Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
The balls display an excellent example of gyroscopic motion. Rotation about the axis connecting the balls results in a vector of angular momentum along that axis. Movement of that axis by rotation of the balls upon the surface causes a torque to be exerted which raises the connecting axis to an angle above the horizontal. You can see a similar effect in the way a top behaves as it become vertical when spun up. The total interaction among the several rotation axis and the friction on the surface is quite complex. It would be interesting to obtain a complete analysis of this system. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Mon, Mar 24, 2014 1:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor The link to the Hurricane balls slow motion movie is also interesting. The two fused balls start out rotating with each ball on the surface but shift to a position where only one ball is on the surface and the other attached ball rotates somewhat above the surface. It looks like a coupling with the gravitational field which causes a step change in the rotating positions of the two balls with one touching the surface and one above that surface. Strange. Bob - Original Message - From: H Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 9:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Harry and Jones-- You two do what I would call out of the box thinking on this issue--I wonder where Axil is. More thoughts: 1. There have been two different coupling experiments I seen--one where the balls are fused and the other where the balls are magnetically coupled. They both represented a connected mostly Fe ferro-magnetic structure. The rotation clearly creates a rotating magnetic field I think. It also would cause a certain electric charge to be established in some pattern on the outer surfaces of the balls at an equal voltage. At some point or points inside the metal surface the electric field should be 0. A conduction sphere distributes charge--electrons for example--over its surface so as to create a null coulomb (electric) field inside the surface. What happens when there are 2 conducting spheres attached together is another thing. When you add a magnetic field and some apparent electric current or megaton currents, you have even a more complex condition. 2. The magnetic field must be rotating with its own rotational energy and angular momentum/inertia. What is this inertia and how does it add or subtract from the to the mass rotating inertia? It seems the system must be coupled by this spinning. It seems there is a collapse of the spin coupling when the spinning slows. (There was an abrupt stop as noted by the researcher that demonstrated the fused balls.) 3. What happens to the angular momentum of the rolling balls in the magnetic coupling experiment. It seems to be converted to the angular momentum of the system of balls once they come together and it seems to happen pretty fast. The net angular of the two balls as they approach each other would be essentially 0 since the J vector points in an opposite direction for each ball. 4. A high speed moving picture of this would be interesting and also something to monitor the change of the magnetic fields with time would be interesting. How fast are are the field changed? Is there any other way to investigate the nuclear magnetic conditions in this system of rotating balls. Hurricane balls in slow motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZwuPyBzp20 5. What happens if the balls are gold instead of iron? Or Pd? Or Ni? 6. What would happen if once the balls are rotating fast you put another conducting surface around to modify the magnetic fields. This video appears to show the spin rate of hurricane balls can be increased by an electric coil. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5VfGpV6tWI 7. Is there a coupling to the Earth's magnetic or gravitational field that happens in steps or macroscopic quantum jumps considering the abrupt stopping of the rotation. Or is this merely a loss of energy via an abrupt change in the coeff. of friction? I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. and for yourself ? ;-) A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Harry and Jones-- You two do what I would call out of the box thinking on this issue--I wonder where Axil is. More thoughts: 1. There have been two different coupling experiments I seen--one where the balls are fused and the other where the balls are magnetically coupled. They both represented a connected mostly Fe ferro-magnetic structure. The rotation clearly creates a rotating magnetic field I think. It also would cause a certain electric charge to be established in some pattern on the outer surfaces of the balls at an equal voltage. At some point or points inside the metal surface the electric field should be 0. A conduction sphere distributes charge--electrons for example--over its surface so as to create a null coulomb (electric) field inside the surface. What happens when there are 2 conducting spheres attached together is another thing. When you add a magnetic field and some apparent electric current or megaton currents, you have even a more complex condition. 2. The magnetic field must be rotating with its own rotational energy and angular momentum/inertia. What is this inertia and how does it add or subtract from the to the mass rotating inertia? It seems the system must be coupled by this spinning. It seems there is a collapse of the spin coupling when the spinning slows. (There was an abrupt stop as noted by the researcher that demonstrated the fused balls.) 3. What happens to the angular momentum of the rolling balls in the magnetic coupling experiment. It seems to be converted to the angular momentum of the system of balls once they come together and it seems to happen pretty fast. The net angular of the two balls as they approach each other would be essentially 0 since the J vector points in an opposite direction for each ball. 4. A high speed moving picture of this would be interesting and also something to monitor the change of the magnetic fields with time would be interesting. How fast are are the field changed? Is there any other way to investigate the nuclear magnetic conditions in this system of rotating balls. 5. What happens if the balls are gold instead of iron? Or Pd? Or Ni? 6. What would happen if once the balls are rotating fast you put another conducting surface around to modify the magnetic fields. 7. Is there a coupling to the Earth's magnetic or gravitational field that happens in steps or macroscopic quantum jumps considering the abrupt stopping of the rotation. Or is this merely a loss of energy via an abrupt change in the coeff. of friction? I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball and the surface upon which they spin would be nice to know to understand the issue of friction changes. An evacuated chamber would be warranted to eliminate the issue with loss of energy via stirring the air around the rotating balls. Bob - Original Message - From: H Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:56 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: H Veeder .two steel ball bearings welded together . are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice.. two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. Suppose the fusion energy which is normally expressed as gamma rays in a very high temperature plasma environment is divided between rotational kinetic energy and much lower energy rays in a condensed matter environment. Since not all the gamma energy would go into rotation the newly formed nucleus would be stable and the rotational kinetic energy of the nucleus would heat the lattice by way of its rotating fields. However, moderate excess energy - well above chemical but less than nuclear, requires only the same basic force which keeps electrons from
RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
From: Bob Cook I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball and the surface upon which they spin would be nice to know to understand the issue of friction changes. An evacuated chamber would be warranted to eliminate the issue with loss of energy via stirring the air around the rotating balls. Yes, in a simple evacuated bell jar, it would be interesting to see if a pair of magnetized balls could be started and kept in rotation via an external laser beam, shining through the bell jar somewhat like a Crookes radiometer (which only works with a partial vacuum and not in the way commonly perceived.) However, in place of one side having a more absorbent coating, as in Crookes, we would be probably going for asymmetry in coherent photons causing tiny phase changes or spin coupling on one side or the other of the rotational vector. Does forward side irradiation help or hinder compared to trailing side? Lasers up to 10 watts are affordable but must be monitored with a grandson's science project. A 10 watt laser would possibly transfer 200 milliwatts through a bell jar - which should be more than enough. If the mirror is placed on top of a number of magnet configurations, then we have another possibility - does any kind of a magnetic field alignment help or hinder rotation. There could be a lesson or two here wrt any spin system, even at nanoscale.
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Jones-- I have just established a separate Vortex-1 file for possible science fair projects. Thanks, Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 8:51 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor From: Bob Cook I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball and the surface upon which they spin would be nice to know to understand the issue of friction changes. An evacuated chamber would be warranted to eliminate the issue with loss of energy via stirring the air around the rotating balls. Yes, in a simple evacuated bell jar, it would be interesting to see if a pair of magnetized balls could be started and kept in rotation via an external laser beam, shining through the bell jar somewhat like a Crookes radiometer (which only works with a partial vacuum and not in the way commonly perceived.) However, in place of one side having a more absorbent coating, as in Crookes, we would be probably going for asymmetry in coherent photons causing tiny phase changes or spin coupling on one side or the other of the rotational vector. Does forward side irradiation help or hinder compared to trailing side? Lasers up to 10 watts are affordable but must be monitored with a grandson's science project. A 10 watt laser would possibly transfer 200 milliwatts through a bell jar - which should be more than enough. If the mirror is placed on top of a number of magnet configurations, then we have another possibility - does any kind of a magnetic field alignment help or hinder rotation. There could be a lesson or two here wrt any spin system, even at nanoscale.
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Harry and Jones-- You two do what I would call out of the box thinking on this issue--I wonder where Axil is. More thoughts: 1. There have been two different coupling experiments I seen--one where the balls are fused and the other where the balls are magnetically coupled. They both represented a connected mostly Fe ferro-magnetic structure. The rotation clearly creates a rotating magnetic field I think. It also would cause a certain electric charge to be established in some pattern on the outer surfaces of the balls at an equal voltage. At some point or points inside the metal surface the electric field should be 0. A conduction sphere distributes charge--electrons for example--over its surface so as to create a null coulomb (electric) field inside the surface. What happens when there are 2 conducting spheres attached together is another thing. When you add a magnetic field and some apparent electric current or megaton currents, you have even a more complex condition. 2. The magnetic field must be rotating with its own rotational energy and angular momentum/inertia. What is this inertia and how does it add or subtract from the to the mass rotating inertia? It seems the system must be coupled by this spinning. It seems there is a collapse of the spin coupling when the spinning slows. (There was an abrupt stop as noted by the researcher that demonstrated the fused balls.) 3. What happens to the angular momentum of the rolling balls in the magnetic coupling experiment. It seems to be converted to the angular momentum of the system of balls once they come together and it seems to happen pretty fast. The net angular of the two balls as they approach each other would be essentially 0 since the J vector points in an opposite direction for each ball. 4. A high speed moving picture of this would be interesting and also something to monitor the change of the magnetic fields with time would be interesting. How fast are are the field changed? Is there any other way to investigate the nuclear magnetic conditions in this system of rotating balls. Hurricane balls in slow motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZwuPyBzp20 5. What happens if the balls are gold instead of iron? Or Pd? Or Ni? 6. What would happen if once the balls are rotating fast you put another conducting surface around to modify the magnetic fields. This video appears to show the spin rate of hurricane balls can be increased by an electric coil. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5VfGpV6tWI 7. Is there a coupling to the Earth's magnetic or gravitational field that happens in steps or macroscopic quantum jumps considering the abrupt stopping of the rotation. Or is this merely a loss of energy via an abrupt change in the coeff. of friction? I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. and for yourself ? ;-) A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball and the surface upon which they spin would be nice to know to understand the issue of friction changes. An evacuated chamber would be warranted to eliminate the issue with loss of energy via stirring the air around the rotating balls. Bob - Original Message - *From:* H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Sent:* Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:56 PM *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* H Veeder ...two steel ball bearings welded together ... are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. Suppose the fusion energy which is normally expressed as gamma rays in a very high temperature plasma environment is divided between rotational kinetic energy and much lower energy rays in a condensed matter environment. Since not all
