Re: [Vo]:BRUSH UP ON BASICS
When I initially saw the video on youtube, it didn't strike me as being a hoax. I probably wasn't in a particularly skeptical frame of mind and besides, the flight was only some seconds. Upon finishing however, I noticed some related videos, one of which included a NOVA special where some guys made a legit human powered flying machine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZjHcjyLprw Note that the actual implementation is incredibly exhausting, requires high tech lightweight materials, and everything is shaved down to the absolute bare minimum. No small feat, for sure! XL On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 10:02 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote: On Tue, 20 Mar 2012, integral.property.serv...@gmail.com wrote: Found this more suitable for spare time than videos or games: http://hydride.has.it/ Nice, but arrg, powerpoint. No PDF vers. For real fun we can go argue about amateur breakthrough hoax videos. DWFTTW is old, so now it's battery-assist human ornithopter (below.) Looks borderline-feasible at a few hundred watts drive power. But the video is full of suspicious stuff. Why make such an elaborate detailed hoax? Perhaps it's a viral publicity campaign? WIRED http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/03/human-bird-wings/#disqus_thread REDDIT http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/r5har/is_whats_shown_in_this_video_possible_calling_on/ MYTHBUSTERS (new forum) http://www.tested.com/articles/43440-thoughts-on-the-mechanics-of-assisted-human-flight/ Or maybe it's the Other Hutchison Effect: I almost have it working, so lets make a fake video, since the public is so easy to fool. PS Elderly physicist http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comicsid=2556#comic (( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Quantum mechanics results in some strange and unexpected stuff that is counter intuitive. I continue to watch these discussions with great interest. I believe there is a clue in the negative resistance temperature coefficient discovered by Celani. T
RE: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
Terry, Thanks for reminding me There was one slide, towards the end of Celani's talk at Cern, that caught my eye. There was a (spreadsheet) table with about 8 rows and 6 columns... The left-most column was temperature (degC), and I don't remember what the other columns were, but what caught my eye was that the measured variable on the right-most column was clearly temperature dependent, and it peaked at 535C. So, yes, I think the negative temperature coefficient of (electrical) resistance is a major clue... -Mark -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 5:50 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Quantum mechanics results in some strange and unexpected stuff that is counter intuitive. I continue to watch these discussions with great interest. I believe there is a clue in the negative resistance temperature coefficient discovered by Celani. T
Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Terry, Thanks for reminding me There was one slide, towards the end of Celani's talk at Cern, that caught my eye. Da nada. Would this be the slide: http://i.imgur.com/2qXQS.png (I did screen captures on some of the stuff I found interesting.) T
RE: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
Bingo... That be the one!! Great minds think alike... you're just faster on the trigger! -m -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 9:29 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Terry, Thanks for reminding me There was one slide, towards the end of Celani's talk at Cern, that caught my eye. Da nada. Would this be the slide: http://i.imgur.com/2qXQS.png (I did screen captures on some of the stuff I found interesting.) T
Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
Videos are now at : Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in LENR / Srivastava, Yogendra (speaker) (University of Perugia Perugia Italy) http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1433865 and Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in LENR / Celani, Antonio (speaker) http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1433866
Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:11 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I have not seen any system that actually creates or destroys energy during its operation. Unless I have missed something extremely important, every current product including the ECAT type of device takes an existing form of energy that has been stored by nature or man and converts it into another form of energy. Mass is a type of frozen energy that is converted into heat by LENR. The magnitude of the energy so converted is precisely defined and no new net energy is generated in these reactions. That is what established theory says. The Motor-Generator type of system suggested by the group mentioned will not be able to create extra energy. The input power integrated over time to yield energy will always be greater than any integrated output power since some of the input will appear as heat due to friction or similar losses. The motor as well as the generator can store rotational energy derived from the input. This motional energy can behave as a long time constant battery that can be withdrawn quickly if needed to impress observers at demonstrations. That is not how it operates. Go and see it for yourself if you don't believe me. I am confident that a very careful analysis of the system would reveal exactly what is occurring and that no new physics is involved. This is not to suggest that it would be easy to prove since a system such as this can easily mask the underlying principles due to nasty phase shifts and complex shapes of the important waveforms. Yes, there is always a rationale for discounting an anomaly. The real proof of the viability of a new physics type device is for the