Sunspots also correlate with higher rates of solar flares and coronal mass
ejections (CMEs). The average CME is 1e+12 kgs of energetic stuff.
Don't you believe that stuff affects Earths energy balance also?
On Wednesday, February 6, 2013, Chuck Sites wrote:
Sunspots do reduce the solar input
I regret that I have not been able to understand this paper. What I
find here are equations from various areas of physics -- electrostatics,
quantum mechanics, etc -- together with a a few general remarks about
those equations. So, for example, it is not clear to me what is the
central result
I set the velocity of sound in the nucleus = the velocity of light in the
electronic structure and got the radii of the atoms, the energy and frequency
of the photon, and the velocity of the atomic electrons.
No cold fusion or anti-gravity was included. I would understand if he did not
agree
Where is the preprint of the paper so that we can take a look?
2013/2/6 fznidar...@aol.com
I set the velocity of sound in the nucleus = the velocity of light in the
electronic structure and got the radii of the atoms, the energy and
frequency of the photon, and the velocity of the atomic
On 02/06/2013 02:48 AM, Chuck Sites wrote:
Sunspots do reduce the solar input and during peak sunspot activity it
can be as high as 15% more or less. Think about it. Sunspots are
dark; Dark spots emit less light. So more sunspots, less light. Less
light, less Solar input. Less solar
Thank you Daniel. I posted a pdf at the link below.
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/pdf/refactoring.pdf
Frank Znidarsic
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
To: John Milstone vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Feb 6, 2013 7:30 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Same
Earthworms? And I thought it was termite and bovine flatus.
You forgot cows
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Earthworms? And I thought it was termite and bovine flatus.
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:44 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
You forgot cows
Leave my wife out of this.
Ouch!
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:44 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
You forgot cows
Leave my wife out of this.
I guess bovine=cow, duh
Is she Holstein? Jersey? Did you meet in a field?...
On Wednesday, February 6, 2013, ChemE Stewart wrote:
Ouch!
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Terry Blanton
hohlr...@gmail.comjavascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'hohlr...@gmail.com');
wrote:
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:44
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 9:03 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
I guess bovine=cow, duh
I thought you were joking. Whew!
Is she Holstein? Jersey? Did you meet in a field?...
Kobe. Massage parlor.
Blah, blah, blah..living from paycheck to paycheck.
The discussion begins and ends there, simply by defining what the phrase means.
With greater advances in automation soon, that phrase will often become
'welfare check to welfare check'.
But fear not for the climate ! The Drudge Report
Please stop hijacking this discussion.
Thanks,
Craig
On 02/06/2013 09:27 AM, Chris Zell wrote:
Blah, blah, blah..living from paycheck to paycheck.
The discussion begins and ends there, simply by defining what the
phrase means. With greater advances in automation soon, that phrase
Speaking of cows and CMEs...
I believe some of those energetic particles/micro black holes/ball
lightning/plasmoid particles expelled from the sun are causing cattle
mutilatios on Earth. The low momentum ones move towards heat, like a cow's
butt.
Keep an eye on your wife, especially when it is
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 09:36:38 -0500
ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
Speaking of cows and CMEs...
I believe some of those energetic particles/micro black holes/ball
lightning/plasmoid particles expelled from the sun are causing cattle
mutilatios on Earth. The low momentum ones move
Sunspots look dark because they are cooler, not because they put out less
light.
On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote:
Sunspots do reduce the solar input and during peak sunspot activity it can
be as high as 15% more or less. Think about it. Sunspots are
Exactly, and just like on Earth, most low pressure atmospheric
disturbances, as gasses are collapsed and condensed are very cold. Same
thing when you collapse and condense Hydrogen in the sun's atmosphere. In
space orbiting particles less than 1e+20 kg are very hot because there is
no
Did you know the Paul stole his exclusion principle from Goudsmit and
Uhlenbeck? This cannot happen in this age of digital information. Reject as
they will I have already published in IE and at Amazon.
I was going to expand Equation #26 in the form of the cross product of the
nuclear
If life on earth has ever evolved to use LENR for survival in extreme
conditions, then evidence of that would likely be found in deep cold lakes
in Antarctica. We talked about this earlier when it looked like the Russians
were about to drill deep enough - but they had equipment failure.
Now, for
I just completed a long time frame program test run for the recent downloaded
data for one of the Celani cells. I am using the time domain curve fit program
that I developed recently that uses the solution for a non linear differential
equation describing the behavior of these types of cells.
This would be a fine development if it turns out that LENR is used by these
organisms. Some of the parameters required for the use of LENR might be
revealed to help us in our quest.
Do you think that the quantity of rocks consumed would give some indication of
whether or not LENR were
Dave,
Here's the problem.
