RE: Sing the Sun Electric
Your neighbor may be interested in: http://jlnlabs.imars.com/plasma/index.htm -john -Original Message- From: thomas malloy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 9:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Sing the Sun Electric Terry Blanton posted; >Not everyone believes fusion powers the sun: Excellent post Terry. I have a neighbor, John T Nordberg, www.grandunification.com , well he lives in the western burbs, who has the intention to create a "light ball", in a metallic container. If I see a bright flash coming from the south west, I'll know what happened. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.10.4 - Release Date: 05/04/27
Re: Sing the Sun Electric
well, ive made ball lightning in a glass before (see bills wonderful website) but in metal? On 4/28/05, thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Terry Blanton posted; > > >Not everyone believes fusion powers the sun: > > Excellent post Terry. I have a neighbor, John T Nordberg, > www.grandunification.com , well he lives in the western burbs, who > has the intention to create a "light ball", in a metallic container. > > If I see a bright flash coming from the south west, I'll know what happened. > > -- "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire
OT : Social Insecurity
Mr. Bush on Social Security...tonite. / Mr Bush sez: In a reformed Social System, voluntary personal retirement accounts would offer workers a number of investment options that are simple and easy to understand. I know some Americans have reservations about investing in the stock market, so I propose that one investment option consist entirely of TREASURY BONDS, which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. Options like this will make voluntary personal retirement accounts a safer investment. / Mr Bush continues... Now, it's very important for our fellow citizens to understand there is not a bank account here in Washington, D.C., where we take your payroll taxes and hold it for you and then give it back to you when you retire. Our system is called pay as you go. You pay into the system through your payroll taxes and the government spends it. It spends the money on the current retirees and with the money left over, it funds other government programs. And all that's left behind is file cabinets full of IOUs. // Hm IOUs? What are those? Sounds risky... >From the US government site Social Security Online http://www.ssa.gov/qa.htm Social Security is largely a "pay-as-you-go" system with today's taxpayers paying for the benefits of today's retirees. Money not needed to pay today's benefits is invested in special-issue TREASURY BONDS. // Oh, so those IOU's are TREASURY BONDS. How about that. Comments? K.
Spiral helixes
Observing the vortex produced in a clear plexiglas tank of water by a high speed rotating member facing down with a clockwise rotation I notice the cone of the vortex is at the surface and counterclockwise due to the vortex curling 180 degrees from the face of the rotating member up to the surface. The diameter of the vortex remains near constant until it approaches the water surface when it expands to the familar parabolic form. a measured amount of air can be induced at the member due to vacuum. The air allows the many shed vortices to become visible in the water that move in many directions. A water vortex is made up of many spirals some of which appear to be flowing opposite from the main bands. These spirals remind me of a model of a DNA molecule.. hmmm. Reading a recent research paper where light was " frozen" reminds me of what happens when a water vortex is disturbed.. it collapses. Thinking of the frozen light experiment, I try to imagine what is taking place. I have considered the event may be similar to impinging on a water vortex... " IF" light is actually in spiral helix form and interrupting ( impinging) the helix may be what causes the light to freeze. If light is actually composed of 3 components it could better explain why sunlight can heat a surface after traveling the distance through space at near absolute zero temperature. The water vortex may reveal one of the " capacitor" properties of water. If water and light have 3 components and are spiral helix in form there may be a way to " interrupt or impinge on one of the bands to " trigger" the capacitor. Looking at Ecclesiastes 4;12 I read a sentence made by the Teacher.. " a cord of three strands is not quickly broken". may offer a clue. Some of the most unseeming comments expressed in this group have led to stimulation of thought which is the real worth of the VortexL. Richard <>
Re: Sing the Sun Electric
Terry Blanton posted; Not everyone believes fusion powers the sun: Excellent post Terry. I have a neighbor, John T Nordberg, www.grandunification.com , well he lives in the western burbs, who has the intention to create a "light ball", in a metallic container. If I see a bright flash coming from the south west, I'll know what happened.
The Economist: "Cold fusion - Honest!"
This is hilarious... The Economist article is titled: "Cold fusion - Honest!" I haven't seen the Science article yet, but the title looks like it too, is relating the story to cold fusion. The UCLA team should have given their work a nifty name like "Crystal Fusion" to give the press something to latch onto. Oops. Too late for that. I In 1989 the press needed a label and they misapplied Jones work to F&P's. Voila - the birth of "Cold fusion." Now some of them don't know what to call the UCLA work. I guess "cold fusion" will do. Deja vu. s Tabletop Accelerator Breaks 'Cold Fusion' Jinx But Won't Yield ... Science Magazine (subscription) - USA A crystal with a strange property is at the heart of a clever method for inducing nuclear fusion in a tabletop-sized device. The ... Cold fusion Economist - UK PHYSICISTS who meddle with cold fusion, like psychologists who dabble in the paranormal, are likely to be labelled quacks by their peers. ...
