Re: [Vo]:More on UVC & Covid

[mixent]

In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Sat, 25 Apr 2020 17:40:28 +1200:
Hi,
[snip]
>This needs public pressure behind it!
>
>Makes a LOT more sense than shutting everything down, might take a little
>while to ramp up production but this should be top priority!
>
>Please, pass this on to people!

I think Donald is lurker. ;)
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:covid19

[mixent]

Hi,

Since the virus doesn't like oxidants, another possible remedy may be the very 
old remedy of sulphur tablets.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:A contrarian thought experiment

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 20 Apr 2020 20:29:04 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
> I like it.
>Now imagine all that future you envision having been precision orchestrated in 
>the year 2020 by an AI which few humans knew about...

I don't think it was an AI. More like the Illuminati. ;)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Weaponizing coronavirus

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 16 Apr 2020 21:38:07 -0400:
Hi,

For paper masks, one could probably also use Ozone or Chlorine gas. That way, 
thousands could be done in a few minutes
in a batch process.


>The University of Nebraska Medical Center is sterilizing their N95 masks
>with a larger version:
>
>https://www.nebraskamed.com/sites/default/files/documents/covid-19/n-95-decon-process.pdf
[snip]

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Weaponizing coronavirus

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 16 Apr 2020 07:51:04 -0700:
Hi,

Bio-"weapons" are just a complicated way of committing suicide. The sooner all 
nations wake up to this the better.

[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME--IMPLICATIONS FOR SO(4) PHYSICS--

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Tue, 14 Apr 2020 13:12:28 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Our live is covered/maintained by faint fluctuations on top of highly 
>stable matter that does not feel time at all.

I think supernovas would imply otherwise. I think what you are trying to say is 
that nuclear matter is very stable in
time, but that doesn't mean that time doesn't exist, it just means that it's 
very stable and undergoes few changes.
Well most of it anyway. Radioisotopes are an exception.

>
>Of course these small fluctations are highly dependent on time but this 
>does not imply that time exist for the universe! It's just us that want 
>to believe that there is time for everything. Our live temperature range

BTW "time for everything" usually means "plenty of time in which to do 
everything", whereas I suspect you mean that we
think that everything experiences time, and you contend that nuclear matter 
does not.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with you on that, and I think the Americium 
in the smoke detector on your ceiling does
too. ;)

>is given by about 0.14eV. This shows how important we are for the universe.

:)

>
>If you go to higher dimensions e.g. 8 then you can reintroduce a global 
>time and *global causality* but not for the small part of the world we 
>live in - the 0.14eV range that clearly shows stochastic behavior.

I think better wording might be "small part of the thermal spectrum"?

While I agree with you that is where most of the action is, I don't agree that 
action defines time.
Even if it did, time would still exist at all levels, since none are without 
action.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME--IMPLICATIONS FOR SO(4) PHYSICS--

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Tue, 14 Apr 2020 01:18:59 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Te best atomic clocks are sensitive to 10cm difference in altitude.
>
>But there is one open point: Is only the Rb/Cs crystal oscillating a bit 
>slower/faster or is the electronics measuring slower/faster - or both? 
>This, may be, could be tested by changing the crystal only.

...or neither. Maybe Einstein is correct, and time actually flows at different 
speeds at different altitudes. ;)

>
>Of course Leibniz is correct and interesting to see that he knew this a 
>long time before we could mathematically prove it.
>
>The basic elements of nature are 99.% stable/static and only 
>small oscillations form our world. Only this tiny fraction believes that 
>there must be time because live is below 0.15eV compared to one proton 
>mass of 938MeV... The proton feels no time except you start to 
>accelerate it to very high speed ...

This is not clear. What do you mean by "Only this tiny fraction believes"? 
(Only sentient beings can believe, not eV's.)
BTW the limit can't be 0.15 eV, or chemical reactions that result in a change 
of multiple eV would also not be time
sensitive, whereas they clearly are. (Consider the application of chemical 
catalysts.)
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME--

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 11 Apr 2020 10:59:14 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Your logic is one way correct.
>
>If you take the path length L given by c covered by one second, then 
>this is just one out of infinite many possible gauges.
>A frequency is just the breakdown of L in units of wavelength. This is 
>also what today is used to define time!! 

No, it's what is used to define the unit of time measurement, not time itself.

>- just the other way round as 
>you know the frequency e.g. of Rubidium and simple count a number of n 
>waves. But you are free to choose a different n' that leads to a 
>different timescale!
>
>Light speed is also based on the definition of 1 meter !! Thus we should 
>not mix up the general notion of time as a progress in the event chain 
>with simply counting regular events (wave maxima) that define a common 
>accepted length.

IOW we should not mix up the existence of time as dimension, with its 
measurement.

>
>Now its easy to understand that time is a virtual concept based on 
>simple counting regular events. 

The words "regular" and "events" already imply the existence of a time 
dimension, and a passage through that dimension.
Even the concept of counting (as opposed to the concept of number), implies the 
existence of time, since the act of
counting separates the things being counted along the time dimension.
(Things are "counted" one after the other. "After" is temporal.)
Without time, one would just have to "know" how many objects there were, 
without counting them.
 
>Here you also see where the digital 
>nature of real physics starts as waves are nowhere (just in average) a 
>continuum contrary to the mathematical use of time.

Mathematics doesn't define existence. It just describes it in terms of 
measurement.

>
>If you have a more deep understanding of physics especially if you 
>understand what already R.Mills did find almost 30 years ago then you 
>know that there is no global time as time changes due to a change in 
>(total bound mass)/(total photon mass)= space-time expands or said in 
>SO(4) physics terms. Time depends on the relation of 2 rotation mass to 
>the mass that does more than 2 rotations = the change of average density 
>of space.

I think you need to distinguish between the rate of passage through time, and 
the concept of time itself as a dimension.
Even the former may not change. It's possible, and common, for the speed of 
processes to change, without the passage of
time changing. Processes can run faster or slower depending on the forces 
acting, and the energy available locally.


>
>Thus all energy mass equations (& relations) in SO(4) physics are based 
>on the path length given by c/s and are finally independent of time.

What is "s" in c/s? If s=second, then how is this independent of time, and 
furthermore, wouldn't a path length be given
by c*s?

There is no "physics" that can do away with time. It's a fundamental part of 
existence, so what are you really trying to
achieve?
Note that our perception of the flow of time and even our measurement of it is 
based on processes which may vary in
speed. IOW if the fabric of space time changes, e.g. in a gravitational field, 
then the processes upon which our clocks
are based may speed up or slow down, but this doesn't *necessarily* imply that 
time itself is flowing faster or slower.
It may be, but we have no object means of telling the difference. IOW our 
temporal "yardstick" may change in length in
some situations. A clock can run fast or slow without the actual passage of 
time changing. If our perceptions also run
fast or slow along with the clock, then we have no way of knowing that it's 
running fast or slow.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME--

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 11 Apr 2020 00:26:55 +0200:
Hi Jürg,
[snip]
>Time is just the measurement interval or the 
>frequency what ever you like more. 

How can you speak of interval or frequency without time? Once time itself 
exists, you can have an interval of time. You
are just talking about a clock. Clocks don't define the existence of time, they 
just measure it.
Just as a ruler measures distance. It doesn't create a spatial dimension.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Better than N95

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 5 Apr 2020 12:53:57 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Bill Gates' noble effort:
>
>https://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-factories-7-different-vaccines-to-fight-coronavirus-2020-4


I wonder if a cocktail of all 7 would be reasonable?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Better than N95

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 4 Apr 2020 19:46:56 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>5000 nm is pretty small.  How many SARS-CoV-2 Virions will fit in one
>aerosol particle?

