Re: [Vo]:Tritium in Ni-H LENR
On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 7:47 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Guys, this thread has gotten very far off the subject. I request that you rename it and continue. I would really appreciate a discussion concerning tritium associated with Ni-H LENR. Dave We seem to be reaching the limits of our knowledge of tritium and the Ni-H system. Up to this point we've gotten as far as concluding that it is sometimes observed and speculating on what might be going on (e.g., hydrinos, or a kind of tunneling of three protons into one another simultaneously, or, left unmentioned up to this point but my favorite, neutron production). One place you might look for more information is lenr-canr.org. A search for nickel tritium yields 177 results. Not all of these links will be relevant, but I'm sure some of them will be interesting. The more concrete details we have to work with, the more interesting the discussion will be. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Critique of Space Shuttle written in 1980
I agree with what you say here Jed. I am mainly attempting to put into words the concept that safety is a relative issue. You could be considered safe if you survive the ordeal and in this case I would assume that the decision makers would not have proceeded with the landing of the shuttle had they known for a fact that it would destruct. That would have been a criminal act. They apparently did not wish to see additional evidence that a delay would have been wise. How much damage could a shuttle sustain and not fail? I suspect that the answer to that question is complex and the final decision makers were overconfident in the design. It became a fatal and terrible mistake that none would have chosen to make. Perhaps there were numerous issues that had to be brushed under the rug if any flights were to proceed at all. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, May 27, 2012 5:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Critique of Space Shuttle written in 1980 I mean that when they finally did the test, the was that SIZE. Big enough to put your head into. The resolution of the spy sat. cameras is not known, and the size of the hole is not known, but it was probably large enough to spot easily. Unfortunately, this Shuttle did not have an arm. If it had they might have checked with that. Although I expect the managers would not have allowed even that check. They were determined not to allow any bad news, and not to allow anyone below them to make any decisions that might reflect badly on NASA. These events were well documented in an extensive investigation, but they did not trigger an uproar. They triggered intense and largely successful efforts to cover up the facts and whitewash the truth. The same thing happened after the Three Mile Island disaster. An NRL engineer who warned that the valve had malfunctioned twice and it was likely to happen again with disastrous consequences was forced out. The managers who had ignored his recommendation and later ordered him to shut up were given large cash bonuses and promotions. That is the way the world works. If cold fusion ever succeeds I am confident that the establishment people who opposed it will take credit for its success. They will be promoted, rewarded and lionized. The people who worked to bring it about -- including me -- will be given the frozen boot, as the Russians say. No good deed goes unpunished. That is the way the world works now, and always has, and probably always will. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Localized time- space curvature demonstrated from 3 phase alternator powered 666 machine
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote: And it's far more likely -- just my personal impression -- that you don't actually know what you are doing. But I'm not inspired to follow you enough to find out either where you are right or where you are wrong. I think you'll probably agree with me on this, Abd, but there's room for all types here. Some people are clearly knowledgeable in the relevant fields that are being discussed, they're careful about what they say and they communicate effectively; others are clearly unknowledgeable and are willing to go off into wild speculation (I include myself in this category); and others do not know that they're unknowledgeable. Somehow, though, different audiences find different threads interesting, perhaps for reasons they weren't expecting, and it all works out. Eric
[Vo]:CIHT paper
For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemicalCell.pdf Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR)
Once again, I hesistate to respond to you cause that will cause people to roundly criticize me for starting a long off-topic thread. You bring up several points that need a response, to set your fallacies straight. Can you suggest a forum where we can do this? Let me know and I'll show up. Otherwise, there is nothing much I am willing to do in this forum. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) At 09:11 AM 5/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am unsure about your point or what you are asking. What exactly is your discussion point or what exactly is your question? Of course,there are strong inference. For example, if you find the presence of Information in DNA, that is an inference for Intelligent Designer, not Darwinian Evolution based on randon chance mutations. Random processes never create Information, because information is Order, the exact opposite of Randomness. The conclusion is being assumed. It is easy to demonstrate information in random output with or without output selection. Information is not defined here, and I suspect that the undisclosed definition again incorporates the conclusions. There is order in the non-living, presumably mechanistic, universe, by any reasonable definition of order. We associate very high levels of order with life, normally, for life organizes material, it can be one of the definitions of life. For instance, the assembling of random letters into a coherent sentence requires the input of an Intelligent being. Easy to demonstrate otherwise. Make a random sequence generator, then select the output which makes sense. Humans actually do this detection well, almost too well, sometimes, we will indeed make sense of random combinations. And then people will insist that the sense that they make from this stuff is intended, a code that proves something or other. Like that the Torah is from God (Torah Code) or the Qur'an from Allah (The Miracle of the Nineteen.) Gambler's Fallacy is a phenomenon related to this. If your throw a bunch of Scrabble letters on the ground, the following 2 sentences have equal chance of occuring. There is a God ethresi da Go -(No, this is not a foreign language. This is a random mixture of the same letters above.) Yes. But if you have a Scrabble set tossed to make random words, but you have a setup which rejects what is not in a dictionary, the second set is impossible, it will not be kept. There is *not* an equal chance as you assume. The genetic code is not randomly mutated, in the sense you think. Many mutations would result in copying failure, for starters. Many more mutations would result in organism failure. In complex organisms, many more mutations would not be viable. Even more might be temporarily viable, but would not survive to reproduce. Or might only last a few generations, either by accident or because of loss of survivability. And many mutations are irrelevant, have no effect on the function of the DNA, so the DNA behind a particular functional part of an organism is, in fact, a family of patterns, not a single one. That junk DNA can be mutations waiting to become, through some further process, something active. It might represent something that was active in the past but which is no longer active, that mutated out of activity but caused no damage because any necessary function was also carried elsewhere. This is all just how DNA functions. It proves nothing about creation one way or another. What is the real issue here? What is the difference between the 2 sentences above. Nothing as far as randon chance is concerned. The first sentence *might* have been created by random chance and, in fact, I could demonstrate this if I thought it were important. The key is that I'd set up an algorithm using random letter selection. There is a God is short enough that I could get this result with fairly little computer time, and that's why web sites advise more complex passwords! What you have shown, Jojo, is that your own selection process is not random chance. This proves? It *certainly* does not prove that random chance cannot produce sensible words, but you seem to think so, which demonstrates what? Are you familiar with the Torah Code? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_code Yet for an Intelligent Entity, there is a huge difference. Sure. That is, to an Intelligent Entity, which you assume yourself to be, of limited intelligence. A *huge* difference. Which the intelligent entity made up. That's what intelligent entities, in fact, do, they make up meaning. It's a useful process, often. Not always. Gambler's Fallacy. What differentiates the 2 sentences? It is Information of course. That's debatable. What information? What I see in the first
