[Vo]:Kudos - Ruby- on NASA LENR Airplane
Kudos Ruby on the NASA LENR post: http://coldfusionnow.org/lenr-aircraft-gets-nasa-research-grant-2/ Ad Astra, Ron Kita, Chiralex Doylestown PA
RE: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter
the flow rate to cause turbulence and mixing depends on the ID of the tubing. For a 1/4 in ID, I would normally run at 57.3 ml/min or better. for 1/8 in, 15 ml/min likely be OK with mixers and bends upstream of the sensor. that is for a near constant flow. If you have a pulsating flow (some pumps are like that) you can get by with flows a little lower than with constant flow. I would have all the tubing insulated or the whole thing in a constant temp box/room. It is not just the temperatures you have to be concerned with, it is also the rate of heat flow. (drafts, humidity changes..) D2 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 16:41:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP has built a flow calorimeter From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com DJ Cravens djcrav...@hotmail.com wrote: Be sure to use inline static mixers up stream from your sensors. I don't see that stated. Yeah, I thought about those in-line mixers you use when I read this. You should go on the MFMP site and recommend those things. Give them the part name and number. 15 ml/min. is too slow. They need mixing. Even the in-line mixers may not be enough. I think a faster flow rate might be advisable. As I recall, McKubre once told me it should never be less than 30 ml. Or was it 60? 1 per second? - Jed
Re: [Vo]:@NewEnergyTimes: 1998 SRI International Hydrogen LENR Experiment Produces Helium-4
I think we all need to be clear. Heat has been made using normal hydrogen, but without any indication of helium production. The source of this heat has been discussed. Rossi et al. think it results from Ni +p=Cu transmutation, several people suggest it results from fusion of the deuterium impurity. I and other people have suggested it results from formation of deuterium. In any case, Krivit has confused the issue, as usual. Ed On Jun 19, 2013, at 9:53 PM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: But, what of the excess heat Pons allegedly saw in the H cell(s)? Paul Breed wrote: I've read behind the paywall... It looks like the two D cells made He4 significantly above background He4. One of the H cells started with no He4 and ended with no He 4... The other H cell had a slowly increasing He4, but it seemed to asymptotic with back ground Atmospheric He4... never higher than background... so I would suspect a leak before He4 generation.. The run time was 95 days, so it would not take much of a leak [...]
[Vo]:Helium from nowhere?
There is a decent case for the existence of four real (Euclidian) spatial dimensions. Modern physics is a bit ambivalent on hyperspace, since space and time are already unified in the four-dimensional Minkowski continuum called spacetime. However, spacetime has no Euclidean 4th dimension - but many theories depend on the reality of another spatial dimension (such as Dirac reciprocal space). According to NASA, based on observation and theory - when the Universe was formed in the Big Bang, the resulting elemental matter which formed in expanding spacetime was about three quarters hydrogen, one quarter helium, and a few parts-per-billion of lithium (by weight). Everything else was de minimus. Billions of years later, about 90% of this original matter converted into some kind of dark matter. It no longer seems to exist in Euclidian space. No one really knows what dark matter is - but it could simply related to the present 4-space location of the original primordial matter. If so, then about ¾ of dark matter is dark hydrogen and ¼ is dark helium. That is the required preamble to Helium from nowhere ... which could be an relevant factor in some LENR experiments, but is generally ignored. From time to time the oddity of spontaneous hydrogen does come up for discussion. Many respected experimenters have reported the surprising appearance of hydrogen-from-nowhere in vacuum experiments. The most famous is from Sir J.J. Thomson who won the 1906 Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery of the electron ... and for his work on the conduction of electricity in gases. He was the premiere expert on vacuum anomalies of an earlier era. JJ was convinced of the reality of spontaneous hydrogen. Mainstream physics writes off much of what Thomson and others have claimed to experimental error, but similar findings persist today, even with the best equipment. Some of the stories have been cataloged here: http://blog.hasslberger.com/2006/06/hydrogen_from_space_the_aether.html At any rate, the point of all of this is not obvious so it should be stated: if you believe that spontaneous hydrogen does indeed happen in a vacuum and especially in vacuum arcs, and that it derives from a fourth spatial dimension - then the lesser known implication is that helium from nowhere is also to be expected. Jones attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Kudos - Ruby- on NASA LENR Airplane
From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 4:18:29 AM Subject: [Vo]:Kudos - Ruby- on NASA LENR Airplane Kudos Ruby on the NASA LENR post: http://coldfusionnow.org/lenr-aircraft-gets-nasa-research-grant-2/ Wikified (for what it's worth).