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
The link to the Hurricane balls slow motion movie is also interesting. The two fused balls start out rotating with each ball on the surface but shift to a position where only one ball is on the surface and the other attached ball rotates somewhat above the surface. It looks like a coupling with the gravitational field which causes a step change in the rotating positions of the two balls with one touching the surface and one above that surface. Strange. Bob - Original Message - From: H Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2014 9:36 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Harry and Jones-- You two do what I would call out of the box thinking on this issue--I wonder where Axil is. More thoughts: 1. There have been two different coupling experiments I seen--one where the balls are fused and the other where the balls are magnetically coupled. They both represented a connected mostly Fe ferro-magnetic structure. The rotation clearly creates a rotating magnetic field I think. It also would cause a certain electric charge to be established in some pattern on the outer surfaces of the balls at an equal voltage. At some point or points inside the metal surface the electric field should be 0. A conduction sphere distributes charge--electrons for example--over its surface so as to create a null coulomb (electric) field inside the surface. What happens when there are 2 conducting spheres attached together is another thing. When you add a magnetic field and some apparent electric current or megaton currents, you have even a more complex condition. 2. The magnetic field must be rotating with its own rotational energy and angular momentum/inertia. What is this inertia and how does it add or subtract from the to the mass rotating inertia? It seems the system must be coupled by this spinning. It seems there is a collapse of the spin coupling when the spinning slows. (There was an abrupt stop as noted by the researcher that demonstrated the fused balls.) 3. What happens to the angular momentum of the rolling balls in the magnetic coupling experiment. It seems to be converted to the angular momentum of the system of balls once they come together and it seems to happen pretty fast. The net angular of the two balls as they approach each other would be essentially 0 since the J vector points in an opposite direction for each ball. 4. A high speed moving picture of this would be interesting and also something to monitor the change of the magnetic fields with time would be interesting. How fast are are the field changed? Is there any other way to investigate the nuclear magnetic conditions in this system of rotating balls. Hurricane balls in slow motion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZwuPyBzp20 5. What happens if the balls are gold instead of iron? Or Pd? Or Ni? 6. What would happen if once the balls are rotating fast you put another conducting surface around to modify the magnetic fields. This video appears to show the spin rate of hurricane balls can be increased by an electric coil. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5VfGpV6tWI 7. Is there a coupling to the Earth's magnetic or gravitational field that happens in steps or macroscopic quantum jumps considering the abrupt stopping of the rotation. Or is this merely a loss of energy via an abrupt change in the coeff. of friction? I think I have a good science fair project for a grandson. and for yourself ? ;-) A little high tech monitoring equipment is all that is necessary. Maybe NI would be interested in loaning the instruments. A transient change in the temperature of the ball and the surface upon which they spin would be nice to know to understand the issue of friction changes. An evacuated chamber would be warranted to eliminate the issue with loss of energy via stirring the air around the rotating balls. Bob - Original Message - From: H Veeder To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, March 22, 2014 10:56 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: From: H Veeder .two steel ball bearings welded together . are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice.. two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 9:47 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: *From:* H Veeder ...two steel ball bearings welded together ... are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. Suppose the fusion energy which is normally expressed as gamma rays in a very high temperature plasma environment is divided between rotational kinetic energy and much lower energy rays in a condensed matter environment. Since not all the gamma energy would go into rotation the newly formed nucleus would be stable and the rotational kinetic energy of the nucleus would heat the lattice by way of its rotating fields. However, moderate excess energy - well above chemical but less than nuclear, requires only the same basic force which keeps electrons from interacting with protons to begin with. That force is the zero point field. Puthoff and associates have elegantly framed the details of this kind of energy transfer, but until recently, there was doubt that ZPE could be easily converted to energy at a macro scale. The armchair theorist can imagine that the two balls are protons at a distance, and when they are accelerated together, say during the collapse of molecule of H2 due to electron degeneracy, Pauli exclusion keeps the two from fusing, and yet their linear motion is converted to spin. Extraordinary spin such as is the visual effect of the videos. In fact, just prior to this happening with protons, the two electrons of H2 could have joined into a temporary cooper pair of electrons, which function to accelerate the electrons towards each other. Thus one cooper-pair starts the LENR reaction and another finishes it, but no permanent fusion takes place. The transient electron pairing only needs to happen for a femtosecond to set the stage for this form of LENR). This model serves to explain, to an large extent, why Ni-H LENR can be so robust with no permanent nuclear reaction at all - since all of the resultant high spin is coupled back to magnons - which are easier to couple within a ferromagnetic lattice than within an exciton. When the exciton is ferromagnetic itself, the reaction is boosted and ZPE is converted to thermal energy. Jones One further point about pairing of spheres being special or natural or favored at many levels of geometry. This goes beyond cooper pairs - to cosmology. In our solar system, out sun is a single star, and consequently humans are misled into thinking that most stars are singlets. In fact that is not true - and only about 15% of stars in our galaxy are singlets. 85% of stars are found as binary or multiple arrangements. http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec10.html A stable pair of nucleons or a stable pair of stars both require energy to pull them apart. Harry
