Re: [Vo]:vo ref paper accpeted
On Jun 14, 2008, at 3:44 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would not take much for me to walk away. How do Jed and Stevek keep going? Frank Znidarsic You have a classic case of burnout. If you get some rest and time for yourself things will get a lot better. Hang in there. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:News from Japan
Big Correction (retraction) -- in this paper: http://www.hydrino.org/Labs/Final-Report-Nascent-Hydrogen.pdf The previous suggestion was wildly incorrect, since the connection of an anomaly in ionization potential to a an exploitable energy gap cannot be made, via triggered oscillations AFAIK. Yet it did bring in email as to why anyone would believe this and not Stanley Meyer! On reread, it is not clear precisely what I was thinking yesterday when this was written, although at the time there seemed to be a possible tie-in to Thermacore (other than trying to shoehorn something useful into Terry's suggestion) - apologies for that. OTOH - this is not to say that there could not still be something to it- only that a putative ZPE pump would probably not be related directly to a presumed gap or anomaly in the measured IP of this reactant -- over what it should be - that is: if it were to be related to multiples of 13.6 eV. At least I have not been able to find any rational suggestion in the literature of such relationship. Now. Going much further into the subject of water fuel and the desire of millions of people to see this emerging technology as an alternative to oil (yes, I am guilty of that desire as well). My initial bad-posting on the thermacore paper detail is now out in cyberspace and in the archives (even though now retracted) but is the kind of disinformation which can snowball - and get blown into something far-more than the dead end streets it is. The prime example is Stanley Meyer. I mention him as the best modern example of how misguided but well-meaning people and their followers (who are basing everything on merging science and religion) get caught up into irrationality. First, there is not a single scintilla of scientific evidence of overunity in anything the man did. Not one. Running a dune buggy for 20 minutes at a time on what is said to be water fuel is easily explainable as a mundane utilization of crankcase oil in that kind of engine. 40 years ago, I had a VW beetle that could hardly be turned-off due to residual oil-burning and an overdue ring job. If it had an electrolyzer attached back then, it too could have been run for 20 minutes on no gasoline. Yet I still get cranky email from Meyer disciples - over the prior claim in the vortex archives that his death was natural and not evidence of suppression. Jed Rothwell may get the same kind of cranky mail since he agreed with that detail and went further. It is almost an article of faith with some younger folks out there that Meyer was murdered by some nebulous group (a group that apparently only goes after washed-out inventors, designers of magic carburettors and scam artists. Because of the one video on YouTube, where Stanley claims to be walking with angels or whatever, and it is a pretty well-done slick video - and one which has been watched by tens of thousands of impressionable young people - this guy has been elevated almost to sainthood. But, in contrast he is closer to misguided nut-case than to saint in the eyes of science, and for good reason: Zero data ! Advice: get out there and get *good data* first, and then write your cranky email. I can say all of this AND at the same time opine that it might really be possible to engineer the Meyer or Brown's gas type of WFC into a Mizuno, LENR or hydrino-augmented water splitter which would be overunity !! There is no conflict in these positions. And I can even opine that yes, Meyer could conceivably have done this already, or Yull Brown - BUT - there is not the least bit of evidence that they did do it. i.e. zero data. You would think by now that one of his true believer disciples would have validated some tiny bit of OU with his device, except for one little problem. They may be good mechanics and garage tinkerers but they don't do science, and have not taken the time to read-up on the controversial and cutting-edge enhancements to the WFC like LENR or the Mills' hydrino. Small (but important) difference there in POV, and I hope the people sending me hatemail on the Meyer sainthood will get a life - no - better yet: get a WFC and engineer it to use hydrinos or Mizuno LENR etc- and next get good *reliable data* to prove that your crucified messiah really did pull-off this miracle... Jones
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
