The Baron posted
The Baron posted Garrison Keeler claims that the garden of Eden and the Adam and Eve of the bible occurred near California and not in the Middle East and they were not related to apes and have no ape genes in them since they were genetically engineered by star visitors. The wife that Adam had before Eve called Lilith allegedly came from the Amazon region near Mexico. Some of the bible clans then relocated to Minnesota to become the Norse tribes Keelor is a comic, who has made a good living by pretending to be a laid back guy from a small town, which just proves that he is one hell of an actor. OTOH, I don't suppose that the idea that the star visitors engineered us is any wackier than life just happened. He also posted. More on J. Searl's devices and other topics are contained in articles at The Institute for New Energy website: I'm going to criticize Pat for posting a noncritical evaluation of Searl's technology. Searl claims to have built a free energy machine, which levitates, and will cure any disease known to man. I'm prepared to take back all times I've called him a fraud and a charlatan just as soon as I see one of his machines do any one of the above. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: ISS
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Wesley Bruce's message of Thu, 03 Nov 2005 15:09:42 +1100: Hi, [snip] Firstly the ISS is the dry dock not the ship. It is actually doing quite a lot of quiet science; learning to live in space *was* the original objective. The ISS would not survive a trip to Mars. It would not survive the required acceleration, I think that if you put the modules in line, rather than in their current configuration, it wouldn't have any problem with the acceleration. However I'm more curious about how long the trip would take using a nuclear reactor and an ion engine at low acceleration as opposed to the high acceleration chemical thruster you appear to be considering. About the same. The time frame is not acceleration limited. Its limited by orbital windows. Some have proposed making a cycler using ISS modules. The minimum fuel option is a cycler. A cycler is a craft that orbits the sun in such a way that it takes a crew to Mars in three months and then swings around the sun unmanned to pick up a new crew. A second cycler going in the opposite direction would take three months to drop someone home from mars and then spend a year going around the sun. Ion engines are too slow for manned flight we want to go faster than three months for manned missions. That gives us three options. Avoiding solar flares, we have more than three months warning but less than six I believe. Some say we have more than a year but we've only looked at a years data from the new sats in close to the sun. Ion engines are OK for dead cargoes but solar sails can match ion engines and plasma sails beat them. The best sail design is at: http://www.ess.washington.edu/Space/propulsion.html 2nPa is good thrust, better than Ion and you are not burning fuel. Also you can combine robotic craft with manned craft in a way they accumulates momentum in six unmanned craft. And then bounce them off the manned crafts fields. This takes a months acceleration from the solar wind and packs it into a few minutes of field interaction. This is my reusable reaction mass drive. Not yet published. If you could run a drive at one g continously Mars is 3 to 5 _days_ away but you'd need a hell of a bumper bar. Nuclear salt water rocket 0.1 g ~ 3 -5 weeks, a good plasma drive 0.01 g ~4 to 7 weeks, The best sail 0.005 ~6 to 9 weeks. Reactionless drives rule. Too bad about newtons laws. ;-) and it would not carry enough supplys to make the round trip of three to five years. It need not be the whole ship. About 30% of its mass would not be required on a trip to Mars but can't be removed. What mass would that be, and why can't it be removed? Lab racks with power and cooling. Their not much use on mars because there systems are optimized for zero g. On mars you want your lab on the ground or better still in the rover. I'm in the Australian Mars society and the National space society NSS. We're doing the design work that Nasa keeps claiming the credit for. Excellent, then you should be able to answer all my questions! :) Dou now I'm in trouble. Space exploration would be simpler if we had the heavy lift craft the National Space Society NSS has been talking about for years and Nasa has just announced it now will slowly design and build the thing./ /That's called reinventing the wheel; given that volunteers in the NSS did a full design a decade a go. The heavy lift ship could lift the remaining ISS components in two shots. It can lift ~100 tons. We could do one lift if all the bits fitted in one bundle but they don't. *Dou!* What's the lifting capacity of the Russian's largest rocket? [snip] * An Orbiting network of data relay sats and navigation beacons. Mars Net. It's been designed awaiting funds. This means that a How many satellites are already in Mars orbit, and is there any reason they can't talk to one another, and thus be used as relay satellites? I know there is at least one, if you count the trip vessel as a second, then you need only one other small satellite to form a triangle, and that could be taken along on the trip. There's at least three and one on the way but there are incompatibilities and other problems in the current constellation. Mars Net is store and forward email, much bigger data streams and the sats can talk to each other in the same language so you can send 'live' video. Also their clocks are optimized for limited gps type navigation. You need 6 to 18 sats for a minimal navigational system, I believe. The system we have uses many more sats but we do not need to more than half a mile accuracy on mars. We don't have streets to find and buildings to bomb over there yet. crew or robot on Mars can call earth at any time from anywhere on Mars and no-one can get lost. It also means a team on Mars can teleoperate a robot anywhere on the planet in real time at any