The only reference I could find for the size of the virus is 0.1 micron. So 
assuming that both measures (i.e. 0.1 & 5)
refer to a diameter, and volume goes as the cube of diameter that means at most 
50^3 = 125000 (which ignores packing
factor) in one aerosol particle, probably much less of course. However droplets 
(sneezing) are usually larger than 5
microns AFAIK.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Better than N95

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 4 Apr 2020 18:35:31 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>I found an old Hoover HEPA vacuum bag and thought to make a mask.  Then I
>Googled the idea.  Nothing new under the sun.  HEPA spec is 300 nm but test
>show them effective down to 50 nm (depends on the rating).  SARS-CoV-2 is
>125 nm.

I think the size of the virus is irrelevant. The mask doesn't really have to 
stop individual virus particles, it only
has to stop the moisture droplets that carry them. Droplets are thousands of 
times larger than the virus. 
A normal handkerchief/silk scarf should do fine provided that there are no 
spaces around edge where droplets can bypass
the filter.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Laissez les bon temps rouler -

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Sat, 28 Mar 2020 11:48:28 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>UMass Tries Innovative Method To Clean N95 Masks: UV Light
>March 27, 2020
>https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2020/03/27/umass-memorial-disinfects-masks-ultraviolet-light

Just wash them in bleach.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:A flu irony - less total deaths !!!

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 11 Mar 2020 20:22:49 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
>The interesting dynamic is this: why does a few degrees of extra heat in 
>springtime kill the virus? Say, maybe there is an additional irony to "global 
>warming"?
Perhaps in the warmer months people's immune system is less compromised because 
the body doesn't need to burn fuel to
maintain the core temperature. That leaves more energy to fight infections.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 5 Mar 2020 14:44:46 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>$2.4T World GDP loss?  Hah!  The stockmarket lost $6T last week alone.

BTW stock market losses don't really count, because there is a winner for every 
loser. The net impact is small. GDP
losses OTOH imply a loss of production. That is a real loss, though what 
remains will be spread over less people, so the
net effect per head of population may not be too severe.

>
>https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-selloff-impact-americans-3-charts-not-immediate-impact-2020-2-1028952948
>
>
>On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:06 AM Frank Znidarsic  wrote:
>
>>
>> https://www.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-spreads-one-study-predicts-10155.html
>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 5 Mar 2020 14:44:46 -0500:
Hi,

It will be much more than that. If no cure/vaccine is found then about 250 
million will die World wide. (worst case).

>$2.4T World GDP loss?  Hah!  The stockmarket lost $6T last week alone.
>
>https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-selloff-impact-americans-3-charts-not-immediate-impact-2020-2-1028952948
>
>
>On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 11:06 AM Frank Znidarsic  wrote:
>
>>
>> https://www.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-spreads-one-study-predicts-10155.html
>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: A good model makes accurate predictions

[mixent]

In reply to  Frank Znidarsic's message of Sun, 1 Mar 2020 17:25:15 + (UTC):
Hi Frank,
[snip]
>I put in a ventless heater that does not require electric power. 

What does it burn?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: A good model makes accurate predictions

[mixent]

In reply to  Frank Znidarsic's message of Sat, 29 Feb 2020 20:33:43 + (UTC):
Hi,
>The mathematics of my model came before I had the words to describe it.  Out 
>of the model came this mega-hertz meter relationship.  Someone on vortex told 
>me that megahertz-meter was a velocity.  With that I found later that it is 
>the velocity of sound in the nucleus.  Thanks.
[snip]
You're welcome. :)
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

[mixent]

In reply to  Blaze Spinnaker's message of Thu, 27 Feb 2020 15:37:26 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
https://stationfy.imgix.net/cm/5e5808bfe3daa3000772bb7c.jpg?w=570=fillmax 

This looks like only the outside of the bundle gets disinfected.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 27 Feb 2020 08:58:45 -0500:
Hi,
>*All schools in Japan told to close until April over virus outbreak*
>
>https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2020/02/27/national/hokkaido-coronavirus-school/#.XlfJtmhKg2w
>
[snip]

First they take a stringent measure, then immediately blow holes in it, by 
creating exemptions. 
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Galilean relativity and a tree.

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Wed, 26 Feb 2020 19:47:22 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
>Ideally the choice should be the product of investigation and (conscious)
>deliberation rather than just be driven by perception.

I agree.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Galilean relativity and a tree.

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:24:06 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
>On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 3:08 PM  wrote:
>
>> In reply to  H LV's message of Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:57:52 -0500:
>> Hi Harry,
>> [snip]
>> A frame of reference is exactly that. It's a mathematical construct.
>> Choose any frame you like, and stick to it, and the
>> math will all work out.
>> Difficulties only arise when we, sometimes sub-consciously, change our
>> frame of reference.
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>My point is that the mathematical construct known as a "frame of reference"
>misses something substantial about reality.

My point is that you are missing something about frame of reference.
The Human mind prefers to think of the World around us as a stationary frame, 
and think of all motion as relative to
that frame. However that's just a personal choice. 
As far as the math is concerned, you can choose any frame you like, but your 
mind may not be comfortable with it.
BTW note that on a stellar scale we tend to choose different frames of 
reference.

>
>Does vertigo provide a frame of reference?

Frames are reference are not "provided", they are chosen.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Galilean relativity and a tree.

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:57:52 -0500:
Hi Harry,
[snip]
A frame of reference is exactly that. It's a mathematical construct. Choose any 
frame you like, and stick to it, and the
math will all work out.
Difficulties only arise when we, sometimes sub-consciously, change our frame of 
reference.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Galilean relativity and a tree.

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Wed, 26 Feb 2020 14:21:20 -0500:
Hi Harry,
>In Galilean relativity if I walk eastward towards a tree with uniform
>velocity this is equivalent to saying the tree is moving westward towards
>me with the same uniform velocity. As a fundamental proposition of modern
>physics this is eminently useful but it is also absurd. 
[snip]
Have you ever been sitting in a train next to another train, at the station, 
and when you see relative motion between
the two wondered whether it is the other train or your own that is moving?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:More on the WuFlu conspiracy theory

[mixent]

In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Sat, 15 Feb 2020 10:31:40 +1300:
Hi,
[snip]
>To have any idea about how the number of infected and dead compare to
>the lethality of this Virus we need to know two things.
>The mean time it takes someone to die from the virus after it is
>recognized they have it...
>And when most of those healthcare workers were first recognized to be infected.
>
>We don't have anything like either of those numbers, but as it stands
>if you want to use recovered .vs dead it is about 18% die and 82%
>recover, not that that is perfectly accurate either.
>
>However maybe in the end we can presume that the true rate lies
>neither ate 1 or 2% not at 18% but somewhere in the middle.
[snip]
That would certainly explain the unprecedented measures the Chinese government 
is taking to control the spread of the
virus. IMO however, no measure can be perfectly effective. They may slow the 
spread, but eventually it will infect
everyone.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:Bioweapons

[mixent]

Hi,

Creating a bio-weapon is like designing a gun to backfire.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:OT: Sea level rise anomaly

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:46:17 + (UTC):

PS - They also mention that Canada & Alaska report little or no sea level rise. 
Perhaps this is because of loss of ice
cover pressure on land causing the land to rise.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:OT: Sea level rise anomaly

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 12 Feb 2020 15:46:17 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
>Why do many tidal gauges show almost zero sea level rise over the past 40 
>years and almost none of them match the satellite data?
>This is from the NextBigFuture and is a hated topic among many climate experts 
>as there are no easy answers.
[snip]
I wonder if they took into account the slow deterioration of satellite orbits?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:2019-nCoV

[mixent]

Hi,

Apparently it's susceptible to oxidants. Sodium chlorite is an oxidant.
There was an article called "MIRACLE MINERAL SUPPLEMENT: AN INTEGRATED THERAPY" 
in NEXUS vol. 16, no. 4 (June-July 2009)
on medicinal use of Sodium Chlorite. Maybe an "out of the box" treatment that 
requires no research, and could thus be
applied immediately?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:Darpa has been reading my book and responding.

[mixent]

Hi Frank,

If you can think of any experiments that would either confirm or refute your 
theories, then you know what you could use
funding for.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Vipervirus Truth?