input power to be discontinued entirely (removed and unplugged) and for it to continue operation with the same internal motional energy indefinitely. Of course, if the device is to be useful, the internal energy must increase under these conditions. Let me know when the device is self sustaining and I might change my mind. I have come to wonder why this self sustaining requirement is a necessary before it is taken seriously. It is similiar to demanding neutrons before CF experiments are taken seriously. People generally prefer to dismiss physical anomalies as error or fraud unless it satisfies their preconcieved notion of what a radical discovery should involve. It is not enough to present people with physical anomolies. Nothing short of amiracle will suffice which is also a form of dogmatism -- nature is either this way or that way. I could speculate on the cause of these onerous expectations, but I don't have time right now. The DGT or Rossi devices do not have a problem explaining where the energy that appears as heat is derived. There is some question as to exactly which nuclear reactions are involved, but there is no question that E=M*C*C defines the precise amount of energy released. All that is required is for DGT or Rossi to simply (pun intended) overcome the activation threshold leading to the energy release. The only thing known is that the amount of heat produced is consistent with nuclear reactions. Harry -Original Message- From: Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Mar 22, 2012 2:40 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims The conversion of one form of energy into another form may involve a loss (destruction) of energy or a gain (creation) of energy depending on the type and direction of energy conversion. Even if a system is creating energy, the created energy would be destroyed as it is converted into another type of energy. By that, I do not mean the energy is simply lost to the environment because it is converted inefficiently. I mean the process of conversion literal destroys energy. In Thane Heinz's system an input of kinetic energy maybe required to keep the system creating more kinetic energy, because the conversion of the created kinetic energy into electrical energy destroys the kinetic energy that was created. Harry On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: There is another possibility which probably seems absurd from a logical perspective. What counts above all is the INTUITION that a perpetuum mobil is impossible. All the formal concepts and laws of physics merely serve to affirm the intuition. However, the laws and concepts do not prove or replace the intuition. perhaps it is possible to violate CoE in such a way that the intuition remains true, although I admit it is a struggle to imagine how it can be logically possible because it would involve NEW concepts of motion. Harry On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 8:53 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: I agree in principle with your skepticism, David - with the proviso that Thanes could be just plain stubborn and completely incapacitated by inventor's disease - by not pursuing the
Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
Post 11 Under the Rydberg ion theory of cold fusion, Rydberg crystals will be ionized very easily. They are comprised of highly excited and energetic atoms that are all close to large scale group ionization. Because of their collective high excitation level, Rydberg crystals will ionize a lot more readily than ordinary matter. As the ambient temperature increases, the probability of ionization of the crystals also increases. Because of their electrostatic nature, Rydberg crystal will tend to stick to the lattice surface like lint on your outfit or be integrated into the surface of the lattice near the surface depending on the type of LENR being considered. When the temperature of the lattice rises, more and more Rydberg crystals will become ionized creating a large surplus of electron holes on the surface of the lattice. As the temperature rises, so will the nuclear fusion based heat produced by the ionized Rydberg crystals. At the same time, resistance to electric flow will decrease because of increased “hole conduction”. The surface of the lattice acts as a slowly forming ionizing plasma where the resistance to electric flow is gradually reduced in direct proportion to the ionization level of the Rydberg crystals. Here is some experimental verification of this type of Rydberg crystal behavior See: http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/STAFF/VISITING_FELLOWSPROFESSORS/pdf/MileyClusterRydbLPBsing.pdf Ultrahigh-density deuterium of Rydberg matter clusters for inertial confinement fusion targets Quoted as follows: *Rydberg matter was predicted and measured in gases where a static clustering of protons or deuterons to comparably high densities is generated with number densities up to 10^^23 cm-3 (Badiei et al. 2006). In contrast to gases, the appearance of ultra-high density clusters in crystal defects in solids were observed in several experiments where such configurations of very high density hydrogen states could be detected from SQUID measurements of magnetic response and conductivity (Lipson et al. 2005) indicating as special state with superconducting properties. These high density clusters have a long life time and with deuterons and – in contrast to protons – as being bosons which should be in a state of Bose-Einstein-Condensation (BEC) at room temperature (Miley et al. 2009,2009a).* What Miley actually saw was a nearly ionized Rydberg crystal that behaves as plasma. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Quantum mechanics results in some strange and unexpected stuff that is counter intuitive. I continue to watch these discussions with great interest. I believe there is a clue in the negative resistance temperature coefficient discovered by Celani. T
Re: [Vo]:Fly Me to the . . .