Re: A low cost alternative to the space elevator
Mark Goldes posted MPI has been supporting How Wachspress, an inventor who holds a Patent and has done many experiments that suggest a free-flying magnetic levitator can become practical, and provide a better path to access to space. The concept of an electrically powered levitation system is very interesting. The proposed Space Elevator is neither fast or cheap. Now all we have to do is come up with a low weight electrical supply system. I just had an email exchange with Kiril Chukanov. He didn't hold out the hope of any help on the home heating system that I'd like to build however. A levitator can be designed to take off and land at ordinary airports, using the geomagnetic field as the stator of a very clever electric motor. The geomagnetic field can be used for braking, eliminating the need for heat shields. I have to admit that the proposed system would be great if it worked. One of the local TV stations just did a story on the people who live under the approach to the new runway at our airport. We anticipate that electricity for the propulsion system will be supplied by our Magnetic Power Modules. As I mentioned above Mark, I'm looking for a home heating unit. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
energy medicine and the bird flu
One of my friends just sent me this. Parksie enjoys attacking energy medicine, well take this. In the 1918-19 flu epidemic, of the people who sought out conventional medical treatment, their mortality rate was over 40 percent. Of the people who did nothing, did not seek out any treatment, their mortality rate was about 15 percent. The people who sought out homeopathic care for their flu had a mortality rate of less than 1 percent. The above statistics are from pages 103-111 in the scholarly work, The Homeopathic Treatment of Influenza, Surviving Influenza Epidemics and Pandemics Past, Present and Future with Homeopathy by Sandra Perko, PhD, CCN, copyright 1999, Benchmark Homeopathic Publications. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: O. T. The Power of Hearing
Here is a starter, Richard. A. J. Hudspeth is/was associated with the University of Texas. I've read quite a bit of his work. Hudspeth County in West Texas indicates his Texas roots. I'll stick by that 10e-21 watts per square centimeter electrical response even though the acousticthreshold forthe outer ear bottoms out at 10e-17 watts per square centimeter. Note the "telepathic" ability of a dog to foretell of an impending epileptic attack. It seems that they can sense brain wave patterns as well as chemical cues. But they don't speak English yet. Have we lost this ability through the ages of "progress"? Taos NM was pretty quiet until about 1990. :-) Fred http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/15/5/8 "Ahair bundle is an appendage measuring a few microns across that sticks up above the surface of every hair cell. It is composed of a bundle of columnar "stereocilia", which slope up against one another. The tip of each hair is connected to the next by a fine filament called a "tip link" (see figure 3). Shear flow in the cochlear fluid causes the whole bundle to deflect, with each stereocilium pivoting at its base so that the tip links get stretched. Each tip link connects directly to a tension-gated "transduction channel" in the cell membrane of the stereocilium, which admits potassium ions. So the deflection leads to a change in the ionic current that, in turn, alters the cell potential. "This very direct mechanism for converting motion into electrical signals was established by numerous researchers in the 1980s and 1990s. Jim Hudspeth, now at Rockefeller University, and David Corey of Harvard University made particularly important contributions by developing methods to manipulate frog hair bundles with microneedles and measure the transduction current."
Re: energy medicine and the bird flu
thomas malloy wrote: In the 1918-19 flu epidemic, of the people who sought out conventional medical treatment, their mortality rate was over 40 percent. Of the people who did nothing, did not seek out any treatment, their mortality rate was about 15 percent. Beware of unexamined statistics. First of all, I doubt that the mortality rate was 40% anywhere in the U.S., except in isolated Inuit villages. 40% would rival the black plague, the worst disease in European or American history. Second, people who seek out medical treatment are usually very sick. People who were only mildly ill stay home. When there is no effective cure for a disease, the seriously sick patients are likely to die even though they go to a hospital. The people who sought out homeopathic care for their flu had a mortality rate of less than 1 percent. So did most people who sought out no cure whatever, especially if they were middle-aged or black and living in the East Coast. Overall the mortality rate was 2.5%, but that included many groups that were particularly vulnerable, such as vigorous, healthy young soldiers gathered together in camps or on troopships. The 1918 strain was particularly dangerous for healthy young people, just the opposite of most influenza types. - Jed
Re: A low cost alternative to the space elevator
