Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
At 10:13 pm 21/12/2005 -0500, you wrote: From *my* POV, it's Happy ChristmaChannuKwanza And I am in and of the Spirit! The four rules of this CA are: 1) Love the cell above you 2) Love the cell below you 3) Love the cell to your right 4) Love the cell to your left I'm afraid the above illustrates one of the scientific traps that putting things down on two dimensional paper leads to, i.e. the failure to think in three dimensions. What you should have written is, 1) Love the cell above you 2) Love the cell below you 3) Love the cell to your right 4) Love the cell to your left 5) Love the cell in front of you 6) Love the cell behind you. I loved the militant agnostic bumper sticker quote, by the way. 8-) A bit like liberals who want freedom for everyone except people who disagree with them. Unfortunately the Church has been almost completely taken over by such at this point in time.
RE: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
Mike, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-modern (Don't take this badly this is not a personal attack, only observation.) I see a lot of this in the middle classes. It's a kind of trendy fashionable complacency that comes of being a cultural elite and not having to strive or work fro a living. Post-modernism is what you'll hear the chattering Islington classes around a dinner table party going on about, that feeling that it has all been done before or anything of value is done by hugely funded government co-operations. It's all anti-individual, anti-heroic, small-minded and petty that which comes of being educated beyond one's ability. Needless to say these people want the cushy, well-paid administrative type jobs but get in the way of progress. If you want to see post-modernism take a trip down an art-house cinema, or look at modern architecture or music. I don't subscribe to philosophies that say give up and that our lot in life is to suffer in ignorance. Yes there is a limit to the amount of information a brain can comprehend but like statistical mechanics we can with our limited powers find a rationale. I get annoyed when I see the elite in the society giving up. This can only set a bad example for the young or the less intelligent. Ultimately the intellectual police force of the universities must police itself. Regards, Remi. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Carrell Sent: 21 December 2005 16:28 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference The bottom line is that the overwhelming complexity of the manifest universe is arguably the result of the operation of something as simple as cellular automata, and that we have no hope of discovering the nature of that seed. Mike Carrell How's that? Prove it. Do we all give up and go home? Sounds like post-modern science. -- As I said, there is no substitiute for tackling Wolfram's book. There just isn't. The argument is advanced by the hundreds of illustarions of the operation of the cellular automata. This does not fit into any existing tidy boxes except deterministic chaos theory, which is not tidy. As for not being able to discover the seed, consider the Mandelbrot Set. The operation of the generating equation produces a mathematical object of extreme complexity. However, examining the object will not disclose the equation which generated it. The Mandelbrot Set and Wolfram's cellular automata have the common feature that the generating operations are non-linear and recursive. A seminal book on the consequences of this is Godel Escher Bach. A remarkable feature of Wolfram's thesis is that the product of the the cellular automata can be some order as found in our scientific exploration of natural phenomena. I'm not sure what the term post modern means, especially when applied to science. Certainly Wolfram's work is a new bemchmark among many other current studies of deterministic chaos and cellular automata. Mike Carrell
RE: Civil Liberties, Correa attacks Wikipedia
Stephen, I heard they want to chip us all as they do to pedigree horses and dogs. I heard that on average 300 CCTV cameras will record one's image in the UK coupled that to routine number plate scanning, mobile phone tracking. Could it be that those who want this kind of power over us employ people to write viruses or commit atrocities to scare us all in to giving up more rights? I just find it all sinister. I really want to unplug from it all, buy a plot of land and live like the Amish (without the inbreeding though)! Remi. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stephen A. Lawrence Sent: 21 December 2005 17:46 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Correa attacks Wikipedia Um ... wouldn't this make identity theft awfully easy? snip ETC.
Re: First Publicly Traded Cold Fusion Company
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Steven Krivit wrote: Does anyone know of any other publicly-traded company or subsidiary besides D2Fusion that exists which is exclusively geared toward RD or commercialization of cold fusion? http://www.d2fusion.com/ I visited the above website, AFAIK, they have yet to demonstrate any usable energy. I found another website of an Israeli startup company, very little energy, but 100% reproducable, which is good. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: weird glow from aluminum in baking soda solution
Another variation on electrospark: http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/sparkly/report.html No excess energy, but uses AC, LiOH electrolyte, 6061 alloy Al rods, and is way up in the electrospark regime at 400 V. Nice photos and description. Horace Heffner
Unlocking the Mystery of Life
Vortexians; I saw a preview of this video, Unlocking the Mystery of Life on Christian TV. Having studied enough biochemistry and cellular physiology to appreciate what they were animating, I find their argument quite convincing, although I sure that Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms will be unmoved. But, IMHO the video makes it plain that life at the molecular level is a machine and believing that random events produced it strains credulity. Given the prejudiced actions of that appeals court judge who handed the I D advocates a defeat, I feel motivated to protest, if this be theology, than so be it. http://www.arn.org/arnproducts/videos/v026.htm The Liberals (Socialists) have no respect for the freedom of speech which goes against their world view, witness what has happened (banning of politically incorrect and religions speech) were they have gotten power, the Communist countries and most universities, Dennis Prager. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: First Publicly Traded Cold Fusion Company
Does anyone know of any other publicly-traded company or subsidiary besides D2Fusion that exists which is exclusively geared toward RD or commercialization of cold fusion? http://www.d2fusion.com/ I visited the above website, AFAIK, they have yet to demonstrate any usable energy. I found another website of an Israeli startup company, very little energy, but 100% reproducable, which is good. I agree that the d2fusion.com website is short on details, but perhaps that is on purpose, why give all their secrets away. They don't do a very good job keeping their news current. The public press releases from their parent company are rarely reflected on the d2fusion.com website in a timely manner, if ever. Is the Israeli startup company Entergetics Technologies? I tried to track down their website a few months ago without success. If you could forward their website address, that would be great, I could add it to the write up I did on cold fusion commercial developments at: http://peswiki.com/index.php/PowerPedia:Cold_fusion#Ongoing_developments Solar LTD/D2Fusion (Symbol: SLRE) is currently the only way to buy stock in a company that is publicly pursuing cold fusion. The stock is now around 55 cents per share and was around $1.40 per share a few months ago. Obviously, if Solar LTD/D2Fusion actually made an announcement about a cold fusion device ready for the consumer market the stock would trade much higher. A speculative stock if there ever was one, caution is advised. But if they are serious about their intentions to market cold fusion it could take a wild ride higher at some point in the future.
Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
In which case one should append: 7) Love the cell which came before you. 8) Love the cell which comes after you. and deliberately avoid superstring theory. :-) -Original Message- From: Grimer What you should have written is, 1) Love the cell above you 2) Love the cell below you 3) Love the cell to your right 4) Love the cell to your left 5) Love the cell in front of you 6) Love the cell behind you. ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Mandelbrot Set fractal images
Check this out... Pretty cool. http://www.math.utah.edu/~alfeld/math/mandelbrot/mandelbrot.html#applet -john -Original Message- From: Mike Carrell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:28 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference As for not being able to discover the seed, consider the Mandelbrot Set. The operation of the generating equation produces a mathematical object of extreme complexity. However, examining the object will not disclose the equation which generated it. The Mandelbrot Set and Wolfram's cellular automata have the common feature that the generating operations are non-linear and recursive. A seminal book on the consequences of this is Godel Escher Bach.
Re: Unlocking the Mystery of Life
From: thomas malloy ... Setting the Mysteries of Life aside for the moment... ... You quote Dennis Prager: The Liberals (Socialists) have no respect for the freedom of speech which goes against their world view, witness what has happened (banning of politically incorrect and religions speech) were they have gotten power, the Communist countries and most universities, Dennis Prager. My spouse and I have been invited over to our neighbor's house for a Christmas eve dinner. We will meet their parents, have turkey and consume other wonderful things to eat as well. We will bring the Jewish bread, calla, as our contribution to the culinary celebration. I'll take a moment to pet their kitty and complement him on the large ground squirrel he caught the previous summer. I'll admire our neighbor's sparkling aluminum Christmas tree which I have been told is a shade of pink. Pink aluminum Christmas trees, I understand, are collector's items these days, and would fetch a pretty price on eBAY. The couple we're visiting, John and Fred, (not their real names) have lived next to us for close to five years now. When individuals like Prager finally acquire the decency to allow individuals like John and Fred the same God given rights that he assumes God has given himself is the day I'll stop considering him to be a hypocrite. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com
Re: Lautzenhiser paper uploaded
By the way, this was the paper that made John Huizenga turn green around the gills and flee, at an ICCF conference. It was a memorable moment. - Jed
Re: Atmospheric electric polarization
It was my understanding that the electric polarization has more to do with interaction with the earth's magnetic field than with gravity. You also need to take into account cosmic radiation being absorbed into the upper atmosphere. --- David Jonsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I read in vortex-l many years ago about the atmosphere on Jupiter or Saturn being electrically polarized. The author said that ions were more attracted by gravity than electrons. It is also known on earth that there is an electric field of 90-150 V/m. Is it caused by the same effect? I am basically interested in electric polarization in pressure gradients. David Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Mandelbrot Set fractal images
Careful you don't become a victim of Mandelmania like Edith Craig in Sir Clarke's The Ghost From the Grand Banks. -Original Message- From: John Steck Check this out... Pretty cool. http://www.math.utah.edu/~alfeld/math/mandelbrot/mandelbrot.html#applet ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
To further elaborate on a previous hypothesis for the appearance of significant 3H without excess heat - let's begin by suggesting the controversial proposition that any robust LENR cell is most likely operating on more than one modality - Ockham be damned - even if those modalities must interlock before success is guaranteed. For instance, it is almost inconcievable that the basic underlying reactions of LENR do not involve quantum tunneling in addition to whatever normal macro EM processes (quasi-Lawson criteria) might be involved - and this sets the field far outside the range of normal nuclear physics. If the 'hydrino' or something like it it - is real - then it is almost inconcievable that in LENR the mechanics of the hydrino (deuterino) are not somehow involved in promoting nuclear reactions, such as transmutation or actual fusion (presumably with reduced output as no gamma signature is witnessed). The appearance of tritium could be just such a hybrid - as there are two potential sources of this isotope - and these two modalities might be so intertwined that achieving higher than quantum-probability demands that both be active at the same site at the same time. First - the endothermic photofission of lithium: 1) 7Li -- 4He + 3H requiring -2.43 MeV (endotherm) of mass-energy and then there is: 2) D + D -- 3H(1.01 MeV) + 1H(3.02 MeV) which is normally a branched reaction of nearly equal probability with: 3) D + D -- 3He(0.82MeV) + n(2.45MeV) The second reaction is the source of neutrons, which are seldom seen in LENR reactions, especially with lithium electrolytes. Notice that the reation 2) produces a proton of sufficient energy to cause the photofission reaction 1) which will proceed with much higher probability then if a direct nuclear impact of the proton was needed. The can be autocatalytic in the reversed sense as well - for an arcane but proven QM reason. Given that there are no other sources for such a fast proton, then the net reaction may depend on a tandem reaction of 2) followed by 1) which in turn increases the probability of 2) in an adjoining spatial geometry. IOW there is mutual synergy. The actual photon involved in 1) which is a high energy gamma but is never witnessed externally for well-known reasons (direct exchange) comes from the Feynman exchange - the electroweak process (and his famous diagrams) as the proton passes-by on a close but non-impact interaction. That is: the close proximity of of an accelerating proton with a relatively stationary 7Li nucleus. The reaction will proceed much faster at lower temperatures, and in a confined matrix (even if it is a surface interface) since the Lithium provides a more stationary target at lower temps + partial confinement. The cross-section for photofission of lithium could in fact be as much as 10^6 times higher, based on the penetration needed for actual fusion (which is very low for H + Li). This suggestion also provides an avenue for falsifiability - as an actively cooled cell, especially a crogenic cell, should produce more tritum than a warm one. As mentioned, given that there are no other sources for such a fast proton, then the net reaction may depend on a tandem reaction of 2) followed by 1). It turns