[Vo]:No More Anticipation
Probably the most important nanotech yet to be developed: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679878/mits-freaky-non-stick-coating-keeps-ketchup-flowing Amazing! T
Re: [Vo]:No More Anticipation
WTF! WOW!! 2012/5/28 Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com Probably the most important nanotech yet to be developed: http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679878/mits-freaky-non-stick-coating-keeps-ketchup-flowing Amazing! T -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper
Blacklightpower has posted a major release of the IHT cell [Catalyst induced Hydrino Transition]. Peter Gluck has posted a link to a 89-page paper at the site detailing the CHIT cell chemistry and operation. I will list below features warranting attention by members of this group: 1. The cell generates electricity directly, without a thermal cycle. 2. The fuel is water vapor produced by bubbling argon through water. 3. The end products are hydrinos [H in the H(1/4) state], electricity , and oxygen 4. No pollution 5. No scarce or costly materials 6. Adaptable to volume manufacture 7. CIHT battery of desired voltage by stacking cell plates 8. Validation reports by six very competent scientists 9. Current test at a 10 W level, 1.5 kW modules for residential use in 2013 10. Estimated installed cost $100/kW 11. Privately financed, investment to date ~$60 million The existence of the hydrino state of hydrogen has been established by multiple means which are outlined the website links. A short summary of the CIHT cell operation is on p.28 of the cited paper. The cell operates at an elevated temperature Which may be maintained by insulation but initiated by external power; it is not part of the energy balance. In my experience of a couple of decades of Mills-watching, I have found statements backed up by evidence. Careful reading is recommended. Do not assume features which look like some other work really is other work. This is a historical achievement. Mike Carrell From: c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:c...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Gluck Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 5:10 AM To: VORTEX; CMNS Subject: CMNS: CIHT paper For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemical Cell.pdf Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups CMNS group. To post to this group, send email to c...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns?hl=en. This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
RE: [Vo]:CIHT paper
Blacklightpower has posted a major release of the IHT cell [Catalyst induced Hydrino Transition]. Peter Gluck has posted a link to a 89-page paper at the site detailing the CHIT cell chemistry and operation. I will list below features warranting attention by members of this group: 1. The cell generates electricity directly, without a thermal cycle. 2. The fuel is water vapor produced by bubbling argon through water. 3. The end products are hydrinos [H in the H(1/4) state], electricity , and oxygen 4. No pollution 5. No scarce or costly materials 6. Adaptable to volume manufacture 7. CIHT battery of desired voltage by stacking cell plates 8. Validation reports by six very competent scientists 9. Current test at a 10 W level, 1.5 kW modules for residential use in 2013 10. Estimated installed cost $100/kW 11. Privately financed, investment to date ~$60 million The existence of the hydrino state of hydrogen has been established by multiple means which are outlined the website links. A short summary of the CIHT cell operation is on p.28 of the cited paper. The cell operates at an elevated temperature Which may be maintained by insulation but initiated by external power; it is not part of the energy balance. In my experience of a couple of decades of Mills-watching, I have found statements backed up by evidence. Careful reading is recommended. Do not assume features which look like some other work really is other work. This is a historical achievement. Mike Carrell From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 5:10 AM To: VORTEX; CMNS Subject: [Vo]:CIHT paper For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemical Cell.pdf Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
[Vo]:MY WAY TO TRUTH IN LENR
Dear Colleagues, I have published a synthesis, summary presentation of the evolution of my understanding of LENR: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/my-way-to-lenr-truth.html It is possible that the ideas are in error, however some of them can be even true. But they are actually radical, beyond any doubt. At ICCF-17 we will know more. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper
As I understand it Blacklight has an exceptionally high Promises:Products ratio over the first 20 years of their existence, and have burned through an enormous amount of money from investors (no doubt hurting a fair number of people and careers for those that believed in them). Does this latest release represent a significant change from their business modus operandi? Is there any reason why we should have greater faith in their ability to deliver on current promises than those of years past? Or is this another Paul Moller like operation? Put another way; is there anyone in the collective who would invest a significant portion of their wealth into Blacklight? On 28 May 2012 17:39, Mike Carrell mi...@medleas.com wrote: Blacklightpower has posted a major release of the IHT cell [Catalyst induced Hydrino Transition]. Peter Gluck has posted a link to a 89-page paper at the site detailing the CHIT cell chemistry and operation. I will list below features warranting attention by members of this group: ** ** **1. **The cell generates electricity directly, without a thermal cycle. **2. **The fuel is water vapor produced by bubbling argon through water. **3. **The end products are hydrinos [H in the H(1/4) state], electricity , and oxygen **4. **No pollution **5. **No scarce or costly materials **6. **Adaptable to volume manufacture **7. **CIHT battery of desired voltage by stacking cell plates **8. **Validation reports by six very competent scientists **9. **Current test at a 10 W level, 1.5 kW modules for residential use in 2013 **10. **Estimated installed cost $100/kW **11. **Privately financed, investment to date ~$60 million ** ** The existence of the hydrino state of hydrogen has been established by multiple means which are outlined the website links. A short summary of the CIHT cell operation is on p.28 of the cited paper. The cell operates at an elevated temperature Which may be maintained by insulation but initiated by external power; it is not part of the energy balance. ** ** In my experience of a couple of decades of Mills-watching, I have found statements backed up by evidence. Careful reading is recommended. Do not assume features which “look like” some other work “really is” other work. ** ** This is a historical achievement. ** ** Mike Carrell ** ** ** ** *From:* c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:c...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Peter Gluck *Sent:* Monday, May 28, 2012 5:10 AM *To:* VORTEX; CMNS *Subject:* CMNS: CIHT paper ** ** For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemicalCell.pdf ** ** Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com ** ** -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups CMNS group. To post to this group, send email to c...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns?hl=en. This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
Re: [Vo]:CIHT paper
In the literature I have read, I have not seen a discussion on how tolerant the CIHT cell is to impurities in the water. T
Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR)
