One further refinement of the cold electricity theme, now to be called
SEC or spatial energy coherence.
Horace Heffner wrote:
ZPE is not carried by real photons. If ZPE consisted of real photons
then film would automatically expose at a phenomenal rate. Real
radiometers, the kind built to
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 29 Oct 2007 12:44:16 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
No one knows what the effective input power is, and in one incarnation
of the circuit - yes - it may come via the ground wire, but surely in
Fig 16, the scope image which shows a peak current to ground from the
I am really surprised that all of the RF-expertise here on Vo seems to
be fixated on capacitive coupling when the initial photo on that page
shows a battery driven isolated circuit with its own signal, where
capacitive coupling is impossible.
As mentioned, RF from AM has been eliminated now
Jones Beene wrote:
I am really surprised that all of the RF-expertise here on Vo seems to
be fixated on capacitive coupling when the initial photo on that page
shows a battery driven isolated circuit with its own signal, where
capacitive coupling is impossible.
The circuit under discussion
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
The circuit under discussion was the one with a single ground wire
attached and no input. It is based on the circuit shown in video #7. It
is described farther down on that page.
The one with a battery is yet something else again.
The circuit is FAR from
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 4:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
It seems to me that the commentators here have been too quick to assume that
the effect is
conservative.
Only
Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
The circuit under discussion was the one with a single ground wire
attached and no input. It is based on the circuit shown in video #7.
It is described farther down on that page.
The one with a battery is yet something else again.
The
Stephen,
How can you possibly think a circuit with a battery in it provides a
more clear-cut case of OU than a circuit which lights LEDs with no input
power at all?
Once again - let me repeat that no one has ever claimed that there is NO
power input. No one has ever claimed that there is
everyone
seems so sure about on this list? I would like to know as it does seen very
cool and a neat way to do very low power lighting.
DM
-Original Message-
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 4:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re
What a dodgy mess this is! 8^)
On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen,
How can you possibly think a circuit with a battery in it provides
a more clear-cut case of OU than a circuit which lights LEDs with
no input power at all?
Once again - let me repeat that no one
What a dodgy mess this is! 8^) Second try to send this.
On Oct 29, 2007, at 11:44 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
Stephen,
How can you possibly think a circuit with a battery in it provides
a more clear-cut case of OU than a circuit which lights LEDs with
no input power at all?
Once again -
In reply to John Winterflood's message of Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:54:55 +0800:
Hi,
[snip]
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
... Note that Tesla lit light bulbs 25 miles away, with no wires,
using only the ground as common medium. ...
As I understand it there were two conductors - the earth and the
On 10/28/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this patent 6798329 you are referencing ? Two of the inventors have
the first name of Osamu, so this may not be the one you are referencing.
No, try JP55082505, *GB2075755*
Also - Coler: where is the diamagnetic material there?
Silver
-- Forwarded message --
From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Oct 28, 2007 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
On 10/28/07, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You said the forum would be set up so the messages would be readable
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, John Berry wrote:
but he did inform me of someone else (In Italy IIRC, which I very well may
not) who had replicated the effect and that is the same basic device here.
That's different! (And by replication, do you mean the stand-alone
operation, with no DC supply, no sig
William Beaty wrote:
It's either the nobel prize, **OR** it's just tapping into the AM radio
station.
Or something else. Horace pointed out figure 22 on this page:
http://www.drstiffler.com/ce4.asp
I think that page deserves a very careful reading, and then I think we
really, really
Terry, you have shown just enough interest so let's give this a go eh? (ie.
Any at all)
The crux of this is that it is possible to suck in fields by propper
manipulation of space-time. (which is fluid)
I can't say for sure if this relates to radio but it likely does, but now
I'm going to have to
John Berry wrote..
Did I waste my time typing this? (if you read this in interest please say so)
Howdy John,
Discussion among Vorts is never a waste of time. Bill Beatty's challenge to Ron
Stiffler began a most healthy dialogue much needed as the search goes on. It
was unfortunate that Ron
Interesting post, John.
Lots of ground covered, but returning to one point:
6. Osamu, a patent where 2 magnets sandwich a diamagnetic material with
a coil wound over) produces stronger reception of signal, much. (lots of
correlations with joining of diamagnetic materials with magnetic ones...