[mixent]

In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 12 Feb 2020 13:18:50 +1300:
Hi,
[snip]
>https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/news-nation/coronavirus-in-china-20-million-quarantined-2-8-million-infected-112-000-dead
>
>Maybe people are dying because there is no food, no trucks allowed in
>to bring it?!   

If true, this is just shear stupidity. One could easily set up "air locks" 
where containers of food can be deposited
from one side, then later retrieved from the other side, thus avoiding any 
human to human contact.
After a while containers might start to pile up, but there are millions of them 
World wide.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Vipervirus Truth?

[mixent]

In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Mon, 10 Feb 2020 07:44:04 +1300:
Hi,

Note that when deriving the mortality rate, one needs to take into account the 
time it takes an average victim to die.
E.g. if that is 2 weeks, then the deaths now need to be compared with the 
number of people that were infected 2 weeks
ago, not with the number infected now.
Also the numbers are too low because of people that are infected and die away 
from medical care and thus don't get
included in the statistics.


>If it's just a slightly worse flu, these would be bizarre
>over-reactions from a Government that was initially very laidback.
>
>At any rate I wrote this last night and am sending the almost still up
>to date figures now:
>Infected:
>37,553  nowish
>30,000 2 days ago
>20,000 5 days ago
>
>Despite the efforts it's still growing, though the rate of growth is
>slowing down.
>https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/  See the chart, the growth
>is steep despite massive efforts by China
>https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-cases/  encouraging and frightening, the daily cases and growth factor show
>potential hope that it will be under control, but
>813 (this morning 815) deaths
>
>Looking though at the deaths .vs recovered, well everyone who hasn't
>yet died or recovered could still do either one, so 2,990 recovered
>and 815 dead, that's 21.4% fatality rate.
>
>Not sayig that reflect reality, but it does come closer to some of the
>other bits of evidence that support the idea that the lethality of
>this is an order of magnitude worse than what is publicly disclosed.
>
>On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 3:55 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:
>>
>> Some good news:
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/feb/08/misinformation-coronavirus-contagious-infections
>>
>> and some not so good:
>>
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7980883/Video-shows-officials-protective-suits-dragging-suspected-coronavirus-carriers-homes.html
>>
>>>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Re: Give It Up for Randell

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 9 Feb 2020 11:59:17 -0500:
Hi,

The COP however still leaves a little to be desired. I don't think they can use 
this for electricity generation just
yet. As an efficient heat source, yes.

>On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 11:54 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:
>>
>> ...one more time!
>>
>>
>https://revolution-green.com/blp-4-24x-gain-yielding-295-71-kw-net-excess-power-validated-unc-phd-randy-booker/
>
>
>The poorly focused images remind me of UFO piccys!
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Densest Object on Earth

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Tue, 14 Jan 2020 15:08:24 + (UTC):
Hi,
[snip]
>https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/01/densest-object-on-earth-made-from-compressed-copper.html?utm_source=feedburner_medium=feed_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2Fadvancednano+%28nextbigfuture%29
[snip]
This method only results in high density for a very short time. It doesn't 
produce a substance one can carry around.
IOW any alternative use would need to make it "on the spot", and whatever 
process it was involved in would need to
happen very quickly.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:SO(4) Physics

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 13 Jan 2020 20:37:25 
+:
Hi,

I suspect that only the angular momentum of photons is quantized. 
Allowed atomic transitions can be found by making that assumption, without 
applying any other rules, i.e. Occam's razor.

[snip]
>Comment:
>
>I have started to read reference 8 concerning the Biot-Savart operator.  It 
>appears to apply to SO(4) physics.  However it does appear that the math of 
>reference 8 assumes a continuous vector function  that would address angular 
>momentum.  In my humble opinion angular momentum is quantized at h/2pi in the 
>real world where the Biot-Savant operator is applied per the assumption of 
>reference 8.  (h is Planck’s constant.)
>
>I also conclude that the magnetic flux of SO(4) physics is quantized in order 
>to explain real quantum changes in a system’s angular momentum.  I.e., the 
>“spinors” should be predicted to exist  in discrete quanta.
>
>Bob Cook
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Dense hydrogen may facilitate water splitting

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Wed, 1 Jan 2020 03:51:42 
+:
Hi Bob,

Nemo explained that the power came from splitting water & recombining the 
gasses IIRC. 
Normally that would be considered impossible, however if a Mills type reaction 
occurs, with water molecules as the catalyst,
then it would make sense.

>The subs I sailed in were powered by steam—water that was heated by a nuclear 
>potential energy source  via steam generators.   I’m not sure what Jules 
>thought was the energy source for his sub’s reactor.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Dense hydrogen may facilitate water splitting

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 30 Dec 2019 15:51:58 
+:
Hi Bob,


Minor difference here is that Verne obtained the energy from water, whereas in 
your case it comes from Uranium. ;)
Obtaining energy from water could mean either some form of dense hydrogen or 
fusion or both.

[snip]
>I spent 18 years in the design, fabrication and  of nuclear fission reactor 
>powered subs—some underwater at significant depths for days at a time.  They 
>would travel 20,000 leagues and more without refueling.
>
>Bob Cook
>
>Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
>From: mix...@bigpond.com
>Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2019 11:31 AM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:Dense hydrogen may facilitate water splitting
>
>On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 03:23:03 +, "bobcook39...@hotmail.com" 
> wrote:
>
>Hi Bob,
>
>What first hand experience are you referring to?
>
>>Jones—
>>
>>Jules Verne was science fiction in the 1800’s.  I know first hand that it was 
>>NOT science fiction.
>>
>>Bob Cook
>[snip]
>Regards,
>
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>local asymmetry = temporary success
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Dense hydrogen may facilitate water splitting

[mixent]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 03:23:03 +, "bobcook39...@hotmail.com" 
 wrote:

Hi Bob,

What first hand experience are you referring to?

>Jones—
>
>Jules Verne was science fiction in the 1800’s.  I know first hand that it was 
>NOT science fiction.
>
>Bob Cook
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:[OT]cancer research

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sat, 28 Dec 2019 22:53:00 + (UTC):
Hi Jones,

Thanks. It seems they are well ahead of me on this one! :)

[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Dense hydrogen may facilitate water splitting

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 28 Dec 2019 20:22:55 
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>Jones—
>
>If dense H has accumulated on Earth as you suggest, it may sink deeper into 
>the crust and Mantle where the conditions are  ripe for LENR to happen—i.e., 
>geothermal heating.’

Dense hydrogen is probably created from water under influence of high pressure, 
high temperature, and the presence of certain chemicals, in subduction zones.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:[OT]cancer research

[mixent]

Hi,

Coeliac disease is caused by the body's own immune system attacking other wise 
healthy cells in the gut due to the presence of a protein called gluten.
I wonder if an analogous method could be employed to get the immune system to 
attack cancer cells?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:This recent Palladium alloy is one of strongest alloys ever made

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 15 Dec 2019 12:58:21 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>A LENR reaction producing 4-He (alpha) from D*-D* does not emit kinetic 
>alphas as there is no momentum available. All nuclear magnetic flux is 
>symmetric!
>Only in a case where e.g. 3-He 3-H would be produced out of D*-D* there 
>can be a "small" kinetic part.

1) Bob was talking about fast alphas. That doesn't necessarily mean that he was
thinking of the D*-D* reaction.

2) D*-D* -> He4 would indeed have a momentum problem, if it happened in
isolation. However if momentum can be exchanged with another nucleus then fast
alphas would be possible.

3) Another possibility for the D*-D* reaction is that fast electrons carry away
the energy since the "shrunken" electrons are "available".

