[Vo]:
A time-varying Electric Field around a Multipole might act as Tachyons if the legs are sequenced in the right manner. The electrostatic induction effect from this might also allow lift from a planet or moon, as well as generation of a force field, cloaking and Warp 10 FTL travel. Try this three-point device next Sunday? O O O Fred http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Tachyon.html Tachyons are a putative class of particles which able to travel faster than the speed of light. Tachyons were first proposed by physicist Arnold Sommerfeld, and named by Gerald Feinberg. The word tachyon derives from the Greek (tachus), meaning speedy. Tachyons have the strange properties that, when they lose energy, they gain speed. Consequently, when tachyons gain energy, they slow down. The slowest speed possible for tachyons is the speed of light. Tachyons appear to violate causality (the so-called causality problem), since they could be sent to the past under the assumption that the principle of special relativity is a true law of nature, thus generating a real unavoidable time paradox (Maiorino and Rodrigues 1999). Therefore, it seems unavoidable that if tachyons exist, the principle of special relativity must be false, and there exists a unique time order for all observers in the universe independent of their state of motion. Tachyons can be assigned properties of normal matter such as spin, as well as an antiparticle (the antitachyon). And amazingly, modern presentations of tachyon theory actually allow tachyons to actually have real mass (Recami 1996). It has been proposed that tachyons could be produced from high-energy particle collisions, and tachyon searches have been undertaken in cosmic rays. Cosmic rays hit the Earth's atmosphere with high energy (some of them with speed almost 99.99% of the speed of light) making several collisions with the molecules in the atmosphere. The particles made by this collision interact with the air, creating even more particles in a phenomenon known as a cosmic ray shower. In 1973, using a large collection of particle detectors, Philip Crough and Roger Clay identified a putative superluminal particle in an air shower, although this result has never been reproduced. timg1.gif Description: timg1.gif astronomy.gif Description: astronomy.gif
[Vo]: Re: Three Phase Lifters
- Original Message - From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 3/24/2007 4:03:37 AM Subject: [Vo]: A time-varying Electric Field around a Multipole might act as Tachyons if the legs are sequenced in the right manner. The electrostatic induction effect from this might also allow lift from a planet or moon, as well as generation of a force field, cloaking and Warp 10 FTL travel. Try this three-point device next Sunday? O O O Fred http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Tachyon.html Tachyons are a putative class of particles which able to travel faster than the speed of light. Tachyons were first proposed by physicist Arnold Sommerfeld, and named by Gerald Feinberg. The word tachyon derives from the Greek (tachus), meaning speedy. Tachyons have the strange properties that, when they lose energy, they gain speed. Consequently, when tachyons gain energy, they slow down. The slowest speed possible for tachyons is the speed of light. Tachyons appear to violate causality (the so-called causality problem), since they could be sent to the past under the assumption that the principle of special relativity is a true law of nature, thus generating a real unavoidable time paradox (Maiorino and Rodrigues 1999). Therefore, it seems unavoidable that if tachyons exist, the principle of special relativity must be false, and there exists a unique time order for all observers in the universe independent of their state of motion. Tachyons can be assigned properties of normal matter such as spin, as well as an antiparticle (the antitachyon). And amazingly, modern presentations of tachyon theory actually allow tachyons to actually have real mass (Recami 1996). It has been proposed that tachyons could be produced from high-energy particle collisions, and tachyon searches have been undertaken in cosmic rays. Cosmic rays hit the Earth's atmosphere with high energy (some of them with speed almost 99.99% of the speed of light) making several collisions with the molecules in the atmosphere. The particles made by this collision interact with the air, creating even more particles in a phenomenon known as a cosmic ray shower. In 1973, using a large collection of particle detectors, Philip Crough and Roger Clay identified a putative superluminal particle in an air shower, although this result has never been reproduced. timg1.gif Description: timg1.gif astronomy.gif Description: astronomy.gif
Re: [Vo]: Water vortex footage
On 3/24/07, Esa Ruoho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: oh and by the way, regarding waterhammer/cavitation, i really recommend hunting down the 2 hour documentary from dale pond (the basics of sympathetic vibratory physics (SVP)) Would this be it: http://snipurl.com/b3tl http://mail.google.com/mail/?auth=DQAAAHIApkNZxuMcXdo-zzKnrKX1K_0WglE1_ue9jLvIEkQ9y6HS00l5wpSAjr_nEzlTRfK7MWzqWSjD3JNlqPP6RQIuymvFhalh6rY0Bk3tunRC52vMg8lNy8sZdEQalCox4vUK5UXc9rf-bIr2CM-cxDBXhVb0gGWVrJ-gF4qhu9UJuwzx=yo8ei5lmjn3yshva=1 Terry
Re: [Vo]: Water vortex footage
linking gmail isnt quite gonna do it. try again! :) On 24/03/07, Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/24/07, Esa Ruoho [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: oh and by the way, regarding waterhammer/cavitation, i really recommend hunting down the 2 hour documentary from dale pond (the basics of sympathetic vibratory physics (SVP)) Would this be it: http://snipurl.com/b3tl http://mail.google.com/mail/?auth=DQAAAHIApkNZxuMcXdo-zzKnrKX1K_0WglE1_ue9jLvIEkQ9y6HS00l5wpSAjr_nEzlTRfK7MWzqWSjD3JNlqPP6RQIuymvFhalh6rY0Bk3tunRC52vMg8lNy8sZdEQalCox4vUK5UXc9rf-bIr2CM-cxDBXhVb0gGWVrJ-gF4qhu9UJuwzx=yo8ei5lmjn3yshva=1 Terry
Re: [Vo]: What's New Bob?