out that the required endotherm is very close to this exotherm ... so perhaps these reactions occur in tandem and with one further (gigantic) QM benefit - that being the enhancement of QM probability based on proximity considerations of like reactions(more on that later when I dig it out of some old files). Bottom line: ...isn't it a bit too coincidental that in carefully documented experiments, you can come out to nearly net neutral on the energy equation yet - still have lots of tritium? ... what happend to the excess heat ? Tiritum,by the way, is easy to find and document because of the well-known decay curve. The is almost 100% certainty that Claytors experiments are rick solid evidence for some of this. And furthermore this is all in keeping with the observation of the 'absence' of noticable excess heat when large amounts of 3H are seen. Now - is it fair to say (albeit a bit immodestly) that there is a hypothetical rationale for explaining many previously contradictory observations of LENR ? - at least in the specialized set of experiments involving lithium and significant tritum. Jones
Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
At 09:37 am 22/12/2005 -0500, you wrote: In which case one should append: 7) Love the cell which came before you. 8) Love the cell which comes after you. and deliberately avoid superstring theory. :-) Veerry good. We only need two more and Jed can come down from the mountain bearing Cold Fusion's 10 commandments. 8-)
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
I had one point of slight interest to add here. Jones Beene wrote: To further elaborate on a previous hypothesis for the appearance of significant 3H without excess heat - let's begin by suggesting the controversial proposition that any robust LENR cell is most likely operating on more than one modality - Ockham be damned - even if those modalities must interlock before success is guaranteed. For instance, it is almost inconcievable that the basic underlying reactions of LENR do not involve quantum tunneling in addition to whatever normal macro EM processes (quasi-Lawson criteria) might be involved - and this sets the field far outside the range of normal nuclear physics. If the 'hydrino' or something like it it - is real - then it is almost inconcievable that in LENR the mechanics of the hydrino (deuterino) are not somehow involved in promoting nuclear reactions, such as transmutation or actual fusion (presumably with reduced output as no gamma signature is witnessed). The appearance of tritium could be just such a hybrid - as there are two potential sources of this isotope - and these two modalities might be so intertwined that achieving higher than quantum-probability demands that both be active at the same site at the same time. First - the endothermic photofission of lithium: 1) 7Li -- 4He + 3H requiring -2.43 MeV (endotherm) of mass-energy and then there is: 2) D + D -- 3H(1.01 MeV) + 1H(3.02 MeV) This indicates that we _might_ expect 4MeV per tritium atom. In the Iyengar paper Jed uploaded recently a number of tritium measurements were done which very nicely included an estimate of the total number of tritium atoms produced in each run. The largest number they cited was about 10^16. Let's go with this for a moment. The Lautzenhiser paper, also uploaded recently, documented a successful 2 month wet cell run. Total (net) heat produced appears to have been about 50 kilojoules. Total tritium produced doesn't seem to have been computed, unfortunately. Let's suppose, arbitrarily, that the Lautzenhiser run also produced 10^16 tritium atoms. That would have been about 4e+16 MeV of energy, or about 6400 joules, unless I messed up the division. That's about 13% of the total energy generated in the run. I'm not sure it's necessary to explain away the missing heat from the tritium production, at least in this run; even if a totally conventional reaction produced the tritium it would have amounted to just a fraction of the total OU out. For whatever that's worth (which, given the fact that I got here by slobbing together data from two totally unrelated experiments, is probably not much)... which is normally a branched reaction of nearly equal probability with: 3) D + D -- 3He(0.82MeV) + n(2.45MeV) The second reaction is the source of neutrons, which are seldom seen in LENR reactions, especially with lithium electrolytes. Notice that the reation 2) produces a proton of sufficient energy to cause the photofission reaction 1) which will proceed with much higher probability then if a direct nuclear impact of the proton was needed. The can be autocatalytic in the reversed sense as well - for an arcane but proven QM reason. Given that there are no other sources for such a fast proton, then the net reaction may depend on a tandem reaction of 2) followed by 1) which in turn increases the probability of 2) in an adjoining spatial geometry. IOW there is mutual synergy. The actual photon involved in 1) which is a high energy gamma but is never witnessed externally for well-known reasons (direct exchange) comes from the Feynman exchange - the electroweak process (and his famous diagrams) as the proton passes-by on a close but non-impact interaction. That is: the close proximity of of an accelerating proton with a relatively stationary 7Li nucleus. The reaction will proceed much faster at lower temperatures, and in a confined matrix (even if it is a surface interface) since the Lithium provides a more stationary target at lower temps + partial confinement. The cross-section for photofission of lithium could in fact be as much as 10^6 times higher, based on the penetration needed for actual fusion (which is very low for H + Li). This suggestion also provides an avenue for falsifiability - as an actively cooled cell, especially a crogenic cell, should produce more tritum than a warm one. As mentioned, given that there are no other sources for such a fast proton, then the net reaction may depend on a tandem reaction of 2) followed by 1). It turns out that the required endotherm is very close to this exotherm ... so perhaps these reactions occur in tandem and with one further (gigantic) QM benefit - that being the enhancement of QM probability based on proximity considerations of like reactions(more on that later when I dig it out of some old files). Bottom line: ...isn't it a bit too coincidental that in carefully
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
Stephen, 1) 7Li -- 4He + 3H requiring -2.43 MeV (endotherm) of mass-energy and then there is: 2) D + D -- 3H(1.01 MeV) + 1H(3.02 MeV) This indicates that we _might_ expect 4MeV per tritium atom. Not really - if the two reactions are (approximately) interlocking and mutually dependent (in the sense of high probability). All but ~600 keV for the proton is lost - and then the rest divided between the two tritium's - so there is a net of ~800 keV per tritium produced - not exactly chump change but over five times less than would be expected from straight fusion of deuterium. Jones
Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
