[Vo]:Oriani/SPAWAR mylar film

[William Beaty]

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Michael Foster wrote:

> I'm afraid I haven't been following the discussion of Kowalski's work
> and don't know why he needs the 6u material or if it has to be
> polyester.

I'm a latecomer too.  Here's the later incarnation of Oriani/SPAWAR lenr
experiment:
  http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/368project.html
  http://pages.csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/368TGP_oriani.pdf

The goal is to make a "science fair" CF experiment which always works.
He's etching CR-39 dosimeter plastic after placing it against a wire
cathode in a simple electrolysis cell.  But the hot alkaline electrolyte
trapped in the cathode boundary layer attacks the dosimeter surface, so
another layer needs to be interposed, but must be thin enough to not
significantly block all the slow alphas/neutrons/weirdness.  Oriani used
6u PC film, so that's what we're looking for.  Thinner film might not
survive the alkaline liquid. Only about a square inch is needed for each
run.

Ludwik just tried the 13u Kapton, and found that the film adjacent to
the cathode wire is eaten away during the 4-day run.  The 6u Mylar did
this too, but the hole was smaller.

Also see:
  http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/KrivitSextraordin.pdf
  http://www.earthtech.org/experiments/PACA/report2.htm

> I thought it was pretty funny about the measurement bias. When you have
> been working with these films as long as I have, you can just sort of
> rub the stuff between your fingers and identify the thickness. Virtually
> all of my employees can do this, so it isn't a unique talent. Not very
> scientific, but apparently more accurate than an ordinary micrometer
> with an unpracticed operator.

Or shake it and listen to the peak frequency of the pink noise?  ;)

Also, our Kapton tape displays that same "impossible" effect discussed
years ago: the whole spool shows a positive charge, and Kapton pulled off
the spool is strongly positive (even if I pull off a couple of meters, so
it's not just the outer layer getting charged through hand contact.)


(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:vortex balls!

[Harry Veeder]

I'll be back.

Harry


- Original Message -
From: Horace Heffner 
Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 9:57 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex balls!

> 
> On Jul 1, 2009, at 3:33 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Horace Heffner 
> > Date: Monday, June 29, 2009 3:24 pm
> > Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex balls!
> >
> >>
> >> On Jun 29, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> Yes the loop is closed, but I am working from the hypothesis that
> >>> the bearings are accelerated by the magnetic field produced by the
> >>> current flowing through the shaft. Therefore the bearings
> >>> do not need to make electrical contact with the shaft,
> >>> although  they might need some start-up rotation. Note,
> >>> my hypothesis is just a guess so I can't justify it on theoretical
> >>> grounds using conventional physics. All I can say is that a
> >>> "torque" is
> >>> not required. This is becoming clearer to me as we talk about it.
> >>
> >> It there is no torque there will be no rotation. There is friction
> >> that stops any rotation unless torque is maintained. If there is no
> >> current there will be no torque.
> >
> > Yes if Newton's third law is the whole truth and nothing but the  
> > truth.
> 
> 
> Newton's laws are the *last* thing I would discard in describing a  
> machine which to me has no apparent anomaly. In any case, if you 
> are  
> going to invoke bizarre physics, it is up to you to carefully  
> specify, quantify, and justify it.
> 
> 
> >
> >> It there is a current through the shaft there is a circular B field
> >> around the shaft, except in the vicinity of the brushes.  A
> >> circular B field, even if it magnetizes the balls, will produce 
> no  
> >> torque
> >> upon the balls other than a torque that retards their rotation,  
> >> unless
> >> there is also a radial current through the balls.
> >
> > Remember I am making the shaft stationary so there are no 
> brushes.  
> > (See
> > my description above.)
> 
> 
> Yes I got that. I repeat all the above and below.  The only way I 
> can  
> have any understanding of your statements that otherwise make no  
> sense at all to me is the possibility that you have the 
> misconception  
> that a magnet in a uniform B field will have a net force (besides 
> any  
> torque) on it from the uniform B field.  This is just not true.  
> The  
> magnetic material of the balls will have a magnetic field induced 
> in  
> them that aligns with the circular magnetic field, and thus 
> provides  
> a torque on the balls upon any ball rotation that resists that ball 
> 
> rotation, and which provides no net circumferential force (torque)  
> about the shaft to either them or or to the shaft.  Perhaps if you  
> described in detail, with drawings, why you think there would be 
> any  
> motion of the balls in the circular field, or any net force or 
> motion  
> reinforcing torque on the balls, without a current through the 
> balls,  
> it would make some sense.
> 
> 
> >
> >> It is easy to see, by symmetry, that a radial current through the
> >> balls can not produce a net torque, because the circular B field is
> >>
> >> in the same direction at the bearings at both ends, but the current
> >>
> >> direction is into the shaft at one end and out at the other, thus
> >> any
> >> such torque must net to zero. The torque at one end of the shaft
> >> exactly cancels the torque at the other end, provided both ends are
> >>
> >> symmetrical to each other.
> >
> > Assume the bearings are in the middle of a very long shaft so the 
> 
> > relevant
> > B field is circular.
> 
> Uhhh  did you even read what I wrote?  What circular B field 
> did  
> you think I was referring to in my post?
> 
> I guess for now the quality of and effort for accurate 
> communication  
> has dropped to the point in this discussion that it is now simply  
> beyond the point of usefulness.
> 
> Please excuse my grouchiness. I'm short of time and sleep.
> 
> >
> >> Besides the symmetry argument, if you actually draw the
> >> configuration
> >> you can see that a circular B field will act on any radial current
> >> through the balls to produce an axial force on the bearings, not a
> >> torque on the bearings.
> >>
> >> If you look more carefully at what happens to the magnetic material
> >>
> >> in the ordinary Marino motor as it rotates, however, you can see
> >> that
> >> hysteresis (a delay in the de-magnetizing of the material) permits
> >> magnetized material to rotate into place where the radial current
> >> through it produces a torque that reinforces the direction of
> >> rotation, which ever direction of rotation that might be. This is
> >> all
> >> laid out in diagrammatic form in Figs 3 and 4 of:
> >>
> >> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/HullMotor.pdf
> >>
> >> Further, the symmetry argument for the ordinary Marinov motor now
> >> shows a reinforcing, not canceling, effect at both ends of the
> >> shaft.  This is because, when the

