Re: More MAHG BLP
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 27 May 2005 12:52:06 -0400: Hi, [snip] which lost energy while we were gaining it. Violating the second law would actually be more serious, I think; it's not clear how you'd fix thermodynamics to deal with a second law violation. [snip] Any electrical diode will violate the second law. Take a source of electrical noise that derives it's energy from thermal energy of the environment. Send the current through a couple of transformers that increase the voltage to about 10 V. Put a diode and capacitor in the output of the last transformer, and you have a (very small) source of DC current at about 10 V. The noise source will cool it's environment till it reaches absolute zero. The electrical noise will be random in nature, but the diode creates order out of chaos by converting the complex AC into DC. Actually all of this may already exist in simplified form in a solar cell. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread.
Re: More MAHG BLP
If true, then it's free energy (though somewhat hard to scale). (But it sounds a lot like Maxwell's daemon electrified, and figuring out why Maxwell's daemon doesn't work always seems to involve arguments I can't quite follow with proofs that don't fit in the margin...) Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Fri, 27 May 2005 12:52:06 -0400: Hi, [snip] which lost energy while we were gaining it. Violating the second law would actually be more serious, I think; it's not clear how you'd fix thermodynamics to deal with a second law violation. [snip] Any electrical diode will violate the second law. Take a source of electrical noise that derives it's energy from thermal energy of the environment. Can you give an example of such a source? I immediately thought of shot noise from a resistor, but then realized a resistor does its thing when you've already got a current flowing through it. IOW its behavior is more like a noisy resistor than a noisy voltage source (not too surprising, I guess!). So rectifying shot noise isn't likely to get you free energy. Is there an example of a noise source with which this actually can be made to work? Send the current through a couple of transformers that increase the voltage to about 10 V. Put a diode and capacitor in the output of the last transformer, and you have a (very small) source of DC current at about 10 V. The noise source will cool it's environment till it reaches absolute zero. The electrical noise will be random in nature, but the diode creates order out of chaos by converting the complex AC into DC. Actually all of this may already exist in simplified form in a solar cell. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread.
[OT] Happy Solstice
More information than you might want on the solstice: http://tinyurl.com/adkva -Gnostic Neo-pagan
1/f noise: was More MAHG BLP
- Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence and Robin van Spaandonk Is there an example of a noise source with which this actually can be made to work? Send the current through a couple of transformers that increase the voltage to about 10 V. Put a diode and capacitor in the output of the last transformer, and you have a (very small) source of DC current at about 10 V. The noise source will cool it's environment till it reaches absolute zero. The electrical noise will be random in nature, but the diode creates order out of chaos by converting the complex AC into DC. Yes - But... this 1/f noise is not robust enough to make-up for the transformer losses, normally - should you want to demonstrate an available form of free energy (really heat and natural EM radiation) There is the prospect that 1/f noise can be captured most effectively with a fractal antenna... which can be thought of as a form of diode. Actually the form which is etched on these is roughly triangular - somewhat like the diode electrical symbol. A few folks will even tell you correctly that a tiny amount of free-energy is available by rectifying the output of a fractal antenna, or other kinds of efficient antennae like the helical torus (CTHA), or Avramenko's plug. Yes, I know. Most of this energy could be 'free' but still originate primarily from your local broadcasting tower or from ambient heat ... but nevertheless, it would be interesting (to perpmos at least) to see if it is enough to keep a spinning top in motion for a time-frame of years. Here is a suggestion from an old post that I made a while back, using 1/f and the spinning top toy, but never got around to trying it. The LEVITRON (tm) http://www.levitron.com/ has been argued to be a stolen invention, so buying it from the turkeys who mis-appropriated it is a problem, but nevertheless we know that when the top spins in the range from about 20 to 35 revolutions per second (rps) it is stable - but unstable above 40 rps and below 18 rps. After a few minutes of spinning it always reaches the lower stability limit due to air friction and falls. The spin lifetime of the can be extended to about 30 