I'll go if I can meet the Princess of Barsoom (Mars). Harry On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Mars? http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/21/musk_mars_colonization/ Musk muses on middle-class Mars colony Technology ready for $500,000 round trip By Iain Thomson in San Francisco • Get more from this author Posted in Space, 21st March 2012 23:02 GMT SpaceX boss Elon Musk has said that later this year or in early 2013 he will announce a plan to offer flights to Mars and back for half a million dollars, hopefully within the next decade. more
Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
Thanks for the links. I added a news item to LENR-CANR with the links to the videos and slides. The CERN server serves slow. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
In reply to Jojo Jaro's message of Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:19:42 +0800: Hi, [snip] 2. I don't believe bulk heating the powder is the best way to create Rydberg matter. Bulk Heating it would tend to concentrate too much heat on certain portions of the clump and possibly melt it. At the least, the heat would probably sinter the nickel powder and destroy all active nano sites. Someone correct me, but if I remeber correctly, Nickel atom migration and the start of the sintering process begins to occur at around 500C. Clearly, with bulk heating, you can not prevent heating a few protions of that the nickel powder clump to 500C. The goal is to ionize the powder and hydrogen to create Rydberg matter, not heat it and sinter it and melt it with bulk heating. If the Hydrogen is injected through a very small hole, then the gas jet can be directed at the Ni powder on the bottom, puffing it up, resulting in constant mixing, and ensuring that the temperature of both gas and powder are constant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Videos are now at : Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in LENR / Srivastava, Yogendra (speaker) (University of Perugia Perugia Italy) http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1433865 Thanks, Alan. I joined too late to see Srivastava's presentation live. I imagine it was painful to some of his audience. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol
Robin, Injecting hydrogen would necessarily complicate the reactor setup. I suppose you would need a very precise injection, filtering and recirculation system operating at extreme pressure and temperature. This would greatly increase the cost of your reactor without any guarantee of success. If you do not recirculate the hydrogen, you would need to have fresh hydrogen being pumped constantly. I believe that would be counter productive as you would be replacing hydrogen Rydberg matter with molecular hydrogen - the latter being unwanted. Simply designing the reactor for turbulence is a more straightforward solution. Jojo - Original Message - From: mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 4:38 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ang.: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol In reply to Jojo Jaro's message of Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:19:42 +0800: Hi, [snip] 2. I don't believe bulk heating the powder is the best way to create Rydberg matter. Bulk Heating it would tend to concentrate too much heat on certain portions of the clump and possibly melt it. At the least, the heat would probably sinter the nickel powder and destroy all active nano sites. Someone correct me, but if I remeber correctly, Nickel atom migration and the start of the sintering process begins to occur at around 500C. Clearly, with bulk heating, you can not prevent heating a few protions of that the nickel powder clump to 500C. The goal is to ionize the powder and hydrogen to create Rydberg matter, not heat it and sinter it and melt it with bulk heating. If the Hydrogen is injected through a very small hole, then the gas jet can be directed at the Ni powder on the bottom, puffing it up, resulting in constant mixing, and ensuring that the temperature of both gas and powder are constant. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's... -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 2:12 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Alan J Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: Videos are now at : Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in LENR / Srivastava, Yogendra (speaker) (University of Perugia Perugia Italy) http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1433865 Thanks, Alan. I joined too late to see Srivastava's presentation live. I imagine it was painful to some of his audience. :-) T
Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's... Me too. But the pain comes from the various examples of transmutation he presented. Oh, the heresy! T
RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
LoL To the dungeon with him! No, burn him... He's obviously possessed or crazy mad! It might be infectious. -m -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 3:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's... Me too. But the pain comes from the various examples of transmutation he presented. Oh, the heresy! T
[Vo]:Cern Presentation Summary
Vo, This article by David French is his Summary of the Cern presentations. http://coldfusionnow.org/?p=15307 FYI, Mark Mark Goldes Co-founder, Chava Energy CEO, Aesop Institute 301A North Main Street Sebastopol, CA 95472 www.chavaenergy.com www.aesopinstitute.org 707 861-9070 707 497-3551 fax
Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
I noticed he doesn't have problem using the f-word in regards to his own theory, because he calls it Electro-Weak Fusion. Harry On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 7:19 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: LoL To the dungeon with him! No, burn him... He's obviously possessed or crazy mad! It might be infectious. -m -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 3:23 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's... Me too. But the pain comes from the various examples of transmutation he presented. Oh, the heresy! T
[Vo]:George Miley
Is there anything new on George Miley's conference that was supposed to be today?
Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
I apologize -- I missed some of the early context for this thread. I just want address a general point or two. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The reason for the self sustaining requirement is to ensure that there are no false measurements taking place. Agreed -- being able to show that an isolated system can run on its own is good. This is a nice way to dispel any questions about where the energy comes from. Any useful source of energy should be capable of supplying the power required to make it function. This seems too strong a statement. So far neither Rossi nor DGT have demonstrated this goal and until that is proven, their devices are suspect. Their devices are suspect. But this is not because DGT and Rossi failed to demonstrate that they can operate in a self-sustaining mode. It's 2012. We should be able to measure the inputs and outputs for a system that has been running a long time, even one that is connected to power, and demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that more energy is coming out of it than is going into it. To my view, self-sustaining operation is a nice-to-have and not a must-have for showing that a device produces more energy than can be accounted for by known chemical reactions. There may be subtle reasons that it's necessary to keep early prototypes connected to a power supply to keep a reaction going. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims
There are several reasons why Rossi's and DGT's devices are suspect in my opinion, but all of them would become moot if a self sustaining mode were demonstrated in which they ran without the power connected and for a very long period of time. I am always concerned about a heat pump simulator type of device. In these systems the output heat energy is several times the input electrical energy but they can not produce excess energy if operated in a loop where one acting as a heat engine generator combination powers the other. The excess heat appearing at the output is obtained from the environment and does not represent any new energy. I agree that there may be subtle reasons why an early prototype might not be able to power itself, but a high power system such as the ECAT followed by a generator should not exhibit this problem. The relatively low COP of the ECAT does complicate the issue, but the specified value of 6 should be adequate as long as the output temperature and pressure can drive a generator efficiently. It does concern me that the ECAT performance is dangerously close to that of a high efficiency heat pump. DGT indicates that their Hyperion device has far more gain and the heat pump equivalent would not apply. You are correct that my suggestion that an useful energy source should supply its activation power is too broad. Many devices depend upon external energy sources such as solar or wind and would not operate on their own. I suggest that a device of the mechanical nature discussed which is an electrical generator should fall into the category of self powering and thus self sustaining. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Mar 23, 2012 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Thane Heins continues with his bold claims I apologize -- I missed some of the early context for this thread. I just want address a general point or two. On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:46 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The reason for the self sustaining requirement is to ensure that there are no false measurements taking place. Agreed -- being able to show that an isolated system can run on its own is good. This is a nice way to dispel any questions about where the energy comes from. ny useful source of energy should be capable of supplying the power required to make it function. This seems too strong a statement. So far neither Rossi nor DGT have demonstrated this goal and until that is proven, their devices are suspect. Their devices are suspect. But this is not because DGT and Rossi failed to demonstrate that they can operate in a self-sustaining mode. It's 2012. We should be able to measure the inputs and outputs for a system that has been running a long time, even one that is connected to power, and demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that more energy is coming out of it than is going into it. To my view, self-sustaining operation is a nice-to-have and not a must-have for showing that a device produces more energy than can be accounted for by known chemical reactions. There may be subtle reasons that it's necessary to keep early prototypes connected to a power supply to keep a reaction going. Eric