Re: [Vo]:Expectation bias, delusion

[William Beaty]

On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:

> No, the force should have been the same in each trial.  Think about what
> you've got.
>
> If each layer is behaving elastically, then the question you need to ask
> is, what force is needed to compress 1 layer to 1/2 its thickness?  Call
> that force "F".

Nah, the stuff is really rigid, and the stack visibly remains flat when
squeezed.  (That's probably a good clue that there were no air layers in
the first place!)  It's probably the plastic case connected to the
micrometer jaw that's flexing, see
http://www.harborfreight.com/cpi/ctaf/displayitem.taf?Itemnumber=47257

Wow, they're down to $10 each!   They originally were $50 a few years
back.   They have a serial port under a little door, but it's not a listed
feature, so it might not be alive.




(( ( (  (   ((O))   )  ) ) )))
William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb at amasci com http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair
Seattle, WA  206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci

Re: [Vo]:More about the Russian superbomb

[Horace Heffner]

Many days I can't even get things right on the second try.

I wrote: "I expect the gradient within the cathode can be made over  
100 times that 0.02 T/cm^2, using even permanent magnets, in  
experiments designed to meet that objective."


That should be: "I expect the gradient within the cathode can be made  
over 100 times that 0.02 T/cm, using even permanent magnets, in  
experiments designed to meet that objective."


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:2012 and Nebran Planet X

[Edmund Storms]

How does anyone know that the obit of Nebran Planet X lasts for 3600  
years except by relating it to the events that are assumed to be  
caused by the planet?  In other words, this looks like circular  
reasoning, which gives no evidence at all.


Ed

On Jul 4, 2009, at 5:38 AM, Taylor J. Smith wrote:



Hi All, 7-4-09

I'm enclosing some snippets on 2012 which you may find
interesting.

Jack Smith



Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007

thomas malloy wrote:

``Vortexians;

Those of you who have been on the list for a while
know that I have a fascination with the apocalypse,
and a gallows sense of humor. The author of this
website was interviewed this morning on C to C AM,
no matter what you think about his theories, you will,
IMHO, appreciate the art that went into the introductory
page. http://www.apocalypse2012.com . Momma mia, that's
a spicy webpage!