There is already a crude replication on Hartmann's site. Details sparce,
but the core is not radioactive, at least.
I had hoped by now that there would have been some published
replications. Maybe this weekend. If and when, or should I say 'as soon
as' this happens, then people will be
On 10/27/07, John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Terry, you have shown just enough interest so let's give this a go eh? (ie.
Any at all)
Whew, what a summary! Yes, I am familiar with most of your examples.
Okay, my wife is laid up with cosmetic surgery and I have some time
between the bell
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, John Berry wrote:
According to Mr. Beaty the reason energy sucking antennas work is not
because the field of the transmitter is actually sucked into the receiving
element, but because the field of the receiving element enhances the voltage
induced.
Probably my article
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 4:12 PM
The only remaining thing to do is this. Given the proximity of AM
broadcast, not only at his lab in particular - but in any metro area- he
will eventually find the time, in order to
is there any way we could arcihve everything that ron has said, in unedited
form, so that we can all keep up-to-date as regards what he says, etc. it
seems many are falling out of the loop now and becoming confused. im sure
some really organized person could do this well :)
On 25/10/2007,
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, EnergyLab wrote:
So lets see, If I place a picture of the readings on my TriField meter and
my Ham RF field strength meter what a large can of worms that will open up.
May I guess?
You have it positioned in a dead spot of the lab, do a test over every
square foot.
You
: Harry Veeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On 25/10/2007 7:08 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote:
The important thing about a Faraday cage
On 10/26/07, William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, EnergyLab wrote:
I don't think big RF sources are common. Once you're far from the AM
tower, I doubt that there's much chance that you'll accidentally get close
to another major transmitter. So carrying your device to
On 10/26/07, John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually I have studied many different (and yet I believe similar) Free
Energy devices and not a single one has a ground, indeed some go to lengths
not to have a ground.
Newman would certainly agree.
Terry
On Oct 26, 2007, at 6:51 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
On 10/26/07, John Berry [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually I have studied many different (and yet I believe similar)
Free
Energy devices and not a single one has a ground, indeed some go
to lengths
not to have a ground.
Newman would
thomas malloy wrote:
...
I thought that grounding was part of the definition of a Faraday Cage.
Not really. The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it
you cannot tell anything about electric fields or electric potentials
that exist outside. You can't tell (in theory at
- Original Message -
From: John Winterflood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
... Note that Tesla lit light bulbs 25 miles away, with no wires,
using only the ground
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote:
The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it you
cannot tell anything about electric fields or electric potentials
that exist outside. You can't tell (in theory at least) whether
the cage you are in is grounded, or
Horace Heffner wrote:
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote:
The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it you cannot
tell anything about electric fields or electric potentials that exist
outside. You can't tell (in theory at least) whether the cage you
are in
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Horace Heffner wrote:
...
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply strip
a section
On Oct 25, 2007, at 5:30 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
I think it has been stated in a variety of ways by a variety of people
(Terry, Bill...) that the Faraday cage should be grounded, I can
hardly
believe this hasn't been tried yet...
There is a considerable difference between just
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Horace Heffner wrote:
...
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply strip
a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the faraday
cage at the entry point using an alligator clip. It the lights go out
On 25/10/2007 7:08 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote:
The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it you
cannot tell anything about electric fields or electric potentials
that exist outside. You can't tell (in theory at least)
]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Horace Heffner wrote:
...
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply strip
a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the faraday
cage
in the interest of experiment it is worthwhile going down that road.
Thank you all
-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 12:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On 25/10/2007 7:08 AM, Horace Heffner wrote
, October 25, 2007 12:36 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On 25/10/2007 7:08 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:
On Oct 24, 2007, at 10:54 PM, John Winterflood wrote:
The important thing about a Faraday cage is that inside it you
cannot tell anything about electric
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, John Winterflood wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
As Jed pointed out, a pair of heavy iron frying pans might make a superb
Faraday cage.
Yes, and they solve the problem of shielding low-freq magnetism. For
example, to well shield the magnetic component of 60Hz you'd need many
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply
strip a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the
faraday cage at the entry point using an alligator clip. It the
lights go out
PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Horace Heffner wrote:
...
