research
Are you refering to Virginia Steen-McIntyre ?
Chuck Kinney
- Original Message -
From: Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:10 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Need big list of legit heretical research
There was also a woman archaeologist who
? the albedo of the earth is indeed changing.
2009/6/3 Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net:
Or has the balance always been there?
Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi has quite a distinguished scientific career,
including a number of years at NASA Langley.
It's a long read, but well worth it...
http
And one would think that this motor is a gutless wonder.
Not so fast, but the motor is. Here are basic specs:
HP2g Specs:
- V8 Engine
- 400 HP (horsepower)
- 500 Ft. Lbs. Tq. (foot pounds of torque)
- 110 MPGe (miles per gallon energy equivalent)
- E-85 (ethanol fuel)
- Made in the USA
.
Competitive forces trying to delay that effort??? Fortunately, in this evil,
obsolete capitalistic
society, Doug has plenty of interested investors to move this technology to
market.
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Mark Iverson [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Sunday, June 07, 2009 10:09 AM
Grok is a coward.
If he really believed what he was preaching, then he wouldn't be afraid to use
his real name.
I think most everyone I'm aware of on this list has apologized at one time or
another... It's what a
person with integrity does when they realize their mistake or transgression.
The
2009, Mark Iverson wrote:
I think most everyone I'm aware of on this list has apologized at one
time or another... It's what a person with integrity does when they
realize their mistake or transgression.
Trademarks of the troll/flamer/fsckhead are, refusal to apologize, plus use of
anonymous
FYI,
The Crime of Reason and the Closing of the Scientific Mind
Robert D. Laughlin, Reviewed by Edward Gerjuoy
Basic Books, New York, 2008. $25.95 (186 pp.). ISBN 978-0-465-00507-9
-Mark
Has anyone heard of a 'photonic battery'... i.e., a way to store and
controllably release photons?
-Mark
be interested in this as well.
My thought concept was a sphere, as perfectly mirrored as possible
inside, but of a material similar to two way glass, so that a matching
but opposite piece in physical contact allows passage of light. vacuum
seam it.
2009/6/10 Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net
Steve:
RE: any benefits to society from collider research...
Perhaps the fact that there were NO serious answers to your question, is
the answer!
:-)
And taking the implication a little further, perhaps it's a good source
of amusement!
:-):-)
Mark N. Iverson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
Hey Jed, time to go take a vacation and get some RR... Go climb a mountain
with your kids. By the
time you get back, Bill will have ended the ban...you won't even know it was in
effect!
Come to think of it, I could really use a vacation too. Now, should I use the
'p' word, or the 'r'
word???
Thanks for the info Robin... I forgot about slow light; and I think there was
an article in the last
6 months about a group of researchers actually stopping light. That's a little
too beam me up for
my taste. But my original posting was this:
Has anyone heard of a 'photonic battery'...
Steven wrote:
The point behind this meandering follow-up post is the fact that the bubble
rings these dolphins
were manufacturing, once formed, were exceedingly stable as they traveled
through the much more
dense medium of water. They were quite circular as well. Now, consider the fact
that
!
;-)
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: OrionWorks [mailto:svj.orionwo...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2009 10:20 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Smoke Ring?
From: Mark Iverson
Steven:
I did watch the video clip and would disagree with your above
statement
Bill wrote:
I suggest that it's a VERY bad idea to try distorting results by concealing
any parts of it.
Concealment is an element of deception, that's why the legal phrase says the
WHOLE truth. Such
concealment is what manipulative people do. You'd best avoid it.
Bill, you're much to
is both confusing to me (I
held back evidence
that supports my case) and to me somewhat hostile.
Hopefully this is simply misunderstanding on both sides.