You tell people that they believe in something preposterous and you fear that they will criticize you? The list owner could decide that discussion of evolution was not useful here. But he hasn't, AFAIK. What was a problem was the hijacking of a thread on tritium and NiH LENR, and you were not solely responsible for that. Here, the thread is about Darwinian Evolution, whatever that is. My own interest is ontology, and how we choose (or fall into) what we believe, as distinct from what we experience (and remember of experience, as distinct from what we made it mean.) There is a whole family of pseudosciences based on fallacious post-hoc estimation of probability. In this case, an argument is invented with a pretense of objectivity, when it is clear that the conclusion is incorporated in the assumptions. This is not about whether or not there is intention behind the phenomena of life. Rather it is about whether or not functional complexity beyond some level is a proof of intention. Your argument has, in fact, been circular. It's not that I deny intention itself. It is rather that discerning the purpose of life, the intention, if you will, requires stepping outside the normal machinery of thought and stepping into direct, unmediated experience. You will never get there through firm adherence to any belief. Faith can take you there, but only a faith in reality itself, which, again, I distinguish from collections of words, crystallized as meanings we prefer. Faith in reality, I'll assert, underlies genuine Science. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Once again, I hesistate to respond to you cause that will cause people to roundly criticize me for starting a long off-topic thread. You bring up several points that need a response, to set your fallacies straight. Can you suggest a forum where we can do this? Let me know and I'll show up. Otherwise, there is nothing much I am willing to do in this forum. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) At 09:11 AM 5/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am unsure about your point or what you are asking. What exactly is your discussion point or what exactly is your question? Of course,there are strong inference. For example, if you find the presence of Information in DNA, that is an inference for Intelligent Designer, not Darwinian Evolution based on randon chance mutations. Random processes never create Information, because information is Order, the exact opposite of Randomness. The conclusion is being assumed. It is easy to demonstrate information in random output with or without output selection. Information is not defined here, and I suspect that the undisclosed definition again incorporates the conclusions. There is order in the non-living, presumably mechanistic, universe, by any reasonable definition of order. We associate very high levels of order with life, normally, for life organizes material, it can be one of the definitions of life. For instance, the assembling of random letters into a coherent sentence requires the input of an Intelligent being. Easy to demonstrate otherwise. Make a random sequence generator, then select the output which makes sense. Humans actually do this detection well, almost too well, sometimes, we will indeed make sense of random combinations. And then people will insist that the sense that they make from this stuff is intended, a code that proves something or other. Like that the Torah is from God (Torah Code) or the Qur'an from Allah (The Miracle of the Nineteen.) Gambler's Fallacy is a phenomenon related to this. If your throw a bunch of Scrabble letters on the ground, the following 2 sentences have equal chance of occuring. There is a God ethresi da Go -(No, this is not a foreign language. This is a random mixture of the same letters above.) Yes. But if you have a Scrabble set tossed to make random words, but you have a setup which rejects what is not in a dictionary, the second set is impossible, it will not be kept. There is *not* an equal chance as you assume. The genetic code is not randomly mutated, in the sense you think. Many mutations would result in copying failure, for starters. Many more mutations would result in organism failure. In complex organisms, many more mutations would not be viable. Even more might be temporarily viable, but would not survive to reproduce. Or might only last a few generations, either by accident or because of loss of survivability. And many mutations are irrelevant, have no effect on the function of the DNA, so the DNA behind a particular functional part of an organism is, in fact, a family of
Re: [Vo]:No More Anticipation
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: WTF! WOW!! Somehow they took ketchup, which is fine enough but not quite as good as its reputation, and made it look utterly unpalatable. When it comes to food, presentation is important. I wonder whether it will take a younger generation that hasn't seen ketchup in normal bottles before something like this will catch on. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR)
First you criticize me for hijacking this thread (which was not a hijack because I was trying to draw a parallel and I renamed the thread.), then you continue to criticize me for hijacking even though I have stopped responding, then you continue to keep this topic alive even though I and others have given it a rest. So, make up your mind. If you want to discuss this topic with me, please identify another forum and I will show up and we can continue this discussion. I have a lot of corrections to your allegations and faulty understanding of the issue. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 3:03 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) You tell people that they believe in something preposterous and you fear that they will criticize you? The list owner could decide that discussion of evolution was not useful here. But he hasn't, AFAIK. What was a problem was the hijacking of a thread on tritium and NiH LENR, and you were not solely responsible for that. Here, the thread is about Darwinian Evolution, whatever that is. My own interest is ontology, and how we choose (or fall into) what we believe, as distinct from what we experience (and remember of experience, as distinct from what we made it mean.) There is a whole family of pseudosciences based on fallacious post-hoc estimation of probability. In this case, an argument is invented with a pretense of objectivity, when it is clear that the conclusion is incorporated in the assumptions. This is not about whether or not there is intention behind the phenomena of life. Rather it is about whether or not functional complexity beyond some level is a proof of intention. Your argument has, in fact, been circular. It's not that I deny intention itself. It is rather that discerning the purpose of life, the intention, if you will, requires stepping outside the normal machinery of thought and stepping into direct, unmediated experience. You will never get there through firm adherence to any belief. Faith can take you there, but only a faith in reality itself, which, again, I distinguish from collections of words, crystallized as meanings we prefer. Faith in reality, I'll assert, underlies genuine Science. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Once again, I hesistate to respond to you cause that will cause people to roundly criticize me for starting a long off-topic thread. You bring up several points that need a response, to set your fallacies straight. Can you suggest a forum where we can do this? Let me know and I'll show up. Otherwise, there is nothing much I am willing to do in this forum. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) At 09:11 AM 5/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am unsure about your point or what you are asking. What exactly is your discussion point or what exactly is your question? Of course,there are strong inference. For example, if you find the presence of Information in DNA, that is an inference for Intelligent Designer, not Darwinian Evolution based on randon chance mutations. Random processes never create Information, because information is Order, the exact opposite of Randomness. The conclusion is being assumed. It is easy to demonstrate information in random output with or without output selection. Information is not defined here, and I suspect that the undisclosed definition again incorporates the conclusions. There is order in the non-living, presumably mechanistic, universe, by any reasonable definition of order. We associate very high levels of order with life, normally, for life organizes material, it can be one of the definitions of life. For instance, the assembling of random letters into a coherent sentence requires the input of an Intelligent being. Easy to demonstrate otherwise. Make a random sequence generator, then select the output which makes sense. Humans actually do this detection well, almost too well, sometimes, we will indeed make sense of random combinations. And then people will insist that the sense that they make from this stuff is intended, a code that proves something or other. Like that the Torah is from God (Torah Code) or the Qur'an from Allah (The Miracle of the Nineteen.) Gambler's Fallacy is a phenomenon related to this. If your throw a bunch of Scrabble letters on the ground, the following 2 sentences have equal chance of occuring. There is a God ethresi da Go -(No, this is not a foreign language. This is a random mixture of the same letters above.) Yes. But if you have a Scrabble set tossed to make random words, but
Re: [Vo]:MY WAY TO TRUTH IN LENR
From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 9:52:44 AM Subject: [Vo]:MY WAY TO TRUTH IN LENR Dear Colleagues, I have published a synthesis, summary presentation of the evolution of my understanding of LENR: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/my-way-to-lenr-truth.html An interesting progression (I haven't read all the links yet. I particularly enjoyed THE CONCEPT OF “MISCOVERY” AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR LENR http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/concept-of-miscovery-and-what-it-means.html ) I looked at http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/solving-insoluble-problems.html but couldn't find a list of your Rules.
