[Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
US20140034116A1 patent application published regarding a description of LENR methods to generate energy, including the options to generate electricity. The inventors actually don't mention the term LENR, but indicated that the actual physical effects are still unknown. Ni - H is part of it, but the claims are much wider regarding the potential combinations of elements. http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116/http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fpatents%2FUS20140034116%2Furlhash=0aBv_t=tracking_disc
Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
Improved link: http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116 On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.comwrote: US20140034116A1 patent application published regarding a description of LENR methods to generate energy, including the options to generate electricity. The inventors actually don't mention the term LENR, but indicated that the actual physical effects are still unknown. Ni - H is part of it, but the claims are much wider regarding the potential combinations of elements. http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116/http://www.linkedin.com/redirect?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Egoogle%2Ecom%2Fpatents%2FUS20140034116%2Furlhash=0aBv_t=tracking_disc
Re: [Vo]:Evidence of SR Length Contraction
This is what I described and illustrated from the frame of reference of the train. Section C shows the railway ties closer together. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing Harry On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 11:43 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: There has been a continuous discussion on the list about the reality of SR time dilation and length contraction. Most of the commenters accept the time dilation concept since it is relatively easy to measure. Some among the group point out the paradox that they perceive as existing, but for now I want divert attention to evidence of length contraction that seems highly relevant. I found an article in Wikipedia about the free electron laser. There is a technique for generating very high energy tunable x rays which strongly depends upon the length contraction due to electron velocities near light speed. The frequency and wavelength of the emitted radiation can be directly calculated by using the Lorentz factor. Read the article found at the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_electron_laser to see how well the mathematics works. The process uses an alternating series of magnets that are clearly spaced a large distance apart when compared to the the emitted wavelength of the synchronous radiation. If you accept that the electrons are moving at very nearly the speed of light, then the wavelength should be approximately equal to the spacing between alternate magnets unless that distance is effectively shortened by the Lorentz contraction as seen by the electrons in motion. The shortening factor directly enters into the determination of the radiation frequency. A radio wavelength structure of magnets is employed to achieve an x-ray length emission due to Lorentz contraction. Harry, this might help to explain the behavior of your train on the track questions. Think of the distance between the magnets as being similar to the space between the rail ties. Dave
[Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now.
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now. quote from article Not every major earthquake is preceded by lightning. And not all clear-sky lightning is followed by earthquakes. Since the effect does not reliably reproduce itself the reports must be coming from people who are fooling themselves. ;-) Harry
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now. My take:- When two grains rub against one another, the distance between them is nm. If a slight charge imbalance develops due to friction, and the particles are insulators, they form a minute capacitor. If a crack in the powder forms, then the nm distance can increase to mm's. This deceases the capacitance enormously, and since the charge is fixed, the voltage rises accordingly. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
In reply to H Veeder's message of Sat, 8 Mar 2014 15:09:56 -0500: Hi, [snip] On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now. quote from article Not every major earthquake is preceded by lightning. And not all clear-sky lightning is followed by earthquakes. High voltages won't develop where there is ground water containing some dissolved salts, as it will short out the high voltage. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 4:45 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now. My take:- When two grains rub against one another, the distance between them is nm. If a slight charge imbalance develops due to friction, and the particles are insulators, they form a minute capacitor. If a crack in the powder forms, then the nm distance can increase to mm's. This deceases the capacitance enormously, and since the charge is fixed, the voltage rises accordingly. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html Normally a charge imbalance arises when different materials are rubbed together. (eg. amber and fur) Since all the grains are made from same the material a charge imbalance should not occur and no voltage should arise ...hence the mystery. harry
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