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Could this similarity to sonofusion be part of Putterman's nefarious agenda... you remember, in his recent downplaying of normal sonofusion. This guy could end up being a "bad actor" in terms of intellectual-greed, so to speak... but thanks to the internet his past deeds will likely catch up with him, "sooner rather than later." Jones, I'm on it. I smell some bad fish and I think its close by here in LA. The BBC Horizon ploy was disgusting. Please feel free to (privately) send me any other leads. Steve
Taleyarkhan and Lahey in the May 2005 Issue of IEEE Spectrum
In the May 2005 issue of IEEE Spectrum, Taleyarkhan and Lahey discuss their latest experiments in detail and also explain how they plan to turn their tabletop apparatus into a full-scale electricity-generating device. "If this proves possible--and it's still a big 'if'--sonofusion could become a revolutionary new energy source," they write. They also say that other groups may soon have new findings to confirm that sonofusion works. "Now at least five groups--three in the United States and two in Europe--are working on reproducing our sonofusion results," they write. "Some have apparently already succeeded and are now preparing to publish their findings." More at: http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/511337/?sc=rssn
Re: Greg's msg from 1997: continuous closed-loop SMOT
--- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William Beaty wrote: > > That is what I love about computers. They never > forget! If we ever win the > CF wars, all of the stupid comments by harsh > opposition skeptics will be > preserved for posterity. Hi Jed, You once posted me a copy of the SMOT review Chris Tinsley did for IE. Could you please do that again? I would like to review it and post a few comments. By the way, can you provide the mailing address for IE so I can ship the two SMOT kits and the new KE measurement system IE which were ordered? Thanks, Greg Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Hey Mike, Good point; it's just that I was staring at an old x-ray xformer when I posted that's about 100KV or so; even my solid state 50KV Glassman is kinda hefty, but as you say it's the current that adds the bulk. I do sort of regret buying that old boat anchor; but you know sometimes you just can't resist Sure you could prolly use a piezo crystal, I have a bunch of scavenged units from lighters that I use occasionally for things like triggered spark gaps. I seem to remember measuring them into a couple of pF load at 10KV or so. But the pyroelectric effect is much more amenable to engineering, especially in a sealed chamber as would be ideal for this experiment. Puttermans device has real engineering application as a neutron source, that's what's important. Cheap, reliable, and easy to control. As to the press? Big mouths get big press, simple enough. Remember, CF doesn't exist, so you'd basically have to blow something up with it to get any attention. Don't underestimate the power of belief to block direct observation, as you can plainly see from certain recent list postings Say, women over 40 complain of your invisibility problem all the time. "I just don't understand it, when I was 20 cars would drive into fire hydrants when I jaywalked, now people walk right over me without pause" *grin* K. -Original Message- From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:35 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion Hello Keith, Well yes, but I don't think it would take anywhere near 50lbs of power supply to reach the tiny currents generated by lithium tantalate. For that matter, why not just use the PZT from one of those gas flame lighters. PZT is a slightly better pyroelectric, no? And besides, why not just go piezoelectric, tap the PZT and get a really nice burst of neutrons? Frankly, I just don't get this whole news release. Here's a guy getting fairly major publicity for accomplishing nearly nothing, while people doing major research on CF can't get arrested. The only thing that I can see that attracts any attention is the "cuteness factor" of using a pyroelectric. M. (the invisible man) Keith wrote: > About 50 pounds of iron, and a wall outlet. > You could warm the pyroelectric crystal with your > hands and generate neutrons. > But there is no new physics here, sadly. You are > not missing anything. > K. >> -Original Message- >> From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 3:02 PM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion >> Am I missing something? What is the advantage of >> using the pyroelectric crystal as a high voltage >> source over some other more conventional power >> supply? >> M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
More Taleyarkhan and Lahey Sonofusion Results
Looks like Taleyarkhan and Lahey are coming through with additional peer reviewed proof that so many seemed sure they would never be able to provide. In the May 2005 issue of IEEE Spectrum, they discuss their latest experiments in detail and also explain how they plan to turn their tabletop apparatus into a full-scale electricity-generating device. "If this proves possible--and it's still a big 'if'--sonofusion could become a revolutionary new energy source," they write. There are five independent replication experiments and variations on their experiment from other peer review teams going on at the moment. They also say that other groups may soon have new findings to confirm that sonofusion works. "Now at least five groups--three in the United States and two in Europe--are working on reproducing our sonofusion results," they write. "Some have apparently already succeeded and are now preparing to publish their findings." More at: http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/511337/?sc=rssn