Mark Goldes wrote: MPI has been supporting How Wachspress, an inventor who holds a Patent and has done many experiments that suggest a free-flying magnetic levitator can become practical, and provide a better path to access to space. A levitator can be designed to take off and land at ordinary airports, using the geomagnetic field as the stator of a very clever electric motor. The geomagnetic field? 0.6 gauss at the maximum? That's preposterous. As Clarke wrote in Profiles of the Future: The Earth's magnetic field is so extremely feeble (a toy magnet is thousands of times stronger) that it is not even worth considering. From time to time one hears optimistic talk of 'magnetic propulsion' for space vehicles, but this is a project somewhat comparable to escaping from Earth via a ladder made of cobwebs. Terrestrial magnetic forces are just about as tough as gossamer. You would have to have a ship that reacted against the field with a plate of hundreds of square kilometers, and the plate would have to weigh a few kilograms. - Jed
Zone refining for Reprocessing
This is a continuation of the previous thread regarding the prospect for an advanced, small, modular, safe and affordable nuclear reactor (rail mounted). My apology for another long post as I am aware that this subject is of limited interest to most readers - and that more than a few are ingrained anti-nuclear anyway. That is understandable. We have almost "blown it" for the past forty years. It is a hybrid design which goes way beyond current thinking. It works ONLY whenALL the pieces of the puzzle are put together ina unit, as some of them individually do not look optimum.By my reckoningthe current crop of so-called "advanced designs" are deficient in too many ways to mention - andare overly influenced by the entrenched and powerful special interests of the GE, Westinghouse, the DoE "club." They are the problem, not the solution. A key detail in how one can achieve nearly complete fuel burnup, starting with only natural Uranium, is in the absolute requirement for an ongoing (partial) reprocessing system which is built into the reactor itself. This idea is not novel, but has been written-off for years, under the phony pretext of "non-proliferation" or mostlybecause partial reprocessing via the well-known technique of *Zone Refining,* (which is only "easy" technique) - thisprocess only gets rid of the lighter fission ash and not the heavier poisons. Neither the military, nor the fuel suppliers like it, and it has been therefore "marginalized" by special interests. When fission occurs, there are at least two molecules of "ash" which often are huge "neutron poisons" (high cross-section for thermal neutrons) and this inevitably dictates almost all of the subsequent design choices, and of course this usually eliminates natural Uranium as the choice fuel, despite its 10,000 to one net cost advantage (net meaning to society as a whole). If it were not for these fission poisons accumulating, then we would never need to refuel the reactor, nor to store/bury old nuclear fuel - we could just burn it all, while fuel cost would be negligible, and most of the power for the USA would be nuclear already. The kicker is "heavy water"... but that is also becomes the beauty of the overall system. (more on that in a subsequent post). This being a forum where anything to do with deuterium is of interest, then even applying it to "hot fusion" should have some backing - not to mention that the very reason why it works so well (in part) - neutron stripping - is or can be related to ongoing electrolytic research. In a later post, I am going to frame-up some basic speculation on the "next-step" in the evolution towardsa more"active" heavy water moderating core, which uses 7-lithium and other LENR techniques to enhance neutron production.. IOW what I am saying is that the early choices, in the USA,to use enriched fuel and zero reprocessing and zero burnup of accumulated wastes - these terrible but understandable choices - have nowalmost doomed to the industry. In a perfect world, we should be getting almost all of our power from nuclear. It is the most ecological choice - done correctly. It is a terrible choice, done incorrectly. We are stuck in between and falling toward the incorrect extreme. Thispast non-choice (regarding the possibility of partial reprocessing by zone refining) was due to the fact that historically,it was ofnegativeinterest to the military industrial complex. This isbecause they wanted to also segregate-out the fissile material, and also to get rid of the transuranics at the same time - which are no-good for bombs... and/oras for the companies like GE - this prohibits them form maximizing profits. Zone refining is contra-indicated for both poles of special interest, and was never pursued as actively as it should. The so-called neutron "poisons" are found on both sides of the density spectrum - and zone refining generally only allows removal of the low-density variety. Had civilian power-producers been involved from the start they would have said - "WAIT" that is what I need - get your hand off my valuable so-called "spent fuel" (only 5% is actually "spent") and give me back this very valuable resource, and let me reprocess it for further use using zone refining -after all, I don't give a rat's-ass about transuranics. We will just burn them too." This scenario never happened, and only a handful of reactor designers today even realize that if you provide an 1) unpressurized reactor (for continuous fuel removal) 2) natural U fueled-reactor 3) automatically controlled fuel removal and addition subsystem, and 4) continuous staged zone refining 5) lots of heavy water moderator that essentially you can breed far more fuel than you burn, without "fast" neutrons (although some are helpful and can be designed into the concept) and also get nearly complete burn-up... and also put your toxic nuclear waste into an outerpart of the reactor where
Re: Zone refining for Reprocessing
sorry for a number of small errors in the previous posting,like "molecules" instead of "atoms" and a few other tell-tale traits of mild dyslexia. My editor didn't show up for work this morning ;-) I am making corrections, and if anyone wants a revised version, let me know off-list, so as not to gooble-up too much band-width.
