.
You do this all the time, why do you ask? lol
FWIW:
I have the feeling your posts always come as new posts, when in fact it is
sometimes clear from the context that they are replies. In such cases, if this
is not deliberate, whatever your email software, I encourage you to use the
reply
At first sight multiple pawls would seem to go around the bug in feynmann's
original ratchet indeed, but it remains to be verified (a simple 80's video
game like 2D simulation with classical bouncing balls in the two boxes might do
the trick).
Michel
- Original Message -
From:
Vortexians;
Pat Bailey just sent me some emails. One proports to show a UFO landing
on the US Capitol building, what I see is a ball of light. Then there is
the upcoming C to C AM interview of Michael of www.theyfly.com . He
mentions the website www.gaiaguys.net , which is weird by Thomas
David Thomson wrote:
Hi Harry,
If E=mc^2 is true, and mass is converted
to energy during nuclear binding, nuclear fission reactions should
create a vast cold implosion, not a vast hot explosion.
It depends on where they are on the periodic table. Elements with an
atomic number greater
Hi Harry,
If E=mc^2 is true, and mass is converted
to energy during nuclear binding, nuclear fission reactions should
create a vast cold implosion, not a vast hot explosion.
It depends on where they are on the periodic table.
Another irrational argument. I know what fusion and fission
David Thomson wrote:
Hi Harry,
If E=mc^2 is true, and mass is converted
to energy during nuclear binding, nuclear fission reactions should
create a vast cold implosion, not a vast hot explosion.
It depends on where they are on the periodic table.
Another irrational argument. I know what
Michel Jullian wrote:
---
Silly questions, have you made sure there was no heat source (such as
yourself) in the room? Are the walls of the room at the same temperature as the air?
---
There's always the possibility, as those particular experiments were not
meticulously performed. One of
Just found this on a Google News Alert for: Cold Fusion:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/75p4572645025112/?p=36faf43185bd4180b239
1cb40c4031e7pi=1
-DonW-
Further evidence of nuclear reactions in the Pd/D lattice: emission of
charged particles.
Journal
Naturwissenschaften
Publisher
Hi Stephen,
Why do these discussions always have to end like this?
Excuse me. For the record, you accused me of having SR as my
religion, after which I observed that cranks always seem to say that
in relativity discussions, which is true. Go back and check the post.
On March 5, after
Oh I forgot again, could a Jones readable Vo reply to this so he gets it?
Thanks.
Michel
- Original Message -
From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2007 12:52 AM
Subject: [Vo]: Re: Loop closed? (was Re: High efficiency electrolysis)
Or, even more simply, _experiment_ with macro size bouncing balls and a macro
size multiple pawl ratchet wheel, and shake the solidarized boxes randomly to
see if you can get the axle between the two boxes to rotate consistently in the
right direction.
This should give a correct yes/no
Perhaps a stepped frame video where random numbers are
used to select realistic alterations to the parts of a
model between frames would be appropriate. Can I talk
myself or anyone else into it?
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 02:16:51 +0100
Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or, even more simply,
- Original Message
From: DonW [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just found this on a Google News Alert for: Cold Fusion:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/75p4572645025112/?p=36faf43185bd4180b2391cb40c4031e7pi=1
This paper must be the same one, or an update of the same RD reported by Steve
Krivit
Sure enough, no apology. Too bad.
David Thomson wrote:
Hi Stephen,
[ ... ]
You called me a crank in two different posts, now.
Sigh... OK, you're right, at the very least I insinuated it pretty
strongly... I shouldn't have done that.
I'm sorry I called you a crank, and if you don't assert that my religion
must be SR
Jones wrote,
However the main thing which may be new - or if not new, not well covered
elsewhere --may be their model of the reaction based upon electron
capture
Howdy Jones,
Never cease to be surprised at your insight. You may consider that some of
your posts are most revealing which
Thomas,
Please forward a copy to me
Regards,
Dean
Original Message Follows
From: thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]: lightballs on US Capitol
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2007 14:46:25 -0600
Vortexians;
Pat Bailey just sent me
Jones Beene wrote:
- Original Message From: DonW [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just found this on a Google News Alert for: Cold Fusion:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/75p4572645025112/?p=36faf43185bd4180b2391cb40c4031e7pi=1
This paper must be the same one, or an update of the same RD
The heart of the matter is this.
Even is SR GR weren't flawed, even if there were no experiments which
showed it to be incorrect (there are quite a few) it is still a fact that
aether theory had no reason to be dropped as there is no evidence against a
fluid aether (a stationary one is illogical
David Thomson wrote:
Hi Harry,
If E=mc^2 is true, and mass is converted
to energy during nuclear binding, nuclear fission reactions should
create a vast cold implosion, not a vast hot explosion.
It depends on where they are on the periodic table.
Another irrational argument. I know
Couple quick comments/questions...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This email will describe the simplest (as far as I know) method of
capturing and storing ambient temperature energy. Hopefully those
wanting to reply could first read the entire email since I'll
address various possible
Charles M. Brown wrote:
Feynman's ratchet used one sprung pawl on a ratchet wheel. The spring
biases the pawl towards the ratchet wheel so mechanical pressure on
the gentle slope of the ratchet wheel drives the wheel the wrong way
where it can rest against the sharp or even overhanging
Michel Jullian wrote:
This should give a correct yes/no qualitative result shouldn't it?
Michel
Perhaps.
;-)
Harry
39 matches
Mail list logo