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply strip
a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the faraday
cage
EnergyLab wrote:
In truth the reason I am no longer participation on the thread is it is in
my view pointless.
Yes indeed, Ron, you already made your views quite plain when you said,
three days ago,
None of you deserve to see anything.
'Nuf said, eh?
William Beaty wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, John Winterflood wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
As Jed pointed out, a pair of heavy iron frying pans might make a superb
Faraday cage.
Yes, and they solve the problem of shielding low-freq magnetism. For
example, to well shield the magnetic component
Hi Ron,
To be honest I don't know what to make of your prototype. It seems
prudent from my point of view to remain as neutral as one can under
the circumstances. Nevertheless, I'm both fascinated and encouraged by
what I've seen so far. I'm sure there are many (myself included) who
wish to be
On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:45 AM, William Beaty wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply
strip a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to
the
faraday cage at the entry
William Beaty wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply
strip a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to the
faraday cage at the entry point using an alligator clip. It
On Oct 25, 2007, at 10:08 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, John Winterflood wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
As Jed pointed out, a pair of heavy iron frying pans might make a
superb
Faraday cage.
Yes, and they solve the problem of shielding low-freq
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Harry Veeder wrote:
You don't care about the earth ground, if you have already made up your mind
that a conventional explanation is good enough.
Now hold on right there.
All of us on vortex are SUPPOSED to assume that it's a conventional
effect. If we did not, then we'd
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
But Ron DID report that the lights go out if you ground the cage. And
then there apparently was a bunch of flaming going on about whether a
Faraday cage is still a shield if not grounded.
He did? I sure missed that!
Bill sez:
Now hold on right there.
All of us on vortex are SUPPOSED to assume that it's a conventional
effect. If we did not, then we'd become true crackpots: the kind who are
so in love with Weird Discoveries that we stop questioning our own
assumptions, stop critiquing our own work, and
On Oct 25, 2007, at 9:45 AM, William Beaty wrote:
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Horace Heffner wrote:
Good point. Another option along the same lines might be to simply
strip a section of the ground wire and connect the ground wire to
the
faraday cage at the entry
-Original Message-
From: William Beaty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 10:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, John Winterflood wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
As Jed pointed out, a pair of heavy iron frying
: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, John Winterflood wrote:
thomas malloy wrote:
As Jed pointed out, a pair of heavy iron frying pans might make a
superb
Faraday cage.
Yes, and they solve the problem of shielding low-freq magnetism. For
example, to well shield
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, OrionWorks wrote:
Well said.
It's one of the most difficult lessons to learn in a life time. The
lure of fame and fortune are both seductive and addictive. Without a
properly grounded sense of neutrality the seductive lure of fame and
fortune will inevitably skew one's
Bill sez:
The other side of fooling ourselves is the Scoffers' delusion, where all
phenomena are well known, and Weird Discoveries are impossible by
definition. After seeing many examples of this, I suspect that it's not
driven by ego, but by fear. Fear of the unknown, and worship of the
On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
Yes, and they solve the problem of shielding low-freq magnetism. For
example, to well shield the magnetic component of 60Hz you'd need many
inches thick of copper.
I've heard this statement, or others very much like
didn't tolerate probing?
Michel
- Original Message -
From: William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 5:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, William Beaty wrote:
For enormous Q-factors
- Original Message -
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 10:26 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Michel Jullian wrote:
I heard that some people living close to the Eiffel tower manage to
derive their electrical heating
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 10:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
EDF should be told about this!-)
Electricité De France don't care, they sell the missing energy to the
broadcasters
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Michel Jullian wrote:
Couldn't a real radio receiver be used to see if the lab receives
significant emissions at 18MHz?
Certainly! But seeing his LED results, the signal would have to be many
watts per square meter, so it might overload a radio.
A simple RF
William Beaty wrote:
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Harry Veeder wrote:
On 22/10/2007 10:48 PM, William Beaty wrote:
Small resonant coil-antennas behave as if they were extremely large, like
long-wire antennas. But any unknown transmitter that's supplying the
power would have to be fairly
On Oct 22, 2007, at 10:03 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
On 22/10/2007 10:08 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
In reply to E Lab's message of Mon, 22 Oct 2007 18:55:55 -0500:
Hi Ronald,
[snip]
Lets talk apples and no lemons. The only time ANY measurements
have been
made, because it is not possible
I know little about electrical engineering, but
surely we can resolve all questions about this
device fairly easily. If the device can be scaled
up a little, and power can be ramped up to a few
watts that will rule out things like radio tower
transmissions as the source of energy. We would
Good post, Jed.
