[Vo]: Jones' conclusions
Chris opined; So Jones was deluded about Cold Fusion as well as 911 - but Cold Fusion is real, therefore his views on 911 must also be correct. There's a nonsequitor if ever I heard one. Hum, the spell checker flagged nonsequitor. I'll try again, just because he's smart enough to get a PhD in physics, and open minded enough to realize that the evidence for CF is compelling, that doesn't mean that he's right about 9/11. I've decided that even if the 9/11 conspiracy folks are right, I'm not going to worry about it. We have 1,000,000,000 people, a significant percentage of whom believe that killing us will get them a worderful eternity, and they have declared a jihad against us. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c)
On Friday 27 October 2006 13:08, Jones Beene wrote: The impetus for this [far-out] idea is based on the earlier premise: For instance, even without subscribing to the details of Mills' hydrino theory - it is conceivable (but not likely) that an easily hidden species of redundant ground state hydrogen is being continuously created in the solar corona over geologic time - and makes its way to earth in the solar wind - First two corrections. The hypothetical particle in question will be designated as Hy- [but in an earlier post it was dyslexicly written as a positive ion]. This species (if real) must consists of one proton and two electrons at 'orbitals' which are a whole fraction of the Bohr orbital. However, this solar-derived species may be largely incompatible with any earthly existence at all, and yet it could still be a major component of solar wind. Believe it or not, we do NOT presently know from real experiment just what is in solar wind. It's all a guess now. Even the recently failed attempt by NASA to find out was not equipped to search for this species, Hy-, so it too would have been inconclusive. Electrons, despite electrostatic repulsion, can display an equally strong and balancing magnetic attraction, and often will exhibit a very strong preference for pairing, as we know. This - even without Mills' CQM - is a most revealing and important observation. We might even go so far as to agree with Mills that the Bohr orbital is NOT the sole ground state, as is generally stated in physics textbooks, but instead is merely the first [of many redundant ground states] at which the electron and proton *can exist with unpaired electrons*, as opposed to paired. A further implication is that - for every Bohr atom at normal earth-ground-state, in the Universe as a whole, there could possibly exist from 10 to 100 widely dispersed and 'cold' Hy-, which ARE then defined as 'dark matter' (or at least a major component thereof). This creates the situation of an inherent charge-bias across the Universe. Not to mention making fools of previous cosmology experts who are convinced they have it all figured out already. Does a charge bias, or inherent imbalance, seem to fly in the face of observation? is it theoretically even possible? ... and before reflexively yelling NOT POSSIBLE! ...consider that universal expansion itself could be a relic of this inherent charge bias! We certainly have a charge-bias in earth's atmosphere, which varies in layers, and is most apparent as the so-called fair weather field but one of those layer may be caused by the solar wind containing lots of Hy- instead of what is normally envisioned = free electrons. Free solar electrons could be almost impossible in a situation where the Sun itself has an ever increasing positive charge bias from having already given up 5 billion years worth of Hy-. In contrast to free electrons, these Hy- can and do exit the corona by means of the 1837x greater kinetic momentum which they possess, compared with free electrons. At any rate, given the thermodynamics of the constant formation of hydrinos in the solar corona, we might further suspect that the average [most prevalent] hydrino paired orbital is near maximum entropy, of perhaps n=1/7 or 1/8 (if Robin's calcs are correct). See http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ however, I should add that Robin will likely disagree with parts of this speculation. It is ironic that perceptive folks, of all persuasion, can seldom agree on anything without first having the ferment of a previous, and vigorous, disagreement. The major spatial difference between hydrogen and hydrino is that in the same volume of a typical H2 molecule, upwards to 4000 of the solar Hy- would fit if they were not charged, but since the charge creates a strong near-field, the actual ability to coexist with normal matter is extremely doubtful at all, and is unknown (to anyone other than Mills, but his present inability to harness this species is probably meaningful). But that is not the end-of-story for using them elsewhere, even if making them on earth is too difficult. Stated another way, why buy the cow when the milk's free? OK, after this preamble (more like a pre-ramble g) we are back to the Hydrino Harvester (c). I have taken the liberty of copywriting this name and idea today for a number of reasons. Mills, despite his admitted genius, has a history of [occasional] plagiarizing the ideas of others without attribution. This continues today, as many corrections in his various revised versions of CQM resulted from the unacknowledged input from his critics: somewhat as 'punishment' it seems for their correct criticism, which makes it doubly wrong - but at least he does continue to make the necessary changes in that oeuvre ... but seldom with proper attribution. Ergo the (c). Anyway, if the Hy- is a real species, then what follows will be of great
Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c)
- Original Message - From: Standing Bear There is a company called JP Aerospace that has an idea of going to space in a balloon This space ascender would then leave and ascend in a slow circular pathway gaining speed with each orbit, more so after leaving the last traces of atmospheric friction for practical purposes. Ultimately the space ascender should arrive at a true rigid space station in space in synchronous orbit about 20,000 miles up. From there it would return for another load, taking with it anything needing transport back to the surface. They do this, possibilities are endless. This plan places all its parts at one time or another in this hydrino region, and all of these parts could take part in such a hydrino harvest. This comment involving the use of others' technologies and ideas named above together in a useful and practical form is copyrighted by me, Lee M. Castleton, USAF retired. Very interesting, and thanks for putting this piece of the puzzle into place. If you are personally in contact with these individuals, I hope you will write them privately to express the same sentiment. That 'puzzle', mentioned above being - how to get space exploration out of the hands of a top-heavy bureaucracy and perhaps into the hands of a nimble corporation or small wealthy country. If for no other reason - then to make it competitive by offering the lowest cost option. NASA is too focused on man-in-space, when instead, space is the perfect environment for artificial intelligence. Actually several candidate countries come to mind - which are possessed with both a top-flight (pun intended) education system, a history of efficient and pragmatic government (desirous of international recognition) and most of all - wealth - particularly oil wealth. Norway would be one. Among companies - one would presently need to merge several types of corporate expertise - Virgin (Branson) with say Chevron and Intel. I suspect that this concept, as complicated as it seems, could still be pulled-off in the short-term for the quarterly profit of Chevron - spread out over five years - if (BIG IF) the ionosphere can be harvested for solar hydrinos. Even if the supply is tinier than the optimists suspect - if there are any at all, that resource could be put together as a step in yet a bigger package - one that would put a population of micro-robotic drones on the moon - to harvest lunar 3He, a proven resource, and then that would be another step-wise wrinkle in a more complicated hybrid system. I don't see the JP balloon thing as being very advantageous, otherwise; unless there is this kind of harvestable propellant in the ionosphere. And BTW - I'm sure Robin has been thinking about hydrino-induced fusion more than I have, but the Hy+3He reaction would seen to be a natural (or Hy + 11B, or Hy + 7Li) given the very small atomic size of the type of solar hydrino-hydride, hypothesized in the original post (i.e. N= 1/7 or 1/8) should they be in the ionosphere. You could probably get to breakeven fusion levels with those using a device as small as a Farnsworth Fusor ... Needless to say, any type of breakeven fusion in a small device in the ionosphere - using air buoyancy to shuttle smaller payloads up with reusable gear - that almost guarantees the availability of lunar payloads for about cost of terrestrial rail transport - seriously: pennies per pound instead of hundreds of dollars per pound. Hey, Branson may be the man ... if can step-back from his numerous overload of involvements, and focus on what is needed in the big-picture for private space exploration. He says that it is his number-one priority. Jones
Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c)
- Original Message - From: Standing Bear [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 29, 2006 2:06 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c) There is a company called JP Aerospace that has an idea of going to space in a balloon. Hmmm odd I wouldn't mind flying an Orion. As long as its got good shocks. Very high thrust, and very high Isp. Launch it from Antarctica, no one there to scream not in my back yard. WHAM...WHAM...WHAM...WHAM...Orbit. --Kyle
Re: [Vo]: Original OU?