[Vo]:anapole field dot connections
Anapole magnetic moments inside nuclei seem to be correlated with radioactive decay with its association with parity non conservation (PCN), a weak force characterization property. The even nucleon number susceptibility to the LENR reaction also is marked by greatly elevated magnetic anopole levels. Anapole magnetic fields are produced by monopole field magnetic generation by quark/antiquark pairs inside subatomic particles. One point that surprised me was that gluons, the strong force carriers, seem to be virtual particles that actually carry monopole field strength. This idea comes from the theory of quantum chromodynamics called the dual superconductor model. For more background on this theory see as follows: http://ccdb5fs.kek.jp/tiff/2012/1227/1227046.pdf *Non-Abelian dual superconductivity and Gluon propagators in the deep IR region for SU(3) Yang-Mills theory* In this theory of quantum chromodynamics, the dual superconductor model attempt to explain confinement of quarks in terms of an electromagnetic dual theory of superconductivity. The strong force is just a reversal of electromagnetic behavior. In an electromagnetic dual theory the roles of electric and magnetic fields are interchanged. The BCS theory of superconductivity explains superconductivity as the result of the condensation of electric charges into Cooper pairs. In a dual superconductor an analogous effect occurs through the condensation of magnetic charges (also called magnetic monopoles). In ordinary electromagnetic theory, no monopoles have been shown to exist. However, in quantum chromodynamics — the theory of color charge which explains the strong interaction between quarks — the color charges can be viewed as (non-abelian) analogues of electric charges and corresponding magnetic monopoles are known to exist. Dual superconductor models posit that condensation of these magnetic monopoles in a superconductive state explains color confinement — the phenomenon that only neutrally colored bound states are observed at low energies. Color confinement is where the LENR reaction operates. Qualitatively, confinement in dual superconductor models can be understood as a result of the dual to the Meissner effect. The Meissner effect says that a superconducting metal will try to expel magnetic field lines from its interior. If a magnetic field is forced to run through the superconductor, the electric field lines are compressed in magnetic flux tubes. In a dual superconductor the roles of magnetic and electric fields are exchanged and the Meissner effect tries to expel electric field lines. Quarks and antiquarks carry opposite color charges, and for a quark–antiquark pair 'electric' field lines run from the quark to the antiquark. In a pion, the quark–antiquark pair is immersed in a dual superconductor, and then the electric field lines get compressed to a flux tube. The energy carried to the tube is proportional to its length, and the potential energy of the quark–antiquark is proportional to their separation. The energy of colored objects gets infinite if quark/antiquark pair moves apart. A quark–antiquark will therefore always bind regardless of their separation, which explains why no unbound quarks are ever found. Dual superconductors are described by (a dual to) the Landau–Ginzburg model, which is equivalent to the Abelian Higgs model. The MIT bag model boundary conditions for gluon fields are those of the dual color superconductor. It is possible that a monopole field will disrupt the duel superconductive mechanism that keeps the nucleus and the nucleons that make it up together. How can this monopole magnetic field disrupt a nucleus? One type pion that keeps the nucleus together is made of one up quark and one down antiquark. If we can find a source of a monopole field in the Ni/H reactor, we may be able to explain transmutation of elements via disruption of the strong force. To begin with, MarkI-ZeroPoint pointed out the creation of a possible monipole field generator: the skyrmions in magnetic material as follows: http://phys.org/news/2013-05-skyrmions-ferromagnet-centrosymmetry.html *Observation of skyrmions in a ferromagnet with centrosymmetry* See his post as follows: [Vo]:Of Rabbit Holes and Rogue Waves... was Why did Rossi prevent detailed measurement of the power input? MarkI-ZeroPoint Fri, 24 May 2013 17:02:46 -0700 I take this opportunity to extend MarkI’s thinking as follows: This skyrmions production mechanism is supported by this observation as follows: http://www.nature.com/nnano/journal/v8/n5/full/nnano.2013.69.html#ref2 *Direct observation and dynamics of spontaneous skyrmion-like magnetic domains in a ferromagnet* The skyrmion-like magnetic domains appear as clusters above the Curie temperature. We found that the repeated reversal of magnetic chirality is caused by thermal fluctuation. The closely spaced clusters exhibit
[Vo]:Evidence is all around us
Widespread evidence for LENR already lies buried in the filing cabinets and computer archives of universities, commercial companies, and research organisations, across the world. I'm not talking about results from specific CF or LENR experiments, but of all the oddball or slightly puzzling results, from ostensibly unrelated fields, that are either explained away in some cavalier fashion, or simply ignored. For instance, back in the 90s I was shown data confirming accidental transmutation, and physically induced radiation, resulting from experiments in hot gas erosion of steel. Researchers had dismissed the results, at the time, because they made no sense to them - and so the trials were abandoned. I was later shown the results by an engineering lecturer from the university that had conducted the tests – because I had tentatively mentioned the possibility of LENR effects in some other RD work we were both involved with (this was after we had experienced a bizarre “heat-after-death” incident). It seems he had always been puzzled by the data (hence holding