10 were written in concrete; but, Mosaic law includes over 600. Speaking of string theory, you might like this: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg18825305.800.html Lenny Susskind's theory is running up against the anthropic principle. He acknowledges that string theory likely predicts not merely 1,000,000 universes but 10^500 such vacuums. His last two statements: Without any explanation of nature's fine-tunings we will be hard pressed to answer the ID critics. One might argue that the hope that a mathematically unique solution will emerge is as faith-based as ID. of course speak of those six numbers Sir Martin Rees discussed in his book: http://www.accampbell.uklinux.net/bookreviews/r/rees-2.html Amazin' that you Brits were able to avoid genetic degeneration what living on an island and all. -Original Message- From: Grimer We only need two more and Jed can come down from the mountain bearing Cold Fusion's 10 commandments. 8-) ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
As an aside. What would be wrong with applying a high electrostatic field across a D-loaded Pd foil? This should unbalance the internal charges in the interstices enough to let the Pd charge push the deuterons over the repulsive D-D coulomb barrier. No? Then take what you can get CF-wise. Fred
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
Jones Beene wrote: Stephen, 1) 7Li -- 4He + 3H requiring -2.43 MeV (endotherm) of mass-energy and then there is: 2) D + D -- 3H(1.01 MeV) + 1H(3.02 MeV) This indicates that we _might_ expect 4MeV per tritium atom. Not really - if the two reactions are (approximately) interlocking and mutually dependent (in the sense of high probability). All but ~600 keV for the proton is lost - and then the rest divided between the two tritium's - so there is a net of ~800 keV per tritium produced - not exactly chump change but over five times less than would be expected from straight fusion of deuterium. Yes, I followed that. I was just wondering how much heat would be produced by the tritium production in the _absence_ of a balancing reaction, _and_ with the assumption that it's the conventional 2H+2H-3H+1H reaction that's producing it. Tritium never seems to appear in large quantities; perhaps, I thought, whatever reaction is causing it is just at so low a rate that its heat of production is overlooked or below the detection threshhold -- perhaps it's just dwarfed by the 2H+2H-4He reaction. (I believe this is what Ed Storms has suggested in the past.) If that's the case then there may be no need to assume a balancing reaction, which in turn depends on some rather uncertain additional assumptions about as yet undiscovered properties of neutrons in order to make it possible. One would need to look closely at experiments which showed excess heat and tritium, and which included enough data to compute total energy generated and total number of tritium atoms produced to come to any sort of conclusion. The very crude calculation I did just produced a very squishy rough ballpark number, but it suggests that perhaps this line of reasoning is not so far off. Based on other comments on this list, and particularly those by Ed Storms, I'm reasonably confident that this calculation has already been done, a number of times, and the conclusion drawn was that the heat of tritium production was indeed a small fraction of the total excess. Unfortunately I haven't been paying close enough attention to be sure of that. Jones
Re: evolution, diversity vs complexity
OrionWorks wrote: From: Harry Veeder When you look at life what do you see? 'Complexity' or 'diversity'? The science of complexity has a long history, but the science of diversity is really just beginning. We can now define, construct and measure complexity in great mathematical detail, but what of diversity? While diversity can be simulated by complexity, I do not think it is the same thing. It seems to me the debate between the intelligent designers and the Darwinians is a debate about the extent to which life is diverse or whether life is complex. Unfortunately confusion, arrogance and fear dominates the debate. Harry Indeed, much arrogance exists on this subject, and probably on both sides of the fence too. At present my brain can't wrap itself around the concept of determining if there really is that much of a difference between those two words. There probably is and I just can't perceive it. Perhaps some in this group will take some satisfaction in my confession as it would imply that I'll shut my mouth. A possible approach is to consider the number of invariants in each system. Complexity manifests a small number of invariants which means it is allied with reductionism. Diversity manifests an unlimited number of invariants. Harry
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Jones Beene wrote: Stephen, 1) 7Li -- 4He + 3H requiring -2.43 MeV (endotherm) of mass-energy and then there is: 2) D + D -- 3H(1.01 MeV) + 1H(3.02 MeV) This indicates that we _might_ expect 4MeV per tritium atom. Not really - if the two reactions are (approximately) interlocking and mutually dependent (in the sense of high probability). All but ~600 keV for the proton is lost - and then the rest divided between the two tritium's - so there is a net of ~800 keV per tritium produced - not exactly chump change but over five times less than would be expected from straight fusion of deuterium. Yes, I followed that. I was just wondering how much heat would be produced by the tritium production in the _absence_ of a balancing reaction, _and_ with the assumption that it's the conventional 2H+2H-3H+1H reaction that's producing it. Tritium never seems to appear in large quantities; perhaps, I thought, whatever reaction is causing it is just at so low a rate that its heat of production is overlooked or below the detection threshhold -- perhaps it's just dwarfed by the 2H+2H-4He reaction. (I believe this is what Ed Storms has suggested in the past.) If that's the case then there may be no need to assume a balancing reaction, which in turn depends on some rather uncertain additional assumptions about as yet undiscovered properties of neutrons in order to make it possible. One would need to look closely at experiments which showed excess heat and tritium, and which included enough data to compute total energy generated and total number of tritium atoms produced to come to any sort of conclusion. The very crude calculation I did just produced a very squishy rough ballpark number, but it suggests that perhaps this line of reasoning is not so far off. Based on other comments on this list, and particularly those by Ed Storms, I'm reasonably confident that this calculation has already been done, a number of times, and the conclusion drawn was that the heat of tritium production was indeed a small fraction of the total excess. Unfortunately I haven't been paying close enough attention to be sure of that. You are right, these calculations have been made. However, the calculations are based on the rate of tritium production, not on the total number of atoms because heat is measured as power. The amount of calculated power is always too small to measure. Ed Jones