2009/6/24 Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net
Bill wrote:
I suggest that it's a VERY bad idea to try distorting results by concealing
any parts
When I replicated the ball-bearing (marinov) motor about 12 years ago, I
thought it might have
something to do with longitudinal forces ala the Graneaus (Ampere-Neumann
electrodynamics), since it
only seemed to manifest with large currents. I didn't have an amp meter back
then, but what kind
FYI:
Favorable CF article in EDN (Electronic Design News)...
http://www.edn.com/blog/40040/post/1750043575.html?nid=2431rid=4465865
Comment section overall pretty reasonable, but with a few of the usual ignorant
armchair scientists
that are still parroting 20 year-old info. They obviously
Ed:
Although a significant proportion of the wealthy and powerful are jewish (and
they probably worked
hard and smart to get there), I think you could have left the religious
background out of your
statement and it still would have been accurate...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From:
, for
example, are a fact. I
see nothing wrong with identifying such groups when they are likely to act in a
particular way as a
group.
Ed
On Jul 13, 2009, at 10:33 PM, Mark Iverson wrote:
Ed:
Although a significant proportion of the wealthy and powerful are
jewish (and they probably worked
Stephen wrote:
Let's stop right there. The 'present', for any observer, has zero thickness
along that observer's
time axis.
What is zero thickness for a human could be a lifetime at the subatomic level...
It all depends on what scale you're talking about... And don't mix scales!
-Mark
LOL!!! That was hilarious! Thx Stephen...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com]
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 8:05 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:How to Build a UFO
Terry Blanton wrote:
Speaking of UFOs on a slow Sunday, this guy
In this article:
Breaking the Planck's law, at the nanoscale
http://www.physorg.com/news168101848.html
http://www.physorg.com/news168101848.html
One of the authors states:
Current theory will not be valid once we push down to 1 nanometer spacing.
Which is something that I've been
I see more and more instances of when some research is finding things that
don't quite agree with
'theory' or 'whats expected', and it always involves some kind of experiment
where a physical
parameter is way beyond what science has explored. I distinctly remember a
quote from one scientist
There is, it's just overcome by the forces causing the separation of charge...
Understand that just as in a chemical battery, there is an active process
keeping the charges
separated, and it has to do with the turbulent columns of air moving vertically
inside the cloud.
It's been about
Dr. Swartz:
You should read carefully Stephen Lawrence's post today, 9/30/2009, at 6:16PM.
You might want to recind your comment since Stephen included quotes from as far
back as 5 Dec 2004
which CLEARLY show that Jed has ALWAYS admitted that he got the CD from you,
but that he couldn't
read
If I understand Jed's requirements, he is asking for image-over-text, which
means the image file is
what one sees, but that there is text associated with each image that allows
one to do full text
searches. Thus, there is NO reason for Dr. Schwartz's concern about 'editing',
since the original
Jed wrote:
Fleischmann told me he has had the problem for a long time.
I'm outraged, how could you be so insensitive to reveal in a public forum
personal health details
that someone told you!!!
Me thinks this touches an emotional 'button' for both Jed and ABD... And that
comment Jed made
This sort of thing makes me wonder about scientists, or the scientific
'process'...
For those of you more familiar with the details of atomic/molecular physics,
can you please explain
why you would even think that the magnetic orientation/properties of copper
atoms in covalent bonds
would be
Yet another example of how the ego totally screws up the (scientific) process...
Imagine where civilization could be now if ego's weren't involved...
-Mark
_
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 7:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re:
Who was it that was using RF to enhance the CF/LENR reaction???
This from PhysOrg.com...
http://www.physorg.com/news175281818.html
As the authors report in an upcoming issue of Physical Review A, the
radio-frequency (RF) radiation
could serve as a second knob, in addition to the more
For those who want to explore the criticisms of Relativity theory, there is a
journal that focuses
on that. From their Editorial Policy:
Galilean Electrodynamics aims to publish high-quality scientific papers that
discuss challenges to
accepted orthodoxy in physics, especially in the realm of
I think this is an important statement...
However, if by experts they mean Mosier-Boss, McKubre, etc., then less so
since these people,
altho certainly experts, are also insiders.