RE:[Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Thursday March 20 Jones said [snip] Would moving cavities be able to couple ZPE more effectively than stationary? [/snip] This is why I posited that small mobile LENR reactors when discovered will lead quickly to inertialess drive..there should be a linkage between motion and the cavities ..or at least if there are any hydrogen or ambient gases in those regions to act as fractional state linkage where the orbitals remain connected to the nucleus but stretch [Lorentzian contracted] on the temporal axis to exist in a different frame than their associated nucleus - obeying all the normal laws of inertia but time dilated and spatially shifted appropriate to their frame / fractional/inverted Rydberg state. My hypothesis is that the first time a compact LENR system is placed on a balance scale they will discover that the system balances out much quicker when turned off as opposed to when it is on...hints to the old legend of pyramid blocks being able to be scooted 2 bowshots after being struck by a special device and having the blocks it was elevated on yanked out... could they have been agitating the ambient gases in the calcium based stone into a tortured fractional state where the orbitals and nucleus were pinned to different rates of inertia? Holding the blocks in space between 2 different space time coordinates of the ambient fractional gas? Likewise I have tried to imagine similar material embodiments of casimir geometry and ambient gases that might explain different perpetual machines like circulating metal balls and magnets or coils and magnetic material to form armatures. How about silicon and hydrocarbons bubbling up through the sea floor of the Bermuda triangle :_) Fran _ From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Thursday, March 20, 2014 11:21 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor The continuing reports (on various alternative energy sites) about RAR having recently demonstrated overunity in Brazil, are provocative... but nothing more than rumor. Should we wait to explore the ramifications of perpmo - until it is fact? Nah. Why wait? It was always obvious to the contrarian that everything at the atomic and molecular level is in perpetual motion, as is everything at the cosmological level, so why the hell should a well-constructed machine be forbidden, other than the fact that none have made the grade thus far? Never mind a theory - let's stick to lack of results. It will not be obvious at first why paired-pelotas in the video below, consisting of two steel ball bearings welded together is also provocative. The two are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 In alternative energy - we are always looking out for carrier processes which are so efficient that they can be bootstrapped with something else which is very slightly gainful in a hidden way- so as to present an arguable case for overunity and/or perpetual motion in a more visible way. Impossible? Perhaps, but that will not stop tinkers from trying. And the recent reports of success in Brazil gives hope that this feat has already been achieved on a grand scale, with or without Harry Tuttle. That machine supposedly harnesses gravity - but another option for perpmo is ZPE. The welded spheres are probably amenable to ZPE coupling (to be explained) even if there is nothing special in the cooper pair geometry itself. A pendulum is the classic case of high-Q oscillation using gravity. Tuning forks are another high-Q oscillator using mechanical tension - and they can have quality factors around 1000 but the mass-in-motion is not high. The RAR machine would have a low-Q but high momentum, so we may be talking about the importance of a cross product. Moreover - the 'noise' of a tuning fork is 'work' of a sort and a Q of 1000 when partial damping is present can lead to perpetual motion, to the extent that the radiated damping energy can reflected efficiently back to the oscillator. Thus a room of tuning forks can have a Q which is much higher than the sum of units - despite the lack of efficient coupling. This comes up periodically here. Since the frequency of tuning forks is high compared to a pendulum, and since coupling of energy is often better accomplished at high frequency (especially ZPE) higher is preferable. And a pendulum can have high momentum and high Q but only low frequency. In one case, a pendulum in a vacuum was shown to have a Q of 10,000,000 but the frequency was only around one Hertz. The Q of perpetual motion is infinite of course, and even giga-Q falls short. Anyway, the point is that there are three important parameters which together can point to perpetual motion on the macroscale. Q, Mo, and L
RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
From: H Veeder .two steel ball bearings welded together . are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice.. two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. However, moderate excess energy - well above chemical but less than nuclear, requires only the same basic force which keeps electrons from interacting with protons to begin with. That force is the zero point field. Puthoff and associates have elegantly framed the details of this kind of energy transfer, but until recently, there was doubt that ZPE could be easily converted to energy at a macro scale. The armchair theorist can imagine that the two balls are protons at a distance, and when they are accelerated together, say during the collapse of molecule of H2 due to electron degeneracy, Pauli exclusion keeps the two from fusing, and yet their linear motion is converted to spin. Extraordinary spin such as is the visual effect of the videos. In fact, just prior to this happening with protons, the two electrons of H2 could have joined into a temporary cooper pair of electrons, which function to accelerate the electrons towards each other. Thus one cooper-pair starts the LENR reaction and another finishes it, but no permanent fusion takes place. The transient electron pairing only needs to happen for a femtosecond to set the stage for this form of LENR). This model serves to explain, to an large extent, why Ni-H LENR can be so robust with no permanent nuclear reaction at all - since all of the resultant high spin is coupled back to magnons - which are easier to couple within a ferromagnetic lattice than within an exciton. When the exciton is ferromagnetic itself, the reaction is boosted and ZPE is converted to thermal energy. Jones One further point about pairing of spheres being special or natural or favored at many levels of geometry. This goes beyond cooper pairs - to cosmology. In our solar system, out sun is a single star, and consequently humans are misled into thinking that most stars are singlets. In fact that is not true - and only about 15% of stars in our galaxy are singlets. 85% of stars are found as binary or multiple arrangements. http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec10.html