Or you can perhaps entertain the theory that human evolution is not the commonly-accepted straight line trend from the ape until now, at which time we modern-day humans are at the supreme end-point (all of us) of millions of years of positive evolution. And there's more to come... In fact so-called evolution may be like virtually all natural occurrences in that it comes and goes in very large cycles. Take a look around you and try to figure out where exactly we are right now in the evolutionary cycle, without placing too much emphasis on our toys. It could be that the pyramids were in place well before the Egyptians took them over as interesting burial places. So the idea of the major explosion in technology in ancient Egypt may not be a reasonable fact. Question of course is, what would have promoted this explosion of technology? Anyone looking at the cave paintings in Lascaux, from 15000 years ago, then looking at the Chauve-Pont-D'arc paintings from about 3 years ago, may see that the older paintings were far better than the newer ones (which were quite superb), leading us (well - me, that is) to believe that there was a high degree of civilization somewhere on Earth, before the Egyptian one - a mere 4000 years ago - than current dogma lets us believe. P. At 08:58 AM 10/28/2006 -0700, you wrote: Before anyone starts to take what follows too seriously, let me say that it is offered in the spirit of the season shall we say. That season being the rather irrational season around Halloween with its ties to the ancient Celts and even to the Egyptians. Hey - I am trying to avoid pumpkin-carving by pretending to be at work I have to add this caveat, because many normally perceptive individuals tend to go a little gaga about the Egyptians (or the Celts) and their accomplishments. You know... lost knowledge and all of that. Don't get me wrong - in the context of what came before, it is almost like the a major explosion in technology took place around the start of the 4th Dynasty, leading many to invent all kinds of hypotheses for that - like alien contact and so on. You can buy into the concept of lost knowledge without going all the way to alien-contact, but hey... this time of year, anything goes. Let's don't even go there, at least not precisely all the way to aliens... but instead consider a minor detail of the Pyramid of Cheops - that being the shafts leading from the so-called King's and Queen's chambers. But that in the context of putative free energy. Here is some good detail: http://www.cheops.org/startpage/thefindings/thefindings.htm ... and I will not go into the various theories regarding the function of the shafts as passageways for the soul etc, except to say that when discovered, two of them were heavily filled with soot. However, there does seem to be a strange Cartouche next to one shaft which translates to the equivalent of hyperfine ;-) Right. Well, in this context, one must introduce the ancient phenomenon of the eternal flame or the ever-burning lamp (the original genie's lamp) --- the importance of which symbol and the proven relics thereof cannot be over-emphasized to the mentality of ancient people. The ever-burning lamp was a daily miracle to them - a goal of pilgrimage and a gift from divinity ... especially considering the importance of fire - to early civilization. Unfortunately, the archaeology often gets mixed up with other things, as is the case of Ms. Lloyd here: http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12801 ...but anyway, in a few of the dozens of ancient sites where eternal flames were known to have been going, apparently unattended, and of course worshipped, there has been the prevalent hypothesis that the source of flame was a slow underground seepage of natural gas. This source kept the flames going for centuries, it is said. Many of these were located in caves in areas which have some hydrocarbon geology - and we all know the stories of coal gas in the Appalachians of the USA. This explanation is bolstered by the fact that some lamps were extinguished after earthquakes. Anyway - back to the shafts in the Pyramid of Cheops, where of course there is no underground seepage of natural gas, or coal, and any priest who was carrying a secret lamp-refill would have been easily spotted ... consequently - one might be justified to consider whether the shafts themselves could somehow capture of focus a hidden source of energy, which might be involved in either augmenting slow combustion or perhaps in powering a natural iridescence or certain minerals ... or both. (assuming that these were not the lamps of early grave robbers - or of the craftsmen finishing the work, which is the mundane explanation, which we want to avoid at all costs during this special season of alternative reality g) Anyway, I will leave the trick-or-treat answer up to your
[VO]:Re: The Hydrino Harvester(c)