Re: Zone refining for Reprocessing
Jones, No apologies required when you keep hammering home the mechanics and the science of this energy theme. Thanks for the insight that hopefully will be a prod if for no other purpose than to focus attention on the progress being made in France and Canada. We have stumblebums in Washington that are ducking into cracks. Wasn't " Scooter" Libby the lawyer that got Mark Rich the pardon by Clinton. Talk about weird. People complain about the "looting" that happened in New Orleans after the storm but the real looting has been in Washington. No wonder that progress in energy has fled the USA.. We are now sending 1 billion dollars per day to Iraq ( Bill O'Reilly show report) and a major part of each dollar is not being accounted for. If Jones and Richard tried this stunt they would have us both serving in prison35 years for illegal competition . The mention of the word Westinghouse broughtmy thoughtsto the people that led Westinghouse down the tube. In the early 1970's , our systems shop in Houston worked very close with some of the brightest at Westinghouse. They had the reputation of having the best engineering minds in the business. Within 3 years every one of the brightest had left Westinghouse as the company started going down the tube. They had it all, the magic and the resources.. but... squandered it all away with " get rich quick" schemes and discarding science while focusing on the stock price. They were going to corner the world market for uranium ore and wound up on the trash heap of missed opportunities. Richard
Re: Deriving Power from Atmospheric Pressure Differences
In a message dated 10/27/2005 5:18:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Deriving Power from Atmospheric Pressure Differences over Geographically-Spaced SitesNew method of power generation will harness the difference in atmospheric pressure between locations 100 to 200 miles apart, with reliability comparable to coal, nuclear, gas, and hydro, but at a cost substantially lower, and with no pollution. Thanks you just gave me some ideas on how JohnKeely technologies may work by using pressure differences in pressurized pipes to power the devices. Baron Von Volsung, http://www.rhfweb.com/baron, Email: http://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.htmlPresident Thomas D. Clark, Email: http://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.html, Personal Web Page: http://www.rhfweb.com/personalNew Age Production's Inc., http://www.rhfweb.com/newageStar Haven Community Services, at http://www.rhfweb.com/shRadiation Health Foundation Trust at http://www.rhfweb.com/Making a difference one person at a timeGet informed. Inform others.
OT: Tails of the Rich and Famous
Blank- Original Message - From: RC Macaulay Wasn't Scooter Libby the lawyer that got Mark Rich the pardon by Clinton. Talk about weird. ...wow, talk about weird-than-weird, not to mention strange bedfellows. I didn't realize this - but: Scotter also served as staff director for the Cox Commission, a Clinton-era Congressionally mandated study group - which promoted the idea of a future conflict with China, along the lines of Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington's wild call for a Clash of Civilizations war between the West on the one side, and the Islamic world and China on the other. But Lewis Libby's real claim to fame, prior to finally getting caught, appears to his 18-year collaboration with Russian Mafiya godfather Marc Rich. As an understudy to Washington power lawyer Leonard Garment, Libby was the personal attorney for Rich from 1985, shortly after Rich fled the United States to avoid criminal prosecution for tax evasion and trading with the enemy—for illegal oil dealings with the Khomeini regime in Iran, while they were holding American hostages. http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=Board=news_governmentNumber=294091726 Hey, Vo's - let's hear your Top ten list of Strange bedfellows I'll start things off in a non-partisan way with 10. Dubya and Conde 9. Bill and Hillary 8. Bill and Scooter 7. Michael Jackson and Elizabeth Taylor 6. Rock Hudson and Doris Day (who woulda ever guessed?) 5. Anwar al-Sadat and Menachem Begin any takers??
Re: OT:Electrostatic Hover Cars
In a message dated 11/4/2005 10:31:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking of mythic interpretations of reality have you ever read any of Terry Pratchett's Disk World series? Now, here's an individual who knows how to harness the power of myth! ...and, of course, least we forget Douglas Adams. Thanks for the references to the above authors. I will look into them. A series of books I really enjoyed was the River World Series by Philip Jose Farmer, which explained the history of Earth in a unique way by traveling along a million mile river that represented time travel through history to the end of history. You stated that you were an artist in addition to a computer programmer. Being an amateur programmer, I have been very interested in animation art, and virtual reality programming, to program virtual reality worlds that can be experienced by the viewers, which I feel will be the next trend in the entertainment industry. One of Bill Gates former employees wrote a book on game programming in which he explained the myth that long ago in unrecorded past history, the art of computer technology had been so advanced that they could literally create reality and life from computer programs and game animations that actually created the reality in which they lived. I have been focusing on myths to much as you suggest, and I should try to think more about the present and future than the past. In my case, perhaps I may have been tricked and seduced into walking into another if not many othervirtual reality timelines, where all things are possible, and what we think may come to be almost instantly. Those who have tricked me, may be encouraging me to focus more on mythology than I should, to bring the myths of long bygone daysback to life at times if not to idealize them and improve upon them, which is much like the Never Ending Story Novels where the reader of the book becomes part of the book to create the history, present and future around them as they read the book. The Sir Gewain and Green Knight myths mentions the Lost Land of Lionesse, which was part of Atlantis at one time, which also claims that some events in the past may also occur again in the future, as if the future creates the past but some pasts and futures are hidden from usunless wechoose to be part of themmuch like the Lost Land of Lioness. Since there may be many different pasts on Earth, then also there may be many different futures. We all may be in a time in history presently, were we may be choosing and fighting over which past and which future may come to be in our present and in our local region on Earth. Different regions on Earth each have different cultures, histories, pasts, and futures. Certainly those who do not prefer one past history, may deny its existence to hope to prevent its present and future. Baron Von Volsung, http://www.rhfweb.com/baron, Email: http://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.htmlPresident Thomas D. Clark, Email: http://www.rhfweb.com/emailform.html, Personal Web Page: http://www.rhfweb.com/personalNew Age Production's Inc., http://www.rhfweb.com/newageStar Haven Community Services, at http://www.rhfweb.com/shRadiation Health Foundation Trust at http://www.rhfweb.com/Making a difference one person at a timeGet informed. Inform others.