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
For a short term high field applied to a deuterated Pd foil as opposed to electrostatic induction. http://www.unitekequipment.com/Products_Node_View.asp?id=40096 250DP Capacitive Discharge Welder Features: Microprocessor Controlled Energy Selectable up to 250 Watt-seconds Weld Function: Basic, Dual Pulse, Roll Spot, Repeat Stores up to 128 Different Weld Schedules Programmable Squeeze Time Weld Head Choices: http://www.unitekequipment.com/Products_Node_View.asp?Id=10158 [Original Message] From: Frederick Sparber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: 12/22/2005 12:17:55 PM Subject: Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar As an aside. What would be wrong with applying a high electrostatic field across a D-loaded Pd foil? This should unbalance the internal charges in the interstices enough to let the Pd charge push the deuterons over the repulsive D-D coulomb barrier. No? Then take what you can get CF-wise. Fred
Science and Reality
One definition of reality could be this: Matter and energy distributed in various combinations across a finite space. Within these confines we have the natural. Anything outside of this is unnatural, or supernatural. Reality only feels real because we have five senses, composed of sensors which are also made of matter and energy, that feed our conscious mind (whatever that is), and allows us to be aware of the reality. Science investigates specific aspects and details of this interaction of matter and energy to give us better understanding of our surroundings. With this understanding we are then better able to manipiulate our surroundings to make our existence more enjoyable and perhaps more meaningful. Technology is then a measure of our ability to manipulate our surroundings. A.C. Clarke once said that "technology, sufficiently advanced, will always be mistaken for magic." If this is true, then even the most amazing observations we make in our reality should have a foundation based on scientific principles that can ultimately be understood. But, is there real magic that goes beyond the confines of our "matter and energy" reality? Consider the term: magic trick It is an oxymoron. A trick is not magic, and magic is no trick. A trick is the manipulation of matter and energy, in an artful manner, so as to fool the senses of observers, and convince them that the event falls outside the boundaries of reality. This is routinely done by skilled practitioners with some very basic technology. Real magic, if it exists, by definition eminates from beyond our "matter and energy" reality. Real magic could include anything from miracles down to evil spells. Are these things beyond science, or is the problemmerely that present scientific tools are just too primitive to deal with these incidents? Do we ignore these intrusions on our comfortable reality because we are not up to the task of investigating them, or do we face it head on? Do we say that we are going to do our science in our comfortable little corner of reality, and turn our backs on the big picture? Do we say, "This is too tough for me to face. I'm not going to deal with it."? I have seen responses of fear and denial on this forum. Should our discussions be controlled by either of those? We are all considered lunatics anyway for contemplating the existence of hydrinos, among other things. Let us keep open minds on anything that can affect the path of alternate energy development, even if itseems off topic to some. Perhaps we could have a set of spam codesmore specificthan "off topic" to protect the fearful, the scoffers, and the thoroughly annoyed. Jeff P.S. I have responded to many religious threads on this forum, but avoided starting any. This is the brightest group of people I have ever corresponded with. The diversity of beliefs and opinions voiced here is absolutely astounding. I am having a really good time with some of these discussions.
Aether Theory
I read some links on Aether Theory which described that there were7 Layers of Higher Aether, then7 Astral Layers, then thePhysical Layers, and7 Lower Ether Layers. The Lower Ether is said to have been 2000 times more dense than lead but passes through physical objects - perhaps due to being scalar or longitudinal whereas the physical emf waves and energies are transverse. The counter universe of the physical universe follows inverse laws to the physical, so that the more denser an object in the counter universe then the more it will pass through physical matter in the physical universe, whereas the more dense an object is in the physical universe the more it cannot pass through physical matter. Nikola Tesla and Richard Wagner stated that they could connect their minds to an Aether information network and computer system located in secrettemples on Earth and between planets which allowed them to pull up information, do work, and save informationdirectly from their minds connected to the Aether information network computer system on Earth. The same book stated that Tesla was brought to Earth from the planet Venus. Tesla lived alone separate from others most of his life, since his spiritual body and energy frequencies were to high and sensitive that he could not be around others with lower frequencies for very long. The book also stated that Tesla faked his death and relocated to a secret city that he and some of his associates built in an empty underground cavern under a mountain in Venezuela, where they perfected their flying saucer technologies, and flew to the moon and mars around the 1940's to 1950's. 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: Biefeld-Brown Effect by Carl Frederick Krafft (Electrogravitation Antig...
"Occult Ether Physics Tesla's Hidden Space Propulsion System and the Conspiracy to Conceal It By William Lyne, 2000: Teslas technology which electromagnetically canceled inertia and synthesized a new momentum instantaneously Inertia is the momentum which a body at rest already posses because it is in a state of uniform motion, but which to us appears to be at rest, Teslas technology uses the electromagnetic interaction, which is 10^40 times stronger than gravity to create a tremendous propelling force which instantaneously reprograms the atoms and molecules of a ship with new microhelical tubes of force along a new trajectory and destroys the memories of the tubes of force which created its prior inertia momentum. Electropulsion is a free energy process in which energy existing in the environment - gravity and momentum are overcome by and replaced with the naturally stronger force of electromagnetism to perform a greater amount of work during a given time which theoretically is 10^40 times more work using a smaller amount of input energy to trigger the change. The process which makes electropulsion possible, is the dynamis of the universe, which naturally exchanges weaker and stronger forces to conserve perpetual motion, with any lost momentum being resupplied by the ZPR. Quoted >From Pg 41 Occult Ether Physics Teslas Hidden Space Propulsion System and the Conspiracy to Conceal It By William Lyne, 2000"
Beta Aether Involved?