Howdy Vorts, Alas!! NASA and aerospace introduced with their attendant bureaucratic bumbling ang bungling. Did you notice that Boeing was "edged out" of the latest contract with NASA in favor of Lockheed- Martin. Ummm .. lets see.. that means a total regime change at NASA with a new contractor.. as profound as it would be if KBR were replaced by another contractor in Iraq. All this means that energy, space exploration, science etc is not the driving force.. money and power is the driving force. Washington... where it is not nearly as important to win .. as it is to make sure the other guy loses. What a philosophy. Richard
Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c)
On Sunday 29 October 2006 14:37, Jones Beene wrote: - Original Message - From: Standing Bear There is a company called JP Aerospace that has an idea of going to space in a balloon This space ascender would then leave and ascend in a slow circular pathway gaining speed with each orbit, more so after leaving the last traces of atmospheric friction for practical purposes. Ultimately the space ascender should arrive at a true rigid space station in space in synchronous orbit about 20,000 miles up. From there it would return for another load, taking with it anything needing transport back to the surface. They do this, possibilities are endless. This plan places all its parts at one time or another in this hydrino region, and all of these parts could take part in such a hydrino harvest. This comment involving the use of others' technologies and ideas named above together in a useful and practical form is copyrighted by me, Lee M. Castleton, USAF retired. Very interesting, and thanks for putting this piece of the puzzle into place. If you are personally in contact with these individuals, I hope you will write them privately to express the same sentiment. That 'puzzle', mentioned above being - how to get space exploration out of the hands of a top-heavy bureaucracy and perhaps into the hands of a nimble corporation or small wealthy country. If for no other reason - then to make it competitive by offering the lowest cost option. NASA is too focused on man-in-space, when instead, space is the perfect environment for artificial intelligence. Actually several candidate countries come to mind - which are possessed with both a top-flight (pun intended) education system, a history of efficient and pragmatic government (desirous of international recognition) and most of all - wealth - particularly oil wealth. Norway would be one. Among companies - one would presently need to merge several types of corporate expertise - Virgin (Branson) with say Chevron and Intel. I suspect that this concept, as complicated as it seems, could still be pulled-off in the short-term for the quarterly profit of Chevron - spread out over five years - if (BIG IF) the ionosphere can be harvested for solar hydrinos. Even if the supply is tinier than the optimists suspect - if there are any at all, that resource could be put together as a step in yet a bigger package - one that would put a population of micro-robotic drones on the moon - to harvest lunar 3He, a proven resource, and then that would be another step-wise wrinkle in a more complicated hybrid system. I don't see the JP balloon thing as being very advantageous, otherwise; unless there is this kind of harvestable propellant in the ionosphere. And BTW - I'm sure Robin has been thinking about hydrino-induced fusion more than I have, but the Hy+3He reaction would seen to be a natural (or Hy + 11B, or Hy + 7Li) given the very small atomic size of the type of solar hydrino-hydride, hypothesized in the original post (i.e. N= 1/7 or 1/8) should they be in the ionosphere. You could probably get to breakeven fusion levels with those using a device as small as a Farnsworth Fusor ... Needless to say, any type of breakeven fusion in a small device in the ionosphere - using air buoyancy to shuttle smaller payloads up with reusable gear - that almost guarantees the availability of lunar payloads for about cost of terrestrial rail transport - seriously: pennies per pound instead of hundreds of dollars per pound. Hey, Branson may be the man ... if can step-back from his numerous overload of involvements, and focus on what is needed in the big-picture for private space exploration. He says that it is his number-one priority. Jones JP Aerospace has their own website: jpaerospace.com. They bill themselves as America's ..other.. space program. They got a contract from the government to build a ground takeoff ascender prototype as a model for the real thing if a contract for it materialized. They actually have a working ascender about ninety feet long and about a hundred feet wide in the shape of a 'V'. A picture of it is on their site. Positively dwarfs people standing next to it. Of course the real thing would be an order of magnitude larger. My worry about the hydrino if it existed arises from the idea that energy, like manure, rolls down hill. Energy always seeks the down ward path from a higher energy level to a lower. From previous descriptions by Randall Mills in Vortex and on his site, the production of hydrinos is accompanied by a hugely exothermic reaction greater than any chemical reaction yet a bit less than nuclear thermal output weight for weight of reagents involved. This would lead one to believe that given that our planet is a ...water...planet and has a ...lot...of hydrogen, such a reaction if it got started on this planet would have converted us to a kind of