on to it), but other researchers had classed the results as “outliers”, putting them down to unknown errors in procedure – so everybody else was happy to simply throw them in the waste paper basket. The results were what Charles Fort referred to as “Damned Data” – i.e. the data that falls outside the “established” models of how the world is supposed to work. All scientists claim that they would always sieze on anomalies, and pledge to investigate them further – but in practice many will just ignore anything that doesn't fit neatly inside their preconceived notions of reality. Of course, the lecturer in question was coming up to retirement, and understandably didn’t want to jeopardise his position – so wished to keep a low profile. He had said nothing to anyone about the results, until our meeting, and did not intend to pursue the subject afterwards. So what did I do, following this peculiar HAD event? Unfortunately, the tests in question could not be talked about publicly (and still can't) – due to all sorts of confidentiality restrictions. Nevertheless, after some soul searching, I did actually bring up the subject of LENR with my supervisor of the time. The whole idea freaked him out – so he told me, in no uncertain terms, to shut up about it. And so I did – since, like everybody else, I had to eat and keep a roof over my head. How much more aberrent, anomalous (but highly pertinent) field data is out there, languishing in files marked “False Results. Ignore” ? And how many more people are sitting on data that they dare not speak about publicly, since they don't relish the idea of making “career limiting” statements ? - Leo
Re: [Vo]:My response at Forbes: all assertions must be testable and falsifiable
Since Jed decided to debate me in absentia here on the Vortex, I thought I'd respond. Rothwell said: No, as Ian Walker already pointed out to you, it says in the Appendix they checked for it. Also they told me they did. Figure 1 shows a direct connection to each of the 3 wires (for voltage) in Suggesting that a schematic wiring diagram “proves” the exact details of the physical setup is silly. Are you suggesting that the connection for phase 3 is about 1/3 closer to the control box as the connection for phase 1? I hope not. From the report: The three-phase power cables were checked and connected directly to the electrical outlet. It was established and verified that no other cable was present and that all connections were normal. The ground cable was disconnected before measurements began. It’s clear that the authors of the report were using the term “cable” to refer to a single, insulated wire. They were looking for extra wires. Nothing in their description even suggests that they were looking for extra conductors in a single wire. The two “cheese” videos would easily pass the precautions as described. The creator of those videos didn’t need an extra “cable”, and was able to measure both continuity and voltage with the wiring trick in place. Rothwell said: He keeps insisting we can’t be sure the heat originates from inside the cell because they measure the temperature at the outside wall. You are distorting what I said. My reading of the report suggests that the actual “E-Cat” is a metal tube with sealed ends, which slides into the central cavity of a conventional tube furnace. But even if I was mistaken on this point, it doesn’t affect my argument. The device in the photos is a tube containing Rossi’s magic gadget AND conventional electrical resistance heaters. There is no way to prove that the heat being radiated from the surface came from the E-Cat and not the electric heaters. The testers used a finicky, 4th-power function to try to estimate how much heat is being produced. This is a dodgy way of determining how much of the heat came from the actual E-Cat, even if they could be certain that there wasn’t a trick to feed in extra power (and they failed miserably to prove that). But, all they know is that the device on average, produced about 2.5 times as much power as they measured going in. If their input measurements were wrong, then their estimated COP was wrong. Rothwell said: “There is not an extra wire. It is not dead. This is 3-phase power. Please look that up if you do not understand the concept. Look that up yourself. 3-phase power has three HOT lines, PLUS a neutral, plus a GROUND (which, according to the report, was disconnected). The report indicates that, although the device was connected to a 3-phase power outlet, only 2 phases were being used. They specifically state (and show in Fig. 3 of the Appendix) that only 2 phases were supposedly carrying any current. The 3rd phase wire “appears” dead. If this is correct, then Rossi was only using 2 of the 3 phases, and only for 1/3 of the time (i.e. a 33% duty cycle). Each of the “non-dead” phases was drawing about 400 Watts when turned on. At the very least, it is very suspicious that Rossi included a “dead” wire between the power source and the device, unless it wasn’t really “dead”. If the wiring trick had been used on that 3rd phase wire (the one that appeared to be dead), we can make a prediction about the apparent COP from such a deception. Let’s assume that the 3rd phase was carrying the same current as the other two phases (400 W), and that Rossi left it turned on 100% of the time (better for the fraud, and less likely to be detected than if it were being cycled on and off). So, instead of 800 Watts (2 phases of 400 Watts each) for 33% of the time (average Power: 266.6 Watts), the real electrical input would be 1200 Watts (2 + 1 hidden phase) for 33% of the time plus 400 Watts (1 hidden phase) for 66% of the time (average Power: 666.6 Watts), for an apparent COP of 2.5 (really a COP of 1.0). That’s exactly what the report claims to have found. So, without hidden laser beams or magic coatings to mask the power coming out, and without the need for LENR, we only need a single hidden conductor, capable of carrying 400 Watts, to fake the reported results.