The AIP article below notes an unexpected collimated behavior of sand even in a vacuum. It says the anomalous thinner spiky jet remains even in a vacuum. The lower, thicker jet is accounted for by sand- air interaction, but no reason for the spiky jet effects remaining in a vacuum are given. Beta Aether Involved? Begin Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 759 December 22, 2005 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein FAST X-RAY PICTURES OF SAND JETS. Granular materials---possessing both solid-like and liquid-like characteristics---exhibit much strange emergent behavior even in the simplest of experiments. When, for example, a heavy sphere is dropped into a bed of sand, what happens, if you look carefully enough, can still surprise seasoned researchers. Heinrich Jaeger of the University of Chicago and his colleagues watched the jets kicked up by the sphere: they used high speed video and ordinary light to view the outside of the jets and high-speed radiography (the x rays supplied by the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne) of the jet interior. The impact kicked up a bizarre two-tiered jet structure: a thick shaft at the bottom and, projecting up out of the top, a further and thinner shaft (see figures at http://jfi.uchicago.edu/~jaeger/group/granular.html ). That the jets are so well collimated is a surprise: why doesn't the sand just fly out at all angles? In moving up in a sort of directed beam, with very little lateral motion, it seems to act like an ultracold gas (at least in the sideways direction). Another surprise is the twofold jet structure. The lower, thicker jet is surely sculpted by collisions between sand grains and air molecules since it gets progressively scantier until, at pressures close to vacuum, it goes away altogether, leaving only the thinner spiky jet. The jet interior pictures are unprecedented: taken with an exposure rate of 5000 frames per second, the x ray flux provided the equivalent of a 50-watt halogen lamp illumination---only at x-ray wavelengths. The x-ray pictures proved that air squeezed among the grains was the driving force in forcing up the thick stage of the jet formation, and not as one might have expected a force for dissipating the jet. (Royer et al., Nature Physics, December 2005; by the way, Nature Physics is a new journal that began publication in October 2005.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote of AIP article. Horace Heffner
Christmas present from M. Srinivasan
Mahadeva Chino Srinivasan sent me a nice Christmas present: an original Polaroid autoradiograph showing the tritium generated in a Plasma Focus device with deuterium gas loading. It even looks like a Christmas tree decoration. See: http://lenr-canr.org/Experiments.htm#AutoradiographsMSrinivasan I scanned this at high resolution (1200 dpi), so if someone would like to see a larger copy, contact me. I was not sure whether to call this the negative or the positive image, since x-rays are reversed. Chino also sent me a collection of papers in a book, roughly 60 pages long, titled, BARC Studies in Cold Fusion (April -- September 1989), December 1989, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Bombay, India. This is a large book but I plan to scan the entire thing and upload it. That will take weeks, if not months. - Jed
Added autoradiograph to Wikipedia
This should rile the bastards. Maybe even make them think. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Reproducibility_of_excess_heat - Jed
Concerning Reality in an Arbitrary Universe
In science , we are accustomed to think in reductionist terms and search for a cause whenever we see an interesting effect - but what if we looked at the world in the other direction? Suppose we started with the fact that the universe is ultimately arbitrary? To some, the idea that the universe just is on its most basic level seems shocking at first and unexpected. Even so, some scientists are brave enough to expound on it ( such as Victor Mansfield in his books) or use it as an explanation for puzzling observations ( Stenger - in explaining decoherence as an alternative to non-locality). At some point, you just 'run out' of fundamental particles or physical constants to explain stuff. After that, the universe just is. If we accept that the quantum world is the bottom rung of the reality ladder, then it is the ultimate, arbitrary reality. The quantum world just is. However, what aspects of the macro world are purely arbitrary? Schrodinger's cat suggests that macro effects could be uncaused, they just are. While the thought of dropping reductionism probably seems repellent to the current climate of science, it may be inevitable. Non-locality, complex organisms that rely on feeble amounts of genetic code ( do we really share 30% of our genes with a banana?) , the failure of artificial intelligence development by the Japanese ( after spending hundreds of millions on it) and the appearance of emergent behavior all suggest that reductionism may not be enough. Does it ever seem that, although the Newtonian view of a mechanical universe is obsolete, we are still struggling to maintain a mechanical viewpoint, while nature keeps slipping effects between the moving gears, somehow? Ghosts? UFOs? ESP? Life after death? I don't know. I only know that appeals to structures of scientific reasoning can't exclude anything as Impossible. Einstein's cozy comforts that the universe is knowable and consistent may go the way of the dinosaur if contradictory theories are practical - but permanently unresolved. Is biology really just a subset of physics and chemistry in its entirety? It doesn't look that way to me - and, if so, I've got bad news for the nanotech people - you may be doomed to failure if you think of imitating life in mechanical terms. There's too much just is-ness involved in living things. The same goes for past artificial intelligence research that looked for axioms or rules that weren't there. I think that the controversy over Intelligent Design is very useful in that it forces academics to begin to analyse exactly what's reduceable and what isn't, rather than papering over difficulties solved by God - or just so stories told by Darwinists.
Re: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:46 AM Subject: RE: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs How about this explanation? During many a theological debate with my mother, who is a Seventh Day Adventist, over the existence of Aliens etc. she stated that her/the churches belief is that there are many other sentient beings in this universe. She tried to explain that there are many beings that have their eyes on us as it is humanity that has been selected by GOD to have free will as a test and to represent all sentient life in this Universe etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah.(this is when I really turned off!) This explanation of your mom's explains some difficult things. With all the reports and sightings on file, we seem to be overrun with UFO's and aliens. It's like we are the center of the universe. Yet, we have no real contact. Perhaps the human race is in a boxing ring duking it out, and all these aliens are spectators who sometimes get too close to the action. Jeff
Re: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference
- Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 3:44 AM Subject: RE: NKS 2006 Wolfram Science Conference Mike, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-modern (Don't take this badly this is not a personal attack, only observation.) Remi, I took a look at the link on 'post-modern' and from my view see a lot of garbage created by people with nothing better to do, sterile babble. Wolfram's work is a hard grind and challenging.
Beta Aether Involved?
This post resent as a test of the thread handling of http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/ The AIP article below notes an unexpected collimated behavior of sand even in a vacuum. It says the anomalous thinner spiky jet remains even in a vacuum. The lower, thicker jet is accounted for by sand- air interaction, but no reason for the spiky jet effects remaining in a vacuum are given. Beta Aether Involved? Begin Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 759 December 22, 2005 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein FAST X-RAY PICTURES OF SAND JETS. Granular materials---possessing both solid-like and liquid-like characteristics---exhibit much strange emergent behavior even in the simplest of experiments. When, for example, a heavy sphere is dropped into a bed of sand, what happens, if you look carefully enough, can still surprise seasoned researchers. Heinrich Jaeger of the University of Chicago and his colleagues watched the jets kicked up by the sphere: they used high speed video and ordinary light to view the outside of the jets and high-speed radiography (the x rays supplied by the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne) of the jet interior. The impact kicked up a bizarre two-tiered jet structure: a thick shaft at the bottom and, projecting up out of the top, a further and thinner shaft (see figures at http://jfi.uchicago.edu/~jaeger/group/granular.html ). That the jets are so well collimated is a surprise: why doesn't the sand just fly out at all angles? In moving up in a sort of directed beam, with very little lateral motion, it seems to act like an ultracold gas (at least in the sideways direction). Another surprise is the twofold jet structure. The lower, thicker jet is surely sculpted by collisions between sand grains and air molecules since it gets progressively scantier until, at pressures close to vacuum, it goes away altogether, leaving only the thinner spiky jet. The jet interior pictures are unprecedented: taken with an exposure rate of 5000 frames per second, the x ray flux provided the equivalent of a 50-watt halogen lamp illumination---only at x-ray wavelengths. The x-ray pictures proved that air squeezed among the grains was the driving force in forcing up the thick stage of the jet formation, and not as one might have expected a force for dissipating the jet. (Royer et al., Nature Physics, December 2005; by the way, Nature Physics is a new journal that began publication in October 2005.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote of AIP article. Horace Heffner
Re: Beta Aether Involved?