Re: [Vo]:No More Anticipation
Heinz will not be excited either:
A serving size of Heinz ketchup is 1 tablespoon, according to the nutrition
label. The number of servings in a bottle of ketchup varies based on bottle
size. For example, a 40-oz. bottle of ketchup contains about 66 servings.
It is estimated that this technology will save up to 2 tablespoons per 40
oz. bottle thus stretching a bottle of ketchup 3% longer and reducing
Heinz's revenue by $350 Milion annually...
On Monday, May 28, 2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Rocha
danieldi...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'danieldi...@gmail.com');
wrote:
WTF! WOW!!
Somehow they took ketchup, which is fine enough but not quite as good as
its reputation, and made it look utterly unpalatable. When it comes to
food, presentation is important. I wonder whether it will take a younger
generation that hasn't seen ketchup in normal bottles before something like
this will catch on.
Eric
RE: [Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper
Robert, Your skepticism is understandable, especially if you have not done your homework to follow Mills as I have. The investors are qualified [read wealthy] or corporations who can afford long shots. Mills' production of journal papers and a book of epic scope are notable, but the proof is in the product. Nobody in the energy field has reliably used water as a fuel to produce electricity directly. This is accomplished; read the Validation reports on the website. Scale-up may have its problems. Mike Carrell From: Robert Lynn [mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:03 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper As I understand it Blacklight has an exceptionally high Promises:Products ratio over the first 20 years of their existence, and have burned through an enormous amount of money from investors (no doubt hurting a fair number of people and careers for those that believed in them). Does this latest release represent a significant change from their business modus operandi? Is there any reason why we should have greater faith in their ability to deliver on current promises than those of years past? Or is this another Paul Moller like operation? Put another way; is there anyone in the collective who would invest a significant portion of their wealth into Blacklight? On 28 May 2012 17:39, Mike Carrell mi...@medleas.com wrote: Blacklightpower has posted a major release of the IHT cell [Catalyst induced Hydrino Transition]. Peter Gluck has posted a link to a 89-page paper at the site detailing the CHIT cell chemistry and operation. I will list below features warranting attention by members of this group: 1. The cell generates electricity directly, without a thermal cycle. 2. The fuel is water vapor produced by bubbling argon through water. 3. The end products are hydrinos [H in the H(1/4) state], electricity , and oxygen 4. No pollution 5. No scarce or costly materials 6. Adaptable to volume manufacture 7. CIHT battery of desired voltage by stacking cell plates 8. Validation reports by six very competent scientists 9. Current test at a 10 W level, 1.5 kW modules for residential use in 2013 10. Estimated installed cost $100/kW 11. Privately financed, investment to date ~$60 million The existence of the hydrino state of hydrogen has been established by multiple means which are outlined the website links. A short summary of the CIHT cell operation is on p.28 of the cited paper. The cell operates at an elevated temperature Which may be maintained by insulation but initiated by external power; it is not part of the energy balance. In my experience of a couple of decades of Mills-watching, I have found statements backed up by evidence. Careful reading is recommended. Do not assume features which look like some other work really is other work. This is a historical achievement. Mike Carrell From: c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:c...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Gluck Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 5:10 AM To: VORTEX; CMNS Subject: CMNS: CIHT paper For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemical Cell.pdf Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups CMNS group. To post to this group, send email to c...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns?hl=en. This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department. This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
[Vo]:Nano dust fusion
Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible. Third, replace the air with a high pressure hydrogen envelope with the highest pressure possible. Some of my reactions to important parts of Dr. George Egely narrative: On page 6: *My theory of cold fusion centers on charge concentration as the primary mechanism for shilding the coulumb barrier.* *In support of this concept from Dr, Egely’s text as follows:* *Here the more or less familiar rules of quantum mechanics or Q.E.D. rule. In our opinion, strong interaction and “classical” fusion start to dominate the process above a certain power density in the middle layer. Sparking is visible on slow motion films. Obviously, the amplitude of oscillation also depends on the plasma radius, pressure, and temperature. At the center of the plasma, the amplitudes should be much higher than those at the outer wall of the acoustic resonator. (There can be the highest amplitude of a spherical standing wave). See Fig. 5 for the three layers.* *Near the center of the plasma sphere (middle layer), charge shielding can dominate nuclear processes due to the enormous surface charge density of the dust. Then repulsing charges of like protons can be overcome by the huge negative charge density of the carbon particles.* *On the slow motion video records, one can clearly see the appearance of sudden small sparks en mass. Then the Geiger counter starts to click, though at moderate levels. At present no one knows what goes on in the center of the acoustic resonator.* *In Fig. 6 these simultaneous mechanisms are shown as field amplification by resonant surface polaritons (Fig. 6/a), direct volumetric polarization by electron and ion impact (Fig. 6/b), and charge shielding (Fig. 6/c) is shown, where strong interaction rules (again at a different size level) at the characteristic size of a nucleon. Obviously these are all hypothetical mechanisms, as they cannot be observed directly.* On page 23 (b) *At higher input energy, the sparking region appears, along a mild degree of radiation – both x rays and particles. (There is a slight radioactivity in the exhausted dust and the quartz sphere after the power is switched off, for a couple of days).*
Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/5911919.html For those interested in selecting a protonated nano powder for their the reactors, the reference patent for thermionic materials will offer engineering insights. I think that thorium is a good choice in adding to a proton rich nano-powder as a compliment to electron rich carbon nano powder. Very high reactor operating temperatures will be a future discriminator in the LENR market place due to the potential of grade high reactor heat for very high electrical generation efficiencies and the efficacy of very high process heat as a replacement for natural gas in many industrial processes. From the reference text as follows: *In the case of DC cathode applications (e.g., arc-lamps, arc welding), thoriated tungsten is used almost exclusively. The cathodes are made of tungsten doped with approximately 2 percent thorium dioxide (W:2%ThO2). Tungsten serves as the refractory metal-matrix which has a very high melting point, it is very electrically and thermally conductive, has reasonably good thermionic emission properties, yet has a work function of approximately 4.5 eV when pure. Thorium dioxide (thoria) is the most refractory oxide ceramic material known (highest melting point and lowest vapor-pressure), and when properly added in small amounts (typically 1 to 3%) to tungsten, thoria aids in controlling the tungsten microstructural characteristics by pinning grain boundaries, thereby inhibiting exaggerated or non-uniform grain growth. Further, these characteristics, along with other properties by the thoria, lower the work function of the metal-ceramic system to approximately 2.7-3.0 eV. The lower work function enables the W:2%ThO2 cathode to emit thermionic electrons at lower temperatures and with less localized heating at the tip; thus, the thoriated tungsten electrode maintains its integrity longer than pure tungsten would without the thoria additive.* ** ** On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible. Third, replace the air with a high pressure hydrogen envelope with the highest pressure possible. Some of my reactions to important parts of Dr. George Egely narrative: On page 6: *My theory of cold fusion centers on charge concentration as the primary mechanism for shilding the coulumb barrier.* *In support of this concept from Dr, Egely’s text as follows:* *Here the more or less familiar rules of quantum mechanics or Q.E.D. rule. In our opinion, strong interaction and “classical” fusion start to dominate the process above a certain power density in the middle layer. Sparking is visible on slow motion films. Obviously, the amplitude of oscillation also depends on the plasma radius, pressure, and temperature. At the center of the plasma, the amplitudes should be much higher than those at the outer wall of the acoustic resonator. (There can be the highest amplitude of a spherical standing wave). See Fig. 5 for the three layers.* *Near the center of the plasma sphere (middle layer), charge shielding can dominate nuclear processes due to the enormous surface charge density of the dust. Then repulsing charges of like protons can be overcome by the huge negative charge density of the carbon particles.* *On the slow motion video records, one can clearly see the appearance of sudden small sparks en mass. Then the Geiger counter starts to click, though at moderate levels. At present no one knows what goes on in the center of the
Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR)
Jojo, you make up fantasies about what shows in this record. Why would I expect you'd have anything of substance to discuss elsewhere? I did not criticize you for hijacking the thread. This is a great example of meaning created in the mind of the reader. I wrote about what interests me. This conversation will be worth, for you, whatever you say it is worth. To be explicit, I'm declining your request. I might want to discuss this -- what's this? -- if I had a clue you were awake. I don't. So here I am. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: First you criticize me for hijacking this thread (which was not a hijack because I was trying to draw a parallel and I renamed the thread.), then you continue to criticize me for hijacking even though I have stopped responding, then you continue to keep this topic alive even though I and others have given it a rest. So, make up your mind. If you want to discuss this topic with me, please identify another forum and I will show up and we can continue this discussion. I have a lot of corrections to your allegations and faulty understanding of the issue. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 3:03 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) You tell people that they believe in something preposterous and you fear that they will criticize you? The list owner could decide that discussion of evolution was not useful here. But he hasn't, AFAIK. What was a problem was the hijacking of a thread on tritium and NiH LENR, and you were not solely responsible for that. Here, the thread is about Darwinian Evolution, whatever that is. My own interest is ontology, and how we choose (or fall into) what we believe, as distinct from what we experience (and remember of experience, as distinct from what we made it mean.) There is a whole family of pseudosciences based on fallacious post- hoc estimation of probability. In this case, an argument is invented with a pretense of objectivity, when it is clear that the conclusion is incorporated in the assumptions. This is not about whether or not there is intention behind the phenomena of life. Rather it is about whether or not functional complexity beyond some level is a proof of intention. Your argument has, in fact, been circular. It's not that I deny intention itself. It is rather that discerning the purpose of life, the intention, if you will, requires stepping outside the normal machinery of thought and stepping into direct, unmediated experience. You will never get there through firm adherence to any belief. Faith can take you there, but only a faith in reality itself, which, again, I distinguish from collections of words, crystallized as meanings we prefer. Faith in reality, I'll assert, underlies genuine Science. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Once again, I hesistate to respond to you cause that will cause people to roundly criticize me for starting a long off-topic thread. You bring up several points that need a response, to set your fallacies straight. Can you suggest a forum where we can do this? Let me know and I'll show up. Otherwise, there is nothing much I am willing to do in this forum. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) At 09:11 AM 5/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am unsure about your point or what you are asking. What exactly is your discussion point or what exactly is your question? Of course,there are strong inference. For example, if you find the presence of Information in DNA, that is an inference for Intelligent Designer, not Darwinian Evolution based on randon chance mutations. Random processes never create Information, because information is Order, the exact opposite of Randomness. The conclusion is being assumed. It is easy to demonstrate information in random output with or without output selection. Information is not defined here, and I suspect that the undisclosed definition again incorporates the conclusions. There is order in the non-living, presumably mechanistic, universe, by any reasonable definition of order. We associate very high levels of order with life, normally, for life organizes material, it can be one of the definitions of life. For instance, the assembling of random letters into a coherent sentence requires the input of an Intelligent being. Easy to demonstrate otherwise. Make a random sequence generator, then select the output which makes sense. Humans actually do this detection well, almost too well, sometimes, we will
Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion
Jojo, It seems like one should do the trick--DGT seemed to be just jolting their experiment to get an increased output--perhaps just to disassociate the H2. But.. One big missing data point is from you: what have you tried, what has worked, and what hasn't. I think once we get a reproducible NiH LENR project that produces something real, fine tuning it with another spark plug, voltage, pressure, heating element, etc. would be much easier. But I think one spark plug should be effective.. as it sure looked like DGT was just sparking their reactor very briefly to get it to heat up. There is an interesting thread on dust fusion on Talk-Polywell: http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3531postdays=0postorder=ascstart=0 Seems to me an easy way to replicate the transmutation of elements using low power. It includes links to video, replication attempts, and some good discussion and speculation. My video of me nearly blowing up my microwave is posted there. - Brad On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: After reading the entire paper front to back, I am overwhelmed by the complexity of his experimental setup. Seems too complex and finnicky to be scalable for commericial applications. Although looking at his setup reminds me of DGT cylindrical reactor. Specifically, it reminds me of the 2 spark plugs on both ends. I have been pondering a lot on how DGT might be using the 2 spark plugs. It seems to me that 2 spark plug arranged in that fashion would be insufficient to ionize a substantial amount of carbon nanopowders (Assuming DGT uses nanocarbon like Egely.) I am also at a lost in understanding how it can help create some mixing. I wonder if DGT is using the spark plugs to cause oscillations within the chamber like I first originally speculated although it seems to me that the power levels imparted by the spark plugs would be too small for such a task, the reactor chamber being huge. In my spark reactor, my volumes are small and I take advantage of thermosiphon so I can concieve of a way to create turbulence with a single spark plug. What are your thought on my comments above? Am I correct in assuming that turbulence inside the reactor is important? It seems that Egely is going for oscillations rather than turbulence. How does one create carbon nanopowder plasma on such a large reactor chamber volume like DGT's reactor? It appears to me that 2 spark plugs are too small for the task. Any thoughts you may have is appreciated. Jojo - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:37 AM Subject: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible. Third, replace the air with a high pressure hydrogen envelope with the highest pressure possible. Some of my reactions to important parts of Dr. George Egely narrative: On page 6: My theory of cold fusion centers on charge concentration as the primary mechanism for shilding the coulumb barrier. In support of this concept from Dr, Egely’s text as follows: Here the more or less familiar rules of quantum mechanics or Q.E.D. rule. In our opinion, strong interaction and “classical” fusion start to dominate the process above a certain power density in the middle layer. Sparking is visible on slow motion films. Obviously, the amplitude of oscillation also depends on the plasma radius, pressure, and temperature. At the center of the plasma, the amplitudes should be much higher than
[Vo]:RE: Water fueled electric generator
Mike, An American who returned to Vietnam after obtaining 36 U.S. Patents for Hewlett Packard and Kodak has invented a water fueled fuel cell. An article link appeared on vortex some months ago. It uses either fresh or salt water. A 50 watt unit has been demonstrated. 2 kW and 2.4 kW cells have been made. His name is Nguyen Chanh Khe, Ph.D. His work is greeted in a manner similar to Mills or LENR. A 2 kW home generator is apparently nearing production with a price set at $1,600 USD and will only be sold in Vietnam for now. Mark Mark Goldes Co-founder, Chava Energy CEO, Aesop Institute 301A North Main Street Sebastopol, CA 95472 www.chavaenergy.com www.aesopinstitute.org 707 861-9070 707 497-3551 fax From: Mike Carrell [mi...@medleas.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 4:53 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper Robert, Your skepticism is understandable, especially if you have not done your homework to follow Mills as I have. The investors are “qualified” [read wealthy] or corporations who can afford long shots. Mills’ production of journal papers and a book of epic scope are notable, but the proof is in the product. Nobody in the energy field has reliably used water as a fuel to produce electricity directly. This is accomplished; read the Validation reports on the website. Scale-up may have its problems. Mike Carrell From: Robert Lynn [mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 1:03 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: CMNS: CIHT paper As I understand it Blacklight has an exceptionally high Promises:Products ratio over the first 20 years of their existence, and have burned through an enormous amount of money from investors (no doubt hurting a fair number of people and careers for those that believed in them). Does this latest release represent a significant change from their business modus operandi? Is there any reason why we should have greater faith in their ability to deliver on current promises than those of years past? Or is this another Paul Moller like operation? Put another way; is there anyone in the collective who would invest a significant portion of their wealth into Blacklight? On 28 May 2012 17:39, Mike Carrell mi...@medleas.commailto:mi...@medleas.com wrote: Blacklightpower has posted a major release of the IHT cell [Catalyst induced Hydrino Transition]. Peter Gluck has posted a link to a 89-page paper at the site detailing the CHIT cell chemistry and operation. I will list below features warranting attention by members of this group: 1. The cell generates electricity directly, without a thermal cycle. 2. The fuel is water vapor produced by bubbling argon through water. 3. The end products are hydrinos [H in the H(1/4) state], electricity , and oxygen 4. No pollution 5. No scarce or costly materials 6. Adaptable to volume manufacture 7. CIHT battery of desired voltage by stacking cell plates 8. Validation reports by six very competent scientists 9. Current test at a 10 W level, 1.5 kW modules for residential use in 2013 10. Estimated installed cost $100/kW 11. Privately financed, investment to date ~$60 million The existence of the hydrino state of hydrogen has been established by multiple means which are outlined the website links. A short summary of the CIHT cell operation is on p.28 of the cited paper. The cell operates at an elevated temperature Which may be maintained by insulation but initiated by external power; it is not part of the energy balance. In my experience of a couple of decades of Mills-watching, I have found statements backed up by evidence. Careful reading is recommended. Do not assume features which “look like” some other work “really is” other work. This is a historical achievement. Mike Carrell From: c...@googlegroups.commailto:c...@googlegroups.com [mailto:c...@googlegroups.commailto:c...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Peter Gluck Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 5:10 AM To: VORTEX; CMNS Subject: CMNS: CIHT paper For those interested in hydrinos: Mike Carrell has found this paper describing the configuration and operation of Randy Mills' CIHT Cell: http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/papers/CIHTElectrochemicalCell.pdf Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups CMNS group. To post to this group, send email to c...@googlegroups.commailto:c...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.commailto:cmns+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cmns?hl=en. This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
RE: [Vo]:No More Anticipation