Steve Krivit quotes Robert Park: at the annual ACS Meeting in Dallas, but by June it was over. The Utah research was exposed as a pitiful embarrassment. . . . For years the faithful sulked at their own annual meetings held at swank resorts around the world. There they could congratulate each other on their progress. Each year another experiment would be hailed as proof, but never survived replication. . . . Once again, there is a new experiment that is being hailed as proof-at-last. Who knows, maybe this will be the one. Ah, that's more like it! He is back to his old self. As you see, he has not given an inch in 18 years. This is same pack of lies and nonsense he has been spouting all along. To answer Steve's question: Nothing is new. - Jed
[Vo]: What about Bob?
SUBJECT: What about Bob? First, Bob's recent comment: 1. MARCH MADNESS: COLD FUSION PEAKS AROUND THE VERNAL EQUINOX. On this day 18 years ago, the University of Utah announced the discovery of cold fusion without giving any technical details http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN89/wn032489.html. The peak came three weeks later when Stanley Pons received a standing ovation at the annual ACS Meeting in Dallas, but by June it was over. The Utah research was exposed as a pitiful embarrassment. For years the faithful sulked at their own annual meetings held at swank resorts around the world. There they could congratulate each other on their progress. Each year another experiment would be hailed as proof, but never survived replication. A few years ago, however, the bolder of the faithful began to reemerge from the dark, giving papers at professional society meetings. They now prefer to call their field Low-Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR), and they held a session at the APS March Meeting in Denver. Next week they will hold a session at the ACS Meeting in Chicago. Once again, there is a new experiment that is being hailed as proof-at-last. Who knows, maybe this will be the one. Next, Jed's reflections: Ah, that's more like it! He is back to his old self. As you see, he has not given an inch in 18 years. This is same pack of lies and nonsense he has been spouting all along. To answer Steve's [Krivit] question: Nothing is new. - Jed Jed, I'm not entirely convinced that he hasn't budged. Bob's last statement suggests a conveniently constructed escape hatch so that perhaps at a future date he can tell his captivated audience: Well, I kept hoping those guys would come up with something interesting. I think Ed Storms said it best some time ago when he described Bob's opinions as coming from an individual who is in love with the cleverness of his own words. Well, shoot! I like writing clever comments too. Sometimes I even succeed. Sometimes not, more often than I wish. The question I would like to ask is whether this latest Bob bout is worth taking issue with as far as ACS is concerned. Bob's comment was obviously designed with pre-meditated intent to ridicule the ACS as a legitimate scientific organization. It strikes me as an effort to demean the usefulness of ACS as an organization capable of presenting useful scientific knowledge, and THAT's what I wonder if ACS would care to address. How many times can so-called respected scientists and physicists get away with blowing hot air (albeit occasionally clever hot air) out of their own a##es and expect to get away with it. Strikes me as the old my willywag is bigger than your willywag ploy. Perhaps it isn't worth ACS's time and effort to call him to the mat on this issue. After all, size does not always matter. Just wondering out loud. Regards, www.OrionWorks.com Steven Vincent Johnson
[Vo]: The lastest word on cold fusion
For those who are interested in knowing what has been discovered about cold fusion, or better yet the Fleischmann-Pons Effect, I call your attention to the latest book on the subject. This book contains 1070 citations to publications up to 2006 and describes all aspects of the phenomenon. In addition, some of the theory is evaluated and some plausible mechanisms are suggested. Anyone who rejects the reality of the phenomenon after reading this description clearly is not objective. I will be interested to see what Park and the other skeptics have to say after they read this book. Regards, Ed http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?dest=97product_id=5682407sourceid=010030660805302498 http://newenergytimes.com/Books/StormsSLENR/SLENR.htm
Re: [Vo]: UFO records released in France
In reply to David Thomson's message of Fri, 23 Mar 2007 05:20:53 -0600: Hi, [snip] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/22/AR2007032202 132.html [snip] Quote: One case file described how investigators proved a man was lying about being abducted by aliens when blood tests failed to show he had recently experienced the weightlessness of space travel. This reminds me of the early transistor patent that was knocked back because it didn't contain a heated cathode, and hence couldn't work. Has it not occurred to these people that alien races that can travel between the stars probably have artificial gravity, hence no evidence of weightlessness is even to be expected? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
RE: [Vo]: UFO records released in France