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Hello Keith, Well yes, but I don't think it would take anywhere near 50lbs of power supply to reach the tiny currents generated by lithium tantalate. For that matter, why not just use the PZT from one of those gas flame lighters. PZT is a slightly better pyroelectric, no? And besides, why not just go piezoelectric, tap the PZT and get a really nice burst of neutrons? Frankly, I just don't get this whole news release. Here's a guy getting fairly major publicity for accomplishing nearly nothing, while people doing major research on CF can't get arrested. The only thing that I can see that attracts any attention is the "cuteness factor" of using a pyroelectric. M. (the invisible man) Keith wrote: > About 50 pounds of iron, and a wall outlet. > You could warm the pyroelectric crystal with your > hands and generate neutrons. > But there is no new physics here, sadly. You are > not missing anything. > K. >> -Original Message- >> From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 3:02 PM >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion >> Am I missing something? What is the advantage of >> using the pyroelectric crystal as a high voltage >> source over some other more conventional power >> supply? >> M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
Re: Computers and Religion
yeah, well, this is a topic for humor and a bit ot, so hey. /didnt know that though. makes one wonder, then mary wasnt really the mother of christ. wait... nicean... yeah, constantine can go jump in a lake. On 4/28/05, Stephen A. Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > leaking pen wrote: > > >but, as a son of adam and eve in part, would jesus not also hold some > >aspect of original sin? in fact, his creation would never have been > >neccesary if not for that bite from the fruit of knowledge of good and > >evil, yes no? > > > No. Check out the Nicene Creed. Jesus was begotten, not made, and he > was/is of one substance with the father. I could go on (the Nicene > Creed sure does, it's the Energizer Bunny of creeds) but, as Jed says, > Amen to this being a science list... > > -- "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire
Re: Computers and Religion
leaking pen wrote: but, as a son of adam and eve in part, would jesus not also hold some aspect of original sin? in fact, his creation would never have been neccesary if not for that bite from the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, yes no? No. Check out the Nicene Creed. Jesus was begotten, not made, and he was/is of one substance with the father. I could go on (the Nicene Creed sure does, it's the Energizer Bunny of creeds) but, as Jed says, Amen to this being a science list...
Re: RE: Computers and Religion
but, as a son of adam and eve in part, would jesus not also hold some aspect of original sin? in fact, his creation would never have been neccesary if not for that bite from the fruit of knowledge of good and evil, yes no? (which, btw, was a fig, not an apple) so why not the mac? /jesus loves you /the rest of us think you're an asshole. On 4/28/05, Terry Blanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > From: "Keith Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2005/04/28 Thu PM 01:42:49 EDT > > To: > > Subject: RE: Computers and Religion > > > > But Hank, > > > > You're neglecting the key theological issue. > > > > Did Jesus or Satan use the Mac? > > Uh, you can look at the Mac logo and ask that question? > > Jesus saves souls . . . > and trades them in for valuable prizes! > > -- "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire
Re: OT: Leaking Pen asked and answered
am i the only one laughing at the irony of that statement? /looking up irony to be sure it was in fact ironic. still not sure. On 4/28/05, Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > leaking pen wrote: > > >i will say this once again, and then i will ignore you. this is a > >SCIENCE discussion list. you wish a religous debate, join a list > >designed for religious debate. > > Amen. > > - Jed > > -- "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Hi Michael, About 50 pounds of iron, and a wall outlet. You could warm the pyroelectric crystal with your hands and generate neutrons. But there is no new physics here, sadly. You are not missing anything. K. -Original Message- From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 3:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion Am I missing something? What is the advantage of using the pyroelectric crystal as a high voltage source over some other more conventional power supply? M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Am I missing something? What is the advantage of using the pyroelectric crystal as a high voltage source over some other more conventional power supply? M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
RE: RE: Computers and Religion
Terry, I'm searching without results for the "think different" ad with Anton LaVey. You know the one, you animal... Can you work your linking magic It's gotta be out there somewhere. K. -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: RE: Computers and Religion > > From: "Keith Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2005/04/28 Thu PM 01:42:49 EDT > To: > Subject: RE: Computers and Religion > > But Hank, > > You're neglecting the key theological issue. > > Did Jesus or Satan use the Mac? Uh, you can look at the Mac logo and ask that question? Jesus saves souls . . . and trades them in for valuable prizes!