Re: A low cost alternative to the space elevator
Mark Goldes wrote: Geomagnetic propulsion is based on the use of the earth's magnetic field as a force field analogous to the stator of an electric motor. I understand that. You might compare it to a linear motor railroad. In effect, it is as through the small artificial field source expands itself into a huge magnetic balloon, because of the low density of the earth's magnetic field. Instead of using a physical plate you are making a huge virtual magnetic plate. How huge? It would have to hundreds of square kilometers, wouldn't it? How much energy does it take to make such a gigantic field? Cohering the seemingly insignificant forces that act upon every point on the surface of the balloon, yields a considerable resultant force. The forces that act on the balloon appear to be orders of magnitude stronger than those you propose to harness. Helium balloons can be very small, and I have made functional toy hot air balloons around 2 m tall, out of paper. What is the smallest magnetic field you can harness to launch a toy lifter of this design? You (or the inventor) would have a great deal more credibility if you can demonstrate the principle in a toy. - Jed
Re: A low cost alternative to the space elevator
Jed, A toy is possible and likely to be a product in about a year. This will utilize ferromagnetic material which is quite marginal when compared with Ultraconductors. Size does not appear to be a factor. Quite small motors have been used in experiments. That is what makes this so interesting a technology. Mark From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.com To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: Re: A low cost alternative to the space elevator Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 14:31:36 -0500 Mark Goldes wrote: Geomagnetic propulsion is based on the use of the earth's magnetic field as a force field analogous to the stator of an electric motor. I understand that. You might compare it to a linear motor railroad. In effect, it is as through the small artificial field source expands itself into a huge magnetic balloon, because of the low density of the earth's magnetic field. Instead of using a physical plate you are making a huge virtual magnetic plate. How huge? It would have to hundreds of square kilometers, wouldn't it? How much energy does it take to make such a gigantic field? Cohering the seemingly insignificant forces that act upon every point on the surface of the balloon, yields a considerable resultant force. The forces that act on the balloon appear to be orders of magnitude stronger than those you propose to harness. Helium balloons can be very small, and I have made functional toy hot air balloons around 2 m tall, out of paper. What is the smallest magnetic field you can harness to launch a toy lifter of this design? You (or the inventor) would have a great deal more credibility if you can demonstrate the principle in a toy. - Jed
Re: Double Positronium Molecules
Some news is good news. http://www.spacedaily.com/news/cosmology-05zc.html ""Our research also gives the first hint of the presence of double positronium molecules, each of which is made up of two electrons and two positrons,""said Allen Mills, professor of physics and leader of the research project." ""This kind of matter-antimatter pairing has never been formed or studied in the laboratory until now, and paves the way for a new field of study on its properties."" Fred
Re: O.T.: Tails of the Rich and famous
Jones wrote.. Hey, Vo's - let's hear your Top ten list of "Strange bedfellows"I'll start things off in a non-partisan way with10. Dubya and Conde9. Bill and Hillary8. Bill and Scooter7. Michael Jackson and Elizabeth Taylor6. Rock Hudson and Doris Day (who woulda ever guessed?)5. Anwar al-Sadat and Menachem Beginany takers?? I'll take a shot at # 5, In 1982, we went to New Orleans to bid a package controls systems, electrical switchgear and electronics on two huge grain silosto bebuilt in Egypt and funded by EDA. These silos were to receive the grain shipments per week into perpretuity promised Egypt as part of the deal to get Sadat to shake hands with Begin at the White House ceremony with Prez Jimmie Carter. Us being naive ole Texas country boys that though the world wuz run on the level, we and 12 other competitors entered our bids and sat in the bid opening. Shazzaam ! The low bidder, a New Orleans good ole boy , came in almost a 1/3 of what everyone else bid. As we rode down on the elevator, one bidder from Dallas remarked.. did you ever get the feeling we were looking at a completely different set of contract drawings? The Engineer was the Corps of Engineers USA but subbed the engineering to a Baton Rouge consulting engineering firm. Later I heard the rumor that the contractor was awarded numerous change orders to suppliment his contract. Where is this story leading? hmmm.. The Port of Houston has been shipping grain to Egypt at the rate ofTWO freeships a week since the 1980's... but.. that has now been increased to FOUR free ships per week. After all Egypt has the highest birthrate and largest population of the Arab middle east Muslim nations and they only want us to keep our handshake deal. Jimme Carter paid the price for that gesture later by the Iranians holding our embassy people hostage. Later Reagan brokered a deal with Egypt to keep the grain flowing if Egypt would put in agood word to Iran to play the great game. All of which led to the later Iran- Contra scandel, Oiley North et.al. Bush One took a Mad Magazine approach uttering .. who me?
