date:20200613

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

2020-06-13 Thread ROGER ANDERTON

i.e. the modern version of Ptolemaic epicycles

On Sunday, 14 June 2020, 01:31:32 BST, ROGER ANDERTON
wrote:

>>I wonder what they mean by "information" when they say in the introduction
>>that the "information speed" never exceeds the speed light.<<
I think its bluff.
Go back to Einstein 1905 when he started all this relativity madness, he never
said anything about there being "information speed".

Its just something that relativists have had to invent to try to save
relativity.
What they believe is relativity; they have just got all wrong.
Nothing in Einstein 1905 about c being a limiting speed; its just a
misinterpretation that they impose and go to absurd lengths to try to save.

On Sunday, 14 June 2020, 01:13:50 BST, H LV wrote:

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:27 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:

I recently had and still have some discussion on researchgate about
superluminal signal transmission by scalar waves. It is well known and even
classically allowed that the group/phase speed can be greater than the speed of
light.

This has been experimentally proven to be higher than at least 64 * c! :
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08735-8

I wonder what they mean by "information" when they say in the introduction that
the "information speed" never exceeds the speed light.

It looks like we must rewrite Maxwell equation for dense matter as matter is
able to provide an extra force:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341931087_Revision_of_Maxwell's_Equations

The method used in the proposal is "basically the same" I used in SO(4) physics
to derive all known nuclear properties including strong force, gravity etc..

It looks like energy transport to any point in an SO(4) entangled system is
instantaneous at least for the added phase part that couples 2D orthogonal to
the classic wave. This of course basically violates GR but an entangled system
looks like a black hole and thus it is external to the horizon of GR!

Discussion:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Did_I_actually_measure_a_superluminous_signal_thus_disproving_the_relativity_theory

J.W.

PS: On RG you also find many different experimental refutations of GR but this
is anyway mots since we know that gravity is an (SO(4) based) EM force...

Quantum entanglement suggests that a transfer of information does not
necessarily require a transfer of energy.
It seems to me that a dynamical geometry program exemplifies information
transfer without energy. For example, imagine a horizontal line with two
points. One point (O) is fixed and the other point (A) is movable. Constuct
circle which is centred on point O and such the circumference of the circle
passes through A. The circle intercepts the line at a second point B. If the
point A is dragged left or right the radius of the circle increases or
decreases and this motion instantaneously changes the location of point B
without a transfer of energy. "Dragged" is used metaphorically so no inertia or
forces of any kind cause the point B to move in the opposite direction of point
A. One could say this is just an exercise in abstract geometry which does not
represent the "real" world, but why should such geometric relationships be
excluded from the domain of what is real?
Harry

Harry

On 12.06.2020 18:25, H LV wrote:

Typically mathematical issues that arise never seem to be regarded as
evidence that there is something seriously wrong with a theory. I think this
attitude exists for a few reasons. First mathematical models have been
tremendously successful at describing patterns in nature. Second, the
structure of the mathematical models themselves can suggest the existence of
novel particles such as the positron. Third, mathematical problems seem to be
eventually rectified at a later date.
Also, even if the positron had not been found I doubt it would have led
physicists to doubt the validity of the mathematics of quantum mechanics. For
example the mathematics of special relativity allows for the existence of
tachyons (faster than light particles) but as far I know tachyons have never
been detected and their absence has never led physicists to doubt the validity
of special relativity.

Harry
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:19 PM Che wrote:

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON
wrote:

>>it might be preferable to accept them as each true within their respective
domains<<
When "they" talk of those "domains" - there is a lot of handwaving; general
relativity is often said to breakdown at the singularity, and quantum mechanics
supposedly fails to be able to deal with gravity; but no maths for that is
presented as to precisely when equations from such theories fail.

Isn't that 'divide-by-zero' issues..?

On Monday, 8 June 2020, 20:03:09 BST, H LV wrote:

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

2020-06-13 Thread ROGER ANDERTON

On Sunday, 14 June 2020, 01:13:50 BST, H LV wrote:

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:27 PM Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:

This has been experimentally proven to be higher than at least 64 * c! :
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08735-8

I wonder what they mean by "information" when they say in the introduction that
the "information speed" never exceeds the speed light.

It looks like we must rewrite Maxwell equation for dense matter as matter is
able to provide an extra force:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341931087_Revision_of_Maxwell's_Equations

The method used in the proposal is "basically the same" I used in SO(4) physics
to derive all known nuclear properties including strong force, gravity etc..