minutes by placing it in a vacuum. There is a powered version that requires a battery and will spin a very long time even with no vacuum. But there is a way that almost perpetual motion could be obtained without the battery (would that make you a quasi-perp-mo ?) that is, if any tiny amount of free energy could be rectified from 1/f noise, ZPE or whatever. This noise might be somehow increased in the vicinity of the spin itself. The head of Caltech's Physics Dept. has an interesting site: http://www.its.caltech.edu/~atomic/display/displaycase.htm where he discusses his efforts to keep a top spinning using a battery. They achieved almost a year and had it not been for earthquakes and so on, it could have been longer. Go down to the item called: The Perpetual Top and then below that is he shows the powered version of the Levitron. I don't know why he didn't even consider replacing the 9 v. battery with caps and an antenna - for effect - at least, even if the EM energy is coming from broadcast waves instead of ZPE. Maybe the answer is related to why he is a prof at Caltech, or maybe its because he has too much education and too little inventiveness (and/or exposure to vortex ;-). Side note: Most technological progress - on an international scale - does come slowly from incremental advancement of the status quo by organized teams of specialists, and in my experience, most professors are very good at facilitating that slow process - but conversely, most are not worth much for riskier adventuring and finding the breakthrough. Less well-educated inventors should be thankful for that - as it gives them a window for the occasional big advance, unlikely as it might be...and the big advance can start with an accident (Goodyear and Curie), or by wiring something up incorrectly (profs seldom do that). OK. Enough philosophizing. To paraphrase and incorporate the 1/f capture idea into the info from the Cal Tech site: The goal of the PM spin top (PM = either permanent magnet or perpetual motion, depending on you boldness) is to make a device that will spin for many years with no battery, only a tiny amount of extra energy which could be supplied from 1/f or ZPE, assuming that some of it can be rectified. Perpetual motion may be forbidden by someone's so-called law and by our patent office, but our solar system and every atom in our body indicates that things can spin for many billions of years without loosing much, and that should be adequate encouragement for present needs. The spinning top contains embedded in it a small permanent magnet, oriented perpendicular to the spin axis and balanced with a washer near the lower end. The base contains a levitating magnet, a bifilar coil around the levitating
Re: correction/Sunshine-Propelled Craft Is Set to Sail in Space
Terry Blanton wrote: From: Harry Veeder In reality the wavelength (and consequently momentum) of the reflected photon is slightly less than the wavelength ( momentum ) of the incoming photon. That should say slightly longer instead of slightly less! But, but, but, that means the sail should be black not reflective, right? If it is reflective you get more bang for the buck. Harry
Re: Big CF breakthrough reported
John Coviello wrote: iESiusa definitely deserves a field trip by cold fusion advocates to see if they seem legit. I have been in communication with them, and I would go, but they want visitors to sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA), and that is something I will not do. As I said yesterday, for me that would take away the whole point of the trip, which is to share information. If I were an investor I might consider it. iESi will have no credibility until they independently replicated and the replication is published. I gather they do not care about credibility. On the contrary, their web site seems designed to make them look like frauds. They want to keep a lid on the discovery even though it has been patented. They say they have improved it since the patent was issued. Ludwik Kowalski has written some highly skeptical reviews of the research, starting with this one: http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/cf/216koldamasov.html - Jed
Re: Golka video: Ball Lightning in lab. WHAT?!!!!!
At 09:05 pm 17/06/2005 -0700, Grimer wrote:
William Beaty wrote:
snip
I suspect that we're looking at something unexplained.
If I'm right, then people have been staring right at Ball Lightning for
decades, while at the same time fooling ourselves with wrong explanations
which prove that welding-spatter is something mundane.
I believe you are right because it is one more
example of a phenomena which occurs on several
different scales.
It seems to me that the above, ball lightning,
Buckminster Fullerenes, Shoulders clusters,
and last, but by no means least, Paul Rowe's
hydrogen are all essentially the same systemic
phenomena at different scales. In short, they
are the result of intense hierarchical sets of
vortices set up by intense electrical discharge
which involves (d^n)L/dt^n of very high orders.