Horace Heffner wrote: This post resent as a test of the thread handling of http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/ The AIP article below notes an unexpected collimated behavior of sand even in a vacuum. It says the anomalous thinner spiky jet remains even in a vacuum. The lower, thicker jet is accounted for by sand- air interaction, but no reason for the spiky jet effects remaining in a vacuum are given. Beta Aether Involved? Speaking from a near total ignorance of the subject of behavior of near-fluids, couple with a total ignorance of fluid dynamics theory in general (beyond a general impression that simulating it involves finite element analysis, particle-in-cell, and exotic programs with names like ALE and Miranda), my first thought was Was the sand _charged_? Supposing the sand grains picked up a static charge, and supposing furthermore than the charges weren't distributed evenly on each grain (so that each grain had a nonzero dipole moment), could that account for any part of the behavior seen? Begin Quote: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News Number 759 December 22, 2005 by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein FAST X-RAY PICTURES OF SAND JETS. Granular materials---possessing both solid-like and liquid-like characteristics---exhibit much strange emergent behavior even in the simplest of experiments. When, for example, a heavy sphere is dropped into a bed of sand, what happens, if you look carefully enough, can still surprise seasoned researchers. Heinrich Jaeger of the University of Chicago and his colleagues watched the jets kicked up by the sphere: they used high speed video and ordinary light to view the outside of the jets and high-speed radiography (the x rays supplied by the Advanced Photon Source at Argonne) of the jet interior. The impact kicked up a bizarre two-tiered jet structure: a thick shaft at the bottom and, projecting up out of the top, a further and thinner shaft (see figures at http://jfi.uchicago.edu/~jaeger/group/granular.html ). That the jets are so well collimated is a surprise: why doesn't the sand just fly out at all angles? In moving up in a sort of directed beam, with very little lateral motion, it seems to act like an ultracold gas (at least in the sideways direction). Another surprise is the twofold jet structure. The lower, thicker jet is surely sculpted by collisions between sand grains and air molecules since it gets progressively scantier until, at pressures close to vacuum, it goes away altogether, leaving only the thinner spiky jet. The jet interior pictures are unprecedented: taken with an exposure rate of 5000 frames per second, the x ray flux provided the equivalent of a 50-watt halogen lamp illumination---only at x-ray wavelengths. The x-ray pictures proved that air squeezed among the grains was the driving force in forcing up the thick stage of the jet formation, and not as one might have expected a force for dissipating the jet. (Royer et al., Nature Physics, December 2005; by the way, Nature Physics is a new journal that began publication in October 2005.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - End quote of AIP article. Horace Heffner
Re: Notes on ICCF12 from T. J. Dolan
A couple items on the list caught my eye. Jed Rothwell wrote: Notes from the 12th International Conference on Condensed Matter Nuclear Sciences November 27 – December 2, 2005, Yokohama T. J. Dolan The following brief summary refers to only some of the 60 papers presented at the conference. Experiments Yasuhiro Iwamura (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries) presented more data on transmutations of Cs to Pm, Ba to Sm, and Sr to Mo, using a variety of diagnostic techniques, including a detailed surface mapping using a synchrotron microbeam (100 x 100 micrometers). They found that the transmutations occurred in small concentrated sites on the surface. Afterward I asked him what labs have reproduced some of his transmutations, and he said Osaka University, Shizuoka University, Francesco Celani (Italy), and NRL (in progress). A. Kitamura (Kobe University) coated films on the vacuum side of the Pd foil (Iwamura coated the gas side) and reported transmutation of Sr into Mo. Irina Savvatimova (“Luch” Institute, Moscow) reported transmutation of Ba into Sm. A. El-Boher (Energetics Technologies, Israel) used superwave modulation of the current in electrolysis cells to increase yield. He achieved 600% excess heat for 24 hours, and 150% for 134 hours. Irving Dardik (a physician) developed the superwave technique with regard to curing human illnesses, and it is found to have applications in several fields. The numbers on this one sound fabulous: 600% excess heat sounds stunning. Is this paper online? I didn't see it in the index, though there appears to be other superwave stuff from El-Boher on your site going back at least to ICCF-10. Anyone got any idea where breakeven is for a typical cold fusion cell? (Yes, I know, they're all different, there is no typical cell...) At what level of excess heat is total energy in likely to be less than recoverable energy out? (For that matter, what's the right way to even ask the question? It's pretty obvious what breakeven is for hot fusion, but for CF it seems a bit less clear.) In other words, is 600% excess heat anywhere near breakeven? Vittorio Violante (ENEA, Italy) used a HeNe laser to enhance excess power generation during electrochemical loading. Yoshiaki Arata (Osaka University) observed intense heat generation during ingress of deuterium into a thin cylinder containing Pd nanoparticles. Alexander Karabut (Luch laboratory, Russia) observed excess heat generation and transmutations during deuterium glow discharges, but not during Kr or Xe discharges. Using spark mass spectrometry, SIMS, and secondary neutral mass spectrometry they identified the emergence of many impurities, including abnormal isotope ratios for several elements. They also observed emission of gamma rays and x-rays. Andrei Lipson and George Miley (Lebedev Institute, Moscow, and University of Illinois) reported emissions of energetic protons and alpha particles during controlled exothermic deuterium desorption from the surface of a Pd/PdO:Dx heterostructure. Using CR-39 detectors they found 1-3 MeV proton tracks and 11-16 MeV alpha tracks, with a yield about 0.005 alphas/cm2-s, reproducible during about 20 experiments. They also reported data indicating superconductivity in Pd hydride and deuteride. This appears to be a PowerPoint slide set. Is there a paper to go with it? The slides are fascinating, though, sad to say, mostly pretty incomprehensible to this yokel. I had no idea that signs of superconductivity had been observed in loaded Pd, but it appears from your index that there are hints of this going back to at least ICCF-10. Might it be possible to parley this aspect into back-door access to conventional money for research into CF, I wonder? 30K for a transition temperature isn't exactly sweltering, but it still qualifies as HT and it's totally different from conventional HT superconductors, I think, and that should interest people. For that matter, is that possibly what Lipson and Miley are already doing...? [ snip snip ] Summary In his summary of the ICCF-12 conference Prof. Xing-Zhong Li said that CMNS has three “legs”: ·excess heat generation ·nuclear reaction products transmutations ·good reproducibility. Many experiments have achieved the first two legs, but reproducibility has only been demonstrated in a few experiments, such as those of Iwamura. Prof. Arata is building a larger device (3 x 30 cm) to demonstrate reliable higher power operation. That will be really interesting! I have no idea if using Pd as a sort of catalyst for high-temp D2 gas will every produce useful energy, but the tiny amounts I've read about it make it sound like the process may be a lot more reproducible than the wet-cell CF.