Hi Robin, One case file described how investigators proved a man was lying about being abducted by aliens when blood tests failed to show he had recently experienced the weightlessness of space travel. Has it not occurred to these people that alien races that can travel between the stars probably have artificial gravity, hence no evidence of weightlessness is even to be expected? Good point. All the reported cases of UFO abductions I have read stated the aliens walked around the craft, not floated. Of course, this could be due to the lack of imagination of fake abductions, but if the abductions are real, then your point would be more reasonable than the conclusion of lying. Dave
Re: [Vo]: Excess heat from a Pd cylinder
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:25:44 -0400: Hi, [snip] The explosions are described here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/ZhangXontheexplo.pdf [snip] These people appear to still be searching for the explanation, that Hydrino fusion has long provided. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
RE: [Vo]: Re: Three Phase Lifters Are Fast Neutrons Tachyons?
Curious? http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw12.html The source of the cygnons has been traced to an unusual binary star system in the constellation Cygnus. In recent years space-bourne instruments have been able to examine the universe through a new window, the x-ray part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Bright sources of x-rays have been located and catalogged, and it has been found that the constellation Cygnus contains three bright x-rays objects. One of these called Cygnus X-3 is probably the most powerful source of high energy photons in the galaxy and has become the hottest topic in astrophysics today. Cygnus X-3 is on the other side of our galaxy, about 30,000 light-years from Earth. It is a binary star system, probably consisting of a neutron-star supernova remnant orbiting a normal star which feeds it hydrogen. The system has an orbital period of 4.79 hours. That's a remarkably short period: if a neutron star of 1 solar mass were orbiting our sun with that period, its orbit would be less than one solar radius above ! the sun's surface!! The 4.79 hour period can be used as a sort of fingerprint to tag radiation from Cygnus X-3, which should change in strength with this characteristic period. This period has been seen in Cygnus X-3 infrared, visible, x-ray, and gamma-ray emissions. The cygnons in the underground experiments have also been found to fluctuate with the same 4.79 hour period. This is confirming evidence that they come from Cygnus X-3. It also means that they travel at essentially the velocity of light; otherwise a spread of lower velocities straggling out across 30,000 light years would wash out the time variations. Cygnons events observed with the Fly's Eye have truly enormous kinetic energies: up to 20 million times the mass-energy of a proton at rest, or 20,000 times more energy than particles from even the largest earthbound accelerators. They must have no electric charge because they travel in a straight line path from Cygnus X-3. Their path is not curved by the magnetic field of the galaxy, as the path of a proton or any other charged particle would be. Further, the cygnons are found to make many µ-mesons in their collisions with the atmosphere, suggesting that they are strongly interacting particles (like protons) rather than electromagnetic particles (gamma rays) or weak particles (neutrinos). The zero charge of the cygnons is intriguing, for all of the known stable neutral particles can be counted on the fingers of one hand with a few fingers left over. The only truly stable neutral particles are photons, neutrinos, and neutral atoms. For good measure we could include the neutron, which is unstable to beta decay with a half life of 10.6 minutes. There are good reasons for eliminating each of these as cygnon candidates. As all good Analog readers know, relativity makes clocks run slower. Neutrons could possibly make it from Cygnus X-3 to Earth before decaying if they travelled so fast that relativistic time dilation slowed their internal clock until 10 minutes of internal neutron time became equivalent to 30,000 years of earth time. But this time dilation factor needs neutrons with 100 times more energy than the most energetic cygnon events which the Fly's Eye has seen. Neutral atoms can be eliminated because the empty space between Earth and Cygnus X-3 is not completely empty. A pipe with a cross section one centimeter square stretching across this distance would contain about 5 grams of interstellar hydrogen. This is several thousand times more matter than required to strip some electrons from any energetic neutral atom and give it a net electrical charge. Neutrinos can be eliminated because they interact with matter too weakly, and also because the detected cygnons show a horizon effect, diminished counts when Cygnus X-3 drops below the horizon. The gamma rays from Cygnus X-3 have about the right energy, but should, because they are electromagnetic particles, produce only 1/300 of the µ-mesons observed in cygnon events. No known neutral particle has all the characteristics of the cygnons. The inevitable conclusion is that the cygnon must be a new and previously unknown kind of particle. - Original Message - From: Frederick Sparber To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: 3/24/2007 4:03:37 AM Subject: [Vo]: A time-varying Electric Field around a Multipole might act as Tachyons if the legs are sequenced in the right manner. The electrostatic induction effect from this might also allow lift from a planet or moon, as well as generation of a force field, cloaking and Warp 10 FTL travel. Try this three-point device next Sunday? O O O Fred http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Tachyon.html Tachyons are a putative class of particles which able to travel faster than the speed of light. Tachyons were