Discussion:

https://www.researchgate.net/post/Did_I_actually_measure_a_superluminous_signal_thus_disproving_the_relativity_theory

J.W.

PS: On RG you also find many different experimental refutations of GR but this
is anyway mots since we know that gravity is an (SO(4) based) EM force...

Harry

On 12.06.2020 18:25, H LV wrote:

Harry
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:19 PM Che wrote:

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON
wrote:

Isn't that 'divide-by-zero' issues..?

On Monday, 8 June 2020, 20:03:09 BST, H LV wrote:

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON
wrote:

>>Thoughts?<<
there are problems combining relativity (especially general relativity) with
quantum

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

2020-06-13 Thread H LV

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 6:27 PM Jürg Wyttenbach  wrote:

> I recently had and still have some discussion on researchgate about
> superluminal signal transmission by scalar waves. It is well known and even
> classically allowed that the group/phase speed can be greater than the
> speed of light.
>
> This has been experimentally proven to be higher than at least 64 * c!   :
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-08735-8
> 
>

I wonder what they mean by "information" when they say in the introduction
that the "information speed" never exceeds the speed light.

>
> It looks like we must rewrite Maxwell equation for dense matter as matter
> is able to provide an extra force:
>
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341931087_Revision_of_Maxwell's_Equations
>
> The method used in the proposal is "basically the same" I used in SO(4)
> physics to derive all known nuclear properties including strong force,
> gravity etc..
>
> It looks like energy transport to any point in an SO(4) entangled system
> is instantaneous at least for the added phase part that couples 2D
> orthogonal to the classic wave. This of course basically violates GR but an
> entangled system looks like a black hole and thus it is external to the
> horizon of GR!
>
> Discussion:
>
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/post/Did_I_actually_measure_a_superluminous_signal_thus_disproving_the_relativity_theory
>
> J.W.
>
> PS: On RG you also find many different experimental refutations of GR but
> this is anyway mots since we know that gravity is an (SO(4) based) EM
> force...
>
>
>
Quantum entanglement suggests that a transfer of information does not
necessarily require a transfer of energy.

It seems to me that a dynamical geometry program exemplifies information
transfer without energy. For example, imagine a horizontal line with two
points. One point (O)  is fixed and the other point (A) is movable.
Constuct circle which is centred on point O and such the circumference of
the circle passes through A. The circle intercepts the line at a second
point B. If the point A is dragged left or right the radius of the circle
increases or decreases and this motion instantaneously changes the location
of point B without a transfer of energy. "Dragged" is used metaphorically
so no inertia or forces of any kind cause the point B to move in the
opposite direction of point A.  One could say this is just an exercise in
abstract geometry which does not represent the "real" world, but why should
such geometric relationships be excluded from the domain of what is real?

Harry


Harry




> On 12.06.2020 18:25, H LV wrote:
>
> Typically mathematical issues that arise never seem to be regarded as
> evidence that there is something seriously wrong with a theory. I think
> this attitude exists for a few reasons. First mathematical models have been
> tremendously successful at describing patterns in nature. Second,  the
> structure of the mathematical models themselves can suggest the existence
> of novel particles such as the positron. Third, mathematical problems seem
> to be eventually rectified at a later date.
>
> Also, even if the positron had not been found I doubt it would have led
> physicists to doubt the validity of the mathematics of quantum mechanics.
> For example the mathematics of special relativity allows for the existence
> of tachyons (faster than light particles) but as far I know tachyons have
> never been detected and their absence has never led physicists to doubt the
> validity of special relativity.
>
> Harry
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 9:19 PM Che  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON <
>> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >>it might be preferable to accept them as each true within their
>>> respective domains<<
>>>
>>> When "they" talk of those "domains" - there is a lot of handwaving;
>>> general relativity is often said to breakdown at the singularity, and
>>> quantum mechanics supposedly fails to be able to deal with gravity; but no
>>> maths for that is presented as to precisely when equations from such
>>> theories fail.
>>>
>>
>> Isn't that 'divide-by-zero' issues..?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Monday, 8 June 2020, 20:03:09 BST, H LV 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 4:30 PM ROGER ANDERTON <
>>> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >>Thoughts?<<
>>>
>>> there are problems combining relativity (especially general relativity)
>>> with quantum physics, so when people try to talk from things combining them
>>> then they are not on solid ground.
>>>
>>>
>>> I only mentioned SR because it is often wrongly invoked to dismiss any
>>> experiment needing simultaneity.
>>> On the issue reconciling the two domains of quantum mechanics and SR/GR,
>>> instead of trying to change one or the other or both, it might be
>>> preferable to accept them as each true within their respective

Re: [Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

2020-06-13 Thread Jones Beene

 In a closed-cycle piston engine, particularly a Stirling-type, the suggestion 
is that there could be an inherent thermodynamic advantage in having sequential 
reactions which are exothermic on formation and then endothermic milliseconds 
later, on the expansion stroke. 