I would hope that at least some of the experts were people who have never done
any LENR research...
-Mark
Times News Flash: DoD Report Released
Mark Iverson wrote:
However, if by experts they mean Mosier-Boss, McKubre, etc., then less so
since these people,
altho certainly experts, are also insiders.
I would hope that at least some of the experts were people who have never
done any LENR
So the Intelligence community of the DoD looked into LENR, decided that
there's enough sound
scientific evidence to suggest that LENR just might be real, and because of the
most extraordinary
ramifications if it is real, is, with this report, warning government agencies
and the scientific
Mark Iverson wrote:
Jed, then you've got some extremely liberal definition of 'insider'!
I was using the skeptics' definition. As I said, one of them called Duncan a
charlatan because he
concluded that Energetics Technology is correctly measuring 0.8 W in, ~20 W
out. Any sane expert
Mark Iverson wrote:
Duncan has now become an insider, by that definition.
No, I disagree. Has he set up a lab and done some experiments? No.
Yes, he has now. That's my point.
I am pleased he has!
My point was that at the time of the 60-Minutes piece, he most certainly
RE: the discussion about chain reactions in LENR-type experiments...
Not sure if I got the below reference from vortex-l or not, but, in a general
sense, it seems that
it is saying that under certain conditions, normally incoherent behavior can
suddenly become
coherent... i.e., the behavior of
This just out at PhysOrg... (see at bottom of msg)
What I find funny, in a sad kind of way, is the following statement:
So you have one set of data that tells you the mass-dependence picture doesn't
work and another
that tells you the density-dependence picture doesn't work, Arrington
Steve:
I really don't think it was a good idea to post her phone msg transcript!
She must be itchin' to get fired... this will make it back to her superiors.
-Mark
_
From: Steven Krivit [mailto:stev...@newenergytimes.com]
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 2:26 PM
To:
Mark Iverson would like to recall the message, [Vo]:ONR Inspector General
Helps New Energy Times
Break Story.
attachment: winmail.dat
She must be one gutsy lady!
And a good moral compass and high degree of integrity...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com]
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 8:21 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:ONR Inspector General Helps New Energy Times
Steve wrote:
...but it has been re-assigned.
As has she...
Boy, they sure didn't waste any time did they! ;-)
That's whatcha get for tryin to do the right thing nowadays...
How did it get so bad?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Steven Krivit [mailto:stev...@newenergytimes.com]
Sent:
, November 20, 2009 5:09 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Proton's internal structure...
On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Mark Iverson wrote:
This just out at PhysOrg... (see at bottom of msg)
What I find funny, in a sad kind of way, is the following statement:
So you have one set
Thanks for the reminder...
That was actually the result of hitting Send before thinking about it! It was
late and I was dozing
off! :-)
-Mark
_
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2009 6:49 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Please
Errors found in final version, so far:
Some of the affidavits suggest that Butt have [had] been subjected to coercion
by the senior
professors who were conducting the fact-finding.
...has been demonstrated to be out [missing] of it's jurisdiction.
-Mark
_
From: Steven Krivit
I must be brain-dead... sorry 'bout that post.
I obviously meant it to go to Steve... :-/
-Mark
_
From: Mark Iverson [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 10:15 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:RE: NET Bubble Fusion Story
Errors found in final
yeah, I deserved that!
:-)
I was really trying to show all those OCD Vorts how few grammatical errors
there are in your very
lengthy, detailed, and fact-filled investigative articles! :-)
-Mark
_
From: Steven Krivit [mailto:stev...@newenergytimes.com]
Sent: Monday, November 23,
Here is an analysis of CRU source code used in some of the models:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/11/crus_source_code_climategate_r.html
But here's what's undeniable: If a divergence exists between measured
temperatures and those
derived from dendrochronological data after (circa) 1960,
This is pretty cool:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi7Srd-LSeE
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: William Beaty [mailto:bi...@eskimo.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 5:14 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:terrifying online videos
Danyk666 and his microwave oven (Czech
Today's 'serendipitous surfing' led me to this...