Savvatimova paper uploaded
See: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Savvatimovresultsofa.pdf This may need some additional editing. If anyone here finds a mistake in it, please let me know toot-sweet, as they say in the South of France. - Jed
OT: Exploding Toads
Not that this topic is likely to have anything to do with "CF", "OU", "LENR" or other kool vortexian acronyms... Never the less, I just couldn't help sharing it with all of you: I give you: Exploding TOADS http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7654561/?GT1=6428 spontaneous toadie combustion? Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: RE: Computers and Religion
> > From: "Keith Nagel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2005/04/28 Thu PM 01:42:49 EDT > To: > Subject: RE: Computers and Religion > > But Hank, > > You're neglecting the key theological issue. > > Did Jesus or Satan use the Mac? Uh, you can look at the Mac logo and ask that question? Jesus saves souls . . . and trades them in for valuable prizes!
RE: Computers and Religion
But Hank, You're neglecting the key theological issue. Did Jesus or Satan use the Mac? / Some important theological questions are answered if we think of god as a computer programmer. Q: Does God control everything that happens in my life? A: He could, if he used the debugger, but it's tedious to step through all those variables. Q: Why does God allow evil to happen? A: God thought he eliminated evil in one of the earlier revs. Q: Does God know everything? A: He likes to think so, but he is often amazed to find out what goes on in the overnight job. Q: What causes God to intervene in earthly affairs? A: If an critical error occurs, the system pages him automatically and he logs on from home to try to bring it up. Otherwise things can wait until tomorrow. Q: Did God really create the world in seven days? A: He did it in six days and nights while living on cola and candy bars. On the seventh day he went home and found out his girlfriend had left him. Q: How come the Age of Miracles Ended? A: That was the development phase of the project, now we are in the maintenance phase. Q: Will there be another Universe after the Big Bang? A: A lot of people are drawing things on the white board, but personally, God doubts that it will ever be implemented. Q: Who is Satan? A: Satan is an MIS director who takes credit for more powers than he actually possesses, so people who aren't programmers are scared of him. God thinks of him as irritating but irrelevant. Q: What is the role of sinners? A: Sinners are the people who find new an imaginative ways to mess up the system when God has made it idiot-proof. Q: Where will I go after I die? A: Onto a DAT tape. Q: Will I be reincarnated? A: Not unless there is a special need to recreate you. And searching those .tar files is a major hassle, so if there is a request for you, God will just say that the tape has been lost. Q: Am I unique and special in the universe? A: There are over 10,000 major university and corporate sites running exact duplicates of you in the present release version. Q: What is the purpose of the universe? A: God created it because he values elegance and simplicity, but then the users and managers demanded he tack all this senseless stuff onto it and now everything is more complicated and expensive than ever. Q: If I pray to God, will he listen? A: You can waste his time telling him what to do, or you can just get off his back and let him program. Q: What is the one true religion? A: All systems have their advantages and disadvantages, so just pick the one that best suits your needs and don't let anyone put you down. Q: Is God angry that we crucified him? A: Let's just say he's not going to any more meetings if he can help it, because that last one with the twelve managers and the food turned out to be murder. Q: How can I protect myself from evil? A: Change your password every month and don't make it a name, a common word, or a date like your birthday. Q: Some people claim they hear the voice of God. Is this true? A: They are much more likely to receive email. -Original Message- From: Hank Scudder [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 1:17 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Computers and Religion Jesus and Satan were having an on-going argument about who was better on the computer. They had been going at it for days, and frankly God was tired of hearing all the bickering. Finally fed up, God said, "THAT'S IT! I have had enough. I am going to set up a test that will run for two hours, and from those results, I will judge who does the better job." So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards and typed away. They moused. They faxed. They e-mailed. They downloaded. They did spreadsheets. They wrote reports. They created labels and cards. They created charts and graphs. They did some genealogy reports. They did every job known to man. Jesus worked with heavenly efficiency and Satan was faster than hell. Then, ten minutes before their time was up, lightning suddenly flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, rain poured, and, of course, the power went off. Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curseword known in the underworld. Jesus just sighed. Finally the electricity came back on, and each of them restarted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming "It's gone! It's all GONE! "I lost everything when the power went out!" Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours of work. Satan observed this and became irrate. "Wait!" he screamed. "That's not fair! He cheated! How come he has all his work and I don't have any?" God just shrugged and said, JESUS SAVES
Computers and Religion