Re: [Vo]: The Hydrino Harvester (c)
- Original Message - From: Standing Bear making hydrinos must be a little harder than Mills has admitted. That is becoming clear and it should be obvious why that would be so -- for the simple reason that it requires *free atomic hydrogen* to exist in proximity to extremely hot catalyst ions for a fairly substantial time period (relative to the normal time-frame that hydrogen would remain free and unionized). The relative part comes into play because - and this may be important even though you have never heard it stated this way: the catalyst ion with a net positive charge will still have a negative near-field, since the ion is still surrounded by many electrons... which will repel the near-field of atomic hydrogen in a cool plasma. And if the plasma is hot enough to propel the oncoming H past this near-field barrier - then that plasma is generally hot enough to have already ionized the H atom instead. See the problem? Think about free atomic hydrogen. Not protons. Not H2 molecules. Not hydrogen ions of any variety - ONLY neutral atomic hydrogen will do. And all of these hydrogen species are far more likely to turn up in a warm plasma than free atomic hydrogen. If the plasma is hotter you get protons and if it is colder you get either molecules or molecular ions but almost never (percentage wise) do you find the necessary raw material for this reaction on earth (except perhaps within a metal matrix ;-) These parameters make it the rarest of the rare situation here - but not in the solar corona, where parameters may be much more favorable ?? who knows but in fact there could be several pathways for them to form in those conditions. With the intense gravitation, hydrino=hydrides may form easily in one step from a flux of protons and tightly paired electrons. Many observers tend to agree with Mills' assessment that a large fraction of the heat of the sun is due to this reaction - rather than to the complex fusion pathway as is generally accepted, and that explains the solar neutrino problem better than the kludges which are now resorted to. I'm pretty sure that the first stage reaction for hydrinos is also far more reversible (re-inflation)than Mills admits-to; and that the production of useful quantities of hydrinos on earth may be hopeless. After burning through $50 million, RM has a couple of vials full, but that is not going to provide cheap energy or anything else, Until NASA finds out for sure what the solar wind consists-of ... as it enters the ionosphere - we will not know if there is any chance of using this potentially gigantic resource. To repeat a lament which has been expressed here before: Seven years after launch, NASA's Stardust space capsule returned recently with a bit of comet debris. Will they even look for hydrinos? They are probably in there - from the Oort cloud. At least the parachute opened this time, already giving Stardust more success than its predecessor - the Genesis solar wind mission last year, which crashed in Utah after its chute failed to open. Dammit. Many observers really wanted to know if there are substantial hydrinos in the solar wind or not - but no one is sure if NASA is even prepared or equipped to look for them. OTOH - since we know from the aftermath of the Rowan work for NASA which you mentioned that some key people at NASA do have an appreciation for this - there is always the possibility that the whole story about the failure of the Genesis solar wind mission last year was invented or exaggerated as part of a secrecy plan - so that they would not alert our enemies and competitors (China, USSR, and maybe even the Euros) that they did find a harvestable resource. Jones ... Sorry for that last paragraph. How could anyone be so cynical of Governmental motives?
Re: [Vo]: Original OU?
Civilization? It hasn't happened yet. Harry Philip Winestone wrote: Anyone looking at the cave paintings in Lascaux, from 15000 years ago, then looking at the Chauve-Pont-D'arc paintings from about 3 years ago, may see that the older paintings were far better than the newer ones (which were quite superb), leading us (well - me, that is) to believe that there was a high degree of civilization somewhere on Earth, before the Egyptian one - a mere 4000 years ago - than current dogma lets us believe. P.