I'm reminded of a Tesla Society conference around 1992
where someone mentioned the wall in 2012, and remote
viewing. That was before I heard about Hal Puthoff's role
in the development of remote viewing, 2012 seemed a long
way off at the time.''

--

http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-22-2004/Bell-InterviewPartOne.htm

Hoagland & Wilcock on Coast to Coast

5-15/16-04

[AB is Art Bell]

``AB: From the high desert in the great American southwest,
I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon
-- as the time zone may dictate -- all of them covered
like a blanket by this program, Coast to Coast AM. I'm
Art Bell. It's the weekend, and I am honored to be with
you on a Saturday night going into Sunday morning, and of
course tomorrow night as well.

I have some shocking and tragic news for you at the top
of the program and I'm sure Richard's gonna have a lot to
say about this and will probably fill me in on details
I don't yet have. But what it boils down to is that Dr
Eugene Mallove is dead. And it is indeed with great sadness
that we report the passing of Gene Mallove who died, no,
correction, was killed, on May 14th apparently due to some
sort of -- we don't know about this -- allegedly, some are
saying 'some kind of property dispute'. It is considered
by the police to be a homicide and an investigation is
under way now ...

AB: I know this has great meaning for Richard, but I?

RH: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. We're not getting to
the good stuff yet.

If you look at that line -- where it is in the sky --
and you extend that line (like a celestial Meridian)
out into space -- so it goes through, you know, where

Sirius is in the sky, if you track twelve degrees to the
East -- one degree per year (which is how Sirius will
move, in relation to the Earth, and in relation to the
Galactic Center) -- when that alignment occurs at midnight
at 2012 -- that will be the Winter Solstice, and 'D-Day'
will have arrived!

In other words, that [planned Giza 2000] Ceremony marked
the beginning of a 12-year [countdown] 'clock!'

DW: Right -- I got it!

RH: The final countdown to 'something' -- happening in 2012
-- by these guys, led by Zahi, who know 'something' -- that
they are not wanting the rest of us to figure out! ...''

-

Commentator 1 wrote:

``From my March 20, 2008 email:

"The Sunday before last, a similar browsing trip to
Border's brought Mar/Apr [2009] SCIENCE Illustrated to my
attention for "The Volcano that Lied: How Santorini Is
Changing History 3,600 Year After It Blew", pp. 46-53.
The article describes how the new "date" for the Minoan
eruption of Thera was determined and is shown by the
Greenland ice cores to be 1642 BC and by radiocarbon
dating, 1627-1600 BC, while not mentioning the tree-ring
date of 1627 BC. The radiocarbon date was obtained by
high-precision dating of an olive branch that was trapped
in the tephra from the eruption."

Forgive any year or two discrepancies, as with the
Greenland ice core date for eruption of Thera. The point
is that the tree ring climate signal for Thera is dated
1628 BCE, based on the frost damage at that time, while
the acidity signal for the eruption in Greenland is 1642
BCE (originally reported to be 1645 BCE in 1987). The C-14
date for the eruption based on an olive branch trapped in
the tephra is closer to the tree ring date than the ice
core date. Mike Baillie has published on this discrepancy,
but I am not aware of the latest news on this score.''

Commentator 2 wrote on 7-1-09:

Why is the date 1628 BCE important? I can remember that
long ago I adhered to that date. Now I think that it
is 1588 BCE. After all, there are not (geologically
speaking) all that many years between 1645 BCE (which
I never heard of before) and 1588 BCE.  What difference
would a few years, even half a century, make here? Please
explain. Thanks.  I'll appreciate it.

Commentator 1 wrote:

... annual-looking layers based on the dating of ancient
volcanic eruptions. For example, the tree ring date for
the Minoan eruption of Thera is 1628 B.C.E.

Commentator 2 wrote:

Thanks for

Re: [Vo]:More about the Russian superbomb

[Horace Heffner]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 8:06 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:


...but wouldn't that gradient need to exist between the particle  
and the

nucleus?