On the contrary, Heinz may love the idea. The faster the ketchup escapes, the more likely you are to overpour. When that occurs, the 66 servings per bottle become, in practice, substantially fewer. This means the bottle will need replaced more frequently, and Heinz sells more ketchup. Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 18:15:45 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:No More Anticipation From: cheme...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Heinz will not be excited either: A serving size of Heinz ketchup is 1 tablespoon, according to the nutrition label. The number of servings in a bottle of ketchup varies based on bottle size. For example, a 40-oz. bottle of ketchup contains about 66 servings. It is estimated that this technology will save up to 2 tablespoons per 40 oz. bottle thus stretching a bottle of ketchup 3% longer and reducing Heinz's revenue by $350 Milion annually... On Monday, May 28, 2012, Eric Walker wrote: On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: WTF! WOW!! Somehow they took ketchup, which is fine enough but not quite as good as its reputation, and made it look utterly unpalatable. When it comes to food, presentation is important. I wonder whether it will take a younger generation that hasn't seen ketchup in normal bottles before something like this will catch on. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion
Several years ago I tried Titanium Oxide Nano powder. I got a free sample in a jar, I forget from where. I sent sparks through the powder it at near vacuum to a pressure of one atm. I only got smelly dust. No anomalous energy. Frank Z -Original Message- From: ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, May 28, 2012 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Jojo, It seems like one should do the trick--DGT seemed to be just jolting their experiment to get an increased output--perhaps just to disassociate the H2. But.. One big missing data point is from you: what have you tried, what has worked, and what hasn't. I think once we get a reproducible NiH LENR project that produces something real, fine tuning it with another spark plug, voltage, pressure, heating element, etc. would be much easier. But I think one spark plug should be effective.. as it sure looked like DGT was just sparking their reactor very briefly to get it to heat up. There is an interesting thread on dust fusion on Talk-Polywell: http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3531postdays=0postorder=ascstart=0 Seems to me an easy way to replicate the transmutation of elements using low power. It includes links to video, replication attempts, and some good discussion and speculation. My video of me nearly blowing up my microwave is posted there. - Brad On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: After reading the entire paper front to back, I am overwhelmed by the complexity of his experimental setup. Seems too complex and finnicky to be scalable for commericial applications. Although looking at his setup reminds me of DGT cylindrical reactor. Specifically, it reminds me of the 2 spark plugs on both ends. I have been pondering a lot on how DGT might be using the 2 spark plugs. It seems to me that 2 spark plug arranged in that fashion would be insufficient to ionize a substantial amount of carbon nanopowders (Assuming DGT uses nanocarbon like Egely.) I am also at a lost in understanding how it can help create some mixing. I wonder if DGT is using the spark plugs to cause oscillations within the chamber like I first originally speculated although it seems to me that the power levels imparted by the spark plugs would be too small for such a task, the reactor chamber being huge. In my spark reactor, my volumes are small and I take advantage of thermosiphon so I can concieve of a way to create turbulence with a single spark plug. What are your thought on my comments above? Am I correct in assuming that turbulence inside the reactor is important? It seems that Egely is going for oscillations rather than turbulence. How does one create carbon nanopowder plasma on such a large reactor chamber volume like DGT's reactor? It appears to me that 2 spark plugs are too small for the task. Any thoughts you may have is appreciated. Jojo - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:37 AM Subject: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible. Third, replace the air with a high pressure hydrogen envelope with the highest pressure possible. Some of my reactions to important parts of Dr. George Egely narrative: On page 6: My theory of cold fusion centers on charge concentration as the primary mechanism for shilding the coulumb barrier. In support of this concept from Dr, Egely’s
Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion
Did you utilize a high pressure hydrogen envelope? Did you test for transmutation? I doubt that an air envelope will give positive results in terms of anomalous energy production. But that is just a guess. On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:52 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Several years ago I tried Titanium Oxide Nano powder. I got a free sample in a jar, I forget from where. I sent sparks through the powder it at near vacuum to a pressure of one atm. I only got smelly dust. No anomalous energy. Frank Z -Original Message- From: ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, May 28, 2012 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Jojo, It seems like one should do the trick--DGT seemed to be just jolting their experiment to get an increased output--perhaps just to disassociate the H2. But.. One big missing data point is from you: what have you tried, what has worked, and what hasn't. I think once we get a reproducible NiH LENR project that produces something real, fine tuning it with another spark plug, voltage, pressure, heating element, etc. would be much easier. But I think one spark plug should be effective.. as it sure looked like DGT was just sparking their reactor very briefly to get it to heat up. There is an interesting thread on dust fusion on Talk-Polywell: http://www.talk-polywell.org/bb/viewtopic.php?t=3531postdays=0postorder=ascstart=0 Seems to me an easy way to replicate the transmutation of elements using low power. It includes links to video, replication attempts, and some good discussion and speculation. My video of me nearly blowing up my microwave is posted there. - Brad On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: After reading the entire paper front to back, I am overwhelmed by the complexity of his experimental setup. Seems too complex and finnicky to be scalable for commericial applications. Although looking at his setup reminds me of DGT cylindrical reactor. Specifically, it reminds me of the 2 spark plugs on both ends. I have been pondering a lot on how DGT might be using the 2 spark plugs. It seems to me that 2 spark plug arranged in that fashion would be insufficient to ionize a substantial amount of carbon nanopowders (Assuming DGT uses nanocarbon like Egely.) I am also at a lost in understanding how it can help create some mixing. I wonder if DGT is using the spark plugs to cause oscillations within the chamber like I first originally speculated although it seems to me that the power levels imparted by the spark plugs would be too small for such a task, the reactor chamber being huge. In my spark reactor, my volumes are small and I take advantage of thermosiphon so I can concieve of a way to create turbulence with a single spark plug. What are your thought on my comments above? Am I correct in assuming that turbulence inside the reactor is important? It seems that Egely is going for oscillations rather than turbulence. How does one create carbon nanopowder plasma on such a large reactor chamber volume like DGT's reactor? It appears to me that 2 spark plugs are too small for the task. Any thoughts you may have is appreciated. Jojo - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:37 AM Subject: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible.