FW: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday November 4, 2005
[Original Message] From: What's New [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 11/4/2005 1:02:35 PM Subject: [BOBPARKS-WHATSNEW] What's New Friday November 4, 2005 WHAT'S NEW Robert L. Park Friday, 4 Nov 05 Washington, DC 1. EVOLUTION: BUSH ASKS FOR $7B TO FIGHT EVOLVING BIRD-FLU VIRUS. This is the final week of the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board trial in a Harrisburg, PA federal court. Back in August, before the trial was underway, President Bush came down on the side of intelligent design, much to the delight of the religious- right http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN05/wn080505.html . On Tuesday, however, he announced that he would ask Congress for $7.1 billion to prepare the nation for a worldwide outbreak of flu. It's a hedge against evolution. Although a virulent strain of bird flu has killed at least 62 people in Asia, there have been no confirmed cases of human-to-human transmission. The fear is that the H5N1 virus will mutate (evolve) making that possible. Does this mean that Mr. Bush has changed his mind on evolution? 2. SUPREME QUESTION: WHAT ARE THE NOMINEE'S VIEWS ON SCIENCE? According to the news, Samuel Alito, the President's new choice for the Court, told Senators in both parties that the Court may have gone too far in separating church and state. How can they be too separate? That's particularly scary now when it seems possible that the decision in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board will be appealed to the Supreme Court, no matter how it turns out. We'll go back to questions submitted by readers next week, but in light of Alito's nomination, WN will exercise its editorial prerogative, posing its own question this week: Does the intelligent designer who designs people, also design viruses? If so, is this conflict-of-interest? 3. FUNDAMENTALISM: THE POSITION OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EVOLVES. In the summer heat, a powerful Cardinal, writing in the NY Times, flatly rejected Darwinian evolution, outraging most scientists. However, WN wrote that, the Church's position is evolving, http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN05/wn070805.html , and so it has. In an Associated Press story today, Cardinal Poupard, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said, we know the dangers of a religion that severs its links with reason and becomes prey to fundamentalism. The faithful have the obligation to listen to that which secular modern science has to offer. Amen. 4. NASA: THE ERA OF HUMAN SPACE FLIGHT ENDED 33 YEARS AGO. That's when Apollo 17 returned from the moon. Someone had better tell NASA. Thursday, Michael Griffin told the House Science Committee that the agency needs another $5B to continue operating the shuttle until 2010. It will take that long to complete the International Space Station so we can begin to dismantle it. The shuttle was the biggest technological blunder in history, but the station is closing the gap. The shuttle was supposed to make it cheaper to send things into space. It didn't. The space station was supposed to do something. I can't remember what. But we do still need the shuttle for one final repair mission to Hubble. THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND. Opinions are the author's and not necessarily shared by the University of Maryland, but they should be. --- Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.bobpark.org What's New is moving to a different listserver and our subscription process has changed. To change your subscription status please visit this link: http://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=bobparks-whatsnewA=1
Re: O.T.: Tails of the Rich and famous
RC Macaulay wrote: Bush One took a Mad Magazine approach uttering .. who me? I think you mean: What me worry? Let us quote great literature accurately. - Jed
Re: BlackLightPower Hydrinos In The News
The link to this article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,3605,1627424,00.html Notice the brief mention of Cold Fusion. - Original Message - From: John Coviello To: Vortex Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 6:27 PM Subject: BlackLightPower Hydrinos In The News Fuel's paradise? Power source that turns physics on its head· Scientist says device disproves quantum theory· Opponents claim idea is result of wrong maths Alok Jha, science correspondentFriday November 4, 2005The GuardianIt seems too good to be true: a new source of near-limitless power that costs virtually nothing, uses tiny amounts of water as its fuel and produces next to no waste. If that does not sound radical enough, how about this: the principle behind the source turns modern physics on its head.Randell Mills, a Harvard University medic who also studied electrical engineering at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, claims to have built a prototype power source that generates up to 1,000 times more heat than conventional fuel. Independent scientists claim to have verified the experiments and Dr Mills says that his company, Blacklight Power, has tens of millions of dollars in investment lined up to bring the idea to market. And he claims to be just months away from unveiling his creation.The problem is that according to the rules of quantum mechanics, the physics that governs the behaviour of atoms, the idea is theoretically impossible. "Physicists are quite conservative. It's not easy to convince them to change a theory that is accepted for 50 to 60 years. I don't think [Mills's] theory should be supported," said Jan Naudts, a theoretical physicist at the University of Antwerp.What has much of the physics world up in arms is Dr Mills's