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Harry and Jones-- I have not said anything about these balls--Jones has said it all. They demonstrate the instantaneous change of kinetic energy, angular momentum and linear momentum into spin--rotational energy alone. However, if the potential energy of the welded bond or the magnetic field goes away, the spin energy would transform back into kinetic energy of the two balls. They would fly apart with the same kinetic energy (or nearly as much less friction loss) that they had when they first met. (Kind of like getting married and then divorced.) LENR is nice since the system starts out with high spin energy and only increases its potential energy (remaining married) with no destructive kinetic energy to speak of--only well managed heat. Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 6:47 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor From: H Veeder .two steel ball bearings welded together . are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice.. two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. However, moderate excess energy - well above chemical but less than nuclear, requires only the same basic force which keeps electrons from interacting with protons to begin with. That force is the zero point field. Puthoff and associates have elegantly framed the details of this kind of energy transfer, but until recently, there was doubt that ZPE could be easily converted to energy at a macro scale. The armchair theorist can imagine that the two balls are protons at a distance, and when they are accelerated together, say during the collapse of molecule of H2 due to electron degeneracy, Pauli exclusion keeps the two from fusing, and yet their linear motion is converted to spin. Extraordinary spin such as is the visual effect of the videos. In fact, just prior to this happening with protons, the two electrons of H2 could have joined into a temporary cooper pair of electrons, which function to accelerate the electrons towards each other. Thus one cooper-pair starts the LENR reaction and another finishes it, but no permanent fusion takes place. The transient electron pairing only needs to happen for a femtosecond to set the stage for this form of LENR). This model serves to explain, to an large extent, why Ni-H LENR can be so robust with no permanent nuclear reaction at all - since all of the resultant high spin is coupled back to magnons - which are easier to couple within a ferromagnetic lattice than within an exciton. When the exciton is ferromagnetic itself, the reaction is boosted and ZPE is converted to thermal energy. Jones One further point about pairing of spheres being special or natural or favored at many levels of geometry. This goes beyond cooper pairs - to cosmology. In our solar system, out sun is a single star, and consequently humans are misled into thinking that most stars are singlets. In fact that is not true - and only about 15% of stars in our galaxy are singlets. 85% of stars are found as binary or multiple arrangements. http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast122/lectures/lec10.html
RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
While on the subject of high-Q coupling, trihydrogen should be mentioned. The trihydrogen cation - [H3+] is one of the most abundant ions in the universe, far more abundant than H2, since it is stable in the interstellar medium. Therefore, due to its natural stability in extreme circumstance - trihydrogen can form the basis of a compelling model for one variety of LENR. In this type of LENR, which is one of perhaps a dozen possible energetic hydrogen reactions - nanocavities are present; and H3+ could be the active agent for gain within these cavities. Here is a visualization. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laSRGS8-BU4 The center ball would be a proton with both electrons, preferably in reduced orbitals, tightly bound. There is no need for full electron degeneracy in this model. Therefore it could have a higher probability than reactions requiring electron degeneracy, which is rare. The two protons on either end of the centered hydride - are normally oscillating and bound by electrostatic and magnetic bonds which can flip to one of two net spin polarities - ortho and para. These two alignments have different spin energies. What is not shown in the video is the cavity walls, where the proton, on its excursions away from the center of mass, encounters the near field of the metal containment structure. This would provide electrostatic attraction to the wall, and enhanced range of oscillation and also would disrupt the oscillation resonance. Very often, due to the delay and phase shift, a returning proton will encounter the other returning proton, within the electron smear of the tight orbitals, and will react in the known diproton reaction, due to strong force attraction. This is not an elastic collision but is technically reversible fusion since the protons are still protons after the encounter and Pauli exclusion statistics prevents anything more. This reaction provides for asymmetric spin alteration from low spin to high spin via mass conversion and by coupling of nuclear spin to the net magnon spin of the entire system, including the nickel containment. The result is anomalous heat via a sequential Lamb shift, happening at THz frequencies. This would be a mechanism which functions as an alternative or in parallel to ZPE conversion, which can also happen at the same time in the same circumstances. In neither case is real fusion required, yet in both cases, there can be an occasional nuclear reaction or transmutation as a side effect. The side effect would typically supply only a tiny fraction of the excess energy of the sequential Lamb shift so it can be ignored. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