4) In 3-He & 3-H cases, if there is only a "small" kinetic part, then where does
the majority of the energy go to? Note that the kinetic energy in *hot* fusion
is well known.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:This recent Palladium alloy is one of strongest alloys ever made

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:42:37
+:
Hi,

Another variation on this theme might be to allow the alphas to strip electrons
off other atoms, then let the electrons radiate in the field as they return to
the positive ions.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:This recent Palladium alloy is one of strongest alloys ever made

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 14 Dec 2019 23:42:37
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>
>Robin and Jones—
>
>One thing I noticed is that the Nano -sized MG particles are made (a  least in 
>part) by ion deposition.  I can envision a Ni-H base or a Pd base or merely a 
>Ni base  particle with layers of a few  atoms thickness that are the reactants 
>at the surface of the nano particle which readily emit charged alphas or other 
>charged particles that can facilitate direct electrical current and its 
>energy.  

Direct electrical conversion may be possible if the particles could be suspended
in vacuum in a magnetic field, in a chamber where the resonance frequency = the
cyclotron frequency of the alphas in the magnetic field. This would essentially
be a sort of magnetron that was "internally" powered, and the EM energy could
then be tapped as the radius of the cycling alphas decreased while they
delivered their energy to the resonant field. The distance between particles
should be kept >> than the diameter of the circle that the alphas make in the
field at their most energetic, to ensure that only a tiny percentage impact
other particles and lose energy to heat.

[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:This recent Palladium alloy is one of strongest alloys ever made

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sat, 14 Dec 2019 20:26:04 + (UTC):
Hi Jones,
[snip]
> Bob,
>Yes glassy iron is cheaper and Glassimetal, Inc also has an iron based product 
>on their site, presumably available now. The glassy iron could possibly 
>catalyze H2 to dense hydrogen more efficiently. 

I agree, particularly if the GLM can be made as minute particles that have an
increased surface area, though "nano" may be so small that the physical
properties can change. This could be either a good or a bad thing. Only
experiment will tell.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Science discoveries how LENR works

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Tue, 12 Nov 2019 00:59:57 +0100:
Hi,
[snip]
>Standard tensor calculous will not work for a general EM-mass solution 
>in SO(4) as the action is circular. Quaternions works for a subclass of 
>the problems namely the Clifford torus based core flux. But the 
>connections to 6D needs more brain power added.
>
>J.W.
I would have thought adding more variables and equations would take care of the
extra dimensions? (Though there may be some unknown extra constants related to
the extra dimensions.)
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Nick Danger's Top 10 answers for symptom 7

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Thu, 24 Oct 2019 23:31:25 +0200:
Hi Jürg,

1) Do you have nucleus-nucleus distance for H*-H*?
2) What does "for D*-D* up two 2002keV" mean? Is it a typo?

[snip]
>We know that the formation of H*-H* releases 496eV and for D*-D* up two 
>2002keV But there are other higher energy level allowed too.
>
>J.W.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:"Paramagnons" - new way to convert heat into electricalenergy--what is the physics of the Bose magnons--

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Tue, 1 Oct 2019 12:37:50
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>In this regard I am not able to identify aay closed systems—none seem to exist 
>in the known universe.  They are only a virtual construct like quarks IMHO.
[snip]
There may not be any truly closed systems, but there are plenty of systems that
are closed enough to make treating them as closed give answers that are accurate
enough to work with. As an engineer, I'm sure you appreciate this. ;)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:test[OT]

[mixent]

rooly!
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Still working on antenna

[mixent]

In reply to  Frank Znidarsic's message of Fri, 6 Sep 2019 03:17:16 + (UTC):
Hi Frank,


You may also find https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground_wave_propagation of some
use.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Still working on antenna

[mixent]

In reply to  Frank Znidarsic's message of Fri, 6 Sep 2019 03:17:16 + (UTC):
Hi Frank,
[snip]

Since I know next to nothing about radio, take these comments with lots of salt.
:)

1) If some signals are horizontally polarized, and some vertically, then perhaps
you could try creating an antenna that has both vertical and horizontal
elements?
2) Another option maybe to use loops instead of rods? (thus potentially catering
for any type of polarization, including "shifting"?)
3) If you use loops, try loops where the circumference is equal to the
wavelength.

>I have been working on my HD TV antenna design for a while now.  I learned 
>several things.
>My orginal asssumption was that only line of sight reception was possible in 
>the UHF band.  That is not the case.  Currently UHF transmitters blast out a 
>lot of power near the horrizon.  This signal may be refracted of reflected 
>from nearby mountans.  Reception at 30 miles away may be obtained from a 
>reflected signal.  Short interloods of no signal occur that may last up to 30 
>seconds as this reflected signal is reflected in such a mannor that it phases 
>out.  The reflected signal may be very strong +27 SNR and still briefly blink 
>out on a sunny day.  Reflected signals come is steady and best on cloudy days.
>Over the horrizon reception may also be possible through defraction from up to 
>50 miles away.  This signal tends to come in strong under sunny conditions and 
>my dissapear for hours under the inclement conditions.  When you lose it, it 
>not comming back until the postion of the sun or the weather pattern changes. 
>
>Ghosts are filtered out by the digiatal system.  It my be possble to get a 
>clear reflected signal where as with the old analog system the picture would 
>be loaded with ghosts.
>The frindge siganl comes in vertacally polarized.  UHF TV antennas are 
>desigend to be mounted in the horizontally polarized postion with a rotating 
>mechanism.  I have found that frindge reception comes in vertically polarized. 
> I dont know why this is.  Any ideas?
>I have built my own director and replaced the one that came with the amplified 
>antenna.  It has 6 5.5 inchel long elements separated by 4.2 inches.  I have 
>found that this arrangement works best with the repacked TV signals.  There is 
>no longer any need to receive channels on the upper end of the band and the 
>director can be tuned to respond to the lower end of the band. That gives an 
>extra 3 db.
>Some phase rotation my be possible with reflected signels.  One 4 inch element 
>near the amplifier horizontally mounted tends to compenate for the phase 
>rotation.  With this that signal does not blink out as often.  The binking out 
>may be associated with a rotation in the angle of polarization.  I dont have 
>the equipent to test for this.
>I have been trying to understand the effect of photons on the antenn's design. 
> My megahertz meter relationship states the photons will be absorbed at a 
>length of .1 inches.  I dont quite understand where this enters into the 
>picture.  My antenna's director elements are about .1 inches thick.  This is 
>where this work crosses over with LENR.  An understanding of the path of the 
>quantum transtion my lead to a better understanding of both systems.  Maybe I 
>will make another director with elements that are .1 inches thick.  This is 
>about the thickness of bycycle spoke.
>Anyway, I got 15 channels in the valley CBS,  NBC, ABC, Fox and the CW.  I 
>could not get PBS but I purchesed a RUKU stick.   It gets PBS news, NOVA, and 
>on U-tube the PBS nightly business report.  That all of the major stuff for 
>free.  I got it to work without sticking my credit card numbers into it.  I am 
>not sure how I did this.
>I assumed that the higher the antenna the better.  My girlfried lives on the 
>top of a mountain.  Her antenna does work better higher.  I put her's in the 
>attic.  I have a clear view of the horizon in my down in the valley location.  
>I have found that an antenna mounted one meter about the ground works best.  
>High up in a tree, 30 feet up,  I recieived nothing.  I dont understand this.  
>Any ideas?
>The affect of the quantuzation of light on an UHF antenns still baffels me a 
>bit.  I which I could tune for it.
>Frank  Znidarsic
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Fake it till you make it

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 6 Sep 2019 00:49:53 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Randy Mills will face the same, if he cannot manage to enhance his 
>reaction with a second LENR step.
>J.W.