If you look at the reliable Ni-H experiments going back to Thermacore's work
for DARPA, up to Celani and the replications - the proved COP is rather low
- and there is no evidence that it is really nuclear, even if we call it
LENR. There are really no other
And then there is the report of Rossi and Defkalion. Well, at least they
insist that their systems are working and I have my fingers crossed that one
day soon we will hear about good confirmation.
In my estimate, there is some evidence that these and others are seeing good
excess power. The
How can you tell whether these are falso positives and not false negatives?
2013/2/6 David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
I just completed a long time frame program test run for the recent
downloaded data for one of the Celani cells. I am using the time domain
curve fit program that I
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
How can you tell whether these are falso positives and not false negatives?
0.2 to 0.6 W with this system is zero. Not positive or negative. That is
within the noise.
As I said before, no instrument can produce exactly zero.
- Jed
That was not my question. I want to know if he is also fitting excess heat
with his curve and thus giving false negatives.
2013/2/6 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
How can you tell whether these are falso positives and not false negatives?
0.2
Dave,
If the interaction of Dark Matter/Energy (~95%) and Baryonic Matter(~5%)
results in Beta Decay/LENR, transmutations and mutations, I would say life
is possible anywhere as long as the level of Dark/Vacuum Energy is not to
high in that region of space. Weak Anthropic Principle at work.
AGW supporters have a number of mostly derogatory names for people who
aren't on board with their theories: Deniers, skeptics, lunatics, morons,
anti-science.
A lot of us in the skeptic camp aren't so much skeptical of the science
(although there is plenty to be skeptical of, as predictions have
In fact, if the paper below can be believed - we already know that bacteria can
feed on high level nuclear waste – so low-level (EUV) should be a cakewalk.
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/VysotskiiVsuccessful.pdf
From: David Roberson
…. if it is assumed that LENR can be released
Suppose someone asks you to calculate the area under y = sin(x) over
one wavelength?
Since half the curve is above the x -axis and half the curve is below
the x-axis you might calculate the net area as zero, but that would be
false null result.
harry
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Jed Rothwell
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
That was not my question. I want to know if he is also fitting excess heat
with his curve and thus giving false negatives.
I am saying I think it is just a slight instrument bias.
Anyway, even if it is 0.6 W positive, that is not significant.
- Jed
I guess you did not understand the question or I don't know how to express
myself well. Either way, let's wait to see the flow calorimetry.
2013/2/6 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
That was not my question. I want to know if he is also fitting
I agree with that. The transmutation and transformation of Earth did not
just happen EONS ago, it is continuing to happen today right under our eyes
and includes we humans. I think the bad mutations trigger cancers and the
good mutations help create things like Kate Upton...
On Wed, Feb 6,
You mention one of the situations that I have a bit of concern about. The
curve fit is achieved by using the internal curve fitting routine of Excel in
its X-Y chart menu. I am fortunate that it is a quadratic equation that is
required and not a higher order. If excess heat were an issue I
What if excess heat a slow igniting process with very soft variations? And
where higher order correction are important but they are distilled by
hours?
Say, the effect of excess power follows a slow accumulation of some
potential with the subsequen slow release of this potential?
2013/2/6 David
Please stop referring to economic considerations of climate change as
'hijacking'.
For this to be a problem, the data must be of restricted range. The more sine
waves worth of data that are processed, the more closely your result becomes to
zero. This is one reason that I believe that the result is so well
established. Around a week of data is analyzed during which the
By all means Dan. I hope that the calorimeter shows excess power, but I would
not be surprised to see otherwise after reviewing the data.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com
To: John Milstone vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Feb 6, 2013 2:39 pm
Subject:
That was not directed to you, but to Jed...
2013/2/6 David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
By all means Dan. I hope that the calorimeter shows excess power, but I
would not be surprised to see otherwise after reviewing the data.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Rocha
the experimenters are writing about essential
things here:
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/follow-2/206-tgoc
The Genius of Celani
Peter
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote:
That was not directed to you, but to Jed...
2013/2/6 David Roberson
That is what should be showing up as time progresses. If the calibration
values are determined by the faster acting phenomena, then a set of values is
obtained that is accurate for fast moving changes. The time domain fit to
power steps demonstrates that this is happening and fitting the
Can't you simulate a few types of dummy systems with extra heat where the
extra heat would not show?
2013/2/6 David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com
That is what should be showing up as time progresses. If the calibration
values are determined by the faster acting phenomena, then a set of values
Brad Lowe ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't help that Al Gore's graphs showing a hockey stick increase in
temperatures (and hurricanes) has been flat-lined for a decade.)
That is incorrect. Temperatures have increased in line with mainstream
global warming predictions. Please stick to
On Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:40:49 -0500
Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
Brad Lowe ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't help that Al Gore's graphs showing a hockey stick increase in
temperatures (and hurricanes) has been flat-lined for a decade.)
That is incorrect.