That one is easy, it's flour power On Saturday, March 8, 2014, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 4:45 PM, mix...@bigpond.comjavascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mix...@bigpond.com'); wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:45:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now. My take:- When two grains rub against one another, the distance between them is nm. If a slight charge imbalance develops due to friction, and the particles are insulators, they form a minute capacitor. If a crack in the powder forms, then the nm distance can increase to mm's. This deceases the capacitance enormously, and since the charge is fixed, the voltage rises accordingly. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html Normally a charge imbalance arises when different materials are rubbed together. (eg. amber and fur) Since all the grains are made from same the material a charge imbalance should not occur and no voltage should arise ...hence the mystery. harry
Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
Teslaalset-- This Three-Body Association Reactions With Molecular Bonding reaction is another form of a electron screening reaction it seems. It seems to provide a mechanism for generating enough kinetic energy to overcome the repulsion of two positively charged particles. I have copied some pertinent discussion from the patent application below: [0051] Consider a Widely separated pair of reactants thermally at rest that can form a bond without regard to any electron between them. The energy difference between separated reactants and product ground state, E R, is the maximum reaction energy available. With the reactants initially far apart, the entire available reaction energy ER is all potential energy, and the potential well depth equals E R. [0052] Now let the two reactants also be electropositive, such as oxygen or nitrogen atoms, or such as carbon monoxide (CO) and oxygen (0) and each adsorbed on a metal catalyst such as palladium (Pd) or platinum (Pt). Carbon monoxide is adsorbed on a surface of atoms in an egg crate pocket. An oxygen atom is adsorbed on an adjacent egg crate pocket. If a thermal electron finds itself between the oxygen (0) and the carbon monoxide, the thermal electron between them causes the reaction. The electron between them causes the carbon monoxide to smash into the oxygen, literally, because electron is negative, the carbon monoxide and O are positive, and they attract strongly. The temperature of the smash is approximately 20,000 to 30,000 degrees Kelvin. The three-body reaction gently dampens the smashing by using the electron as the damper. The damped electron now has all the energy and was squeezed out like slippery water melon seed between fingers. The potential energy for these three bodies, an electron betWeen tWo positives, is always attractive. This positive-negative-positive three-body configuration is the starting point and initial condition for a three-body association reaction. Nickel may also work as a catalyst as well as a positively charge particle in a three bodied reaction as described above. I think this should be referred to as the slippery watermelon seed effect. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: Teslaalset To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR Improved link: http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116 On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com wrote: US20140034116A1 patent application published regarding a description of LENR methods to generate energy, including the options to generate electricity. The inventors actually don't mention the term LENR, but indicated that the actual physical effects are still unknown. Ni - H is part of it, but the claims are much wider regarding the potential combinations of elements. http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116/
Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
Teslaalset etal-- Axil's polarion and solarton's may be the surface negatively charged item that gets between the positive particles in the three body association reaction identified in this patent application. I would think that there should be some Bremstrahlung radiation noted from the high energy electron (slippery watermelon seeds) associated with the reactions. Axil's Vortex-1 email --- Friday, February 28, 2014 10:42 AM is pertinent to this discussion. The whole string of recent comments on the SPP process is also related. Bob Cook - Original Message - From: Teslaalset To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 08, 2014 9:58 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR Improved link: http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116 On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Teslaalset robbiehobbiesh...@gmail.com wrote: US20140034116A1 patent application published regarding a description of LENR methods to generate energy, including the options to generate electricity. The inventors actually don't mention the term LENR, but indicated that the actual physical effects are still unknown. Ni - H is part of it, but the claims are much wider regarding the potential combinations of elements. http://www.google.com/patents/US20140034116/
RE: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