I've been trying to tell him that for years, but he won't have a bar of it.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 30 Aug 2019 23:58:02 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>The answer is simple
>
>q^2 --> rm. Charge square is proportional to rotating mass. In a proton 
>much more mass is needed to produce the same charge. Ergo adding an 
>electron can do nothing...
>
>J.W.
Given that both mass & charge of the proton are known, what radius do you
calculate?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 30 Aug 2019 22:36:57 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Unluckily charge is only known for the electron. The charge inside a 
>nucleus is given by a topological relation between waves. Charge is a 
>function of rotating mass. Thus your idea is to simple for next 
>generation of physics models.
>
>J.W.
Then simplify the situation by only considering Hydrogen, which has the simplest
possible nucleus, comprising only a single proton, of which the charge is known
with great accuracy.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 30 Aug 2019 13:59:28 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>First a small theoretical update.
>
>A proton consists of a 2x2 core relativistic wave structure that couples 
>with a three wave excess-energy flux part and a two wave charge 
>structure. In SO(4) we have a 5 rotation structure where core mass only 
>can have 4 and charge has 5. This model is highly accurate and allows 
>e.g. to calculate nuclear properties like e.g. the magnetic moment of 
>Deuterium and of course it's exact mass.
>
> From an energy point of view it is completely impossible that adding an 
>electron to a proton will ever generate an anti proton because you would 
>need to completely inverse the flow of all magnetic mass. In the 
>electron case the annihilation is straight forward because the external 
>visible orbits do match in shape and energy! But a proton and electron 
>never match.

1) The energy of a ( positron + anti-proton ) = ( electron + proton ), thus from
an energy standpoint there is no problem.

2) They don't need to match, because we are not talking about annihilation, we
are talking about a charge exchange mechanism, where the proton becomes
negative, and the electron positive, i.e. electron -> positron & proton ->
anti-proton.

3) Annihilation occurs when the newly formed anti-proton meets another normal
proton, where the structures do match. (Ditto for the positron.)

Taking this into consideration, please have another go at explaining why it's
impossible. Note that I think you may be right, but would like to understand the
real reason why.






[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:59:00 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>PS: And please forget the matter anti matter story. It is childish old 
>physics thinking. Why e.g. can a nucleus expel antimatter  
>(positron...) Annihilation is only one option when e- e+ meet.

Perhaps under the right conditions, an electron can combine with a proton,
expelling a positron, and converting the proton into an anti-proton.
Then the anti-proton annihilates a normal proton.
The expelled positron annihilates an external electron.
Charge is conserved because two electrons & two protons have gone.
The net result is the complete conversion of mass into energy.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 30 Aug 2019 01:59:00 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Some years ago people feared that CERN might produce black holes...
>
>the imagination of such things is deep old children instinct driven 
>behavior that outplays the brain.

No, it's just caution, which is wise, if a potential exists to blow up the
planet.

>
>To split a proton you need to add about 53MeV. You can do this only with 
>dense Hydrogen as this state is able to directly accept and store 
>photons of e.g. a laser. The splitting - chain reaction - for a total 
>conversion of proton mass to photons is restricted to the tiny area of 
>condensed dense hydrogen. There is absolutely no chance that such a 
>reaction goes farther as the produced energy has the form of K,Pi,Muon 
>and is transported miles away before it starts to react again.

That wouldn't matter if miles away it encounters another massive particle that
repeats the process. Such a situation is guaranteed to be encountered within the
Earth itself. However if it's a one to one relationship, i.e. no growth, then
the output from a single ongoing reaction would only be a few micro-watts, and
consequently not a problem. However if it grows exponentially, then it would
become problematic eventually.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:Anti-matter

[mixent]

Hi,

Suppose that an anti-proton annihilates a proton. If any of the resultant
particles have a negative charge, and are capable of converting another proton
into an anti-proton, then in dense matter, the result may be chain reaction that
ends up converting all matter into gamma rays.

Perhaps this is the origin of "gamma ray bursters". Some poor race, looking for
a new energy source ends up instantly converting their entire planet into a
burst of gamma rays, going out with a bang, and alerting the rest of the galaxy
to the fact that they once existed.

Motto:- Be very careful, it may just be a matter of doing enough conversions at
once to act as the match that sets off the powder keg.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

[Vo]:anti-matter production

[mixent]

Hi,

Rossi seems to think the Compton wavelength of the electron is important, and
Proton21 uses 600 keV electrons.
Perhaps 511 keV is the minimal energy needed by an electron to convert a proton
into an anti-proton (pair -production??).

If so then the theoretical maximum energy gain per reaction is a factor of 
2 x (mass of proton) / (mass of electron) = 3672.

That ought to be enough to cover conversion inefficiencies. ;)

It also has the great advantage that a star ship wouldn't need to carry around
massive amounts of dangerous anti-matter, but rather could make what they need
on-the-fly from ordinary matter. In fact they may even be able to harvest
hydrogen from interstellar space to use as fuel, ensuring that the initial fuel
load would only need to be sufficient to get them up to a speed where they can
collect it as fast as they use it. 

Combine this with a reactionless drive, and one has a near light speed
capability to reach the stars. :)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Off-topic: Greenland, Smilla and Gingerbread man

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Sun, 18 Aug 2019 15:50:10 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>The value ? … think Sudbury basin with gold plating  ...
>
Yup, and that's not all. There's a chance that large meteorites create cracks in
the crust that allow deep oil/gas to reach up to near the surface. Think "Gulf
of Mexico".
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Transient superconductivity in palladium hydrides

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 17 Aug 2019 23:14:46
+:
Hi Bob,

No, I was just wondering where you expelled electron came from?

>Robin—
>
>You may be correct: However the x-rays associated with replacement of the 
>captured electron have not been reported for Pd systems to my knowledge.  Are 
>you aware of any test data in this regard?
>
>
>
>Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
>
>
>
>From: mix...@bigpond.com 
>Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2019 12:18:33 PM
>To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
>Subject: Re: [Vo]:Transient superconductivity in palladium hydrides
>
>In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 17 Aug 2019 18:12:14
>+:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>First a pairing of H isotopes in a tight spin 0 Cooper pair- like entity 
>>(still part of the coherent system) and second an change of a proton to a 
>>neutron with expulsion of an electron.
>
>A neutron may be formed through electron capture, not expulsion?
>[snip]
>Regards,
>
>
>Robin van Spaandonk
>
>local asymmetry = temporary success
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Transient superconductivity in palladium hydrides

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sat, 17 Aug 2019 18:12:14
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>First a pairing of H isotopes in a tight spin 0 Cooper pair- like entity 
>(still part of the coherent system) and second an change of a proton to a 
>neutron with expulsion of an electron.

A neutron may be formed through electron capture, not expulsion?
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Transient superconductivity in palladium hydrides

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Fri, 16 Aug 2019 15:28:57 -0700:
Hi Jones,

In an early post on vortex - decades ago, I proposed that the reversion of a
superconducting state to normal, would result in a very fast magnetic field
collapse, which due to V = - L di/dt could produce a local high voltage pulse
that might accelerate particles enough to produce some fusion reactions.
(This is because when a section of the lattice becomes locally superconducting
it forms a local short circuit, and all local current flows through it, rather
than through the surrounding lattice. When it reverts to normal, the resistance
suddenly increases and the current tries to stop, but is forced to continue by
the collapsing magnetic field. High current x R => high voltage; another way of
looking at it.)

If temporary superconducting states cycle frequently enough, and in sufficient
number, then this could be the mechanism behind CF.