Re: [Vo]:interview re a sensitive subject
I'm not sure if this is the right way to reply to Peter's recent blog guess I'll find out. Dear Peter, Your little essay was rather nicley framed and appropriate at any time. I especially smiled at your explanation of extremism, which I think has some truth to it. Scientism, mysticism, and many other isms, are as you say, very often taken beyond extremism and constitutes a 'bad' and inimical twist in the affairs of man. Like many of you, I have encountered mad scientists' who proclaim their truth and insist that it, and it alone should be followed pretty much exactly. They are, in actual fact, simply then acting as idealogues. They take their place among the myriad other ideologues, mostly religious, but also various other, too often fanatical cults, groups, organizations, beurocracies, etc who throughout history have maintained themselves in more or less control of large segments of society (or energietically tried to). In a word, scientists are people; with all that that entails and implies. As a biologist, it is expected that I see our species in context of our planet's living world. Man as a species (nowperforce the God species) possesses the magic emergent property of complex mental, non-material, activity, self awareness, culture, etc. We all know that this gift is bound by, comes from, and relies solely on, the common earthly biological system; in fact, it all resides in the evolved central nervous system that was inherited out of parts of the Universe. However, Everyone does not, in fact, know this; or we do not believe it, or are forgetful of it. It is so very curious that this most important, really most obvious feature of our whole existence is so oblivously taken for granted and for the most part forgotten entirely for long stretches, or entirely. Similarly, we all 'know' that some of our fellow animals also have capable central nervous systems, and our near relatives are, in fact, exceedingly smart. They clearly possess sefl awareness, culture, and many other manifestations of high mental activity, usch as society, compassion, even a primitive and undeveloped sense of mysticism or protoreligion. It is quite an obvious biological fact that some of these animals are well equipped to, infutre, evolve exactly the same kind and level of mental acrobatics as humans-- and they surely will! It should be obvious too, that Life consists of moment-to-moment continous series of external stimuli interacting with our nervous systems. In essence, for us and our cousins, everything begins and relies on the incomprehensibly complex multitude of neruonal firings going on inside our head. In the end, some of these 'firings' leads some wolves to coordinate with others to decide to kill a moose for their all important well being. Some other neural patterns, in humans, results in a loud prayer to their preferred God, or in shooting a grouse for dinner, or in mass murders, etc etc. So, as has been eloquently expounded by generations of poets, mystics, religious and other writers, we do, as a human species have a fairly clear view of ourselves floating, apparently alone, on a globe in a huge unverse. Significantly, what people also have (along with many of the less far-along species, like wolf packs, chimpanzee bands, or elephants and others) is a seemingly intermittent, hazy floating, and often subconscious , understanding that we are alive and that our continued existence is bound up with our surroundings, or our pack, or band or tribe, or flock. To Peter's plaint then, my point might be that we of mankind are all of a feather, and will hang together, or separately. In the meantime, however, the incredible variation among individuals ensures that messy evolution (biological as well as socia) will continue to happen; Thus unfortunately ensuring that the lives of individuals, and their interactions will continue to be, at various times and places bloody, or brutish, sometimes sublime, sometimes pleasant, but commonly uneven and uncertain. I believe we are making progess but--. On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Readers, I have just published: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2013/06/lenr-and-scientism.html It is a proof that I don't fear sensitive, somewhat even nasty subjects and I try to make an interview with you all regarding the present and the future of LENR. I hope to learn from your feedback. Please surprise me with your promptitude and sincerity Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Mark has blased the path
Vo]:Nickel nanoantennas... its all about resonances. date: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM I have done my best, but Mark,, it has taken me some time to come around to your mode of thinking.