In concluding this thread, I want to mention that this is a classic anomaly. I've attempted to make the case that the world is, the way that it is, because it has a super natural component, which guides it. Even more anomalous are the writings of the Prophets which spell this scenario out in exact detail. In this scenario,Israel is the center of the world. As prophecized, it has become the focus of the entire World's attention. Edmund Storms wrote: thomas malloy wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: thomas malloy wrote: The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. If this is the case Thomas, Israel better have God on its side because otherwise the country is doomed. This conclusion is obvious to any rational person, not just liberals. Here is a small country that is not self sufficient without outside aid and is Your comments just tickle me Ed, this is exactly the scenario that the prophecies said would occur. Good, this is the spirit we need to continue a discussion. Of course, a person explaining such a conflict even in the past would predict that some people would try to find a reasonable solution. \ IMHO, there is no reasonable solution to a civilizational conflict. There is a night and day difference between a British Common Law based legal system, which is based on the Holy Torah, and a Sharia based system, which is based on the Qu' ran and the Hadith. If you can't see the difference between them, you need new glasses. But, this is not your point. I assume you believe this conflict was foretold in the Bible and that it will end badly, after which Christ will return and set things right again. Is this your belief? Badly is a subjective word. IMHO, the only way to make the world truly better involves the expiation of sin. There have been various Utopian communities, they were either based on the Bible, or they soon went into sexual immorality and or totalitarianism. I believe this is a case of a self fulfilling prophecy that various people worked to bring about in modern times. . If you are right, we should not have to wait long. If I'm right this began with a rebellion in heaven and continued with the lie that the serpent told Eve in the Garden. As far as it being a self fulling prophecy, I'm not G-d, nor is all of humanity. Israel, the weather, and the earthquakes are the prophecized labor pains --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
[Vo]:IEA has it wrong?
The IEA is suggesting a $45T program and over $1T/yr to cut carbon emissions 50% by 2050. See: http://www.iea.org/Textbase/press/pressdetail.asp?PRESS_REL_ID=263 This is on the order of the $26-33T, $1.5T/yr, and 20 yrs I predicted in 2005 would take for 100% conversion. See: http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/BigPicture.pdf http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/EnergyCosts.pdf However, that projected cost was for 100% elimination of carbon fuels. The primary difference is the IEA plan relies on 32 new nuclear plants each year: http://tinyurl.com/6387q2 and yet only 215 million sq m of solar panels total. That's only about $4.3T for solar, at 200W/m^2 and a $1 a watt, numbers which soon will be feasible. The main reason for the long time and large cost of the IEA plan is the principle use of conventional nuclear energy. This strikes me as very short sighted. The principal developments coming that will change this picture are: 1. Dramatic drops in cost per watt for solar power. 2. New cost effective technologies for energy storage and transmission. 3. Excessive risk, insurance costs, and political unrest associated with nuclear plants due to vulnerabilities. 4. Extreme long term increases in carbon based material cost - making the economics of solar more viable. Solar power production will have long term exponential growth without any government program. All government has to do is get out of the way. For example, any environmental assessment should be environmental cost/benefit based. When assessing the use of desert for example, we should compare the risk of extermination of all the major species of the world against partial the loss of life in a few thousand square meters of desert. 5. Carbon materials becoming be too valuable to burn, as opposed to being used as feed stock. 6. Hopefully, the advent of fusion power or other clean nuclear based equivalent in some form. It appears most people just don't expect what is even already in the works in solar energy development. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:IEA has it wrong?
On Jun 15, 2008, at 8:57 AM, I wrote: When assessing the use of desert for example, we should compare the risk of extermination of all the major species of the world against partial the loss of life in a few thousand square meters of desert. The above should say: When assessing the use of desert for example, we should compare the risk of extermination of all the major species of the world against the partial loss of population in a few thousand square miles of desert. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
[Vo]:Test
Test, please ignore. Test from Gmail to see if this fixes the message return redirect problem.