>For many years, a recurring theme  on vortex involves the idea that a local 
>form of high temperature superconductivity could be the hidden  underlying 
>modality which was needed to form a BEC condensate in palladium deuteride, and 
>that this condensate was necessary as a prerequisite for a nuclear reaction  
>to occur at elevated temperature,, even if the state lasted  only picoseconds, 
>as opposed to stability at  cryogenic conditions.
>
>The argument could be worth renewed interest – given that transient HTSC has 
>been found and reported in an authoritative study not involving LENR. That 
>report turned up on LENR forum from poster Ahlfors  - as the subject of a PhD  
>thesis by M. Syed from an Australian University.
>
>http://web.tiscali.it/pt1963.home/publist.htm
>
>“Transient High-Temperature Superconductivity in Palladium Hydride”
>
>The nano-magnetism concept of Ahern, for instance, was  predicated on 
>high-temperature local superconductivity for reducing randomness, arguably in 
>the form of a ‘transient condensate.’ As to why a pulse of magnetism would be 
>important – very simply this gets back to structural uniformity and  Boson 
>statistics. 
>
>Two bound deuterons in a cavity exist at identical ‘compreture’ due to the 
>cavity containment but that is not enough. Magnetism can thereafter align 
>spin, so immediately you have a near-condensate in the sense of extreme DFR 
>("Divergence From Randomness") in the physical properties of those atoms in 
>the matrix.  From this highly structured but non-cryogenic state – a “virtual 
>BEC” need  last only picoseconds if there us sequential recurrence.
>
>This is from one of the earlier threads on vortex - with a SPAWARS citation 
>linking to further details on LENR-CANR.org.
>
>https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg89480.html
>
>
>
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:ni and ca

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 4 Aug 2019 13:52:03 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Unluckily there are some exceptions with Cu/W and there may be more.
>
>J.W.
It's not clear whether you mean Cu/W is the input to the reaction, or the output
from the reaction.

Could you provide an example?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:ni and ca

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 3 Aug 2019 19:00:53 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Adding H* to any useful isotope would result in a much better energy 
>gain in  the range of 1..8 MeV at best. Adding H* is neutron like and 
>not always harmless...

I would have thought that adding H* would only be neutron like when addition of
a neutron would result in a more stable nucleus than addition of a proton. IOW,
I think nature prefers to create stable nuclei, when possible.
In the case of H* it can either add both the proton & the electron in an
enhanced electron capture reaction, or just add the proton, and eject the
electron. IOW it has a choice, and I suspect it will usually choose the path
that leads to a stable nucleus.

[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:ni and ca

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 3 Aug 2019 19:00:53 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>I would roughly estimate that about 10^5 105Pd disappear for 3kW/s. 
 
Is "3kW/s" a typo, and if not, then what do you mean by it?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:ni and ca

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Fri, 2 Aug 2019 18:05:31 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>This is according to my older version of his theory which may have changed. 
>Hydrogen ions (bare protons) also  qualify as self-catalytic but they are 
>usually too reactive.

Bare protons can't catalyze anything, because they have no electrons to absorb
the shrinkage energy. However single atoms or H can, at least in combination (2
x 13.6 = 27.2), and possibly even separately, but don't quote me on the latter.
;)
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:FW: coherent system energy states

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Mon, 29 Jul 2019 16:52:00
+:
Hi Bob,
[snip]

Have you found any evidence that gamma ray emitters don't emit gamma rays when
the nucleus emitting the gamma ray is incoporated in a semi-conductor crystal? 

Note that absorbtion of external gamma rays by semi-conductors, that then
convert the gamma energy into other forms is very inefficient (2%)*, which is
something I would not expect if the lattice as a whole were absorbing the
energy. (Of course you may argue that since the source of the gamma in this case
is external, the nucleus from which it was emitted had no opportunity to couple
with the lattice. Hence my question above.

* See e.g.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330650579_Direct_Energy_Conversion_From_Gamma_Ray_to_Electricity_Using_Silicon_Semiconductor_Cells


As I understand it, an external gamma ray is usually at least partly absorbed by
an atomic electron, which results in the atom being ionized, and the electron
leaving with at least some of the energy of the gamma. The electron may then in
turn ionize other atoms. The net result is lots of ionized atoms and free
electrons.

If those free electons are anywhere other than in the junction of a diode, then
their energy will eventually be converted to heat when they recombine with the
ions. Even those electrons that are in the junction will lose some of their
energy to electrical resistance. Given that the junction is usually only a small
part of a semi-conductor diode, the overall efficiency may be expected to be
low, as seen in the paper quoted here above.


>ANSWERS:
>
>
>  1.  A  coherent system is adiabatic system of energy, including local 
> packets of energy—electrons positrons and neutrinos---that are coupled by a 
> EM field that responds very quickly (less than 10e-30mseconds) to energy 
> additions or losses by changing he special relation of the energy packets.  A 
> good example is a semi conductor crystal that absorbs an electron packet of 
> energy and very quickly changes the allowable energy state of conduction  
> electrons.  There is no apparent delay associated with the allowed energy 
> state across the macroscopic rang of the semi conductor.  Systems which 
> harbor phonic energy are coherent systems, since the lattice acts as a whole 
> without any time dely.
>
>The energy of the coherent system is constrained by  small quanta of energy 
>and angular momentum in accordance with Planck’s theory of quantized energy 
>and quantized angular momentum.  In addition the coherent system will adjust 
>the relative positions of energy packets to increase their relative motions 
>(kinetic energies) and reduce their total potential energy increasing entropy 
>per the second law of thermodynamics..
>
>
>  1.  As noted above the coherent system is coupled by EM fields—primarily 
> magnetic fields that connect electron orbital angular momentum with nuclear 
> angular momentum, including energy packet intrinsic spin  angular momentum 
> which  reflects the magnetic moment associated with those packets of energy.
>
>
>
>  1.  There is no gamma emission within the coherent system—only instanteous 
> changes of  angular momentum  and/or energy between between locations within 
> the coherent system.  (Later in time adjacent coherent systems may conduct 
> heat between them selves via radiant EM coupling or other coupling involving 
> phonic energy changes of the original coherent system.  Too much phonic 
> energy will destroy the lattice of the system in question.
>
>
>
>Bob Cook
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:coherent system energy states

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Sun, 28 Jul 2019 18:46:39
+:
Hi Bob,

Your answers don't appear to have appeared. ;)

>Robin—
>
>You raised the following questions and comments:
>
>
>
>1) What is this "coherent system", and specifically, in what respect is it
>
>coherent, i.e. which property of the system?
>
>2) How do you propose that the nuclear energy is actually coupled to the phonic
>
>energy?
>
>3) Changes in angular momentum of nuclei are usually paired with emission of a
>
>gamma ray or particle to conserve angular momentum. If you want to avoid this,
>
>then you need to provide an actual physical mechanism by which the angular
>
>momentum is transferred to the lattice, and specifically what it is in the
>
>lattice that it couples to. Furthermore, what is it that makes this method
>
>preferable above the usual methods (e.g. gamma emission)?
>
>ANSWERS:
>
>
>  1.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Fri, 26 Jul 2019 02:28:29
+:
Hi Bob,
[snip]
>Robin-
>
>
>
>During NMR isomeric transitions, nuclear species are stimulated with a radio 
>frequency EM field to gain kinetic spin energy in the form of increased 
>angular momentum in small quanta of angular momentum—each quantum being equal 
>to h/2pie.  An ambient magnetic field would change the allowed states for such 
>nuclear spin energy states.
>
>Thus, change in a coherent system’s angular momentum occur in 0 or more quanta 
>of angular momentum .   However the total angular momentum must be conserved 
>just as energy is conserved in a coherent system phase change.  (The reaction 
>does not involve release of any particles with kinetic energy, including no 
>photons or neutrinos)  Only an increase of phonic lattice energy and a 
>decrease of nuclear orbital angular momentum happens associated with a 
>different meta stable or stable nuclear configuration—even ones with a 
>transmuted configuration, but withunchangedt sums of protons and neutrons.

1) What is this "coherent system", and specifically, in what respect is it
coherent, i.e. which property of the system?
2) How do you propose that the nuclear energy is actually coupled to the phonic
energy?
3) Changes in angular momentum of nuclei are usually paired with emission of a
gamma ray or particle to conserve angular momentum. If you want to avoid this,
then you need to provide an actual physical mechanism by which the angular
momentum is transferred to the lattice, and specifically what it is in the
lattice that it couples to. Furthermore, what is it that makes this method
preferable above the usual methods (e.g. gamma emission)?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  bobcook39...@hotmail.com's message of Wed, 24 Jul 2019 13:19:02
+:
Hi,
[snip]
>For example, spin energy transitions within a coupled “coherent” system may 
>not entail any radiation at all, if there is a perfect conservation of angular 
>momentum during the LENR event.  Of course radiant heat may be emitted in a 
>follow-up reaction involving the decay of the phonic energy of the coherent 
>system’s lattice.