The behavior of two balls can not be applied to LENR. Imagining how photons might interact ignores the fact that the protons are not isolated in space when in a chemical lattice. When LENR occurs in a lattice, all the protons, deuterons and electrons are innerconnected. They all are restrained in their motion by forces that hold the lattice together. People who have the mind of the physicist seem to ignore what actually happens in a chemical structure. This structure is not plasma as is experienced in hot fusion. The atoms in such a structure are not free to move except under well known restraint. The amount of energy available is limited by the energy holding the structure together, which is no more than a few eV. Pretending otherwise has made the present theories worthless. If you are a physicist and want to explain LENR, please first learn some chemistry. Ed Storms On Mar 21, 2014, at 8:05 AM, Bob Cook wrote: Harry and Jones-- I have not said anything about these balls--Jones has said it all. They demonstrate the instantaneous change of kinetic energy, angular momentum and linear momentum into spin--rotational energy alone. However, if the potential energy of the welded bond or the magnetic field goes away, the spin energy would transform back into kinetic energy of the two balls. They would fly apart with the same kinetic energy (or nearly as much less friction loss) that they had when they first met. (Kind of like getting married and then divorced.) LENR is nice since the system starts out with high spin energy and only increases its potential energy (remaining married) with no destructive kinetic energy to speak of--only well managed heat. Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 6:47 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor From: H Veeder …two steel ball bearings welded together … are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice…. two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ Thank, Harry - this video is another good visual example of a larger phenomenon involving pairing - since we can better visualize how linear motion is converted to rotational naturally. This is somewhat along the lines of how Bob Cook wants to fashion the LENR reaction, with the conversion of kinetic energy of reactants being spin-coupled, in the end. However, IMO - this process does not require actual fusion to be anomalously energetic. And coupling would never hide gamma rays, if there was a nuclear reaction, so essentially coupling cannot be related to permanent fusion, since the energies are too high. However, moderate excess energy – well above chemical but less than nuclear, requires only the same basic force which keeps electrons from interacting with protons to begin with. That force is the zero point field. Puthoff and associates have elegantly framed the details of this kind of energy transfer, but until recently, there was doubt that ZPE could be easily converted to energy at a macro scale. The armchair theorist can imagine that the two balls are protons at a distance, and when they are accelerated together, say during the collapse of molecule of H2 due to electron degeneracy, Pauli exclusion keeps the two from fusing, and yet their linear motion is converted to spin. Extraordinary spin such as is the visual effect of the videos. In fact, just prior to this happening with protons, the two electrons of H2 could have joined into a temporary cooper pair of electrons, which function to accelerate the electrons towards each other. Thus one cooper-pair starts the LENR reaction and another finishes it, but no permanent fusion takes place. The transient electron pairing only needs to happen for a femtosecond to set the stage for this form of LENR). This model serves to explain, to an large extent, why Ni-H LENR can be so robust with no permanent nuclear reaction at all – since all of the resultant high spin is coupled back to magnons – which are easier to couple within a ferromagnetic lattice than within an exciton. When the exciton is ferromagnetic itself, the reaction is boosted and ZPE is converted to thermal energy. Jones One further point about “pairing of spheres” being special or natural or favored at many levels of geometry. This goes beyond cooper pairs - to cosmology. In our solar system, out sun is a single star, and consequently humans are misled into thinking that most stars are singlets. In fact that is not true - and only about 15% of stars in our galaxy are singlets. 85% of stars are found
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Jones-- What about D3+ cat ion? Pauli is not working in this case--the D is integral spin in an excited state. However, Ed's chemistry would be the same maybe. Its only held together with electric and magnetic forces. The outside D's would bump the metal containment however. Pd is mostly integral spin (Bose particles) however one natural isotope of Pd is a Fermi particle (Pd-105). Ni is also mostly integral spin with Ni 61 odd or Fermi. If the lattice cell includes only Pd 105 or in the case of Ni, only Ni-61, does the interaction and spin coupling to the H3 or D3 change for the cells? What about the other combinations of isotopes making up a lattice cell? Does D3+ have the same stability in space as H3+? Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 7:54 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor While on the subject of high-Q coupling, trihydrogen should be mentioned. The trihydrogen cation - [H3+] is one of the most abundant ions in the universe, far more abundant than H2, since it is stable in the interstellar medium. Therefore, due to its natural stability in extreme circumstance - trihydrogen can form the basis of a compelling model for one variety of LENR. In this type of LENR, which is one of perhaps a dozen possible energetic hydrogen reactions - nanocavities are present; and H3+ could be the active agent for gain within these cavities. Here is a visualization. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=laSRGS8-BU4 The center ball would be a proton with both electrons, preferably in reduced orbitals, tightly bound. There is no need for full electron degeneracy in this model. Therefore it could have a higher probability than reactions requiring electron degeneracy, which is rare. The two protons on either end of the centered hydride - are normally oscillating and bound by electrostatic and magnetic bonds which can flip to one of two net spin polarities - ortho and para. These two alignments have different spin energies. What is not shown in the video is the cavity walls, where the proton, on its excursions away from the center of mass, encounters the near field of the metal containment structure. This would provide electrostatic attraction to the wall, and enhanced range of oscillation and also would disrupt the oscillation resonance. Very often, due to the delay and phase shift, a returning proton will encounter the other returning proton, within the electron smear of the tight orbitals, and will react in the known diproton reaction, due to strong force attraction. This is not an elastic collision but is technically reversible fusion since the protons are still protons after the encounter and Pauli exclusion statistics prevents anything more. This reaction provides for asymmetric spin alteration from low spin to high spin via mass conversion and by coupling of nuclear spin to the net magnon spin of the entire system, including the nickel containment. The result is anomalous heat via a sequential Lamb shift, happening at THz frequencies. This would be a mechanism which functions as an alternative or in parallel to ZPE conversion, which can also happen at the same time in the same circumstances. In neither case is real fusion required, yet in both cases, there can be an occasional nuclear reaction or transmutation as a side effect. The side effect would typically supply only a tiny fraction of the excess energy of the sequential Lamb shift so it can be ignored. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