On the subject of the ultimate collapse of
electron clusters to hydrogen it occurs to
me that hydrogen might be manufactured in
normal lightning strikes and that some of
the explosive force of those strikes could
be the result of a hydrogen-oxygen explosion.
If this were the case I imagine that there
would be some characteristic radiation or
other evidence. Does anyone know what this
would be?
Following up on the last paragraph I thought
I would go surfing on the world wide waves
to see if I could find any evidence of any
peculiar signal from lightning which might
indicate the production of hydrogen from
materon/epo polymers. To my surprise and
no little satisfaction I found the following.
==
http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/tornado/
fusion/Ball_lightning_and_the_charge_
sheath_vortex.html
Terrestrial gamma-ray flashes (or TGFs)
are short blasts of gamma-ray energy
associated with thunderstorms. They only
last a few milliseconds - about as long
as the sound from a snap of the fingers
- and can only be detected by satellites
orbiting the Earth. NASA scientists
inadvertently discovered TGFs while they
were monitoring bursts of gamma-ray
energy coming from the depths of space.
These gamma rays may be being produced
by fusion events within ball lightning.
One test for fusion in ball lightning
would be to test the point where ball
lightning ended for C14 levels. This
C14 may be enhanced by a few neutrons
produced by the fusion being absorbed
by nitrogen to produce C14.
One experiment demonstrates that the
release of energy from fusion in ball
lightning can be much more violent.
In WW2, many submarines ran with electrical
power from a bank of batteries, and if the
connections were incorrectly switched,
ball lightning would occasionally be
produced.
Professor James Tuck had access to a
submarine battery redundant from another
experiment at Los Alamos. After many
attempts to create a ball lightning discharge
which failed- he enclosed the switchgear
in a small cellophane box and added a low
concentration of methane to it. When the
switch was turned it produced a sheet of
flame, a thundering roar, and removed the
roof from the building. The film of the
event showed a ball of light about 10cm
in diameter.
Unfortunately that was the last experiment
in the series as the building was due to be
removed for new developments.
It takes a room sized air methane mixture
of just the right concentration to produce
a gas-air explosion. These were extremely
experienced and competent scientists
introducing a very small concentration of
methane into a small container. Neither
the container of methane, nor the electrical
discharge from the battery was capable of
releasing the energy that was observed and
recorded.
The only known source of energy that could
have created this energy release would be
fusion between the atomic nuclei present
in the methane and air within a fusion
vortex inside the plasma ball. Exactly
the same mechanism as I have proposed for
ball lightning.
==
One could have hardly wished for a better
signal of the generation of hydrogen and
possibly its subsequent fusion than
Terrestrial gamma-ray flashes (or TGFs), eh! 8-)
If fusion is taking place within the
lightning strike then it is possible
that it is being mediated by hydrogen/
deuterium generated by the strike.
Professor Tuck's rather exciting
submarine battery explosion {shades
of PF's palladium cube explosion)
suggests that if fusion is taking
place then it is the hydrogen part
of the methane which is involved.
It is interesting that,
The film of the event showed a ball
of light about 10cm in diameter.
...is objective photographic evidence
akin to that described by William.
What I can't understand is why no
one has ever tried to reproduce
either of these two experiments
since there is nothing so convincing
to the layman as a nice big bang. 8-)
Cheers
Frank Grimer
Re: Golka video: Ball Lightning in lab. WHAT?!!!!!