Can you explain in detail what you have in mind?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:15:44 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>K shells are not usually vacant, so such an electron would still upset 
>things. Regards,
>
>You miss the point! If you increase the nuclear charge by +2 then 
>exactly 2 k-shell electrons are missing!

True, I did miss that point, but your statement raises another. In that case,
you are only supplying a single extra electron from the neutron of the D, so the
other K shell vacancy remains unfilled, and will cause a higher level electron
to drop into the vacancy releasing an x-ray.
Of course, for light elements this will only be a soft x-ray, but for mid-range
or heavy atoms this can be quite energetic.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sun, 21 Jul 2019 18:39:48 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Bob
>
>One reason why the D* path is working like adding +2p/2e could be that 
>the internal electron from the neutron only needs to do a little push to 
>get to the k-shell. Thus no need to emit an electron!

K shells are not usually vacant, so such an electron would still upset things.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Tue, 23 Jul 2019 16:39:57 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>If a nuclear reaction (fusion) was responsible for the transmutation,
>wouldn't gamma radiation be produced?

Not necessarily as much as you might expect. It depends on the actual reaction.
If there are particles available to carry away the reaction energy, then very
few gammas are likely*. If those particles are electrons then some
bremsstrahlung is to be expected, but not so if they are heavy particles.
Positrons would of course result in annihilation gammas.

* This is because particle emission happens on the order of 1E-23 seconds,
whereas gamma emission is more on the order of 1E-17 seconds, so particles
usually carry the reaction energy away before a gamma has time to form.
This can result in a million times less gammas than one might otherwise expect.
If the number of reactions is small to start with, then the gammas may get lost
in the background noise, particularly if any such gammas are also shielded to
some extent by the apparatus itself.

Then of course, the experimenter also has to be looking for them.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Mon, 22 Jul 2019 00:41:51 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>http://www.jmcchina.org/html/2019/1/20190101.htm
>
>Replication of biologic transmutation using a chemical reaction.
>
>The productivity of the transmutation was a function of the ambient
>temperature of the solution. 75C produced the most transmutation. Note that
>there was no report of a heating effect or other energy release that
>accompanied the transmutation.

The actual reported change was in the ppm range, so you should be able to
calculate whether or not any normal nuclear reaction energy release would have
been noticeable.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Sat, 20 Jul 2019 18:09:51 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>Two simple samples:
>
>7-Li + H* --> 8Li --> 8-Be --> 2 4-He. (Lipinski reaction)
>
>105Pd +D* -->107Cd --> 107Ag classic P
>
>You can identify the decay paths by the typical gammas emitted.

So which gammas are emitted in the first case, and what would you expect if the
reaction were 7-Li + H* --> 8-Be --> 2 4-He?

...and how do you know that the first reaction isn't really:-

7-Li + D* --> 8Li (neutron transfer) + p (wanders off) --> 8-Be --> 2 4-He,
making use of trace D in the H?
Does the reaction rate change if you incrementally add D to the H?

>
>To learn about this use. 
>https://www-nds.iaea.org/relnsd/vcharthtml/VChartHTML.html
>
>Most of the time the A+D* reaction is followed by a beta+ decay. But 
>there are some exceptions

...so you detect pairs of positron annihilation gammas?
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Fri, 19 Jul 2019 23:05:52 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>In nuclear transformation (LENR) D* adds like a double proton and H* 
>adds like a neutron. That's what we see (exactly measure) from the gamma 
>radiation signature of complex reactions.

Could you give a couple of example reactions? (I'm a little unsure of what you
mean when you say "adds like".)
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Fri, 19 Jul 2019 08:14:19 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>“The energy release per atom would be useful, to narrow down the 
>possibilities.”
>
>Yes. No doubt this detail would be very useful to know, but is it even 
>possible to know?

I think that with careful work, it is possible. 

1) It should be possible to measure the total energy release over a long period.
2) The amount of D used should be able to be calculated by subtracting what is
left over at the end from what was made available during the course of the run.
The difference (if any) is what was used.

I deliberately specified a "long" run, because if the difference is small, then
the error can potentially be large, because there is always some measurement
error, and a very small signal may be lost in the measurement error.

If at the end of such a long run the difference is still small or near to
non-existent, then we are obviously dealing with one of the very energetic
options.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: FW: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Thu, 18 Jul 2019 13:37:44 +0200:
Hi,
[snip]
>In the Hydrogen LENR (?) the H-H --> H*-H* condensation produces about 
>500eV of magnetic potential energy due to SO(4)  spin coupling of the 
>perturbative proton mass. This can exactly be calculated. 

If it can be exactly calculated, why do you say "about 500 eV"?


Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: FW: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2019 17:08:50 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>So fusion only occurs infrequently. But why then is there NEVER any
>neutrons detected? Why are the the transmutation produces ALWAYS stable?

1) There are occasionally a few neutrons detected. Try searching for neutrons on
LENR-CANR. However I suspect that most of the nuclear reactions that occur are
probably neutron transfer reactions, which by definition don't produce free
neutrons.

2) The reaction products are not always stable, see early paper by Tom Passel
(sp?).

The sort of nuclear reaction one gets (if any) would depend on the reactants
used. Furthermore, nature prefers to create stable nuclei whenever possible,
because the nuclear force packs the nucleons as densely as it can, resulting in
a minimum energy nucleus, which by definition is stable. Therefore, given a
choice of multiple reaction pathways, those that produce stable nuclei are more
likely to be taken.

Note that with fission reactions of heavy nuclei (U, Pu etc.) this is nearly
impossible, due to an excess of neutrons.

However one might expect that a neutron transfer reaction starting out from D
might sometimes produce radioactive nuclei, e.g.

D + Ni58 => H + Ni59 which is a medium long half-life beta emitter.

Though also possible is D2 (shrunken molecule) + Ni58 => Ni60 + H2. (double
neutron transfer).
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: FW: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2019 16:28:37 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Well that is simple. If fusion was was a viable ongoing process during the
>LENR reaction, then there should be lots of gamma rays and neutrons
>produced, and LENR experimenters would all be dead in short order. But LENR
>is safe as safe can be just like light coming from a light bulb. Please
>explain how this is happening.

Most of the energy is coming from electron shrinkage, with the addition of the
occasional nuclear reaction where the energy is carried by charged heavy
particles and is primarily converted to heat.

This is what I consider to be the most likely explanation, though I don't rule
out others, including yours.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: FW: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely tobetheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Wed, 17 Jul 2019 16:10:15 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>The one undeniable aspect of this ferrosilicon transmutation example is the
>shear volume of unexplained material produced. In 11 weeks, an extra volume
>of 327.25 tons of  "anomalous" ferrosilicon output was unaccountably
>produced. Even a bookkeeper in the back-office could see that something is
>not adding up.  327.25 tons of transmutation should have produced lots of
>excess energy, but it did not.

On the contrary, it is very deniable, and I have done so exhaustively in the
past. Enough already, find another example to support your pet theory.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely to betheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Tue, 16 Jul 2019 18:53:04 -0400:
Hi,

All the anecdotal stories I have heard to date report the engine running "cold",
sometimes "hand cold".

>One of the formats that energy production in the LENR reaction can assume
>is shock wave generation. The Papp engine produced a huge amount of energy
>inside the combustion chambers of its paired cylinders but no heat. The
>first Papp engine was based on the production of a fuel cycle based on
>water. Only later in the mid 80's did Papp come up with a new reaction
>based on the explosion of noble gases. By the way, this method of LENR
>energy generation does not require hydrogen to operate.
>
>The same heatless expansion through shock wave generation might be true for
>the combustion of all LENR reaction based gases: Ohmasa, brown's gas, etc.
>in the cylinder of a car engine. If you would be kind enough to ask your
>contacts familiar with LENR gas fueled cars if any appreciable heat output
>is produced, I would be interested to know.
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely to betheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:49:22 -0400:
Hi Harry,

You are making the assumption that it actually has something to do with nuclear
structure. However it is by no means certain as of yet, that such is the case.
That's precisely why the energy release per atom would be useful, to narrow down
the possibilities.