Anyone familiar with Prof. Oliver K. Manuel's work/ideas on neutron emission?
Identify ways to utilize the energy released in neutron emission - the largest
known energy source.
For example, the rest mass converted to useful energy is ~0.1% in
Horace wrote:
I don't know why a neutron would not act like a neutron.
Let me take a stab at that one...
Perhaps because it's in a fully D-loaded palladium lattice, where other things
aren't acting like
they 'should'? ;-) Yeah, I know, that wasn't much help...
-Mark
-Original
Its explained in the YouTube video,
Steorn Orbo Technology Launch 2009
The lower two rotors are a motor with PMs on the rotors and small coils
(electromagnets?) on the
stator. The EMs obviously require some DC electricity. The topmost rotor is a
small generator which
produces AC. To charge
Hoyt (the Insider) Stearns wrote, :-)
The energy in the battery does not go to the kinetic energy of the rotor, it
is used as an easy way
to modify some parameters of the device.
In watching the Launch 2009 video where some closeups and animations are shown,
they show what looks
like a small
Mauro wrote:
maybe they are trying to make alternative energy INVESTORS to look like fools,
and make them spend
their money in a bogus project, so they don't invest it in a real one, and are
afraid to invest in
another in the future.
Which would give them more time to perfect the technology
What an excellent Christmas present for the field of LENR research...
Merry Christmas all!
-Mark
_
From: Steven Krivit [mailto:stev...@newenergytimes.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2009 11:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Krivit Elsevier Encyclopedia Articles
The energy is stored in the mag fld, not the inductor.
Also, I've seen orbos that seemed to have a core with the toroid, and some that
didn't, or at least
it certainly didn't look like there was a core. I also was under the impression
that the stator
cores were NOT PMs, but simply iron cores.
Wikipedia's use of CF as an example for 'science by concensus' and 'burden of
proof'...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof
About 4/5s the way down the page.
Examples in science
As a general rule, the less coherent and less embedded within conventional
knowledge a claim
appears, the
Yes, it does...
I can remember a college lecture in some science-related class (think it might
have been ethology),
where the point of one of the prof's lectures what to avoid using 'cute' or
'descriptive' labels for
things in your research papers...
I guess I just find it very sad that
Could these be used instead of CR39 for LENR research...
http://www.adsem.com/gpage4.html
-Mark
Very interesting comment section here...
http://www.physorg.com/news182184493.html Quantum fluctuations are key in
superconductors
A guy with a login of Johanfprins makes several statements claiming to have a
good model for
superconduction and can make them to operate at room temp, or even
Abd wrote:
And the answer was essentially to first give a bullshit answer, that a
capacitor couldn't supply
the instantaneous current needed. Put enough capacitance in there and you
could vaporize the
conductors if you shorted it.
According to Sean, its not a matter of having enough
I sent one post which hasn't shown up yet... Perhaps its awaiting Bills
scrutiny before allowing it
thru. It had a JPEG attachment of how the inductance of the toroidal coil
changes by a factor of 5
as the rotor magnets approach and move past the coil...
More quotes from the Steorn Forum to
Thanks Michel!
I'll repost with a link or smaller pic...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Michel Jullian [mailto:michelj...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 2:48 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
2010/1/16, Mark Iverson zeropo
If you armchair skeptics spent as much time reading the Steorn forum or
Overunity.com, as guessing
and speculating and accusing here, you just might have a different opinion.
Sean is responding to
questions on the Steorn Forum, and many guys on the Steorn thread on
Overunity.com are making
Attached is a graph that JLNaudin has done...
Forgot to edit that out... The graph is on JLN's webpage.
http://jnaudin.free.fr/steorn/indexen.htm
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Mark Iverson [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 10:18 AM
To: vortex-l
, January 16, 2010 10:55 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
If you armchair skeptics spent as much time reading the Steorn forum
or Overunity.com,
I read and post on both plus the VofB
; however, I am
registered under another alias and have learned a different approach to
getting my messages
through.