kinda like a bose einstein condensate, but between a different set of forms, and on a larger scale? havent seen the video, will download at home, but for those that would know, is an arc welder ac or dc? ditto the devices hes using to generate the balls. On 6/17/05, William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On that hot-streamer.com/mike2004 archive, Mike V's mpeg of Ball Lightning interviews is 180 Megs and takes ~hour to download (at 30Kb per sec!) I clipped one interesting segment out. Take a look at: 1cm glowing spheres: Golka shorts a battery bank (30 Meg video file) http://www.eskimo.com/~bilb/GolkaBL.wmv Yes! It contains one of my hot-button topics: WELDING SPATTER ACTS WEIRD. If you've ever watched arc-welders, you'll note that the metal spatters appear to be glowing spheres perhaps 1cm in diameter, but then they shrink enormously as they cool, turning into tiny balls of metal. I've been wondering about this since I was eight years old watching welders at a commercial garage. I've seen the problem mentioned in books, and they explain it as a visual illusion, a radiating retina effect where intensely bright objects tend to look larger than reality, because the bright light on your retina travels sideways through the retina. Therefore a pinhead-sized metal fragment would seem to be the size of a grape, since the fragment was incandescently bright. Yet I was always confused about this, since the welding spatters *don't* look that bright, yet still appear to be fairly large spheres. And they seem to have a distinct surface. And they appear to clearly shrink as they cool. Finally here's the same phenomenon captured on video. Doesn't look like an illusion now. I bet the illusion explanation is wrong. But Golka claims that there's a salt-grain-sized metal fragment in the center of those 5mm glowing spheres rolling across the water. Really? They have a solid core? I'm suspicious! What if Golka bases his claim NOT on evidence (such as shadowgraphs of dark cores in the center of those spheres.) What if instead he ASSUMES that the metal grains were in the spheres. Maybe they're not. What if the glowing sphere *is* the metal fragment? What if our eyes aren't fooling us, and the glowing balls really do shrink down and turn into solid metal grains? What if those glowing balls are something terribly weird; matter in a quantum state half way between plasma and metal: metal with its electron-sea pumped to stunningly high energy, not a metal at all but an extremely dense plasma of electrons bound to positive ions? If those balls are as Golka says: metal vapor surrounding a tiny liquid metal droplet ..why would metal vapor take a spherical shape with a distinct surface, why wouldn't it just drift away like any flame would? The explanation doesn't make sense, and I suspect that it's wrong, just as the retinal illusion explanation was wrong. I suspect that we're looking at something unexplained.f If I'm right, then people have been staring right at Ball Lightning for decades, while at the same time fooling ourselves with wrong explanations which prove that welding-spatter is something mundane. (( ( ( ( ((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 -- 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
Methane and LENR in Ball Lightning
- Original Message - From: Grimer In WW2, many submarines ran with electrical power from a bank of batteries, and if the connections were incorrectly switched, ball lightning would occasionally be produced. Professor James Tuck had access to a submarine battery redundant from another experiment at Los Alamos. After many attempts to create a ball lightning discharge -which failed- he enclosed the switchgear in a small cellophane box and added a low concentration of methane to it. When the switch was turned it produced a sheet of flame, a thundering roar, and removed the roof from the building. The film of the event showed a ball of light about 10cm in diameter. Aha... methane... there are a number of possible interpretations as to why even a little methane might make a difference, the least of which is the oxidation-reaction alone. But just as carbon is important in the steam electricity effect, this combination of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen (or deuterium) in the presence of an electrical discharge might be important as to why ball lightning can sometimes produce gamma flashes. Furthermore- in the category of things we wish we knew - the one that stands out is what was the deuterium concentration in the methane which Prof. Tuck used in the experiment? If it was only a few ppm, then that would not favor an LENR explanation, but if it were a few percent, the situation would be different. Assuming that there was an LENR event in there somewhere - which is not certain, of course. It has long been known that the terrestrial D/H ratio of ~1.5×10^-4 (or 150 ppm) is highly enriched relative to cosmic values (GEISS and REEVES, 1981) and can be even higher in certain localized regions on earth due to natural fractionating processes. The average protosolar D/H ratio is calculated to have been ~20 ppm (GEISS 1998), leading to the conclusion that Earth's oceans on average are enriched by a factor of about 8 in D/H relative to primordial cosmic values. Some places on earth, such as hot springs have enrichments further extended by substantial factors due to thermal cycling. It would be interesting to know what the highest natural concentration of deuterium ever discovered is, but this figure does not pop up on a google search. The terrestrial planets exhibit the highest D/H