Re: Added autoradiograph to Wikipedia
Jed man, you come out with both fists flying and all brain cells firing! I encourage all Vortexians to watch that page and help defend (if neccessary) what Jed just posted. It is a major step in the right direction. Hey Jed, I just though of somethingthe gremlins like to call in a parlamentarian type rule sometimes to disqualify evidence that they don't like. The rule, if you look it up, as you may know it, goes something like You can't cite yourself, or your own work, or web site for references on Wikipedia. Soif any of those boys try to pull that one on you.let me know, I'll post the paper on NET I don't think they have a rule about citing things on friends' Web sites. S At 05:26 PM 12/22/2005 -0500, you wrote: This should rile the bastards. Maybe even make them think. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_fusion#Reproducibility_of_excess_heat - Jed
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
On Dec 22, 2005, at 10:16 AM, Frederick Sparber wrote: As an aside. What would be wrong with applying a high electrostatic field across a D-loaded Pd foil? This should unbalance the internal charges in the interstices enough to let the Pd charge push the deuterons over the repulsive D-D coulomb barrier. No? Then take what you can get CF-wise. Fred I think this was the idea behind the Szpak cell. I had some suggestions along that line in the Variation on Szpak cell thread in Nov. 2004. Fig. 3 below is my suggested modified version of Fig. 1 in the Szpak paper at: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSprecursors.pdf The electrolysis anode is a platinum screen with a hole cut in its center to accomodate the cathode. The cathode is in effect the edge of Szpak's cathode. Electrolysis potentialGround (+)(-) I I -I--I- |I I| (++) |I I|Key: c |# I| c |# I| I - Electrolysis power wire c |# I| # - Platinum screen anode c |# I| g - Gold foil c |# I| s - Piezo substrate c | I| p - Deposited Pd c | ggg I| -| - Clear plastic cell wall c |pgsg| c - Copper foil HV electrode c |pgs | c |pgs | c |pgs | c |pgs | c |pgsg| c | ggg| c || c |# | c |# | c |# | c |# | c |# | c || c -- c c c c Foil 1 Fig. 3 - Diagram of variation on Szpak's cell Note that ascii figure viewing requires use of a fixed font, like Courier, and Microsoft Outlook users may need to select fixed in the textsize submenu of the view menu. The intent of this configuration is to maximize the imposed electrostatic field imposed perpendicular to the surface of the cathode. I suggested earlier that this might increase the electron density at the surface of the cathode. After seeing the configuration in Fig. 3 it is fairly clear that the vast amount of the potential drop should be across the plastic surface of the cell. Still, the E field is present at the interface, countered by ion redistribution and polarized molecule orientation. Within the cathode the electron distribution should be skewed toward the active surface. There may be unexpected results similar to what Szpak obtained. Horace Heffner
Re: Concerning Reality in an Arbitrary Universe
Zell, Chris wrote: Does it ever seem that, although the Newtonian view of a mechanical universe is obsolete, we are still struggling to maintain a mechanical viewpoint, while nature keeps slipping effects between the moving gears, somehow? Yes, and what is both good and bad about quantum mechanics is that it allows us to prolong the struggle indefinitely. Harry
Re: Tandem-LENR: was- paper by Iyengar
On Dec 22, 2005, at 8:34 AM, Jones Beene wrote: Bottom line: ...isn't it a bit too coincidental that in carefully documented experiments, you can come out to nearly net neutral on the energy equation yet - still have lots of tritium? ... what happend to the excess heat ? Electron catalysis might explain that - given an assumption or two. When two deuterons collide and fuse in hot fusion, it takes a lot of energy. The resulting nucleus has a lot of pent up potential energy, which ends up released in the form of decay particle energy, or gammas. If the waveforms of two deuterons tunnel to the locus of an electron, i.e. the quantum waveforms of two deuterons and a centrally located electron collapse at the locus of the electron center of charge, then the resulting nucleus is not energetic. This concept was more fully described here in 2001. See http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ EcatFusion.pdf. Now, supposing T is the final result of the fusion, and no neutron. We then have: D + D + e- --- He* --- T + P + 2 e- where here He* here is not really helium at all, and certainly not an energetic isomer. Within He*, to produce this reaction, there is an accelerated decay of a neutron, producing a P and e- which have to leave the nucleus, and some nominal energy. The work to eject the P and e- is a wash. The work to eject the second electron, the catalytic electron, further de-energizes the nucleus. There will be no energetic gamma. Additionally, the ejection of P + 2 e- could be expected to produce EM radiation, and not all in one high energy photon, but rather in smaller chunks. The only signatures of this reaction are thus low order heat and tritium. That's my guess. Horace Heffner
Physics Today article
(free article from Physics Today) Albert Einstein as a Philosopher of Science Einstein's philosophical habit of mind, cultivated by undergraduate training and lifelong dialogue, had a profound effect on the way he did physics. Don A. Howard Nowadays, explicit engagement with the philosophy of science plays almost no role in the training of physicists or in physics research. What little the student learns about philosophical issues is typically learned casually, by a kind of intellectual osmosis. One picks up ideas and opinions in the lecture hall, in the laboratory, and in collaboration with one's supervisor. Careful reflection on philosophical ideas is rare. Even rarer is systematic instruction. Worse still, publicly indulging an interest in philosophy of science is often treated as a social blunder. To be fair, more than a few physicists do think philosophically. Still, explicitly philosophical approaches to physics are the exception. Things were not always so... http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-58/iss-12/p34.html