Jesus and Satan were having an on-going argument about who was better on the computer. They had been going at it for days, and frankly God was tired of hearing all the bickering. Finally fed up, God said, "THAT'S IT! I have had enough. I am going to set up a test that will run for two hours, and from those results, I will judge who does the better job." So Satan and Jesus sat down at the keyboards and typed away. They moused. They faxed. They e-mailed. They downloaded. They did spreadsheets. They wrote reports. They created labels and cards. They created charts and graphs. They did some genealogy reports. They did every job known to man. Jesus worked with heavenly efficiency and Satan was faster than hell. Then, ten minutes before their time was up, lightning suddenly flashed across the sky, thunder rolled, rain poured, and, of course, the power went off. Satan stared at his blank screen and screamed every curseword known in the underworld. Jesus just sighed. Finally the electricity came back on, and each of them restarted their computers. Satan started searching frantically, screaming "It's gone! It's all GONE! "I lost everything when the power went out!" Meanwhile, Jesus quietly started printing out all of his files from the past two hours of work. Satan observed this and became irrate. "Wait!" he screamed. "That's not fair! He cheated! How come he has all his work and I don't have any?" God just shrugged and said, JESUS SAVES
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
--- Keith, > The voltages quoted seem lower than what we > were looking at yesterday, 120KV is something you > could do in the dentists office. The Farnsworth fusor puts out 10 orders of magnitude more neutrons than this device does, and at only 20-40 kV... BUT it benefits from **spherical convergence** which is a huge advantage for ICF. There is no apparent reason why you couldn't focus numerous small accelerators of this type at a central target however. Now, with **spherical convergence** added into the equation, what we have is beginning to look a lot more like 'normal sonofusion,' no? Could this similarity to sonofusion be part of Putterman's nefarious agenda... you remember, in his recent downplaying of normal sonofusion. This guy could end up being a "bad actor" in terms of intellectual-greed, so to speak... but thanks to the internet his past deeds will likely catch up with him, "sooner rather than later." > I assume the gradient is what matters more; Exactomundo... > just as one has a massive gradient at the interfacial layer > between electrolyte and metal in an electrolytic cell. Yes, that was where I was going with the "similarity". The gradient is massive indeed. > But this is hot fusion, or at least stripping. I think both. > No wonder the yield is so tiny. However, perhaps several times more stripping neutrons may be present than the MeV variety? They are only set-up to look for the high energy variety. Stripping neutrons can be subthermal and only must be discovered by delayed ~15 minute decay. > As you say, this has nothing to do with fusion in > the solid state, probably any pyroelectric crystal > could be made to do this, although the material > chosen has certain physical properties which make it > very amenable to this kind of work. Yes. High induced surface layer polarity seems to be the key, doesn't it? > >Anyway, the difference between this is and other small neutron accelerators is that *heat* is substituted for*high voltage*... and the results are the same. > I don't understand you here. The heat is just to get > the charge separating on the crystal surface. Yes, of course, and that gives the high potential gradient. If there is 1 volt on the surface at one angstrom, and the effective acceleration zone from the piezo vibration is 10 microns then you can have 100,000 volts applied, assuming a perfect quasi-series-circuit, no? > Mechanical shock would work too, although heating is much > easier to control and dimensional stability is maintained. Actually, the best route might be a mechanical ultrasonic vibrator, even a "tweeter" because the the acceleration zone "throw" length could be much longer than a piezo. You would only need to cover the tweeter surface with a postive **electret** for the same effect, no? Then you could do the acceleration at cryogenic temps and have the possible advantage of better coupling due to lower kinetics with the D. If you could provide the acceleration gradient to a D2+ molecule, rather than requiring a true D atom, your beam density could increase enormously, maybe. That would be worth trying... Which brings to mind an old story about Juan Peron, do you know the one ;-) ... just wanted to add a little historical icing for this story, which is beginning to sound rather tasty and dramatic, for a number of reasons Jones
RE: Times: Tabletop Fusion
Hi Jones, Here's some fresh links for ya. http://www.aip.org/pnu/2005/split/729-1.html http://technocrat.net/article.pl?sid=05/04/27/2025254&mode=thread And your link, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/28/science/28fusion.html? The voltages quoted seem lower than what we were looking at yesterday, 120KV is something you could do in the dentists office. I assume the gradient is what matters more; just as one has a massive gradient at the interfacial layer between electrolyte and metal in an electrolytic cell. But this is hot fusion, or at least stripping. No wonder the yield is so tiny. The first link gives the most detail I have seen short of the Nature article. The girl is making noises about hitting the NYU library today, perhaps I'll impose upon her to copy the article and I'll post a bit more later. The site I posted yesterday is still 'dotted, tell your minions to lay off huh Leaky (grin). But try this later for more info. http://rodan.physics.ucla.edu/pyrofusion/ As you say, this has nothing to do with fusion in the solid state, probably any pyroelectric crystal could be made to do this, although the material choosen has certain physical properties which make it very amenable to this kind of work. Jones writes: >Anyway, the difference between this is and other small >neutron accelerators is that *heat* is substituted for >*high voltage*... and the results are the same. I don't understand you here. The heat is just to get the charge separating on the cystal surface. Mechanical shock would work too, although heating is much easier to control and dimensional stability is maintained. K. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2005 10:55 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Times: Tabletop Fusion There is an excellent story in the NY Times (Kenneth Chang) today on the UCLA device, which, although developed in the acoustics lab by sonofusion expert Putterman, is basically just a small deuterium accelerator and ICF target. side note: ...is "putterman" a great name for a sonofusion guy or what? Anyway, the difference between this is and other small neutron accelerators is that *heat* is substituted for *high voltage*... and the results are the same. That is it... in a nutshell. There is a piezo transducer, just as in sonofusion, but it is pretty clear that alternate piezos could work just as well and that the lithium content of the transducer is not active. Electric fields are interesting phenomena when we get below nano-dimensions. When all is said and done, it is becoming mor and more conceivable to me and others that the very same modality here will be found to have been active in some forms of prior LENR work (beyond sonofusion), especially those experiments where neutrons are seen along with that unusual branching ratio where 3He is gound but no 3H. But Putterman is a notorious headline-grabber and possible plagiarist (some have used far harsher descriptors for him) so I doubt he will give proper attribution to any of them. Very intriguing, but of course, even Chang is very careful not to mention "cold fusion" by name (that probably was put into his interview agreement by UCLA/Putterman) Jones
Times: Tabletop Fusion
There is an excellent story in the NY Times (Kenneth Chang) today on the UCLA device, which, although developed in the acoustics lab by sonofusion expert Putterman, is basically just a small deuterium accelerator and ICF target. side note: ...is "putterman" a great name for a sonofusion guy or what? Anyway, the difference between this is and other small neutron accelerators is that *heat* is substituted for *high voltage*... and the results are the same. That is it... in a nutshell. There is a piezo transducer, just as in sonofusion, but it is pretty clear that alternate piezos could work just as well and that the lithium content of the transducer is not active. Electric fields are interesting phenomena when we get below nano-dimensions. When all is said and done, it is becoming mor and more conceivable to me and others that the very same modality here will be found to have been active in some forms of prior LENR work (beyond sonofusion), especially those experiments where neutrons are seen along with that unusual branching ratio where 3He is gound but no 3H. But Putterman is a notorious headline-grabber and possible plagiarist (some have used far harsher descriptors for him) so I doubt he will give proper attribution to any of them. Very intriguing, but of course, even Chang is very careful not to mention "cold fusion" by name (that probably was put into his interview agreement by UCLA/Putterman) Jones
Re: OT: Leaking Pen asked and answered
leaking pen wrote: i will say this once again, and then i will ignore you. this is a SCIENCE discussion list. you wish a religous debate, join a list designed for religious debate. Amen. - Jed
Re: Greg's msg from 1997: continuous closed-loop SMOT
William Beaty wrote: Vortex-L archives have your original message announcing successful closed-loop operation. And successful rotating-wheel-device operation! See below. That is what I love about computers. They never forget! If we ever win the CF wars, all of the stupid comments by harsh opposition skeptics will be preserved for posterity. - Jed
Re: OT: Leaking Pen asked and answered
once again, you have FAILED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. a statement that is patently false has been made, and no explanation has been given. i toe no party line, and will not argue the shortcomings of many of darwins thoughts. i simply do not like seeing obvious falsehoods about ANYONES work. as for those who supposedly said that its darwin or god, i wonder that they had never heard of lemark, or any of the hundreds of others doing theoretical work into inheritance at the time. it was a virtual cottage industry. i will say this once again, and then i will ignore you. this is a SCIENCE discussion list. you wish a religous debate, join a list designed for religious debate. i can give you a list of those im a part of. youd find my religous beliefs not that far different from yours. but do not dare to presume that you can use religion as ground to attack science, or scientists, or to completely dodge questions by simply attacking the questioner based on your beliefs, and not based on facts. On 4/28/05, thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >please, dont refer to my "teachers". i based my statements off my own > >reading of darwins work. only way to interpret or critique someones > >work is to actually read it yourself. in addition, you assume much, > >that i agree with all darwins theories, that i dont speak other > >languages, the form of my education, ect. dont assume, youve made > >enough of an ass out of yourself already. > > > > Richard and I are unwilling to let your misguided ideas go > unchallenged, Leaking. I realize that you don't see it now, but we're > doing you a favor. I call it the education of Leaking. > > As for your education, you said that you'd been to college. You've > picked up the intellectual establishment's