[Vo]:Hokkaido Shimbun reports on Mizuno hydrocarbon experiments
The following article appeared in the Hokkaido Newspaper on June 12. It describes an experiment that Mizuno has been doing for quite a while. He has been uncharacteristically unwilling to divulge information about this work, but I believe he intends to discuss it in detail at ICCF14 in August 2008. I have been aware of this research for some time, and I have several manuscripts about it, which Mizuno asked me not to discuss. I hope that I can upload more information soon, perhaps before ICCF14. The experimental technique, calibration and other aspects of the work are much improved since I first learned of it, and the cell is smaller and safer. The article says Mizuno has repeated the experiment 30 times. This means 30 times with this particular configuration, starting this year. He has done the experiment many times previously with a larger cell. The older cell was too large and therefore dangerous, so I am relieved to hear he has scaled down the cell. Note that the article refers to Mr. Mizuno and indicates he is a graduate student. He is Dr. Mizuno, associate professor. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hokkaido Shimbun http://www.hokkaido-np.co.jp/news/environment/98372.html Environment * Nature * Science section Cold fusion with a simple reactor? Hokkaido U. Researcher Mizuno Confirms Reaction Will report at international conference June 12, 2008 On June 11, Mr. Tadahiko Mizuno of the Hokkaido University Engineering Dept. (Energy and Environmental Systems) announced a new experiment in which carbon compounds are exposed to hydrogen in a relatively simple reactor (furnace) and then heated. The compounds then produce anomalous heat (excess heat) in amounts far exceeding the heat that could be generated by chemical reactions, as well as gamma rays, which indicate that a nuclear reaction is occuring. Mizuno will present these results at an upcoming international conference in August in the U.S., as a confirmation of a new form of cold fusion. The experiment is done with a stainless steel vessel (internal volume 88 cc). 0.1 gram of phenanthrene (a type of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon) is placed in the vessel, and high pressure hydrogen gas is added. Also exposed to the gas inside the vessel serving as catalysts are sulfur and platinum, which acts as a means to line up hydrogen atoms in gas, and promote hydrogen reactions. When hydrogen pressure is raised to 70 atm, and the temperature is raised to 660°C [with a resistance heater], the temperature rises above the set level, and after the input power to the resistance heat is cut off, the cell temperature continues to rise for about an hour, reaching a peak of 690°C. By this stage, excess heat output reaches 60 watts, and total excess heat energy is 240 kilojoules, which exceeds any conceivable chemical reaction by a factor of over 100. Mr. Mizuno has repeated this experiment 30 times, and observed excess heat in every case. Furthermore, after the test, products found inside the cell include: 1. large amounts of carbon-13, an isotope that occurs naturally on earth as only 1% of normal carbon; 2. nitrogen, which is not found in the cell before the experiment in measurable amounts. Because neither of these can be explained as the product of a chemical reaction, Mr. Mizuno says, One must conclude that a fusion reaction involving hydrogen and carbon is occurring in the cell. Prof. Hiroshi Yamada of the Iwate University Engineering Dept. (Electrical Engineering) said It is quite likely that heat is being generated at levels far exceeding heat from chemical reactions. This research deserves attention. Also, a leading researcher at a major industrial company said, This is quite different from previous reports of cold fusion, and of great interest.
[Vo]:Baseball and GR
Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: By the way, the derivation of pi from Pythagoras's theorem to which I referred, and the derivation of the area of a circle and volume of a sphere using geometric arguments, are here: http://physicsinsights.org/pi_from_pythagoras-1.html http://physicsinsights.org/sphere-volume-1.html You may not feel these pages actually "explain" anything, of course! :-) That was, however, part of the reason for putting them together, and perhaps these pages will give you an idea of what I think an explanation is. Or maybe not...Nice derivations.I've never seen it done but can you useGeneral Relativ! ity to s
Re: [Vo]:Baseball and GR
Sorry my request was truncated. I've never seen it done but can you use General Relativity to show the path of a thrown ball is parabolic? Harry ---BeginMessage--- Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: By the way, the derivation of pi from Pythagoras's theorem to which I referred, and the derivation of the area of a circle and volume of a sphere using geometric arguments, are here: http://physicsinsights.org/pi_from_pythagoras-1.html http://physicsinsights.org/sphere-volume-1.html You may not feel these pages actually "explain" anything, of course! :-) That was, however, part of the reason for putting them together, and perhaps these pages will give you an idea of what I think an explanation is. Or maybe not...Nice derivations.I've never seen it done but can you useGeneral Relativ! ity to s ---End Message---
Re: [Vo]:Test
Yes, that will fix it. On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Test, please ignore. Test from Gmail to see if this fixes the message return redirect problem.