Let me add some new information from DrS:
Last night he took a Luxton light meter and singled
out one LED and took a measurement. He recorded the
reading and then took that same LED from the circuit
and placed a 1K series resistor to it and connected it
to a variable DC supply.
On 10/23/07, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Now remember he can drive many LEDs with this
circuit--
the actual limit is unknown, as the more he adds, the
more it seems to want BUT catch-22 this is tedious
to do, since matching voltage drop per diode is
necessary. There is too
Jones Beene wrote:
This is looking to me like a non-issue, but YES we all agree that
the next step, when time permits, will be to take the setup to a
remote area with very little RF.
That seems like an extreme expensive step. I think that increasing
the power output or using a Faraday cage
Hi Jones,
Glad to see that someone has Ron's ear!
It certainly seems a remarkable circuit that can drive several LEDs to
reasonable brightness with power apparently drawn through the resistance
of ones body and fingers (video #7) without feeling a tingle! I doubt
if Bill would be willing to
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 6:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
Good post, Jed.
Let me add some new information from DrS:
Last night he took a Luxton light meter and singled
out one
John Winterflood wrote:
If a pie dish lid matching the lower one is clipped with crocodile
clips on the top (with a hole to see if the LEDs are shining) then
we have a pretty good Faraday cage with a single wire entering it.
Heck, you could use a heavy iron frying pan. Just darken the room
--- Hi Jack
Thanks for the suggestions. I will pass them along,
although Ron is still subscribed here and replies to
postings, when he has time.
Many of my secondhand postings may be misleading for
several reasons. One, they are often put together from
a number of messages spread over several
Michel Jullian wrote:
I heard that some people living close to the Eiffel tower manage to derive
their electrical heating power from its radio emitters, but it may be a
legend.
And I've heard that you guys don't really get winter over there, so it's
not saying much to say they can heat
--- Michel
Glad I was of some help.
Belated thanks to you, Michel, as you seldom get
enough credit for the little things you do, even if
they had already been underway ;-)
3V per LED, is this correct?
That is ~ what it works out to, which is slightly less
than the spec for the part, but as
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 23 Oct 2007 09:23:50 -0700 (PDT):
Hi,
[snip]
The low powered AM radio station business nearby is
not a very likely power source. If the near field is
about a 1/3 wave length, taking the broadcast band,
figuring the wave lengths and then the uV per meter
On 10/23/07, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a tangent, at what frequencies does HAARP transmit?
2.8 to 10 MHz
Terry
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Harry Veeder wrote:
On 22/10/2007 10:48 PM, William Beaty wrote:
Small resonant coil-antennas behave as if they were extremely large, like
long-wire antennas. But any unknown transmitter that's supplying the
power would have to be fairly close and not miles away.
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I know little about electrical engineering, but
surely we can resolve all questions about this
device fairly easily. If the device can be scaled
up a little, and power can be ramped up to a few
watts that will rule out things like radio tower
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Jones Beene wrote:
Last night he took a Luxton light meter and singled
out one LED and took a measurement. He recorded the
reading and then took that same LED from the circuit
and placed a 1K series resistor to it and connected it
to a variable DC supply. He adjusted
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, William Beaty wrote:
For enormous Q-factors such as with superconductors, the effective
aperture is about a quarter wavelength, and such an antenna absorbs RF
energy in an area of 1/8 wavelength squared.
Oops, that should be 1/16 wavelength squared. For 18MHz, that's an
On 23/10/2007 9:55 PM, William Beaty wrote:
All this stuff is part of well-accepted antenna theory, and is taught in
some fields/waves courses for EEs. But it isn't generally known in other
disciplines. Physics students have a hard time understanding why some
subatomic particles have a
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Harry Veeder wrote:
Would Ron's apparatus cast such a shadow?
It might, but the effects would only appear several wavelengths away (like
hundreds of feet at 18MHz)
If the power source is really RF he could look for the shadow by making a
second apparatus and moving it
William Beaty wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
I totally missed any announcement that self-acting or closed-loop
operation was achieved.