A resonance could then be engineered, especially if the decay was sharp and 
reliable and the engine ran at one speed only. However, this may not be what 
happens in practice with argon and hydrogen.

If the lifetime of argonium happened with endotherm precisely at BDC, then that 
could present a bonus cooling effect in addition to the change in displacement. 
This would arguably increase the Carnot spread between the hot end and cold end 
of the Stirling. 

I have not been able to find evidence for this type of thermodynamic cycle in 
the literature.


Jürg Wyttenbach wrote:   
ArH3+ is long time stable and Ar H3+ is the driving factor in Mills original 
SUNCELL reaction. In fact H3+ is the most abundant form of Hydrogen in deep 
space.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread H LV

There are many ways to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels.
Maybe I am just sentimental, but I think if we electrified everything life
would be clean but sterile.

Personally I think there is market for synthetic fuels (which have net zero
carbon emissions), because
the distribution system is already in place and they still have a greater
energy density then batteries.
Synthetic fuels can be used to power internal combustion engines which will
be used to charge batteries
and the batteries will power electric motors.

Harry

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
>
> For the record, Lazar's Corvette with hydride storage for the ICE engine.
>
> https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4
>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Robin

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:51:39 -0400:
Hi,
>Oh, and I have been hoping for hydrogen hype for three decades now.  So far
>we are just as likely to have warp drive powered by di-lithium.

Imagine the consequences of running into a pebble, or even a gas cloud, at near 
light speed. How much matter do you
think such a vessel would encounter between here and e.g. Proxima Centauri?

I'm afraid "shielding" is at least as big a problem as actually achieving light 
speed.

A worm-hole that actually allowed matter to pass through it unchanged, and 
bypassed the intervening space altogether
would IMO be a much better alternative than "warp drive".

Besides do we really need to go anywhere at all? 

If information can be sent at superluminal speeds, then societies that have it 
can exchange enough information to
satiate their curiosity, without going anywhere.

Our own Solar system provides adequate materials to meet our needs essentially 
for ever. Going to the stars for material
goods is a dream of juvenile civilizations.

Re: [Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

2020-06-13 Thread Jürg Wyttenbach

ArH_3 ^+ is long time stable and Ar H_3 ^+ is the driving factor in 
Mills original SUNCELL reaction. In fact H_3 ^+ is the most abundant 
form of Hydrogen in deep space. About H* we do not yet know.


In Mills theory this emission would be related minimally to multiples of 
27.2 eV so even if the reaction goes no further that a single redundant 
hydrogen orbital reduction, an attractive scenario for net gain would 
exist - even if the protons are lost after a single pass and must be 
continually replace by electrolysis of water.


For a magnetic resonance any coupling mass must be of same size and 
topology 27.2eV is just one good sample that works. But this has nothing 
to do with Mills model. It's just a lucky fit.


The production of H*-H* as Mills does it in teh SUN-CELL is very risky 
as nobody so far knows about its biological impact. I would stay far 
away. Only a follow-up


H*-H*+Any-isotope add-on LENR reaction would reduce the risk.


J.W.


On 13.06.2020 20:30, Jones Beene wrote:
An interesting proposition for an advanced transportation fuel would 
be presented to us - IF (big if) hydrogen can be routinely converted 
into a denser form on a catalyst, and then expanded in a piston engine 
configuration. This concept would relate to using argon as a "pseudo 
oxidizer." Argon is not exactly "inert" to the same extent as helium 
and other Column eight atoms (Vlll on the periodic table).





AFAIK this exact concept, when transposed into a piston engine 
configuration, has never been explored... or has it? There is the Papp 
engine, which used argon and other inert gases but did not use 
hydrogen; and there is the Laumann engine which included oxygen with 
argon and no surface catalyst -- but neither of those is precisely the 
same.