From: Edmund Storms When LENR occurs in a lattice, all the protons, deuterons and electrons are innerconnected. They all are restrained in their motion by forces that hold the lattice together. What you say is true, Ed - but essentially irrelevant. You did not read the premise - at least not carefully - which clearly states that we are talking about nano-porosity and NOT about lattice chemistry such as is seen in Pd-D. Why are you always lost in the old world of Pd-D? A Casimir pore inside Raney nickel for instance could have a diameter of 8 nm. Plenty of room. In which case we would NOT be talking about chemistry but about plasma physics. Should the contents of that pore be H3+ then chemistry is modestly helpful but insufficient to explain the operative dynamics. Thus you entire argument favoring electrochemistry falls apart from the starting premise. * If you are a physicist and want to explain LENR, please first learn some chemistry. If you are a chemist and want to understand the Ni-H reaction as it happens in nanocavities, please first learn to appreciate the physics of nanocavities, the Casimir force, quantum opto-mechanics, QCD and the strong force, the solar diproton reaction, SPP and Pauli exclusion. There is no room for fusion of protons to deuterium in this kind of physics. The dark ages of Pd-D are ancient history in 2014, and we are now moving into a new level of understanding demanding a multi-disciplinary approach based on quantum physics. It is one in which electrochemistry is helpful - but far from sufficient to explain the dynamics of gain in Ni-H. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: The continuing reports (on various alternative energy sites) about RAR having recently demonstrated overunity in Brazil, are provocative... but nothing more than rumor. Should we wait to explore the ramifications of perpmo - until it is fact? I must say, this is all beginning to remind me of Eric Laithwaite: http://www.quantumgravity.us/TheSwingsSecrets/SS-Part-A.html
RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
From: Bob Cook What about D3+ cation? Pauli is not working in this case--the D is integral spin in an excited state. However, Ed's chemistry would be the same . Yes. Nothing in the previous thread applies to deuterium or to Pd-D. The physics of protons is so completely different from deuterium, that it only adds a level of confusion try to merge the two fields in search of commonality. Best to completely separate them IMHO.
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Mar 21, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Jones Beene wrote: From: Edmund Storms When LENR occurs in a lattice, all the protons, deuterons and electrons are innerconnected. They all are restrained in their motion by forces that hold the lattice together. What you say is true, Ed - but essentially irrelevant. You did not read the premise – at least not carefully - which clearly states that we are talking about nano-porosity and NOT about lattice chemistry such as is seen in Pd-D. Why are you always lost in the old world of Pd-D? Jones, ALL chemical structures are similar in this behavior to PdD. I use PdD as an example only because it is the most investigated and the most cited. A Casimir pore inside Raney nickel for instance could have a diameter of 8 nm. Plenty of room. In which case we would NOT be talking about chemistry but about plasma physics. Should the contents of that pore be H3+ then chemistry is modestly helpful but insufficient to explain the operative dynamics. OK, now you are describing a different feature, which I agree can accommodate behavior that is not possible in the lattice itself. In fact, I go this path when I place the Hydroton in a crack. Now the discussion has to address whether the Casimir effect is real or not. I do not believe it is real, as I said before. I believe a structure like the Hydroton must be created for the observed behavior to take place in PdD or in NiH, but in both cases in a nano-crack. We agree that a nano-crack or nano-cavity is required. We differ in what happens in this structure. Thus you entire argument favoring electrochemistry falls apart from the starting premise. I'm not discussing electrochemistry. No one mentioned electrochemistry. Electrochemistry is only one of the 7 methods that have been used to force hydrogen isotopes into a structure where the NAE can be created. It has no other function. Ø If you are a physicist and want to explain LENR, please first learn some chemistry. If you are a chemist and want to understand the Ni-H reaction as it happens in nanocavities, please first learn to appreciate the physics of nanocavities, the Casimir force, quantum opto-mechanics, QCD and the strong force, the solar diproton reaction, SPP and Pauli exclusion. There is no room for fusion of protons to deuterium in this kind of physics. Yes, that is your claim. That is where we differ. I propose that the LENR occurs outside the lattice, as you do, but by a different process. It would help if you focused on where we actually differ rather than on imagined irrelevant differences. The dark ages of Pd-D are ancient history in 2014, and we are now moving into a new level of understanding demanding a multi-disciplinary approach based on quantum physics. It is one in which electrochemistry is helpful - but far from sufficient to explain the dynamics of gain in Ni-H. Here again, we differe. I believe Nature has only one mechanism that applies to PdD, PdH, NiH and any other environment where the mechanism can be made to operate. Only one universal NAE is causing what is observed using PdD or NiH. You apparently believe that several mechanisms are operating. Is that true? If so, what are these mechanisms? Ed Storms Jones
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Jones-- What about Ed's idea that chemistry is separate from physics? D and H should react the same, if its chemistry that controls their demise. Maybe the differential mass makes the vibrations of the molecules a little different with different reaction rates? I'm not sure. Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 9:19 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor From: Bob Cook What about D3+ cation? Pauli is not working in this case--the D is integral spin in an excited state. However, Ed's chemistry would be the same . Yes. Nothing in the previous thread applies to deuterium or to Pd-D. The physics of protons is so completely different from deuterium, that it only adds a level of confusion try to merge the two fields in search of commonality. Best to completely separate them IMHO.