I wrote: "Any hydrogen in a fully loaded lattice is surrounded by  
atoms in all quadrants. Further, even as charged particles, hydrogen  
can readily tunnel the distances between lattice sites, this at  
thermal potential energies of only mV involved. The lattice atoms are  
even closer, but from a tunneling perspective, only to a neutral  
particle, because the Coulomb barrier and the small size of the  
nearby nuclei make the ordinary probability of transmutation events  
small.  This barrier is dropped with respect to deflated hydrogen,  
and enhanced by a magnetic field gradient."


I should have also noted that both the lattice atoms and the nearby  
hydrogen atoms are essentially electrostatically confined.  The  
magnetic gradient has primary effect on nucleus tunneling when a  
hydrogen atom deflates and the nucleus becomes electrostatically  
neutral, while the target atom remains confined to its location,  
essentially unaffected by the magnetic gradient, even if it has a  
substantial magnetic moment.


I also wrote: "I expect the gradient within the cathode can be made  
over 100 times that 0.2 T/cm^2, using even permanent magnets, in  
experiments designed to meet that objective."


That should be: "I expect the gradient within the cathode can be made  
over 100 times that 0.02 T/cm^2, using even permanent magnets, in  
experiments designed to meet that objective."


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:New Energy Times Issue 32

[Jones Beene]

Steve,

 

In regard to #9 on your list of subjects  2008 DARPA Document:  LENR
Research Budgeted  

 

You say "Hidden deep inside a Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
budget justification document is a notice
  for LENR funding.
It's on page 18 in the pdf or page 216 in the original document: "determine
the correlation between excess heat observations and production of nuclear
by-products." You just need to know where to look -- or know an insider at
DARPA to help you out." 

 

 

My reading of this is slightly different from yours. Actually it is very
different, if you throw in the bit about General Atomic, and let you
imagination run rampant with JASON involvement ..

 

OTOH if you had the help of a DARPA insider, then you are probably correct
(let's hope not being played?)

 

Anyway, I think this paragraph you site relates solely to a process called
MISER, and that the LENR situation might have been an inadvertent finding,
such as possibly from a prior report in that program, where maybe there was
an energy anomaly - which they are now trying to understand using LENR as a
hypothesis/

 

Of course, I could be reading too much into this ;-)

 

It can be noted that the contractor for MISER is General Atomic. In 2008
they were to demonstrate a pilot-scale Mobile Integrated Sustainable Energy
Recovery (MISER) process for converting waste to 5 kilowatts electric power,
and then to scale up to 60 kW.

 

I looks to me like - somewhere during the course of this work, the
contractor found an excursion into an excess heat regime. Since they are
located not far from SPAWAR - this might be the "how and why" they were
inclined to link it to LENR.

 

Probably a coincidence, but it could be a situation calling for more
investigative journalism . if you can dodge the spooks, and if not - hey,
work on your tan. Not a bad place to visit. 

 

According to Wiki: General Atomics was conceived in 1955 at San Diego,
California for the purpose of harnessing the power of nuclear technologies
for the benefit of the United States of America. It was founded as the
General Atomic division of General Dynamics. It was sold to Gulf Oil and
renamed Gulf General Atomic. In 1973, it was renamed General Atomic Company
when Shell was a partner. Shell left the venture in 1982 and Gulf named it
GA Technologies Inc. Chevron purchased Gulf in 1984. Then:

 

In 1986, it was sold to a company owned by Neal Blue and Linden Blue when it
assumed its current name.

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2001/jul/12/general-atomics-color-it-blue
/

 

This is where the spooks, JASON and all that, may have entered the picture.
If you believe in that kind of stuff. Hey, maybe Morgan Freeman got his
start down there. It would make a clever sequel to "Chain Reaction".

 

The initial projects at GA were the TRIGA nuclear reactor and Project Orion.
In 1978, it published a pamphlet for new employees that stated, in part,
that "we expect to have several commercial fusion reactors online and
producing electricity by the year 2000." In 2007, General Atomics was
developing a next generation nuclear power plant design, the Gas Turbine
Modular Helium Reactor (GT-MHR). They also make the Predator.

 

Well this tale of chain-reactions could get curiouser and curiouser .. 