Re: [Vo]:MY WAY TO TRUTH IN LENR
Thank you! The Problem Solving Rules are here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/02/problem-solving-quasi-desperate-appeal.html On the Blog the Rules appear in 19 languages but some great languages as Japanese, Arabic, the languages of India missing. Still trying. Peter On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 11:46 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: From: Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 9:52:44 AM Subject: [Vo]:MY WAY TO TRUTH IN LENR Dear Colleagues, I have published a synthesis, summary presentation of the evolution of my understanding of LENR: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/my-way-to-lenr-truth.html An interesting progression (I haven't read all the links yet. I particularly enjoyed THE CONCEPT OF “MISCOVERY” AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR LENR http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/concept-of-miscovery-and-what-it-means.html ) I looked at http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/05/solving-insoluble-problems.htmlbut couldn't find a list of your Rules. -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Coronal Cavity Sphere Deflects Solar Eruption
FYI: Coronal Cavity Sphere Deflects Solar Eruption. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgs4QUNzZfI -mark
Re: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion
After reading the entire paper front to back, I am overwhelmed by the complexity of his experimental setup. Seems too complex and finnicky to be scalable for commericial applications. Although looking at his setup reminds me of DGT cylindrical reactor. Specifically, it reminds me of the 2 spark plugs on both ends. I have been pondering a lot on how DGT might be using the 2 spark plugs. It seems to me that 2 spark plug arranged in that fashion would be insufficient to ionize a substantial amount of carbon nanopowders (Assuming DGT uses nanocarbon like Egely.) I am also at a lost in understanding how it can help create some mixing. I wonder if DGT is using the spark plugs to cause oscillations within the chamber like I first originally speculated although it seems to me that the power levels imparted by the spark plugs would be too small for such a task, the reactor chamber being huge. In my spark reactor, my volumes are small and I take advantage of thermosiphon so I can concieve of a way to create turbulence with a single spark plug. What are your thought on my comments above? Am I correct in assuming that turbulence inside the reactor is important? It seems that Egely is going for oscillations rather than turbulence. How does one create carbon nanopowder plasma on such a large reactor chamber volume like DGT's reactor? It appears to me that 2 spark plugs are too small for the task. Any thoughts you may have is appreciated. Jojo - Original Message - From: Axil Axil To: vortex-l Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 8:37 AM Subject: [Vo]:Nano dust fusion Nano dust fusion http://greentechinfo.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/George_Egely_-_Nano_Dust_Fusion_v7.pdf Dr. George Egely has developed a form of LENR that is uncommon but may not be too far off the mark. His process is an unusual one. The essential ingredients are dusty plasma made from nano‐size carbon particles and air and some water vapor. In its simplest version the process works at atmospheric pressure, and at modest temperatures at 1000 – 3000 º C. I would like to offer some suggestions for improvement that are inspired by the work of Rossi, DGT, and Chan et al. First, lose those hollow quarts balls and the microwave in preference to a spark plug. The plug is more robust and reliable. It will pump many more electrons into the plasma due to its high operational voltage then will a microwave. Second, add zirconium carbide nano-powder to the dust; the use of this metal will provide more charge concentration potential to the plasma. The use of zirconium carbide with a work function of 3.38 and a very high melting temperature of 3532 °C will thermalize the gamma radiation associated with the nuclear reactions of LENR by using a coherent proton surface charge. I love carbide of a transition metals because of their high melting temperature and their compatibity with carbon powder. Together with carbon, a very hot plasma temperature will increase operational reactor hydrogen envelope temperatures to the highest turbo generation efficiencies possible. Third, replace the air with a high pressure hydrogen envelope with the highest pressure possible. Some of my reactions to important parts of Dr. George Egely narrative: On page 6: My theory of cold fusion centers on charge concentration as the primary mechanism for shilding the coulumb barrier. In support of this concept from Dr, Egely’s text as follows: Here the more or less familiar rules of quantum mechanics or Q.E.D. rule. In our opinion, strong interaction and “classical” fusion start to dominate the process above a certain power density in the middle layer. Sparking is visible on slow motion films. Obviously, the amplitude of oscillation also depends on the plasma radius, pressure, and temperature. At the center of the plasma, the amplitudes should be much higher than those at the outer wall of the acoustic resonator. (There can be the highest amplitude of a spherical standing wave). See Fig. 5 for the three layers. Near the center of the plasma sphere (middle layer), charge shielding can dominate nuclear processes due to the enormous surface charge density of the dust. Then repulsing charges of like protons can be overcome by the huge negative charge density of the carbon particles. On the slow motion video records, one can clearly see the appearance of sudden small sparks en mass. Then the Geiger counter starts to click, though at moderate levels. At present no one knows what goes on in the center of the acoustic resonator. In Fig. 6 these simultaneous mechanisms are shown as field amplification by resonant surface polaritons (Fig. 6/a), direct volumetric polarization by electron and ion impact (Fig. 6/b), and charge shielding (Fig. 6/c) is shown, where strong interaction rules (again at a different size level) at the characteristic size of a nucleon. Obviously
Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR)
OK Whatever. This will be my last response to you ever. You are welcome to have the last word and deliver some parting insult or snide remark. No sense in arguing with Darwinian Evolution fanatics; who's only interested in blaberring about things he does not know. It's akin to arguing with Parks regarding cold fusion. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:16 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) Jojo, you make up fantasies about what shows in this record. Why would I expect you'd have anything of substance to discuss elsewhere? I did not criticize you for hijacking the thread. This is a great example of meaning created in the mind of the reader. I wrote about what interests me. This conversation will be worth, for you, whatever you say it is worth. To be explicit, I'm declining your request. I might want to discuss this -- what's this? -- if I had a clue you were awake. I don't. So here I am. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 4:39 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: First you criticize me for hijacking this thread (which was not a hijack because I was trying to draw a parallel and I renamed the thread.), then you continue to criticize me for hijacking even though I have stopped responding, then you continue to keep this topic alive even though I and others have given it a rest. So, make up your mind. If you want to discuss this topic with me, please identify another forum and I will show up and we can continue this discussion. I have a lot of corrections to your allegations and faulty understanding of the issue. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 3:03 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) You tell people that they believe in something preposterous and you fear that they will criticize you? The list owner could decide that discussion of evolution was not useful here. But he hasn't, AFAIK. What was a problem was the hijacking of a thread on tritium and NiH LENR, and you were not solely responsible for that. Here, the thread is about Darwinian Evolution, whatever that is. My own interest is ontology, and how we choose (or fall into) what we believe, as distinct from what we experience (and remember of experience, as distinct from what we made it mean.) There is a whole family of pseudosciences based on fallacious post- hoc estimation of probability. In this case, an argument is invented with a pretense of objectivity, when it is clear that the conclusion is incorporated in the assumptions. This is not about whether or not there is intention behind the phenomena of life. Rather it is about whether or not functional complexity beyond some level is a proof of intention. Your argument has, in fact, been circular. It's not that I deny intention itself. It is rather that discerning the purpose of life, the intention, if you will, requires stepping outside the normal machinery of thought and stepping into direct, unmediated experience. You will never get there through firm adherence to any belief. Faith can take you there, but only a faith in reality itself, which, again, I distinguish from collections of words, crystallized as meanings we prefer. Faith in reality, I'll assert, underlies genuine Science. Sent from my iPhone On May 28, 2012, at 5:42 AM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote: Once again, I hesistate to respond to you cause that will cause people to roundly criticize me for starting a long off-topic thread. You bring up several points that need a response, to set your fallacies straight. Can you suggest a forum where we can do this? Let me know and I'll show up. Otherwise, there is nothing much I am willing to do in this forum. Jojo - Original Message - From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 7:52 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Darwinian Evolution (Was Tritium in Ni-H LENR) At 09:11 AM 5/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote: I am unsure about your point or what you are asking. What exactly is your discussion point or what exactly is your question? Of course,there are strong inference. For example, if you find the presence of Information in DNA, that is an inference for Intelligent Designer, not Darwinian Evolution based on randon chance mutations. Random processes never create Information, because information is Order, the exact opposite of Randomness. The conclusion is being assumed. It is easy to demonstrate information in random output with or without output selection. Information is not defined here, and I suspect that the undisclosed definition again incorporates the conclusions. There is order in the non-living, presumably