According to Wiki, "argonium" is the name for *argon hydride* which 
is**a (1+) ion species formed by combining a proton with argon into a 
short-lived molecule (2+ millisecond) life - which has a surprising 
strong binding energy. Argonium is actually found to be relatively 
common in interstellar space, despite this short lifetime.


In a piston engine a short lifetime could actually be put to good use 
if an asymmetry exists due to the Mills effect. It would act as a 
thermal sink.


Imagine a closed cycle piston engine which recirculates the two gases 
H2 ans Ar in such a way that under compression (at TDC) the two are 
combined on a catalyst surface (such as nickel, palladium, iridium 
etc) allowing for net energy to be freed as UV photons, which gain 
would be the result of some combination of the ion binding energy 
along with a redundant orbital photon emission less the ionization 
loss - as described by Mills, Holmlid etc.


In Mills theory this emission would be related minimally to multiples 
of 27.2 eV so even if the reaction goes no further that a single 
redundant hydrogen orbital reduction, an attractive scenario for net 
gain would exist - even if the protons are lost after a single pass 
and must be continually replace by electrolysis of water.














--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr. 22
8910 Affoltern am Albis

+41 44 760 14 18
+41 79 246 36 06

[Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

2020-06-13 Thread Jones Beene

An interesting proposition for an advanced transportation fuel would be 
presented to us - IF (big if) hydrogen can be routinely converted into a denser 
form on a catalyst, and then expanded in a piston engine configuration. This 
concept would relate to using argon as a "pseudo oxidizer." Argon is not 
exactly "inert" to the same extent as helium and other Column eight atoms (Vlll 
on the periodic table).

AFAIK this exact concept, when transposed into a piston engine configuration, 
has never been explored... or has it? There is the Papp engine, which used 
argon and other inert gases but did not use hydrogen; and there is the Laumann 
engine which included oxygen with argon and no surface catalyst -- but neither 
of those is precisely the same.

According to Wiki, "argonium" is the name for argon hydride which is a (1+) ion 
species formed by combining a proton with argon into a short-lived molecule (2+ 
millisecond) life - which has a surprising strong binding energy. Argonium is 
actually found to be relatively common in interstellar space, despite this 
short lifetime. 

In a piston engine a short lifetime could actually be put to good use if an 
asymmetry exists due to the Mills effect. It would act as a thermal sink.

Imagine a closed cycle piston engine which recirculates the two gases H2 ans Ar 
in such a way that under compression (at TDC) the two are combined on a 
catalyst surface (such as nickel, palladium, iridium etc) allowing for net 
energy to be freed as UV photons, which gain would be the result of some 
combination of the ion binding energy along with a redundant orbital photon 
emission less the ionization loss - as described by Mills, Holmlid etc.
In Mills theory this emission would be related minimally to multiples of 27.2 
eV so even if the reaction goes no further that a single redundant hydrogen 
orbital reduction, an attractive scenario for net gain would exist - even if 
the protons are lost after a single pass and must be continually replace by 
electrolysis of water.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Terry Blanton

For the record, Lazar's Corvette with hydride storage for the ICE engine.

https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4

>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Terry Blanton

Oh, and I have been hoping for hydrogen hype for three decades now.  So far
we are just as likely to have warp drive powered by di-lithium.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Jürg Wyttenbach

Fuel cell cars will run much farther the Li powered battery car as the 
tank in cargo vehicle has no real size limit.


On the other side the Chinese leader in battery technology just 
announced a 90$ /kwh battery. This is a turning point where all electric 
cars become much cheaper than ordinary fuel cars. (Also island home 
solutions!)


I leave it to you to find out what Elon did with this...

But the race is open and the only path to get rid of excess wind current 
is producing Hydrogen/Methanol. Further we just wait for better 
materials to store Hydrogen without pressure. As the LENR folks might 
know Palladium did only fail due to strange degradation  But others 
are in the pipeline. Nickel sponge?


J.W.

Am 13.06.20 um 19:17 schrieb Jones Beene:
Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be 
on the opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly 
critical of the potential of H2 in transportation.


But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that 
point. However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is 
the possibility that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital 
methods - Mills, Holmlid, etc.


When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 
eV per atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg 
or similar power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, 
which... come to think of it... could be a semantic version of 
"Orchestrated Objective Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...



Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t 
Work 










Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells
Won’t Work

Sissi Cao

“Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.




Terry Blanton wrote:

> However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best 
immigrant scientist of the last millennium, NiKola 
Tesla...Nikolamotor.com and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to 
work.  Even Germany is banking on H2 for the future; but, frankly 
Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave up on hydrogen 
when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered embrittlement.