From: Bob Cook The potential energy for these three bodies, an electron between two positives, is always attractive. This positive-negative-positive three-body configuration is the starting point and initial condition for a three-body association reaction.Nickel may also work as a catalyst as well as a positively charge particle in a three bodied reaction as described above. * I think this should be referred to as the slippery watermelon seed effect. This is good digging Bob, and it looks like you are correct on the hidden IP tactic - but I think it should referred to as the watermelon man effect which is essentially a kind of mistaken identity. This is little more than a meal ticket for patent attorneys with a few crumbs for patent trolls. As with Mills theories, which he has tried to frame as patents with the same lack of clarity - this one is even more worthless in what it can protect. Theories are not patentable, even if absolutely correct. Devices and processes are patentable but they require detailed specifications, not operating theories. This is a theory without proper specifications. It will essentially protect nothing. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Newly published US20140034116A1 patent application regarding LENR
There is no bibliography on this patent. This is odd. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Evidence of SR Length Contraction
I do not have enough evidence to make more sense of this, but if the photon becomes an x-ray because of length contraction, 2 things occur to me. Firstly if the electron is not passing by enough magnets to gain the required frequency as far as the Lab frame is concerned, then even if the wavelength could seem to be shortened by length contraction (possibly not the SR version either) it still would not explain the frequency. This is however a very complex issue. More clearly, if the electron is emitting a photon at high relativistic velocities, then there should be red/blue shifting depending on if the photon is detected ahead or behind in much the same way that a horn of a car changes pitch depending of if it is receding or approaching. (Doppler) The Doppler effect is funny actually, since it causes an optical illusion of making an approaching object look longer, yet raises frequency of the same, a wavelength could 'look' longer (if we could see wavelengths like objects) as it approaches but have a higher frequency. So if length contraction can explain this, Special Relativity's version would only be applicable in the electron frame since in the lab frame the electron is not moving fast enough and the magnets are too far apart, but clearly the x-ray detector isn't moving relativistically. If it was an x-ray in the Lab frame without the Doppler effect blue shifting, then it should be an even higher frequency in the electrons frame where time dilation and length contraction should make short wavelength and high frequency (of the lab frame) seem shorter and higher still. Of course that becomes circular reasoning where all motion (other than Doppler) should make a photon appear to be at a higher frequency, since this is non-nonsensical we end up with the conclusion that each photon has a lowest frequency which is when the observer inhabits the frame it was created in, which is fine, but then the photon has a preferred (discoverable) frame! John On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 5:43 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: There has been a continuous discussion on the list about the reality of SR time dilation and length contraction. Most of the commenters accept the time dilation concept since it is relatively easy to measure. Some among the group point out the paradox that they perceive as existing, but for now I want divert attention to evidence of length contraction that seems highly relevant. I found an article in Wikipedia about the free electron laser. There is a technique for generating very high energy tunable x rays which strongly depends upon the length contraction due to electron velocities near light speed. The frequency and wavelength of the emitted radiation can be directly calculated by using the Lorentz factor. Read the article found at the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_electron_laser to see how well the mathematics works. The process uses an alternating series of magnets that are clearly spaced a large distance apart when compared to the the emitted wavelength of the synchronous radiation. If you accept that the electrons are moving at very nearly the speed of light, then the wavelength should be approximately equal to the spacing between alternate magnets unless that distance is effectively shortened by the Lorentz contraction as seen by the electrons in motion. The shortening factor directly enters into the determination of the radiation frequency. A radio wavelength structure of magnets is employed to achieve an x-ray length emission due to Lorentz contraction. Harry, this might help to explain the behavior of your train on the track questions. Think of the distance between the magnets as being similar to the space between the rail ties. Dave
Re: [Vo]:unknown mechanism generates voltage in the powder cracks
The important message therefore is this: LENR is passing the fractal test - we live in a fractal universe, where a pattern at one scale, repeats at larger and smaller scales. Without that symmetry, the universe would break down, and LENR does not let us down here Gordon Docherty http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/03/the-earthquake-lightning-mystery-lenr-connection/ On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-26462348 LENR has been talking about this for some time now.
Re: [Vo]:Asked Answered
Oh geez, here come the assholes again, jumping on their AssholeBandwagon. Typical of anti-science Luddites, they use tag team trolling techniques in their attempts at vigilante censorship.
Replications. Formerly [Vo]:LENR a gateway into the theory of everything.