>If mass energy conversion is treated as a cause of nuclear structure then
>you are correct.   I am looking at it as an effect of nuclear structure so
>the energy produced per atom would only tell us that nuclear forces are
>involved.
>Harry
[snip]
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:If Mizuno is correct, this design is likely to betheprecursor to all future devices

[mixent]

In reply to  H LV's message of Tue, 16 Jul 2019 12:44:27 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>IMO the focus on mass-energy equivalence at the present time is not helpful
>in this field. It should be set aside until there is a rough explanation of
>the nuclear dynamics without it. Harry
[snip]
Calculation of the energy yield / atom would actually tell us a lot, because
there is a considerable difference in yield between the various theories. I.e.

Electron shrinkage (e.g. Mills):ev-keV
Fusion: MeV
Complete conversion of matter to energy:GeV

There is roughly a factor of 1000 between each theory, so the energy / atom
could be a good indicator. Even if the measured value lies somewhere in between,
it would likely be an indication that the energy is coming from a combination of
the above, and even indicate which combination is most likely.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Of interest - abandoned LENR patent applicationUS20130044847A1

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Mon, 8 Jul 2019 12:49:39 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Bob,
>
>For some reason – despite the logic which you mention and the obvious problem 
>with activation, NASA still believes that W got it right. Go figure.
[snip]
...that's probably because it's more palatable to them than the alternatives. ;)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Exponential and self-heating reactions are not necessarily unstable

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 27 Jun 2019 19:58:27 -0400:
Hi Jed,
[snip]
>As shown in Table 1, he adjusted the gas during the 111 day run, to see the
>effects of pressure. He kept an inventory of gas to measure loading. But
>this could be kept constant in a future test. Plus you could probably
>measure the helium (if any) more easily than with most cold fusion reactors.

If he was measuring loading, then he knows how much gas was absorbed into the
Ni. If he could also measure what was left after the run then we would know how
much was consumed, and could consequently calculate the energy / D atom.

As Jones has pointed out, fusion or baryon destruction would yield MeV amounts /
D atom, whereas any form of "super chemistry" would yield on the order of 100's
to 1000's of eV / atom.

There is a pretty large gap between keV & MeV, so the result could well be
indicative, or at least alter the chances of any given theory being correct.

Could you at least suggest it to him?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Exponential and self-heating reactions are not necessarily unstable

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:08:27 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>> The best rationale for the belief that this design will not runaway is the
>> very low inventory of reactant and/or the fact that the gainful reaction is
>> not nuclear fusion.
>>
>Yes.

If the amount of gas in the device is constant, then it should be possible to
calculate the amount of energy generated by each D atom. That could point the
way to an explanation. Has this been done?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:It is unlikely Mizuno’s results are a mistake

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Wed, 26 Jun 2019 15:05:38 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>
>
>Yes  -- It is almost certain the magnitude of the effect he claims could not 
>be so far wrong as to negate most of the  strong anomalous thermal signal.
>
>But what about other kinds of testing? (non thermal)
>
>Is there any data from radiation testing, mass spectrometry (appearance of 
>helium) spectroscopy (Balmer line broadening), film, silver activation or any 
>kind of non-thermal anomaly which would bolster the case?
>
>Surely there must be some other kind of evidence ?

Radiation can't be too severe, he's still alive. ;)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Mizuno's Q and A to a person who wants to replicate

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 25 Jun 2019 10:17:06 -0400:
Hi Jed,

If the heater is only consuming 50 W, why does it need to be a 500 W heater?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  Chris Zell's message of Mon, 24 Jun 2019 15:11:48 +:
Hi,
[snip]
>Could be.  It may be like causes for war.  The US starts militating against 
>some nation and by sheer coincidence causes for immediate military action 
>appear, as if by magic.

Nice to see that at least someone has their eyes open. :)
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2019 14:58:08 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>It is as I read somewhere, as long as there are several trillion dollars of
>oil untapped, cold fusion will remain "fringe science".  When we need it,
>it will suddenly become accepted.  Same with AG.

1) If we wait until all the oil has been burned, then global warming will have
long passed the tipping point.
2) The oil would actually more valuable as a chemical feedstock than as fuel.
3) We need AG now. It would allow us to colonize the rest of the Solar system.:)


Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  Lennart Thornros's message of Fri, 21 Jun 2019 07:02:52 -0400:
Hi,
>If there is such a nonaggression pact. Shouldn't we the people 've
>informed? Why is that secret.? W go benefits from the secrecy?
>Lennart Thornros
[snip]
1) Yes, we should be informed.
2) It's secret because those in power assume massive panic if the word got out.
They are wrong BTW, if *all* the facts are presented, rather than a selection,
then for almost everyone, life would just go on as normal, because if would be
obvious that the situation has been going on for a long time, and essentially
nothing has changed. 
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 21 Jun 2019 10:53:01 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>I think they are following still the guidance offered in the Brookings
>Report:
>
>https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19640053196.pdf

At first glance, my impression is that like most people in power they tend to
believe that they are best placed to wield that power, and make decisions on
behalf of everyone else.

What none appear to have realized is that given the truth, society is far more
capable of adjusting to any situation than anyone (or any group) in a leadership
position could possibly achieve. 
This is because each person in society makes their own decision on what is best
for them, in any given circumstance. This is decision making on such a vast
scale that it is impossible to achieve centrally.

People tend to make the most sensible decisions when given all the facts.

When some facts are hidden, they are forced to make decisions based on
guesswork, which has a greater chance of leading to silly decisions, because
some of those guesses will be wrong.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  mix...@bigpond.com's message of Fri, 21 Jun 2019 13:44:42 +1000:
Hi,
[snip]
PS - The non-aggression pact guarantees that they are no danger to the navy.
They simply get out of the way. :)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Congress up in arms over UFOs

[mixent]

In reply to  Axil Axil's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 22:55:29 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
1) The President doesn't believe they are extra-terrestrial, and also isn't
worried.
2) If they were "home grown" no senate briefing would have been needed.


Not worried implies they are already known not to be a threat.

Conclusion: The source is a terrestrial entity that is not a threat.

The capabilities are clearly beyond anything we have. Since we don't already
have the technology, the owners are not going to share their technology, but
have promised not to harm us unless attacked.

Conclusion:- The government already knows that there is an existing
extra-terrestrial presence here on Earth, and they have a signed a
"non-aggression" pact with them.
Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:02:01 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin,
>
>The separation distance of dense deuterium is about 2 picometers in Holmlid’s 
>model

So, when you  were talking about 2 nm, you were talking about the size of the
cluster as a whole then rather than the separation distance?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 07:00:24 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>The strong force may become involved at this point to provide the binding 
>energy in similar way that gluons bind quarks.  
[snip]
 2 nm = 20 Angstrom ~= 28 times the separation distance of the of the D nuclei
in a Deuterium molecule. If Deuterium molecules are too big to undergo fusion
using the strong force, then I struggle to see how it could be playing a role
when the separation distance is 28 times larger still.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Mizuno reports increased excess heat

[mixent]

Hi,

Should separation distance between metals prove to be important, then a very
small separation between two metal sheets can be obtained by etching a honeycomb
pattern into fine gold leaf, and using it to separate the two target metal
sheets.

This could allow gas pressures as high as 17 atm. to be used if so desired.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:Mizuno reports increased excess heat

[mixent]

Hi,

Observation:-

When Hydrino formation energy is used to clone more Hydrinos of the same size,
the maximum energy gain is a factor of about 6. This is pretty close to what
Mizuno is getting.

I wonder if he tried Hydrogen vs. Deuterium, and if the result was different?

(BTW cloning depends on having atoms not molecules available.)

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success