claim that he has produced a new form of hydrogen, the simplest of all the atoms, with just a single proton circled by one electron. In his "hydrino", the electron sits a little closer to the proton than normal, and the formation of the new atoms from traditional hydrogen releases huge amounts of energy.This is scientific heresy. According to quantum mechanics, electrons can only exist in an atom in strictly defined orbits, and the shortest distance allowed between the proton and electron in hydrogen is fixed. The two particles are simply not allowed to get any closer.According to Dr Mills, there can be only one explanation: quantum mechanics must be wrong. "We've done a lot of testing. We've got 50 independent validation reports, we've got 65 peer-reviewed journal articles," he said. "We ran into this theoretical resistance and there are some vested interests here. People are very strong and fervent protectors of this [quantum] theory that they use."Rick Maas, a chemist at the University of North Carolina at Asheville (UNC) who specialises in sustainable energy sources, was allowed unfettered access to Blacklight's laboratories this year. "We went in with a healthy amount of scepticism. While it would certainly be nice if this were true, in my position as head of a research institution, I really wouldn't want to make a mistake. The last thing I want is to be remembered as the person who derailed a lot of sustainable energy investment into something that wasn't real."But Prof Maas and Randy Booker, a UNC physicist, left under no doubt about Dr Mill's claims. "All of us who are not quantum physicists are looking at Dr Mills's data and we find it very compelling," said Prof Maas. "Dr Booker and I have both put our professional reputations on the line as far as that goes."Dr Mills's idea goes against almost a century of thinking. When scientists developed the theory of quantum mechanics they described a world where measuring the exact position or energy of a particle was impossible and where the laws of classical physics had no effect. The theory has been hailed as one of the 20th century's greatest achievements.But it is an achievement Dr Mills thinks is flawed. He turned back to earlier classical physics to develop a theory which, unlike quantum mechanics, allows an electron to move much closer to the proton at the heart of a hydrogen atom and, in doing so, release the substantial amounts of energy he seeks to exploit. Dr Mills's theory, known as classical quantum mechanics and published in the journal Physics Essays in 2003, has been criticised most publicly by Andreas Rathke of the European Space Agency. In a damning critique published recently in the New Journal of Physics, he argued that Dr Mills's theory was the result of mathematical mistakes.Dr Mills argues that there are plenty of flaws in Dr Rathke's critique. "His paper's riddled with mistakes. We've had other physicists contact him and say this is embarrassing to the journal and [Dr Rathke] won't respond," said Dr
A123 Systems Releases New Lithium-ion Battery
A123Systems releases new Lithium-ion battery Wednesday, November 02, 2005 10:42 PM Utilizing nanoscale electrode technology, the battery lasts 10x as long, has 5X power gain, charges 90% capacity in five minutes. First batteries will be sold to Black Decker for their DeWALT brand chordless tools.WATERTOWN, MASSACHUSETTS, USA -- A123Systems, developer of a new generation of Lithium-ion batteries, Wednesday unveiled its technology and announced that it is delivering batteries with unprecedented power, safety, and life as compared to conventional Lithium technology. A123Systems first battery is now in production and being delivered to the Black Decker Corporation (NYSE: BDK). It will be first utilized by the corporations DeWALT brand, a leading manufacturer of power tools.Advanced PerformanceA123Systems battery technology delivers up to 10X longer life, 5X power gains and dramatically faster charge time over conventional high power battery technology, as validated by independent testing at Motorola and government research labs. A123Systems batteries use proprietary nanoscale electrode technology built on research at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and exclusively licensed from MIT. A123's revolutionary technology will enable manufacturers to improve the performance and form factor of existing high-power portable devices and to transform products currently dependent on power cords and sockets into a new class of portable devices, said David Vieau, CEO and president of A123Systems. We expect that our technology will have the same impact on high-power products as the introduction of first generation Lithium-ion technology had on the development and commercialization of consumer electronics in the 1990s.A123Systems initial family of batteries is targeted at applications that require high power, high levels of safety, and longer life. These include power tools, advanced medical devices, hybrid electric vehicles, mobility products such as electric scooters, robotics, and consumer electronics. High Power. A123Systems first product packs up to five times the power density of current rechargeable, high power batteries. In addition, the battery has the ability to recharge to 90% of its capacity in five minutes. http://www.opensourceenergy.org/C17/News%20Viewer/default.aspx?ID=1041Electric cars anyone? 5X power density and 90% recharge in 5 minutes. We were just discussing this on Vortex a few months ago, a Japanese car maker who was working on a 5 minute rechargable battery. This will bring electric vehicles into the mainstream. With power densities and recharge rates like these, electric vehicles with considerable range and flexibility will bea reality in a few years.