How many times has the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect (PFAHE) been replicated? Ed Storms says that there are 153 peer reviewed papers that replicate the Pons-Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect (PFAHE). http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Cold_fusion --- Jed Rothwell says: Excess heat has been demonstrated at Sigma 90 and above, and the effect has been replicated hundreds of times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ACold_fusion/Archive_4 -- JT He of the Chinese Academy of Sciences says 14,720 times https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdfsid=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2sh=www.springerlink.com . Jing-tang He * Nuclear fusion inside condense matters * Frontiers of Physics in China -- National Instruments looked at 180 replications, citing a University of Texas Austin Thesis which I cannot find. An independent thesis research at the University of Texas at Austin found that from 1989 to 2010 more than 180 experiments around the world reported anomalous high production of excess heat in Pd-D or Ni-H. http://www.22passi.it/downloads/eu_brussels_june_20_2012_concezzi.pdf Conclusion * THERE IS AN UNKNOWN PHYSICAL EVENT and there is a need of better measurements and control tools. -- http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf This file is corrupted. At least for me... On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: How many replications does it take for a rational scientist to accept the finding? It used to be just 2 or 3, but in this field it seems to be hundreds or thousands. I think for most claims it used to be five or 10 good replications. It depends on many factors such as the signal-to-noise ratio, the complexity of the instruments, the extent to which the results call for new and difficult techniques, and so on. It was difficult to believe polywater claims because in every case the instruments were operating at the extreme limits of their capabilities. It is much easier to believe the claim that a mammal has been cloned because you can look at the baby and see it is a twin of the parent, and you can test the DNA. In the case of cold fusion, the experiment is very difficult to replicate, but the results are easy to understand. The first tier of people to replicate were the crème de la crème of electrochemistry. I mean people who now have laboratories named after them such as Ernest Yeager, and people who should have laboratories named after them such as John Bockris. Also Miles, Mizuno, McKubre, Kunimatsu, Appleby, Will, Okamoto, Huggins and so on. The first ~100 replications came in from a veritable Who's Who of electrochemistry. Just about every top electrochemist in the world replicated within a year or so. They were all certain the results were real. Anyone who does not believe that kind of thing, from this kind of people, does not understand experimental science. Over in the Forbes comment section Gibbs referred to these people as the LENR community. It would be more accurate to call them every major academic electrochemist on earth. That puts it in a different perspective. The problem with skeptics is not that they don't believe these results. Or that they have found problems with the results. The problem is they have zero knowledge of this subject. They have never read any papers and they never heard of Yeager or Will or anyone else. They think there are no papers! They would not know a flow calorimeter if it bit them on the butt. People who are completely ignorant of a subject have no right to any opinion about it. A few skeptics such as Cude have looked at results, but they have strange notions about them. Cude thinks these graphs show only random results with no meaning or pattern: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-1.jpg http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/McKubre-graph-2.jpg This is sort of the opposite of a Rorschach test. Cude looks at an ordered set of data that constitutes irrefutable proof of a control parameter, but he sees only random noise. Kevin: Most people still assume it's wrong. Jed: Those people are irrational. You should discount their views. ***Unfortunately, that includes the great majority of people. I would guess that 95%
Re: [Vo]:Asked Answered
Tag Team Trolling is a form of vigilante censorship. They respond to each other's comments with inane criticisms that have zero, nothing, nada to do with the science behind the claims. The purpose of such comments is flamebait so that there is a response leading to the pulling of the thread since the moderation is one sided. It is also that, since they know little else about the science and their intention is to act like seagulls, they deliver seagull shit all over the LENR thread so that some lurker who visits the thread will be forewarned that they will be flamed if they voice any kind of scientific or positive opinion. They are simply acting like assholes, and the standard response of ignoring trolls does not work because they are a GANG of trolls. http://phys.org/news/2013-02-trolls-rude-blog-comments-dim.html *The trolls are winning. Pick a story about some aspect of science, any story, scroll down to the blog comments and let the bashing begin. * Wonder how much taxpayer cash went into this 'deep' study? I think you can take all these studies by pointy headed scientists, 99 percent of whom are socialists and communists, and stick them where the sun don't shine. Yawn. Climate change myth wackos at it again. This article is 100 percent propaganda crapola. Speaking of dolts, if you were around in the 70s, when they also had scientists, the big talk then was about the coming ice age. And don't give me any of that carbon emission bull@!$%#. Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-02-trolls-rude-blog-comments-dim.html#jCp Such nasty back and forth, like it or not, is now a staple of our news diet, and in the realm of online science news, the diatribes, screeds and rants are taking a toll on the public perception of science and technology, according to a study by researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. UW-Madison science communication researcher Dominique Brossard /br study showing the tone of blog comments alone can influence the perception of risk posed by nanotechnology, the science of manipulating materials at the smallest scales. The study, now in press at the Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, was supported by the National Science Foundation. It sampled a representative cross section of 2,338 Americans in an online experiment, where the civility of blog comments was manipulated. For example, introducing name calling into commentary tacked onto an otherwise balanced newspaper blog post, the study showed, could elicit either lower or higher perceptions of risk, depending on one's predisposition to the science of nanotechnology. It seems we don't really have a clear social norm about what is expected online, says Brossard, a UW-Madison professor of Life Science Communication, contrasting online forums with public meetings where prescribed decorum helps keep discussion civil. In the case of blog postings, it's the Wild West. For rapidly developing nanotechnology, a technology already built into more than 1,300 consumer products, exposure to uncivil online comments is one of several variables that can directly influence the perception of risk associated with it. When people encounter an unfamiliar issue like nanotechnology, they often rely on an existing value such as religiosity or deference to science to form a judgment, explains Ashley Anderson, a postdoctoral fellow in the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University and the lead author of the upcoming study in the Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. Highly religious readers, the study revealed, were more likely to see nanotechnology as risky when exposed to rude comments compared to less religious readers, Brossard notes. Blogs have been a part of the new media landscape for quite some time now, but our study is the first to look at the potential effects blog comments have on public perceptions of science, says Brossard. While the tone of blog comments can have an impact, simple disagreement in posts can also sway perception: Overt disagreement adds another layer. It influences the conversation, she explains. UW-Madison Life Sciences Communication Professor Dietram Scheufele, another of the study's co-authors, notes that the Web is a primary destination for people looking for detailed information and discussion on aspects of science and technology. Because of that trend, studies of online media are becoming increasingly important, but understanding the online information environment is particularly important for issues of science and technology. Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-02-trolls-rude-blog-comments-dim.html#jCp On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote: Oh geez, here come the assholes again, jumping on their AssholeBandwagon. Typical of anti-science Luddites, they use tag team trolling techniques in their attempts at vigilante censorship.