;-)
Warmest regards,
Terry
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Yes, Terry, there has been a little discussion on inductance... BillB
back on 12
@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
I see on another list, Rick Friedrich is already digging into Steorn being a
total Bedini rip-off,
you can see such conversations between Friedrich and McCarthy at:
http
You forgot to include mechanical E...
In Harry Veeder's recent post, Sean (Steorn) is quoted as saying,
...to be clear, as the rotor speeds up the mechanical power increases, the
electrical power remains
the same and the power to heat remains the same.
So, does that mean that below some RPM
-Original Message-
From: William Beaty [mailto:bi...@eskimo.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 16, 2010 7:41 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
On Sat, 16 Jan 2010, Mark Iverson wrote:
I don't believe any one here criticising Steorn and calling them
Thx Jed for expressing it a bit more eloquently than I.
In these situations I try to reverse the roles and ask myself, How would I
want to be treated.
All I would want is the time to do what I said I would do before you make any
(public) judgements...
Sincerely,
The Endearing Mr. Iverson
And you KNOW that Sean doesn't know NOW? How? Did he confess this to you over
a beer at the local
pub? Perhaps in a vision or dream? Do you realize how ridiculous, and wrong,
those explicit
statements are unless you provide evidence? Claiming to 'know' what someone
else knows when they
are
@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
So Sean saying that
they've already done the calorimetry and determined it empirically
would not help you one bit --- you would still call them liars and scammers
to meet
in person, I'll buy
the first round! Fair enough?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 7:15 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Back EMF: Sean may be right
On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Mark Iverson
Abd:
You stated:
Right now, the Rossi device is a Black Box, with two apparent inputs:
electrical power, as a supposedly measured level, and water,
Did you forget the hydrogen? At least I would consider it an input since it is
not entirely
contained within the reactor. I.e., there is an
Abd...
I think you haven't been following this as closely as the active
contributors... Perhaps your time
is limited and you have not been able to read all the postings...
What did Rossi hope to accomplish by the demonstration? My suspicion is, he
got exactly what he
wanted. Lots of publicity,
Abd:
You really need to be more careful with your choice of words...
There is a staged demonstration, under the control of Rossi, with experimental
details
concealed...
No, there were at least two tests done with the same seasoned university
scientists present.
No, it was not a 'staged'
Jones:
I just read the following from the linked pdf, and I think it ties in nicely
with your comments
about using a beta emitter...
When working with protium, an explicit source of electrons must be supplied as
the reaction starts
with four protons and no neutron but ends with two of each
for .1 MHz AC to
drive H2O electrolysis
next to Ni or Pd [ wires?], so protons become 4 neutron particles and then He
with heat, no local
lattice damage, no radiation, no radioactives, 200 C, 129 atm
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Or, the Rossi demo has
Been following this discussion carefuly, since I can understand the point being
made...
Stephen asked,
And if the reactor is putting out an extra 500 watts over and above the amount
to exactly vaporize
the water, exactly *where* do you think that extra 500 watts is going?
The answer, which
This whole thread started by the critique by Joshua Cude posted by Rich
Murray...
It would appear that Joshua (and Rich) have not read all of the comments and
reports on Rossi's
website, so they were UNinformed as to the purpose of the 'control box'.
Rich,
would you please correct Joshua on
Although this discussion thread is really a moot point after it was pointed out
that there are 5
PLCs which are controlling the power to the resistive heaters, there's one
thing I'd like to point
out...
Stephen said:
Jed, it's a container, with all the walls at several hundred degrees C or
Is it flies in Ockie's face, or just one big-ass, never-before-seen,
new-species type of fly!
:-) see below...
Jones wrote:
He finds numerous channels for fusion, and by implication, there are numerous
possible nuclear
reactions other than fusion, all at the same time. All in the same
Horace:
Yes, I've noticed the postings out of order... For now we just deal with it.