 

Jones

 

 

Re: [Vo]:More about the Russian superbomb

[Horace Heffner]

On Jul 3, 2009, at 8:06 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 3 Jul 2009 17:29:26  
-0800:

Hi,
[snip]

However, 1 g of hydrogen unexpectedly set off in lattice by the
volume effect of polarized x-rays


Where does this come from?


My fertile imagination. 8^)

It comes from the concept that deflated hydrogen is a magnetic
dipole, and thus the probability of its wave function collapse
(tunneling) into a nearby nucleus within a fully loaded lattice is
thus improved by a magnetic gradient,


...but wouldn't that gradient need to exist between the particle  
and the

nucleus?


Any hydrogen in a fully loaded lattice is surrounded by atoms in all  
quadrants. Further, even as charged particles, hydrogen can readily  
tunnel the distances between lattice sites, this at thermal potential  
energies of only mV involved. The lattice atoms are even closer, but  
from a tunneling perspective, only to a neutral particle, because the  
Coulomb barrier and the small size of the nearby nuclei make the  
ordinary probability of transmutation events small.  This barrier is  
dropped with respect to deflated hydrogen, and enhanced by a magnetic  
field gradient.






and very large such gradients
can be supplied by coherent polarized x-rays.


This I don't understand. Do you have a reference for the simple of  
mind? ;)


Sorry, no reference handy.  However, IIRC, typical x-rays can produce  
magnetic gradients on the order of mT/cm.  FEL lasers can produce  
gradients on the order of a million times greater, or kT/cm.   This  
of course is major overkill. I think various CF experiments have  
shown positive effects from magnetic *fields* on the order of 0.2 T.   
My supposition, based on the deflated hydrogen hypothesis, is the it  
was not the magnetic field, but rather the magnetic gradient that was  
effective, and the gradients involved were likely less than .02 T/ 
cm^2 due to a lack of intent to maximize the gradient within the  
cathode.  The cathodes are typically placed between the poles of two  
magnets, thereby essentially minimizing the gradient there.   I  
expect the gradient within the cathode can be made over 100 times  
that 0.2 T/cm^2, using even permanent magnets, in experiments  
designed to meet that objective. A FEL laser output in addition to  
that would be additive, and has the additional benefits of being able  
to tune the frequency of oscillating electrostatic and magnetic  
fields deep within the lattice, and thus the possibility of tuning in  
to a particle-lattice resonance.







Description and some
justification for the concept is found here:

http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/DeflationFusion2.pdf


[snip]
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html



Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Kowalski paper

[OrionWorks]

>From Mr. Lawrence,

> OrionWorks wrote:
>> Welcome back, Mr. Lawrence
>
> Thank you, Mr. Johnson ... and I would like to make a brief OT excursion
> to apologize to you for my sanctimonious, unpleasant, and undeserved
> comments to you just before I flounced out of the room and slammed the
> door, a couple of weeks back.

Apology accepted, with the caveat that your observations were
accurate. I am often guilty of playing the role of the armchair
psychologist. It's a predilection that occasionally earns me hostile
responses, some of it probably deserved.

>> ... Eventually she just sighed, brushed against my
>> ankle, and purred, "Iem that Iem." She then took pity on my conundrum
>> and suggested we occupy ourselves with another worthy pursuit:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5qd9Kp3Hfc
>
> Merci beaucoup!  Very amusing!  :-)
>
> I happen to know someone rather well who looks a whole lot like the star
> of the video.  You may have met him if you took a peek at the 'images'
> directory under Iemy.

Zoey tells me she frequently hangs out with Iemy at the water dish to
discuss the latest techniques that have been applied to sequestering
the long sought after field sparrow particle. In the meantime, Zoey
wants you to know that she detected the secret paw print on your
forehead. You can rub her belly anytime.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:2012 and Nebran Planet X

[Taylor J. Smith]

Hi All, 7-4-09

I'm enclosing some snippets on 2012 which you may find
interesting.

Jack Smith



Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007

thomas malloy wrote:

``Vortexians;

Those of you who have been on the list for a while
know that I have a fascination with the apocalypse,
and a gallows sense of humor. The author of this
website was interviewed this morning on C to C AM,
no matter what you think about his theories, you will,
IMHO, appreciate the art that went into the introductory
page. http://www.apocalypse2012.com . Momma mia, that's
a spicy webpage!

