Due to the large traffic on Yahoo QA, questions are seldom answered, so I am
posting this here also.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtWqfhPwDpzsyH4C64Rs5_TCDH1G;_ylv=3?qid=20110111063659AAtvYS4
Can a superior amp-turn ratio made with air core primaries vs secondary lead to
more
Reifenschweiler papers are here:
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Reifenschwreducedrad.pdf
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Reifenschwsomeexperi.pdf
Atlanta is a terrible mess. I have not seen it this bad for years. It
took me an an hour and a half to walk 3.5 miles. The main highway, 285,
is
We've have talked in the past about entanglement understood as an
hyperdimensional connection.
According to this paper on Efimov states, Topologist Predicts New Form
of Matter (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26144/)
The deep and unworldly link between particles in Efimov states is
From Mauro:
We've have talked in the past about entanglement understood as an
hyperdimensional connection.
According to this paper on Efimov states, Topologist Predicts New Form
of Matter (http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26144/)
The deep and unworldly link between particles in
-Original Message-
From: Mauro Lacy
... topologically speaking entanglement could be a hyperdimensional
Borromean ring kind of link between particles.
Apart from the earlier threads on Vortex on the implications of this
structure to LENR - going back 4-5 years
Harvey,
That is not input power vs output power but rather a case of transfer
efficency. I^2R loss are greater in smaller diameter wire. If you know the
input current and voltage you would have a more accurate total of the
primary power consumed as wire loss + power transfered to the
I finally got a visa to go to India last week. It took two months. So I
am going to the conference after all. I thought I would make a poster
for the LENR-CANR.org website, and 50 copies of the web site on CD-ROM.
While organizing the poster I compiled the following list of full-length
books
Hi
Ain't I right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Standard_gravity#effect_of_centripetal_acceleration
Sidereal period should be used and not solar.
Do you support a change?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Standard_gravity#effect_of_centripetal_acceleration
David
David Jonsson, Sweden,
Is this the right link?
Harry
From: David Jonsson davidjonssonswe...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, January 11, 2011 3:47:23 PM
Subject: [Vo]:g on Wikipedia erroneously defined
Hi
Ain't I right?
Yes, under effects of centripetal acceleration which is by the way
an erroneous title since it should be centrifugal acceleration.
What I write there is in its entirety:
The denominator should use the sidereal day of 86 164.0905 seconds instead
of 86 400 since inertia is relative the stars and
I wrote:
While organizing the poster I compiled the following list of full-length
books and other documents:
2004 DoE Review
BARC Studies
ICCF-9 Selected Papers
ICCF-10 Proceedings
ICCF-11 Proceedings
ICCF-12 Proceedings
Notable Papers in Our Collection
McKubre and Beaudette Interview
11 matches
Mail list logo