values: Venus shows D/H ratios of a whopping ~2 ×10^-2 probably reflecting the loss of primordial hydrogen by mass fractionating processes (YUNG and DISSLY, 1992 and references therein). This value is higher by a factor of nearly 100 over the terrestrial ocean D/H which is thought to have not been as highly affected by atmospheric loss of H over geologic time as Venus. However the situation of heat-cycle fractionating and/or neutron absorption can be a different ballgame altogether several miles down in the earth - with regard to methane over billions of years. One can suspect that if deuterium enrichment upwards to a few percent is possible in certain deposits of deep earthly methane, due perhaps to proximity to ongoing nuclear reactions involving uranium and thorium, or mass fractionating, then we are on our way to a partial explanation of how the presence of methane could strongly influence LENR in ball lightening. Otherwise, the situation is far more intractable. Jones
Water memory paper
I have a paper here on water memory: Vysotskii, V. and A.A. Kornilova. The Spatial Structure Of Water And The Problem Of Controlled Low Energy Nuclear Reactions In Water Matrix. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. This seems off-topic for LENR-CANR, so I do not plan to upload it, but if anyone would like a copy please contact me. - Jed
iESi replication may not be difficult
Chris Tinsley and some others reported strange effects from devices similar to this iESi device. Chris did not use ultra-pure water, a dielectric. He did use a ceramic to restrict the flow, which is a dielectric. Perhaps I and others here at Vortex should take this a little more seriously. Ludwik Kowalski reported that Irina Savvatimova replicated the effect. She seems like smart cookie to me -- and reliable. I asked Ludwik to contact her directly in Russian for more information. (Her address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] While her English is way better than my Russian, I think it would be easier to get the story in Russian.) I believe the people at iESi plan to keep this under wraps for another year or so. Based on the actions of other OU inventors, I predict that one year will soon stretch to two years, then five, ten, then forever, and they will take the invention with them to the grave. Since I have not signed up for anything with these people and I have no stake whatever in their business strategy (such as an investment), if there is any truth to these dramatic claims, I would just as soon blow the lid off of them as soon as possible. The hide and seek strategy will never work anyway, so what harm? - Jed
Re: Water memory paper
I would like a copy - and BTW this slant on water structure as opposed to aesthetic properties -actually does seem like it could be very on-topic (going by the title at least) - unlike the broader subject of water memory which can stray very far into art shall we say...if not into pure health-quakery scam and new-ageism. You may be thinking (negatively) of Masaru Emoto, who is best known for his controversial claim that if thoughts are directed at water before it is frozen, images of the resulting water crystals (snowflakes) will be beautiful or ugly depending upon whether the thoughts were positive or negative, etc. etc. I have his beautifully photographed The Hidden Messages in Water, which contain photos of snowflakes next to essays and words of intent but did not realize in a hasty purchase at the book store how far-out it was going to be - Hado theory, as it is called, is based on an old Japanese concept which Jed may be able to explain better but it is not that far from Halo or Kirlian, or that kind of stuff. But this particular paper does not sound like it is in that vein - is it ? Jones - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 1:04 PM Subject: Water memory paper I have a paper here on water memory: Vysotskii, V. and A.A. Kornilova. The Spatial Structure Of Water And The Problem Of Controlled Low Energy Nuclear Reactions In Water Matrix. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. This seems off-topic for LENR-CANR, so I do not plan to upload it, but if anyone would like a copy please contact me. - Jed
Re: iESi replication may not be difficult
I have a strong suspicion that the iESi technology is similar to the Dr. Tadahiko Mizuno's patent described in the recent Infinite Energy magazine (pg. 22) Hydrogen Evolution by Plasma Electrolysis in Aqueous Solution published in 2005 JJAP. iESi is claiming to have invented a cheap way of creating hydrogen using some sort of cold fusion. This sounds very similar. Kind of funny since originally cold fusion proponents thought the energy from cold fusion would come from excess heat. At the time of cold fusion's discovery the hydrogen economy was barely even a pipe dream. Fast forward to 2005, and cold fusion might be a missing link that makes the hydrogen economy a reality by providing cheap clean hydrogen. I agree that iESi's website is so cheesy that it makes you think it's a scam. When I first looked at it a year or so ago, I was certain it was a scam. It looked like one of those cheap websites that pennystock companies set up to fleece the public. I will wait and see if iESi is for real. Perhaps they are holding their cards close to their vest and deliberately playing down their technology on their website, but my life experiences tell me a scam is more likely, unfortunately. - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 4:32 PM Subject: iESi replication may not be difficult Chris Tinsley and some others reported strange effects from