I'm reminded of a Tesla Society conference around 1992
where someone mentioned the wall in 2012, and remote
viewing. That was before I heard about Hal Puthoff's role
in the development of remote viewing, 2012 seemed a long
way off at the time.''

--

http://www.enterprisemission.com/_articles/05-22-2004/Bell-InterviewPartOne.htm

Hoagland & Wilcock on Coast to Coast

5-15/16-04

[AB is Art Bell]

``AB: From the high desert in the great American southwest,
I bid you all good evening, good morning, good afternoon
-- as the time zone may dictate -- all of them covered
like a blanket by this program, Coast to Coast AM. I'm
Art Bell. It's the weekend, and I am honored to be with
you on a Saturday night going into Sunday morning, and of
course tomorrow night as well.

I have some shocking and tragic news for you at the top
of the program and I'm sure Richard's gonna have a lot to
say about this and will probably fill me in on details
I don't yet have. But what it boils down to is that Dr
Eugene Mallove is dead. And it is indeed with great sadness
that we report the passing of Gene Mallove who died, no,
correction, was killed, on May 14th apparently due to some
sort of -- we don't know about this -- allegedly, some are
saying 'some kind of property dispute'. It is considered
by the police to be a homicide and an investigation is
under way now ...

AB: I know this has great meaning for Richard, but I?

RH: Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. We're not getting to
the good stuff yet.

If you look at that line -- where it is in the sky --
and you extend that line (like a celestial Meridian)
out into space -- so it goes through, you know, where

Sirius is in the sky, if you track twelve degrees to the
East -- one degree per year (which is how Sirius will
move, in relation to the Earth, and in relation to the
Galactic Center) -- when that alignment occurs at midnight
at 2012 -- that will be the Winter Solstice, and 'D-Day'
will have arrived!

In other words, that [planned Giza 2000] Ceremony marked
the beginning of a 12-year [countdown] 'clock!'

DW: Right -- I got it!

RH: The final countdown to 'something' -- happening in 2012
-- by these guys, led by Zahi, who know 'something' -- that
they are not wanting the rest of us to figure out! ...''

-

Commentator 1 wrote:

``From my March 20, 2008 email:

"The Sunday before last, a similar browsing trip to
Border's brought Mar/Apr [2009] SCIENCE Illustrated to my
attention for "The Volcano that Lied: How Santorini Is
Changing History 3,600 Year After It Blew", pp. 46-53.
The article describes how the new "date" for the Minoan
eruption of Thera was determined and is shown by the
Greenland ice cores to be 1642 BC and by radiocarbon
dating, 1627-1600 BC, while not mentioning the tree-ring
date of 1627 BC. The radiocarbon date was obtained by
high-precision dating of an olive branch that was trapped
in the tephra from the eruption."

Forgive any year or two discrepancies, as with the
Greenland ice core date for eruption of Thera. The point
is that the tree ring climate signal for Thera is dated
1628 BCE, based on the frost damage at that time, while
the acidity signal for the eruption in Greenland is 1642
BCE (originally reported to be 1645 BCE in 1987). The C-14
date for the eruption based on an olive branch trapped in
the tephra is closer to the tree ring date than the ice
core date. Mike Baillie has published on this discrepancy,
but I am not aware of the latest news on this score.''

Commentator 2 wrote on 7-1-09:

Why is the date 1628 BCE important? I can remember that
long ago I adhered to that date. Now I think that it
is 1588 BCE. After all, there are not (geologically
speaking) all that many years between 1645 BCE (which
I never heard of before) and 1588 BCE.  What difference
would a few years, even half a century, make here? Please
explain. Thanks.  I'll appreciate it.

Commentator 1 wrote:

... annual-looking layers based on the dating of ancient
volcanic eruptions. For example, the tree ring date for
the Minoan eruption of Thera is 1628 B.C.E.

Commentator 2 wrote:

Thanks for explaining that.  I have included your comments
for my Planet X list-members.  Now I know why certain
people were focused on the date of 1628 BCE, back 30-odd
years ago.  That was a Thera/Santornini "guesstimate".

As we know, in Worlds In Collision Dr. Velikovsky equated
the time of the Israelite Exodus