Thanks for the analysis, and I'll have to read it fully later, but I'd like to
say two things at
this time:
1) If what you mean by resonant tunneling is,
Resonant tunneling refers to tunneling in which the
Joshua:
A few clarifications from you would be helpful...
Jed wrote:
You do have to trust Levi, Celani and Dufour and some other people.
To which Joshua stated:
Why? They were hand-picked by Rossi.
Where is your evidence that the scientists that were there to instrument the
demo were
I think I've been rcving all the postings... I've got duplicates of the last
two of Horaces' where
he reposted because he didn't see the original...
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: William Beaty [mailto:bi...@eskimo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2011 9:58 AM
To: Vortex-L
Subject:
In Nevada, collective bargaining and behind doors negotiating has resulted in
Fire Marshalls making
a quarter of a million dollars a year in total compensation! That is absolutely
ridiculous... I
would only be in favor of it if its done in the open.. These are public
employees, and the
: Collective bargaining
On Feb 23, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Mark Iverson wrote:
In Nevada, collective bargaining and behind doors negotiating has
resulted in Fire Marshalls making a quarter of a million dollars a
year in total compensation! That is absolutely ridiculous...
Who is to blame
Jones:
I remember someone here saying that someone at the Jan 14 demo said they could
hear the sound of
rushing air inside the hose, and that it was routed thru the door and into the
sink in another room
nearby... that narrows it down, since only a few people on vortex are in
contact with
Abd:
You've been most patient, and Jed too, in trying to bring JC up to speed on the
facts, don't waste
your time... Of course, one could predict how he was going to respond, with the
following statement:
You know, if you spent less time trying to analyze my motives, and describe my
style, and
the reports
and with Giuseppe
Levi. If something interesting happens, i can ask them, but only answerable
questions.
By the way the great problem now is to understand how 0.4 grams of hydrogen can
n generate 270 KWh
energy. Amazing.
Peter
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Mark Iverson zeropo
Charles wrote:
Isn't it more likely that the skeptics simply think the field is a joke,
rather than that they're
intimidated by the weight of the positive evidence?
Yes, given the ridicule that CF has received over the years, that is certainly
a good possibility...
We're very complex beings and
Because of the multiple uses of words like nuclear and fission and fusion, the
message was FWDed to
the Department of Homeland Security... Jones, warm up the tea and crumpets...
you'll be having some
expected, but uninvited, visitors soon... :-)
-Mark
_
From: Horace Heffner
Not interesting yet...
I'll bet he's watching it very closely, though, and will likely mention
something when he's had more
time to ask the same questions as we have here of course, even though he
might ask himself the
same questions, doesn't mean his rational mind will overcome his
Very interesting article (some specific text below). It seems to be indicating:
1) atoms as a whole vibrate, but that is only because they are out of balance
internally
2) whatever an 'atom' is, INTERNALLY it has very regular/periodic oscillations
going on
3) when a quantum or quanta of heat
But hasn't Rossi said repeatedly that his reactor only uses about a gram of
Ni??? Although, I don't
remember a timeframe for that figure.. Was it for an hour, a day or 6 months?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011
Dennis wrote:
Again I am not he, but I would opt for several small units to prove
reproducibility,
It should be obvious by now, and Rossi has stated it many times... his opinion
on how to convince
anyone, be they political or scientific or the press, is to build and install a
decent size
No way... going for ANY govt regulatory body approval first is clearly a Lose,
Lose proposition
They will have to test it first to make any determination, and assess just what
kind of
certifications are needed, and by the time they get around to even starting the
process, you'll be
out of
Here's a table (spreadsheet) of the different reactors and the status of
various parts of the
systems as of 12:30, March 14...
http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/news/2011/110314fukushima_event-status-1.pdf
http://www.jaif.or.jp/english/news/2011/110314fukushima_event-status-1.pdf
201 - 300 of 807 matches
Mail list logo