devices similar to this iESi device. Chris did not use ultra-pure water, a dielectric. He did use a ceramic to restrict the flow, which is a dielectric. Perhaps I and others here at Vortex should take this a little more seriously. Ludwik Kowalski reported that Irina Savvatimova replicated the effect. She seems like smart cookie to me -- and reliable. I asked Ludwik to contact her directly in Russian for more information. (Her address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] While her English is way better than my Russian, I think it would be easier to get the story in Russian.) I believe the people at iESi plan to keep this under wraps for another year or so. Based on the actions of other OU inventors, I predict that one year will soon stretch to two years, then five, ten, then forever, and they will take the invention with them to the grave. Since I have not signed up for anything with these people and I have no stake whatever in their business strategy (such as an investment), if there is any truth to these dramatic claims, I would just as soon blow the lid off of them as soon as possible. The hide and seek strategy will never work anyway, so what harm? - Jed
Re: 1/f noise: was More MAHG BLP
Jones Beene wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence and Robin van Spaandonk Is there an example of a noise source with which this actually can be made to work? Send the current through a couple of transformers that increase the voltage to about 10 V. Put a diode and capacitor in the output of the last transformer, and you have a (very small) source of DC current at about 10 V. The noise source will cool it's environment till it reaches absolute zero. The electrical noise will be random in nature, but the diode creates order out of chaos by converting the complex AC into DC. Yes - But... this 1/f noise is not robust enough to make-up for the transformer losses, normally - should you want to demonstrate an available form of free energy (really heat and natural EM radiation) There is the prospect that 1/f noise can be captured most effectively with a fractal antenna... which can be thought of as a form of diode. Actually the form which is etched on these is roughly triangular - somewhat like the diode electrical symbol. A few folks will even tell you correctly that a tiny amount of free-energy is available by rectifying the output of a fractal antenna, or other kinds of efficient antennae like the helical torus (CTHA), or Avramenko's plug. These are well known. The common name for it is a crystal set :-) Yes, I know. Most of this energy could be 'free' but still originate primarily from your local broadcasting tower or from ambient heat ... but nevertheless, it would be interesting (to perpmos at least) to see if it is enough to keep a spinning top in motion for a time-frame of years. I don't know about a spinning top, but a crystal set (or a diode radio, if you're the lazy type and don't want to fool with a cat's whisker and germanium crystal) will keep playing top 40's music and advertisments through a headset with no (apparent) external power for as long as you care to listen. There's no question at all where the bulk of the energy is coming from at the leads of an antenna these days! And the stuff you hear on the headphones is just AM -- there's lots of other stuff coming out of the antenna too that you can't hear that way, because it doesn't turn into useful sound energy using a simple diode to demodulate it. It still would produce useful electrical energy, though, if all you wanted the antenna for was power. Here is a suggestion from an old post that I made a while back, using 1/f and the spinning top toy, but never got around to trying it. The LEVITRON (tm) http://www.levitron.com/ has been argued to be a stolen invention, so buying it from the turkeys who mis-appropriated it is a problem, but nevertheless we know that when the top spins in the range from about 20 to 35 revolutions per second (rps) it is stable - but unstable above 40 rps and below 18 rps. After a few minutes of spinning it always reaches the lower stability limit due to air friction and falls. The spin lifetime of the can be extended to about 30 minutes by placing it in a vacuum. Pretty cool! And I confess I don't understand how it works. I would have thought the spin would need to induce a current in the top in order to make the levitation work, and that would produce a drag effect (a counter-torque, I suppose you'd call it) that would stop it in rather short order. But that clearly doesn't happen. There is a powered version that requires a battery and will spin a very long time even with no vacuum. One would hope so... [ ... ] The goal of the PM spin top (PM = either permanent magnet or perpetual motion, depending on you boldness) is to make a device that will spin for many years with no battery, only a tiny amount of extra energy which could be supplied from 1/f or ZPE, assuming that some of it can be rectified. Perpetual motion may be forbidden by someone's so-called law and by our patent office, but our solar system and every atom in our body indicates that things can spin for many billions of years without loosing much, and that should be adequate encouragement for present needs. Actually, conservation of angular momentum requires that the sort of perpetual motion exhibited by solar systems co must be really perpetual. Gravity waves can siphon off some of it, but after the planets fall into the sun and the sun picks up their spin, I don't think it radiates anything further since it's rotationally symmetric -- so it just keeps spinning.