Re: Replications. Formerly [Vo]:LENR a gateway into the theory of everything.
Kevin wrote: | http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJtallyofcol.pdf |This file is corrupted. At least for me... FYI: If you Right Click on your URL Link above, and select, “Save Target As...” or “Save Link As” (it really depends on your Web Browser), wait until the file downloads, then you can open it with the normal Acrobat Reader, etc., instead of the Web Browser embedded Acrobat/PDF Reader, and you should be able to view it properly. When I open it with the Embedded PDF Reader in Firefox, the download progress bar at the top will just sit there at the end (I think that’s what you mean by “corrupted”), and it will say at the top, “This PDF document might not be displayed correctly.” I’m not sure why that happens and I don’t think it’s worth delving into it. By The Way, at that point, you can click on “Open With Different Viewer” and dump it to the normal Acrobat Reader, etc. by saving and/or opening it from there. - Mark Jurich
Re: [Vo]:Asked Answered
Vigilante Censorship This is an excellent exchange showing such methodology in action. Note the crickets at the end of the thread. Typical of those who have nothing useful and honest to say. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2989565/posts?page=47#47
Re: [Vo]:Evidence of SR Length Contraction
Yes, this is from the reference of the train. The figures add up according to Lorentz contraction according to SR. Now we need to understand what is to be expected from the point of view of the stationary frame. Dave -Original Message- From: H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Mar 8, 2014 1:17 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Evidence of SR Length Contraction This is what I described and illustrated from the frame of reference of the train. Section C shows the railway ties closer together. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxxczzEYA5C5cXNmZU1aUXNTRFE/edit?usp=sharing Harry On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 11:43 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: There has been a continuous discussion on the list about the reality of SR time dilation and length contraction. Most of the commenters accept the time dilation concept since it is relatively easy to measure. Some among the group point out the paradox that they perceive as existing, but for now I want divert attention to evidence of length contraction that seems highly relevant. I found an article in Wikipedia about the free electron laser. There is a technique for generating very high energy tunable x rays which strongly depends upon the length contraction due to electron velocities near light speed. The frequency and wavelength of the emitted radiation can be directly calculated by using the Lorentz factor. Read the article found at the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_electron_laser to see how well the mathematics works. The process uses an alternating series of magnets that are clearly spaced a large distance apart when compared to the the emitted wavelength of the synchronous radiation. If you accept that the electrons are moving at very nearly the speed of light, then the wavelength should be approximately equal to the spacing between alternate magnets unless that distance is effectively shortened by the Lorentz contraction as seen by the electrons in motion. The shortening factor directly enters into the determination of the radiation frequency. A radio wavelength structure of magnets is employed to achieve an x-ray length emission due to Lorentz contraction. Harry, this might help to explain the behavior of your train on the track questions. Think of the distance between the magnets as being similar to the space between the rail ties. Dave
Re: [Vo]:Evidence of SR Length Contraction
Some of the arguments are weak, but the one with the electrons in the closed tube is pretty solid and clear. The same issue occurs with any rotated disk. On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 7:48 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Another opposing view: http://www.alternativephysics.org/book/LengthContraction.htm