Re: Podkletnov's Disks
thomas malloy wrote: Bruce posted; Don't call me bruce! Call me wes! Podkletnov's device could be made into a reactionless drive if we can get reliable mass production of his disks and steady high voltage power supply. I'm in corrispondance with Dr Podklenov This is very interesting. Have you observed this unidirectional force? No but much of science is based on trust. The effect has not been indepedantly replicated but the same is true for much of the atom smashing work in places like CERN. Do you have an explanation for the mechanism? Yes but I need to work with a physicist that can do the math. I was quite fascinated with the reactionless drive. a Both from a practical and theoretical standpoint. No drive can be truly reactionless! We are really talking of drives that interact electrostatically with waves or photons. These become invisible or insubstantial reaction mass. There are very few practical examples. The magnetic drive that interact with the earths magnetic fields is a fuel less drive. A solar sail is also a fuel less drive. My theory: I believe that the electrons in a Bose condensate can absorb ZPE randomly but can't emit them randomly. It must emit them all in one direction at a given time. With a sphere or other shape the result is random but in Podkletnov’s device the Bose is flat and backed up with a resisting layer. This lazes the ZPE into a beam. It is unidirectional because the Bose Ion can recoil in only one direction. The beam effects sub atomic matter through the radiation reaction effect or the stochastic electrodynamics equivalent. I need someone who can write the equations. Does anyone have DR Puthoffs email address? I only have an out of date address for him. Either that or he thinks I'm a complete nut: which is about right.
Re: ISS
Standing Bear wrote: [Big snip] Don't panic about a chinese space race. I suspect that if China really gets going it will spell the end of communism. People are dropping out of the party buy the millions. To many chinese who see the opportunities of space, are also able to see that gulags on Mars wont work well. As a citizen of a country founded as a convict settlement, Australia, I happen to know that it can work but only if the govenor is a genious. If a Mars Gulag fails that would be sad but what wonderful opportunities to the free setttlers that follow to reclaim the ruin. Frankly I think we can make a nuclear reactor that works fine in a meteor storm. If meteors are punching holes in things then the last thing the crew would be worried about is the reactor! Big bumper bars will be easy. Just stick the bulk cargo out front. So what if the bull dozers got a hole in it! I hope all of our suggestions don't eventually prove to be just academic. I just read an interview that the good people at nuclearspace.com had with some government agencies: quote from webpage-- NASA's Project Prometheus is in partnership with the Department of Energy's Office of Naval Reactors (DOE-NR) within the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to develop a space nuclear reactor for use in future robotic exploration activities. The Office of Naval Reactors (NR) is a joint Navy-DOE organization having responsibility and authority in both agencies. The Secretary of Energy assigned NR to partner with NASA in support of Project Prometheus solely as a DOE civilian project. We made an inquiry over current status in efforts to build a space reactor, nuclearspace.com (NS) contributors posed questions to the agency responsible for building a premier space nuclear reactor. DOE-NNSA/NR Public Affairs Officer, Kevin Davis declined an NS phone interview request, but in a written response to the following questions posed by NS contributors Ty Moore, Jaro Franta and Bruce Behrhorst responded; excerpt of text below.. -- there followed a long obviousely scripted 'interview'. All of the 'questions' appear to have been required to have prior submission and approval, and all the answers appear to be direct from the agencies public relations branch after being run through their general legal counsel. As such, most of the questions are ducked and evaded by the interviewee, who appears to sound like a classic broken record much of the time. The interviewee interjects 'probable lunar mission' or words to that effect into many of the questions that the agency did consent to have presented; and then gives a standard boiler plate denial of a 'lunar mission' over and over again. This is akin to the old rhetorical game of setting up a 'straw man' and knocking him down. The conclusions reached by NuclearSpace at the end were pessimistic about our prospects and our intents concerning realistic space exporation. I tend to agree with NuclearSpace in this, and wonder if the present administration only wants the programs around with minimum funding to use as photo ops and to show that it is 'doing something'. Even if it is wrong!It is evidently not now percieved in the national interest to invest seriousely in space, really. If so all our suggestions to this present administration are going to be ignored until circumstances change. Face it, present so called plans involve using some nebulous 'appolo' capsule of very small size considering what might have to be done, and chemical rockets all the way. No repair capability! If a micrometeoroid holes a tank and fuel is lost, too bad! And if a crew is lost...throw up ones hands and give up like the French in 1940.as if this is the aim all along. But then the chem ships will use a lot of petrol, happily sold to the government by the oil and oil service people now primarily contracting in Iraq and the administration high official with well known connections to that company and its corporate child there with the three letters in its name. The Russians, God bless 'em, have a better vision. The Russian President said as much last March with an appeal for nuclear propulsion. Knowing they lack funds to do it themselves, the Russians appealed then for international cooperation on a joint venture or a series of them in order to go to Mars by 2017. The Europeans appear to be listening. They are joining with them to buy the Kliper. That little ship is 'cute', and it may prove quite practical. If some of the above other technologies prove viable, it can be a platform for a real shuttle all by itself. The Chinese may be listening as well. They have sought out the Russians for some close and secret agreements in recent months, many