WHOA slow down, that's not what was said.
That's exactly what was said. Or at least strongly implied...
On Oct 22, 2007, at 1:21 AM, William Beaty wrote:
On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
I totally missed any announcement that self-acting or closed-loop
operation was achieved.
WHOA slow down, that's not what was said.
That's exactly what was said.
That
On Oct 22, 2007, at 5:00 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I've lost my sound again on this system
If you are running on a Mac and the sound loss is a software problem
relating to video playback then running any track from Garage Band
may restore your sound for the videos.
Horace Heffner
--- Horace wrote:
If you will notice there is no mention of closing
the loop or self running in the video.
Dr, Stiffler will not make such a comment until he can
float the system, with zero input.
As I stated, and the video demonstrates, the signal
can be disconnected now after startup,
Horace Heffner wrote:
On Oct 22, 2007, at 5:00 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
I've lost my sound again on this system
If you are running on a Mac and the sound loss is a software problem
relating to video playback then running any track from Garage Band may
restore your sound for the
Jones Beene wrote:
--- Horace wrote:
If you will notice there is no mention of closing
the loop or self running in the video.
Dr, Stiffler will not make such a comment until he can
float the system, with zero input.
And he is correct in that decision, of course.
As I stated, and the
On Oct 22, 2007, at 7:00 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
Cranking the volume can fix a bad connection in a speaker (if the
power amp can put out enough volts), at least for a while, but how
can playing Garage Band fix a software issue?
I don't know. I had the problem of losing sound for
On Oct 22, 2007, at 6:40 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
--- Horace wrote:
If you will notice there is no mention of closing
the loop or self running in the video.
Dr, Stiffler will not make such a comment until he can
float the system, with zero input.
As I stated, and the video demonstrates, the
Horace Heffner wrote:
Well, I was interested in doing a replication, but Ron Doesn't seem to
actually want replications. I've lost interest in this at this point,
so no need to worry about negative posts. However, I would point out
that any earnest effort to analyze this, e.g. Bill
--- Stephen
If searching for a conventional explanation for an
apparent COE violation in a simple system is
considered
unreasonable or closed-minded, then we have
entered the realm of religion.
You are way off-base here.
No one is suggesting a COE violation, nor trying to
limit criticism.
Jones Beene wrote:
--- Stephen
If searching for a conventional explanation for an
apparent COE violation in a simple system is
considered
unreasonable or closed-minded, then we have
entered the realm of religion.
You are way off-base here.
No one is suggesting a COE violation,
I'm
--- Horace
As I stated, and the video demonstrates, the
signal
can be disconnected now after startup, but not both
the ground and the signal.
Nonsense!
Only with the connotation that this experiment defies
traditional understanding...then yes, it is nonsense
to the mainstream.
--- Stephen
I'm sorry; your posts have seemed to me to suggest
very strongly that Ron is on the verge of closing the
loop. If that's not suggesting COE violation then I
don't understand the term.
Apparently not.
Ron has stated that the power in was insignificant,
vis a vis the power out.
Somehow this quote seems apropos.
;-)
harry
Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to
me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we
know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there
are some things we do not
On Oct 22, 2007, at 11:20 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
Dear Jones, why not trust Horace and Steven's honesty and EE-
competence at
least as much as Ron's? Honestly they made helpful sensible
contributions.
Besides Ron doesn't even claim to be particularly competent in EE I
don't
think, do
Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 7:48 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Cold electricity
--- Stephen
I'm sorry; your posts have seemed to me to suggest
very strongly that Ron is on the verge of closing the
loop. If that's not suggesting COE violation
--- Michel
Dear Jones, why not trust Horace and Steven's
honesty and EE- competence at least as much as Ron's?
Averting Skeptastrophe ?
Jones
Seriously, Michel -- one would have to be a fool NOT
to value the honesty and competence of all three of
these individuals, all of whom I consider
On Oct 22, 2007, at 9:07 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
This is all supposition. No actual power
measurements have been made.
What? Bullshit. That is nothing less than arrogant
stupidity on your part!
OK, show me power measurements that were either posted or on the web
site. That does not
1 - 100 of 142 matches
Mail list logo