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Institute videos are doing well
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:26:27 -0400: Hi, This search string lists all of New Energy Institute videos: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22new+energy+institute%22hl=en - Jed I watched http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1214733147725965006q=%22new+energy+institute%22hl=en and was very disappointed with the sound and with the clips of the screen. In this video, Pamela became almost inaudible every time she turned her back to the camera. Steve in future, would it be possible to get your sound pickup by plugging directly into the sound system of the auditorium? Since the speaker usually carries a microphone, you would be picking up that signal directly, i.e. by wire, rather than through the air. I was disappointed in the screen shots, because frequently when Pamela turned toward the screen to point something out, the camera only caught the right hand side of the screen, thus missing half the content. That made it totally useless. You need to get the entire screen, even if only briefly. We the audience, can always click on pause to freeze the video long enough to read the whole screen, but we do need to see the whole image. In fact, you could have left the camera pointed at the screen the whole time. The message is far more important than the messenger. Another thought: These scientists are prepared to spend time and effort doing a talk for a room full of people ( probably a few hundred at most). You might consider asking them to do a dedicated rerun just for you, under circumstances that are ideal for you to record, since the video you create is going on the web and is likely to be viewed by thousands rather than just the few in that room. Furthermore, they themselves can then refer others to the web video, which saves them time and effort otherwise wasted in lengthy explanations. Since it's a dedicated performance, they can also review if with you when it's done, and perhaps redo bits that came out poorly, which you can then edit in later, resulting in a better overall product. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
Re: [Vo]: Deuterium analysis
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 21 Mar 2007 17:09:34 +0100: Hi, [snip] Sorry to be so obtuse Robin, do you mean (Hy - Hy)+ with one electron orbiting around? I think you get it. It's two protons tightly bound by a single shrunken electron, which is thus a Hydrino molecular ion, acting as a nucleus, with an additional electron in a normal Bohr ground state orbit. As near as I can tell it should be chemically virtually indistinguishable from normal D, and hence should form part of natural heavy water. (Not heavy water created in fission reactors, which is formed by addition of a real neutron to protium). Because Hydrinos are formed among other places, on the Sun, they should be carried to the Earth in the Solar wind, some in the form of Hydrino molecular ions, and when they interact with Oxygen in the Earth's atmosphere, they can form Faux heavy water, which eventually falls as rain. Faux D can be distinguished from normal D by bombarding it with ionizing radiation with a per particle energy of at least 3000 eV. This is enough to break the Hydrino molecular ion apart, freeing up the proton which is then easily detected with SIMS. Since SIMS itself usually uses primary ions with an energy well in excess of 3000 eV, these should be capable of serving both purposes concurrently, hence my interest in SIMS results from heavy water experiments. The 3000 eV is actually a bit of a cheat. This is the energy required to break up a Hydrino molecular ion containing a Hydrino shrunken to level 24, which is IMO the most interesting, because it's the lowest level still capable of forming Hydrinohydride according to Mills. However Faux D could exist at any level of shrinkage, from 2 to at least 120. Hydrinohydride formation is important because it can be an intermediary in the rapid formation of Hydrino molecules, which in turn are important for clean fusion see - http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/Molecular%20Hydrino%20Fusion.htm [snip] BTW I think SIMS usually uses about 2 eV, which would be enough to separate a Hydrino molecular ion with shrinkage level 49. If my variant of Mills theory is correct, then this would imply a radius of the Hydrino of only 22 fm, allowing for very rapid fusion. (A level 24 shrinkage implies a radius of 92 fm). Note that muon catalyzed fusion happens at a distance of Bohr radius / 207 = 256 fm, and at that distance it is already blindingly fast, with up to 150 reactions being catalyzed during the lifetime of the muon (on average 2.2 micro seconds), and this takes into account the migration time of the muon from one atom to the next, as well as the actual time for fusion to occur. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, Cooperation (communism) provides the means.