Re: [Vo]:Hokkaido Shimbun reports on Mizuno hydrocarbon experiments
Jed, Is there an English link for this on the site or did you translate it? Steve At 12:57 PM 6/15/2008, you wrote: The following article appeared in the Hokkaido Newspaper on June 12. It describes an experiment that Mizuno has been doing for quite a while. He has been uncharacteristically unwilling to divulge information about this work, but I believe he intends to discuss it in detail at ICCF14 in August 2008. I have been aware of this research for some time, and I have several manuscripts about it, which Mizuno asked me not to discuss. I hope that I can upload more information soon, perhaps before ICCF14. The experimental technique, calibration and other aspects of the work are much improved since I first learned of it, and the cell is smaller and safer. The article says Mizuno has repeated the experiment 30 times. This means 30 times with this particular configuration, starting this year. He has done the experiment many times previously with a larger cell. The older cell was too large and therefore dangerous, so I am relieved to hear he has scaled down the cell. Note that the article refers to Mr. Mizuno and indicates he is a graduate student. He is Dr. Mizuno, associate professor. - Jed - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hokkaido Shimbun http://www.hokkaido-np.co.jp/news/environment/98372.html Environment * Nature * Science section Cold fusion with a simple reactor? Hokkaido U. Researcher Mizuno Confirms Reaction Will report at international conference June 12, 2008 On June 11, Mr. Tadahiko Mizuno of the Hokkaido University Engineering Dept. (Energy and Environmental Systems) announced a new experiment in which carbon compounds are exposed to hydrogen in a relatively simple reactor (furnace) and then heated. The compounds then produce anomalous heat (excess heat) in amounts far exceeding the heat that could be generated by chemical reactions, as well as gamma rays, which indicate that a nuclear reaction is occuring. Mizuno will present these results at an upcoming international conference in August in the U.S., as a confirmation of a new form of cold fusion. The experiment is done with a stainless steel vessel (internal volume 88 cc). 0.1 gram of phenanthrene (a type of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon) is placed in the vessel, and high pressure hydrogen gas is added. Also exposed to the gas inside the vessel serving as catalysts are sulfur and platinum, which acts as a means to line up hydrogen atoms in gas, and promote hydrogen reactions. When hydrogen pressure is raised to 70 atm, and the temperature is raised to 660°C [with a resistance heater], the temperature rises above the set level, and after the input power to the resistance heat is cut off, the cell temperature continues to rise for about an hour, reaching a peak of 690°C. By this stage, excess heat output reaches 60 watts, and total excess heat energy is 240 kilojoules, which exceeds any conceivable chemical reaction by a factor of over 100. Mr. Mizuno has repeated this experiment 30 times, and observed excess heat in every case. Furthermore, after the test, products found inside the cell include: 1. large amounts of carbon-13, an isotope that occurs naturally on earth as only 1% of normal carbon; 2. nitrogen, which is not found in the cell before the experiment in measurable amounts. Because neither of these can be explained as the product of a chemical reaction, Mr. Mizuno says, One must conclude that a fusion reaction involving hydrogen and carbon is occurring in the cell. Prof. Hiroshi Yamada of the Iwate University Engineering Dept. (Electrical Engineering) said It is quite likely that heat is being generated at levels far exceeding heat from chemical reactions. This research deserves attention. Also, a leading researcher at a major industrial company said, This is quite different from previous reports of cold fusion, and of great interest.