Brad Lowe ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote:
One thing we can agree on: Any solution proposed to fight global warming
will cost trillions of dollars (short of a breakthrough in LENR, or a
nuclear renaissance).
I guess so, but to put it another way, any solution will *earn* trillions
of dollars.
The tragic thing is that the economy actually would benefit if half the
unemployed were paid to dig holes in the ground and the other half paid to
fill the holes in.
This is the result of insane political economics.
So it is true that even if there is no global warming, paying unemployed
people
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com wrote:
I don't follow. Did the predictions of increased temperature say
that there would be no increase for the past 16 years, which is
the case?
It is a myth that temperatures have not increased in 16 years. The people
making this claim started with the
On 02/06/2013 04:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com mailto:vorl@antichef.com wrote:
I don't follow. Did the predictions of increased temperature say
that there would be no increase for the past 16 years, which is
the case?
It is a myth that
If it does not show up, how could it be measured?
Actually, this can be accomplished in an interesting sort of way with the
program. On occasions I intentionally restrict the range of data used in the
optimizer. If I want to concentrate upon the rising edge fit, then I do not
include the
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
The tragic thing is that the economy actually would benefit if half the
unemployed were paid to dig holes in the ground and the other half paid to
fill the holes in.
That would be something like war. WWII was a tremendous boost to the U.S.
economy, even
The Rise of the Drones
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/military/rise-of-the-drones.html
An upcoming Nova program featuring, among other amazing things, Argus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0p4BQ1XzwDg
Hi Craig and other vortexers.
I would like to respond to several of your comments. First on the
issue of Solar Irradiance or the solar forcing as it's described in the
computer models. it is certainly the main contributing factor to heat of
the atmosphere. No doubt about it. Sometimes it
On 02/06/2013 04:20 PM, Craig wrote:
On 02/06/2013 04:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
It is a myth that temperatures have not increased in 16 years. The
people making this claim started with the highest outlier point 16
years ago. See:
I don't agree with that, but you can see it here:
Craig cchayniepub...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's a graph:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4QESdNmbCJSbFFScjJZdUhWdU0/edit?usp=sharing
So the temperature stall is still above the 50 year trend line, and can
continue flat for quite some time before it falls below the first standard
deviation.
They have known causes, such as volcanoes and el nino
So what causes Volcanoes and El Nino Jed?
I am not saying that CO2 does not have a contribution to our climate, I
just want us to all realize we are a freckle on the Sun's butt and at its
mercy whenever it decides to fart.
Stewart
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:57 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
You mention one of the situations that I have a bit of concern about. The
curve fit is achieved by using the internal curve fitting routine of Excel
in its X-Y chart menu. I am fortunate that it is a quadratic equation
The reality of AGM is often presented as a no-brainer and that deniers
are just plain stupid.
However, this shows that global warming is not transparently
self-evident and that an additional level of
analysis is required to tease out the proof. I personally think the
climate scientists speak down
The area in sine wave example was not intended to represent any particular
physical variables. It was just intended as metaphor to show that
the conclusions one draws from data are not necessarily transparent or
undeniably correct.
Harry
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:20 PM, David Roberson
The reality of AGW IS an no-brainer, and it IS the deniers that are plain
stupid. That is a fact jack. Tere are 2 scientist that say so against
your 5.Give it up deniers, you lost this debate in like 2009.
Chuck
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 1:28 AM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
Vorl bek says: Look at this authoritive website for answers, and it points
to a rightwing funded propaganda machine called whatsupwiththat.
Congratulations for proving the point that the deniers are idiots.
Best Regards,
Chuck
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 3:53 PM, Vorl Bek vorl@antichef.com
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 11:07 PM, Chuck Sites cbsit...@gmail.com wrote:
Congratulations for proving the point that the deniers are idiots.
I'm sympathetic to the idea that climate change deniers are in denial. But
everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, and to be honest it doesn't
seem like
Yes, that might be what they need. I am concerned about the calibration used
for the earlier Celani publication where a forth order radiation (S_B)
assumption was used to calculate the power. The MFMP guys have very clearly
demonstrated that this is not happening with their cells. I recently
Hi Craig, and fellow vortexians,
I'm looking at your graph on temperature anomalies and every data point
is above 0. Shouldn't some of you anomalies be negative. You have 16
years of positive anomalies but not a single negative. I think that proves
the point that temperatures are trending
I realize that you were just using the sine wave process as an example. I
pointed out that the time period spanned by the data is important to help catch
issues of this nature. I acknowledge that it is possible for a very long
delayed effect to come into play during or after the samples. The
Chuck, I have reframed from entering this discussion because of the emotions
that become entangled. You should apologize for that comment since it is out
of order. What good would it do if people on the other side directed the same
type of attacks toward you? We recently went through a long
66 matches
Mail list logo