[Vo]: Re: The lastest word on cold fusion
Howdy Ed, Bob Parks is no longer important. Richard
Re: [Vo]: New Energy Institute videos are doing well
At 09:52 AM 3/25/2007 +1000, you wrote: In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 22 Mar 2007 16:26:27 -0400: Hi, This search string lists all of New Energy Institute videos: http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22new+energy+institute%22hl=en - Jed I watched http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1214733147725965006q=%22new+energy+institute%22hl=en and was very disappointed with the sound and with the clips of the screen. In this video, Pamela became almost inaudible every time she turned her back to the camera. Steve in future, would it be possible to get your sound pickup by plugging directly into the sound system of the auditorium? Since the speaker usually carries a microphone, you would be picking up that signal directly, i.e. by wire, rather than through the air. I was disappointed in the screen shots, because frequently when Pamela turned toward the screen to point something out, the camera only caught the right hand side of the screen, thus missing half the content. That made it totally useless. You need to get the entire screen, even if only briefly. We the audience, can always click on pause to freeze the video long enough to read the whole screen, but we do need to see the whole image. In fact, you could have left the camera pointed at the screen the whole time. The message is far more important than the messenger. Another thought: These scientists are prepared to spend time and effort doing a talk for a room full of people ( probably a few hundred at most). You might consider asking them to do a dedicated rerun just for you, under circumstances that are ideal for you to record, since the video you create is going on the web and is likely to be viewed by thousands rather than just the few in that room. Furthermore, they themselves can then refer others to the web video, which saves them time and effort otherwise wasted in lengthy explanations. Since it's a dedicated performance, they can also review if with you when it's done, and perhaps redo bits that came out poorly, which you can then edit in later, resulting in a better overall product. Regards, Robin, You tell me very little that I don't already know. I almost considered not even doing the post-production and posting of Pam's video for the very reasons you state. But I decided to post it anyway, anticipating that at least some people would complain. I do the best I can sir, and I wear too many hats as it is. I'm glad the videos are of such interest that you would want to hear the speakers better. I didn't worry to much about the screen because I figured I could add screen shots in post-production later. I can still do this, but I don't have the time. If you would like to underwrite the costs, I can hire a professional to do this - for you and the rest of the public's benefit. I have a shotgun mike but forgot to pack it. It would have helped with Pam's audio somewhat, but she always speaks quietly. Amping that up is difficult under all configurations. I also have a wireless mike but chose not to carry it. Do you have any idea how much of a f*** hassle it is to do air travel in the U.S. with electronics? The best way do get better production would be to hire a local professional crew. Perhaps you would like to provide the funds for that? If so, I can assure you fully-professional videos in the future. If this is a consideration for you, please move quickly because ACS is this coming Thursday. As far as a dedicated rerun? Not even a question. For one, they are not eager for me to film them any more than you would be eager for me to film you brushing your teeth. This is not a show for them. Two, even if they were willing, I have filmed speakers before in such dry runs, and it just does not come out the same as when they are speaking to a live audience. Three, it would be staged and that's not cool. Four, I'd have to rent a room for a whole other day to setup the studio, and get the speakers to be available on another day, which means an extra day of flights, hotels. Sorry, I really like to hear helpful critique, but the idea of staging a rerun doesn't fly. Any other ideas? Steve
Re: [Vo]: Re: The lastest word on cold fusion
R.C.Macaulay wrote: Howdy Ed, Bob Parks is no longer important. Richard Important to whom? He's still the spokesman for the physics establishment, and a major pain in the ass for anyone attempting to get funding for research in areas ranging from physics to medicine. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