Re: Methane and LENR in Ball Lightning
Jones wrote, Grimer wrote.. Professor James Tuck had access to a submarine battery redundant from another experiment at Los Alamos. After many attempts to create a ball lightning discharge -which failed- he enclosed the switchgear in a small cellophane box and added a low concentration of methane to it. When the switch was turned it produced a sheet of flame, a thundering roar, and removed the roof from the building. The film of the event showed a ball of light about 10cm in diameter. I saw ball lightning producedduring the 1933 hurricane in LaPorte Texas. The lightning was severe and while watching from an upstairs window at around 3 am, a bolt struck across the road into a ravine. The vertical light produced seemsed to fragment into vertical segments and remain in that form for a few seconds. I watched three or more balls near the base of the vertical bolt segments " float" down toward the ground and disappear into the undergrowth in the ravine. The actual " balls" appeared to be on fire with a trailing tail at the top similar to candle flame. I recall this event must have lasted 5-10 seconds until the balls vanished. My estimate of the ball diameterwas volleyballsize based on the distance from my point of view ( about 500 feet) Our home was was located about 2500 feet from Galveston bay which opens into the gulf of Mexico. I learned at a tender age to NEVER mention what I saw because of the ridicule. Later attending a special school in the US Navy, our Lt. Commander flatly stated I was lying. It wasn't until I saw a pic of a Japanese lab experiment in the 1980's that confirmed ball lightning that most of the physics community came around to believing. I have never met another person that said they had actually witnessed this type of event. Since that time, I have considered there are many forms of whatmay bedescribed as ball lightning. Richard
Re: 1/f noise was More MAHG BLP
Stephen , you may add to the spinning top the silver dollar spin.Spinning a new silver dollar on a hard clean flat surface can be a study in itself considering the amount of energy released across the entire range of spin until it is perfectly still. Even in its final throws of decay, the coin seems to increase its " attempt" to continue to rotate. Once had a friend say he could hear music from the fillings in his teeth. Always got a laugh. We tried an experiment . He sat in another room while we had an AM radio playing popular music. He couldn't hear the radio from his location but he could tell us what melody was playing. Wasn't until years later I mentioned this to my dentist. He said keep it down.. he had patients mention the same thing and felt they were imagining things. Richard
RC's AM fillings.
Hi Richard, You write: Once had a friend say he could hear music from the fillings in his teeth. Always got a laugh. We tried an experiment . He sat in another room while we had an AM radio playing popular music. He couldn't hear the radio from his location but he could tell us what melody was playing. Indeed. It is a little know fact that bone is a semiconductor, it is also piezoelectric which is why electric stimulation can be _very_ effective in causing bone fractures to heal. But whenever you have a conductor ( the filling ) and a semiconductor ( the tooth ) in contact you have the makings of a diode, which will in fact demodulate the AM signals quite handily. You will note that it is specifically AM radio, and not FM, that is mentioned in connection with this phenomena. This is why. K.
Re: Water memory paper
Thank you sir. I would be grateful if you would kindly send me a copy. With regards Lew - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 4:04 AM Subject: Water memory paper I have a paper here on "water memory:"Vysotskii, V. and A.A. Kornilova. The Spatial Structure Of Water And The Problem Of Controlled Low Energy Nuclear Reactions In Water Matrix. in Eleventh International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Science. 2004. Marseille, France. This seems off-topic for LENR-CANR, so I do not plan to upload it, but if anyone would like a copy please contact me.- Jed