[Vo]:Mark has blazed the path
Vo]:Nickel nanoantennas... its all about resonances. date: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM I have done my best, but Mark, it has taken me some time to come around to your mode of thinking.
RE: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path
Please explain. and what was it that caused the light bulb to go on? -Mark Iverson From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:28 PM To: vortex-l Subject: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path Vo]:Nickel nanoantennas... its all about resonances. date: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM I have done my best, but Mark, it has taken me some time to come around to your mode of thinking.
RE: [Vo]:Evidence is all around us
That’s why this forum is here Leonard! We place the higher emphasis on data, and hopefully carefully obtained data… Can you provide some details of the HAD event??? -Mark Iverson PS: I need ALL Vorts to send some major ‘licensing’ mojo my way!!! J From: Leonard Arbuthnot [mailto:leonardarbuth...@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 1:57 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Evidence is all around us Widespread evidence for LENR already lies buried in the filing cabinets and computer archives of universities, commercial companies, and research organisations, across the world. I'm not talking about results from specific CF or LENR experiments, but of all the oddball or slightly puzzling results, from ostensibly unrelated fields, that are either explained away in some cavalier fashion, or simply ignored. For instance, back in the 90s I was shown data confirming accidental transmutation, and physically induced radiation, resulting from experiments in hot gas erosion of steel. Researchers had dismissed the results, at the time, because they made no sense to them - and so the trials were abandoned. I was later shown the results by an engineering lecturer from the university that had conducted the tests – because I had tentatively mentioned the possibility of LENR effects in some other RD work we were both involved with (this was after we had experienced a bizarre “heat-after-death” incident). It seems he had always been puzzled by the data (hence holding on to it), but other researchers had classed the results as “outliers”, putting them down to unknown errors in procedure – so everybody else was happy to simply throw them in the waste paper basket. The results were what Charles Fort referred to as “Damned Data” – i.e. the data that falls outside the “established” models of how the world is supposed to work. All scientists claim that they would always sieze on anomalies, and pledge to investigate them further – but in practice many will just ignore anything that doesn't fit neatly inside their preconceived notions of reality. Of course, the lecturer in question was coming up to retirement, and understandably didn’t want to jeopardise his position – so wished to keep a low profile. He had said nothing to anyone about the results, until our meeting, and did not intend to pursue the subject afterwards. So what did I do, following this peculiar HAD event? Unfortunately, the tests in question could not be talked about publicly (and still can't) – due to all sorts of confidentiality restrictions. Nevertheless, after some soul searching, I did actually bring up the subject of LENR with my supervisor of the time. The whole idea freaked him out – so he told me, in no uncertain terms, to shut up about it. And so I did – since, like everybody else, I had to eat and keep a roof over my head. How much more aberrent, anomalous (but highly pertinent) field data is out there, languishing in files marked “False Results. Ignore” ? And how many more people are sitting on data that they dare not speak about publicly, since they don't relish the idea of making “career limiting” statements ? - Leo
RE: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path
Here's the original posting: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg60465.html -mark From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:28 PM To: vortex-l Subject: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path Vo]:Nickel nanoantennas... its all about resonances. date: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM I have done my best, but Mark, it has taken me some time to come around to your mode of thinking.
Re: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path
Reference: [Vo]:Plasmons on a patterned surface can enhance the production of bright electron beams. Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 7:34 PM http://physics.aps.org/articles/v6/17 This article about nano-antennas prompted me to regard these nanostructures as being utilized by Rossi and DGT in their tubule coatings of their micro-powder. On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 11:10 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Here’s the original posting: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg60465.html ** ** -mark ** ** *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, June 20, 2013 5:28 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path ** ** Vo]:Nickel nanoantennas... its all about resonances. date: Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 4:26 PM I have done my best, but Mark, it has taken me some time to come around to your mode of thinking. ** **
Re: [Vo]:interview re a sensitive subject
On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:27 PM, ken deboer barlaz...@gmail.com wrote: our near relatives ... clearly possess ... manifestations of high mental activity, ... even a primitive and undeveloped sense of mysticism or protoreligion. I'm curious in what species this has been discovered. Eric
Re: [Vo]:interview re a sensitive subject
Dear Ken, special thanks for your nice answer. It is my duty to write an editorial regarding the feedback of my Scientism paper. Peter On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:31 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 3:27 PM, ken deboer barlaz...@gmail.com wrote: our near relatives ... clearly possess ... manifestations of high mental activity, ... even a primitive and undeveloped sense of mysticism or protoreligion. I'm curious in what species this has been discovered. Eric -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