--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr.22
8910 Affoltern a.A.
044 760 14 18
079 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Terry Blanton

Hmmm, I guess my humor is unclear...you spelled 'Nikola' as 'Nicola'.

However, I will give you partial credit for bringing the thread back on
topic with your Orch OR analogue.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:17 PM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be on
> the opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly critical
> of the potential of H2 in transportation.
>
> But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that
> point. However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is the
> possibility that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital methods -
> Mills, Holmlid, etc.
>
> When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 eV
> per atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg or
> similar power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, which...
> come to think of it... could be a semantic version of "Orchestrated
> Objective Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...
>
>
> Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work
> 
>
> Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work
>
> Sissi Cao
>
> “Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.
>
> 
>
>
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
> > However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best
> immigrant scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla...Nikolamotor.com
> and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even Germany is banking
> on H2 for the future; but, frankly Scarlett...wait...that's no longer
> allowed...I gave up on hydrogen when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves
> suffered embrittlement.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Jones Beene

 Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be on the 
opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly critical of the 
potential of H2 in transportation. 

But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that point. 
However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is the possibility 
that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital methods - Mills, Holmlid, 
etc.
When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 eV per 
atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg or similar 
power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, which... come to 
think of it... could be a semantic version of "Orchestrated Objective 
Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...

Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work

Sissi Cao

“Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.
 |

 |

 |

Terry Blanton wrote:  
 > However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best immigrant 
 > scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla...Nikolamotor.com and Toyota 
 > really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even Germany is banking on H2 for 
 > the future; but, frankly Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave 
 > up on hydrogen when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered 
 > embrittlement.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:08 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> OK in a world where paper companies with much less to offer (Nicola Motors
> for instance) can raise billions on a worthless IPO, then the sorry record
> of Mills is not such a scandal. Just a major disappointment.
>

Back in the day, I would accuse you of hijacking my thread; but,
considering that this is the ONLY active thread on Vortex, a formerly
whirlwind list, you are forgiven.

However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best immigrant
scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla.

Nikolamotor.com and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even
Germany is banking on H2 for the future; but, frankly
Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave up on hydrogen when Bob
Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered embrittlement.

It's hell having a good memory.  Where's the dementia the good Dr. D
promised? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Demento

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread Jones Beene

 bobcook39923 wrote:  

> “OBFUSCUTION” is the name of the game these days, I’m sorry to say.  The 
> Nordskies are no exception.

Well yes, but they (Norront) are not a University nor charitable organization. 

They are investing major private funds in the hopes of getting a good return. 
We should not expect them to divulge trade secrets or other details which give 
away a competitive edge. Holmlid, however, has many dozens of quality papers 
out there to work from.

Of course, all of us would like to see better evidence that they (anyone) have 
made a major breakthrough after all these years. Norront have been more 
forthcoming with useful info than either BLP or Brillouin - but at this stage, 
they must ship real prototype devices to potential customers even if some 
details remain trade secret. 

Let's hope Norront (or anyone else) can produce decent results which are 
replicated soon. From a practical standpoint, I do not see any justifiable hope 
for Mills' present work. Everything he publishes sounds like a broken record. 
The old vinyl kind. In retrospect, he has run through what must be $200 million 
or more since 1990 without a single significant and verifiable breakthrough.

OK in a world where paper companies with much less to offer (Nicola Motors for 
instance) can raise billions on a worthless IPO, then the sorry record of Mills 
is not such a scandal. Just a major disappointment.

RE: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

2020-06-13 Thread bobcook39...@hotmail.com

Jones---

“OBFUSCUTION” is the name of the game these days, I’m sorry to say.  The 
Nordskies are no exception.

Bob Cook




From: Jones Beene
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 7:14 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Just to clarify - Norront is not exactly a hot fusion company. Their website 
gives that impression and it may be intentional.

In one version they have licensed the discovery of Holmlid of an efficient way 
to produce muons. They have other processes as well - which look more like cold 
fusion.

The "cheap muons" can be used in one of the oldest "proven" versions of hot 
fusion, which is muon catalyzed fusion. This version works on a small scale 
geometry and does not require the expense of plasma magnetic confinement 
although it could provide an enormous boost to say a Tokamak (or to ICF).

http://www.norrontfusion.com/

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

Re: [Vo]:Quantum Non-locality

Re: [Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

[Vo]:"Burning"hydrogen with argon ?

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

RE: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

16 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information