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
Jones-- What about my question regarding the presence of D3+ as a common particle in space--I think not--Li 6 is the likely more stable item? Bob - Original Message - From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 9:19 AM Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor From: Bob Cook What about D3+ cation? Pauli is not working in this case--the D is integral spin in an excited state. However, Ed's chemistry would be the same . Yes. Nothing in the previous thread applies to deuterium or to Pd-D. The physics of protons is so completely different from deuterium, that it only adds a level of confusion try to merge the two fields in search of commonality. Best to completely separate them IMHO
[Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
The continuing reports (on various alternative energy sites) about RAR having recently demonstrated overunity in Brazil, are provocative... but nothing more than rumor. Should we wait to explore the ramifications of perpmo - until it is fact? Nah. Why wait? It was always obvious to the contrarian that everything at the atomic and molecular level is in perpetual motion, as is everything at the cosmological level, so why the hell should a well-constructed machine be forbidden, other than the fact that none have made the grade thus far? Never mind a theory - let's stick to lack of results. It will not be obvious at first why paired-pelotas in the video below, consisting of two steel ball bearings welded together is also provocative. The two are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 In alternative energy - we are always looking out for carrier processes which are so efficient that they can be bootstrapped with something else which is very slightly gainful in a hidden way- so as to present an arguable case for overunity and/or perpetual motion in a more visible way. Impossible? Perhaps, but that will not stop tinkers from trying. And the recent reports of success in Brazil gives hope that this feat has already been achieved on a grand scale, with or without Harry Tuttle. That machine supposedly harnesses gravity - but another option for perpmo is ZPE. The welded spheres are probably amenable to ZPE coupling (to be explained) even if there is nothing special in the cooper pair geometry itself. A pendulum is the classic case of high-Q oscillation using gravity. Tuning forks are another high-Q oscillator using mechanical tension - and they can have quality factors around 1000 but the mass-in-motion is not high. The RAR machine would have a low-Q but high momentum, so we may be talking about the importance of a cross product. Moreover - the 'noise' of a tuning fork is 'work' of a sort and a Q of 1000 when partial damping is present can lead to perpetual motion, to the extent that the radiated damping energy can reflected efficiently back to the oscillator. Thus a room of tuning forks can have a Q which is much higher than the sum of units - despite the lack of efficient coupling. This comes up periodically here. Since the frequency of tuning forks is high compared to a pendulum, and since coupling of energy is often better accomplished at high frequency (especially ZPE) higher is preferable. And a pendulum can have high momentum and high Q but only low frequency. In one case, a pendulum in a vacuum was shown to have a Q of 10,000,000 but the frequency was only around one Hertz. The Q of perpetual motion is infinite of course, and even giga-Q falls short. Anyway, the point is that there are three important parameters which together can point to perpetual motion on the macroscale. Q, Mo, and L (lambda) An ideal facilitator for perpetual motion would have all three parameters as high as possible - and the hurricane balls in the above video look interesting for that, since they should be amenable to having 1) high momentum 2) high-Q and 3) high frequency all in the same package. Thus any small gain could push the Q to infinity. How can they be coupled to ZPE? - that is the $64 question. The hurricane balls are easy to fabricate as ferromagnetic and therein lies one route to potential gain in the sense of a Maxwell's demon, so that polarity can harnessed with sensors and feedback. However, it would be interesting to see if hurricane balls, made of a nanoporous material like Raney nickel would show any further anomaly - possibly infinite Q - based simply on having energy deficient cavities in constant motion. Would moving cavities be able to couple ZPE more effectively than stationary? It's a stretch, this ZPE-ram-jet, but far from the same level of risk as the RAR factory machine which must have cost an enormous amount. If and when it is shown to work - the floodgates of funding will open for this once unspeakable reality: perpetual motion (on the macro scale). Be there or B^2, as they say. attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Hurricane balls, RAR and high-Q factor
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: The continuing reports (on various alternative energy sites) about RAR having recently demonstrated overunity in Brazil, are provocative... but nothing more than rumor. Should we wait to explore the ramifications of perpmo - until it is fact? Nah. Why wait? It was always obvious to the contrarian that everything at the atomic and molecular level is in perpetual motion, as is everything at the cosmological level, so why the hell should a well-constructed machine be forbidden, other than the fact that none have made the grade thus far? Never mind a theory - let's stick to lack of results. It will not be obvious at first why paired-pelotas in the video below, consisting of two steel ball bearings welded together is also provocative. The two are a metaphorical cooper-pair, so to speak... raising another weird question: is there something about spherical-pairing alone, which is special - at any level? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvq8laPb498 Nice. At 2:15 in this video two magnetic balls roll together and their linear motion is converted into rotational motion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIfTKBVI6ZQ harry
