RE: [Vo]:Rossi's imaginary company folds

From: Jed Rothwell Rossi's imaginary company, J.M. Products, has folded its imaginary tent and vanished in the night:

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's imaginary company folds

AxilAxil, Thanks for that. Not enough people know about it. It is even worse for reasons that you didn't mention. These VC/private equity firms tend to sell off bits of an existing company to pay off the debt and then milk what remains until it dies. There is a classic example written up in

Re: [Vo]:Rossi's imaginary company folds

https://hbr.org/2013/05/six-myths-about-venture-capitalists Myth 4: VCs Generate Spectacular Returns Last year my colleagues at the Kauffman Foundation and I published a widely read report, “We Have Met the Enemy…and He Is Us,” about the venture capital industry and its returns. We found that

[Vo]:Rossi's imaginary company folds

Rossi's imaginary company, J.M. Products, has folded its imaginary tent and vanished in the night:

Re: [Vo]:Why pairs?

Monogamy of entanglement '''Monogamy ''' is one of the most fundamental properties of entanglement and can, in its extremal form, be expressed as follows: *If two qubits A and B are maximally quantumly correlated they cannot be correlated at all with a third qubit C.* In general, there is a

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

Correction: Rossi now believes that proton decay powers the Sun should read Holmlid believes that proton decay powers the Sun On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 2:32 PM, Axil Axil wrote: > http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/ >

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169895#pone.0169895.ref007 In his latest article, Holmlid rejects fusion as too weak to power the energy output that he is seeing in his experiments. Holmlid states: "The origin of the particle signals observed here is clearly

Re: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

In fact I have unilaterally removed the offending gamma from the Wikipedia page. I dont expect it to return.  The only gamma rays that it continues correctly to mention are those associated with the annihilation of the positron with an electron. The Mark Davidson paper is very good.  I will

Re: [Vo]:Why pairs?

In a universe where all points must be connected, a pair is a topological requirement. In a system where all endpoints must be connected then every connection must have at least two endpoints. At the beginning of the big bang, Computational complexity was at its minimum and quantum entanglement

RE: [Vo]:Gamma radiation from proton-proton fusion

Proton-proton fusion is of such low probability that it is almost a waste of time to think that it has relevance in the real world, despite the mainstream view. We see gamma radiation in stars with or without fusion (even Jupiter and the gas giants have lots of gamma emission) but this usually

RE: [Vo]:Why pairs?

That doesn’t answer my question… it’s just regurgitating the particle/antiparticle jargon. -mark From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2017 10:41 AM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why pairs? The latest theory is that entanglement keeps spacetime