Party Line somewhere. > However, you clearly didn't gain an appreciation for the necessity of > capitalization in freshman English. > > As for Charles Darwin. A program aired last evening on Trinity > Broadcasting System, I assume that you missed it. They quoted a > scientist who lived in the late 19 century. He said that, "we believe > Darwin's hypothesis not because it looks tenable, but because the > alternative is a creator, which is unacceptable." If you read > Parksie's column in last week's What's New, you will notice his > attack on Intelligent Design. He points out that the press ignored > the debate that the I D advocates staged, why am I not surprised? > Parksie said it himself."if you believe in an entity (G-d) who > manipulates DNA, you are terminally ignorant." Hum, well we can't > both be right. The program also pointed out that Darwin believed > white people to be superior to everyone else, and man to be > intellectual superior to women. Wow, the feminist intelligencia would > have a hissy fit over both of those ideas. > > -- "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write" Voltaire
Sing the Sun Electric
Not everyone believes fusion powers the sun: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050427sun.htm "More than 60 years ago, Dr. Charles E. R. Bruce, of the Electrical Research Association in England, offered a new perspective on the Sun. An electrical researcher, astronomer, and expert on the effects of lightning, Bruce proposed in 1944 that the Suns "photosphere has the appearance, the temperature and the spectrum of an electric arc; it has arc characteristics because it is an electric arc, or a large number of arcs in parallel." This discharge characteristic, he claimed, "accounts for the observed granulation of the solar surface." Bruces model, however, was based on a conventional understanding of atmospheric lightning, allowing him to envision the electric Sun without reference to external electric fields."
Company to Build Space Elevator
http://cbs2.com/water/watercooler_story_116173449.html Apr 26, 2005 2:13 pm US/Pacific BREMERTON, WA (AP) A company in Washington State wants to send an elevator into space. The LiftPort company says it will open a plant this summer in Millville, New Jersey, to start producing nanotube fibers, which are 60-times stronger than steel.
Re: Greg's msg from 1997: continuous closed-loop SMOT
William Beaty wrote: Vortex-L archives have your original message announcing successful closed-loop operation. And successful rotating-wheel-device operation! See below. To all: while reading this, keep in mind that it all happened eight years ago and we've yet to see evidence that his devices ever existed. Keep asking yourself whether it's some well-crafted lies or not. Then figure out ways to find out for sure. Thank you, Bill. Keep in mind that this is straightforward perpetual motion of the first kind; it violates the first law of thermodynanics as well as either (a) the laws of mechanics or (b) the laws of electrodynamics, and it does so at a very simple, fundamental level. Perpetual motion using static magnets. If it were real it would be !!_REVOLUTIONARY_!! and if the inventor has any knowledge of simple physics and/or physical chemistry (which is based on thermo) he must realize that.
Greg's 3-ramp SMOT loop runs continuously!
Not Greg, but an imposter? Or more likely, you are actually Greg Watson, but you lied on vortex-L years ago about closing the loop on SMOT, and now you don't remember the number of seconds/hours/days that you told us the device ran back then. > However when I finish the single > ramp return device maybe I'll put it on a web cam. > Then you can count the loops yourself ;-) I'd bet money that this won't happen... except my personal rule is to never give money to O/U claimants under any circumstances. See http://amasci.com/freenrg/fnrg.html You claimed success in 1997, with videotape and close friends as eyewitnesses. No evidence was ever posted. Excuses or no, in the free energy biz that's always a big warning sign that something funny is going on. On internet, anyone can *claim* anything. And the alt-science field is full of people who freely lie for any number of reasons. Are you one of these? I strongly suspect that you are. I've been waiting for some sign that you're an honest person, but I've never seen any, ever. I've only seen your messages on internet, and messages cannot be trusted 100%. Where free energy claims are involved, I trust messages on internet 0%, and I strongly suggest that everyone else here does the same. Assume that hoaxes are common. Ask tough questions that expose any possible dishonest shennanigans. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-789-0775unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Greg's msg from 1997: continuous closed-loop SMOT
Vortex-L archives have your original message announcing successful closed-loop operation. And successful rotating-wheel-device operation! See below. To all: while reading this, keep in mind that it all happened eight years ago and we've yet to see evidence that his devices ever existed. Keep asking yourself whether it's some well-crafted lies or not. Then figure out ways to find out for sure. ((( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur sci, hobby proj, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-789-0775unusual phenom, tesla, weird sci Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 10:51:27 +0930 From: Greg Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Simple Ou Device Offline Hi All, Sorry to say, but my patent attorney has pulled the plug. By the way, I closed the loop late last night! It is sort of ramp based. Not much power yet. It has been running (self powered) for 12 hours now. Must close now. I will post again as soon as posible. To all thouse of you who have built ramps, all I can say is get three linked ramps working and then study the second (middle) ramp. Think outside the square. -- Best RegardsGreg Watson Consulting[EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Watson Adelaide, S. Australia61 8 8270 2737 Home/Office/Fax Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 08:15:26 +0930 From: Greg Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Simple Rotary Ou Device Hi All, Just a short note to try to answer those questions I can. 1) There is NO outside power source. 2) The device contains only ceramic magnet and ferromagnetic materials (some balsa, a few bearings and some plactic "U" channel as well). 3) The device produces rotary torque. Can be stopped with very little pressure from two fingers on a steel 4mm shaft. 4) The device has been moved to the middle of my lounge and my back garden. It still works. 5) The device will not auto start. However the energy necessary to start is only that required to overcome friction. 6) I don't think the device is worthy of a Nobel or my picture on Business Week. I know of several other devices (Finstrud, Gary, Kawai,Bob Shannon's Barkenhausen Effect Battery and many US patents) which show magnetic devices can do work. For some strange reason, we seem to "Not want to believe" or maybe just want to believe in our own area of research as the "One true path". 7) I have posted enough details and ideas for those of you who REALLY want to duplicate the device to do so. Read my postings. 8) Much work still remains to be able to light a 1 watt bulb. When I can do that, I will make available through Stephan's and Bill's OU web sites a Mpeg of the device working. If I can't light a bulb, it will still make a nice toy and maybe a starting place for someone else. 9) The magnets don't appear to be getting weaker or colder, but then I am not generating much power yet. 10) I still call the effect DNMEC (Direct Nuclear Magnetic Energy Conversion). Like my flux gate DNMEC effect, both these effects revolve around ferromagnetic and magnet interactions. I believe the Kawai motor is another variation of the DNMEC effect (like the Rod & Coil we discussed earlier). Come on guys (and gals), start thinking outside of the square. There is always more than one way to crack eggs. Stop talking .. BUILD SOMETHING! -- Best RegardsGreg Watson Consulting[EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Watson Adelaide, S. Australia61 8 8270 2737 Home/Office/Fax (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-789-0775unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Is "Prometheus Effect" actually Greg Watson?
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005, Prometheus Effect wrote: > > > I can only report on what I achieved and from memory > > it was not stable. So then, stable or not, what was *your* record for number of closed-loop roll-arounds? > Sorry but I don't have my original notes so I can't > give you more info. Hmmm. Suspicions confirmed. This is like saying "I won the national lottery in 1997, but I lost my notes, so I can't tell you the dollar amount." Rght. Screw the notes. You claimed to have had the thing running HOW LONG DID IT RUN? You built it and were looking right at it. The actual inventor would certainly know, with no notes needed. Perhaps "Prometheus Effect" is not Greg Watson at all. It's trivally easy for an imposter to create a Yahoo Group. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-789-0775unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: SMOT closed-loop roll arounds? (2nd msg)
--- Bob Fickle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Why not just dispense with the ramps altogether, and instead mount the"ball" on the rim of a bicycle-size wheel- using the smoothest bearingsyou can find, and very lightweight construction? That way the "return" is free, with less friction than you've got now; just position themagnets along the rim's path, and we could settle this close-the-loop question in short order. Hi Bob, The Prometheus Effect involves gravity and requires a exit at 90deg to the main inline field. I wish it was as easy as your idea, Greg Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com
Re: OT: Leaking Pen asked and answered
please, dont refer to my "teachers". i based my statements off my own reading of darwins work. only way to interpret or critique someones work is to actually read it yourself. in addition, you assume much, that i agree with all darwins theories, that i dont speak other languages, the form of my education, ect. dont assume, youve made enough of an ass out of yourself already. Richard and I are unwilling to let your misguided ideas go unchallenged, Leaking. I realize that you don't see it now, but we're doing you a favor. I call it the education of Leaking. As for your education, you said that you'd been to college. You've picked up the intellectual establishment's Party Line somewhere. However, you clearly didn't gain an appreciation for the necessity of capitalization in freshman English. As for Charles Darwin. A program aired last evening on Trinity Broadcasting System, I assume that you missed it. They quoted a scientist who lived in the late 19 century. He said that, "we believe Darwin's hypothesis not because it looks tenable, but because the alternative is a creator, which is unacceptable." If you read Parksie's column in last week's What's New, you will notice his attack on Intelligent Design. He points out that the press ignored the debate that the I D advocates staged, why am I not surprised? Parksie said it himself."if you believe in an entity (G-d) who manipulates DNA, you are terminally ignorant." Hum, well we can't both be right. The program also pointed out that Darwin believed white people to be superior to everyone else, and man to be intellectual superior to women. Wow, the feminist intelligencia would have a hissy fit over both of those ideas.
