Re: [Vo]:Fringe
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: > I have applied this vibrating Bose condensate thing to the hydrogen > atom. Many things come out of the analysis, such as; It explains why > the electron does not spiral into the nucleus. Can you explain why? I would like to read the preprint of your paper, if possible.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
No, for that you need armchair types. On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Edmund Storms wrote: > The garage researcher can get into the act anytime. In fact, most of us at > the margins of the professional community, as you say, were garage men > initially. My only point was that garage men will not contribute much to an > understanding of the process. Later, when engineering improvements need to > be made, the garage might be a useful laboratory. > > Ed > > > > On Jun 19, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > >> >> - Original Message - >> From: Edmund Storms >> Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:16 am >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe >> >> To avoid making yourself ill with worry, let me add a bit of >>> optimism. Cold fusion has left the garage level of research and >>> entered the level of a well funded laboratory. This is progress. >>> The >>> theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of >>> >>> the trained professional. This is also progress. This is similar >>> to >>> the development of all technologies. You would not consider >>> developing >>> a commercial airliner in your basement or be able to contribute to >>> an >>> understanding or aeronautical engineering would you? >>> >> >> >> All the *progress* to date has occured at the professional level, even if >> it >> has been conducted at the margins of the professional community. >> I am waiting for progress to emerge at the "garage level of research". >> >> Harry >> >> >
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Ed, You are making the experiment to hard. All that is need is a @ 5 inch palladium wire. The wire would be run through a divider. On one side of the wall would be low pressure hydrogen. On the other side would be water though which you could see the hydrogen bubbling. Connect a signal generator at each end of the wire. Turn it on vary the frequency and watch the bubbles. Easy enough. I would like to see this done. Frank In a message dated 6/19/2009 4:17:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, stor...@ix.netcom.com writes: This might be something KivaLabs could try, Frank. We are using radio frequency for other purposes, which would make this use relatively simple. However, since PdD is a conductor, the RF would induce a current of that frequency in the metal surface. The interior where diffusion occurs would see no effect. This might be a problem. I expect a lower frequency would probably be necessary to influence the interior of the diffusion barrier. Ed **Dell Inspiron 15: Now starting at $349 (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222435718x1201460505/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fad.doubleclick. net%2Fclk%3B215748553%3B38126199%3Bs)
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
The garage researcher can get into the act anytime. In fact, most of us at the margins of the professional community, as you say, were garage men initially. My only point was that garage men will not contribute much to an understanding of the process. Later, when engineering improvements need to be made, the garage might be a useful laboratory. Ed On Jun 19, 2009, at 12:49 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: - Original Message - From: Edmund Storms Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe To avoid making yourself ill with worry, let me add a bit of optimism. Cold fusion has left the garage level of research and entered the level of a well funded laboratory. This is progress. The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the trained professional. This is also progress. This is similar to the development of all technologies. You would not consider developing a commercial airliner in your basement or be able to contribute to an understanding or aeronautical engineering would you? All the *progress* to date has occured at the professional level, even if it has been conducted at the margins of the professional community. I am waiting for progress to emerge at the "garage level of research". Harry
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
This might be something KivaLabs could try, Frank. We are using radio frequency for other purposes, which would make this use relatively simple. However, since PdD is a conductor, the RF would induce a current of that frequency in the metal surface. The interior where diffusion occurs would see no effect. This might be a problem. I expect a lower frequency would probably be necessary to influence the interior of the diffusion barrier. Ed On Jun 19, 2009, at 1:43 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Ed, this super-diffuser idea could lead to a good experiement to test the Bose condensate idea. The coherence length at thermal frequencies is 50nm. Assuming the product that I get applies to this system 1.094 megahertz-meters, the coherence length should be longer with radio frequency stimulation. At 10 mega hertz of stimulation the co-herence length should be .1 meters. The rate of diffusion should increase when a proton conduction of this length is stimualted at that frequency. If I were not on the road, living in a hotel in Knoxville, and here working on CO2 capture, I would try this. Cc: Edmund Storms Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 10:28 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe This is a nice imaginative theory described in the article, Frank, but it does not prove that Bose Condensates of hydrogen exist. In fact, such structure should show up as anomalies in diffusion, which they do not. If a structure containing H(D) can move through the lattice without resistance, the material should also become a super- diffuser, which it is not. In addition, PdD is superconducting in the normal way at about 10°K, not at room temperature where the BC structures have to exist to be useful for CF. I still see no evidence that these structures exist in PdD. Dell Inspiron 15: Now starting at $349
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Ed, this super-diffuser idea could lead to a good experiement to test the Bose condensate idea. The coherence length at thermal frequencies is 50nm. Assuming the product that I get applies to this system 1.094 megahertz-meters, the coherence length should be longer with radio frequency stimulation. At 10 mega hertz of stimulation the co-herence length should be .1 meters. The rate of diffusion should increase when a proton conduction of this length is stimualted at that frequency. If I were not on the road, living in a hotel in Knoxville, and here working on CO2 capture, I would try this. Cc: Edmund Storms Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 10:28 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe This is a nice imaginative theory described in the article, Frank, but it does not prove that Bose Condensates of hydrogen exist. In fact, such structure should show up as anomalies in diffusion, which they do not. If a structure containing H(D) can move through the lattice without resistance, the material should also become a super-diffuser, which it is not. In addition, PdD is superconducting in the normal way at about 10°K, not at room temperature where the BC structures have to exist to be useful for CF. I still see no evidence that these structures exist in PdD.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
That is because (at thermal frequencies) the co-herance length is about 50nm. There is normal material between these hyperconducing grains that blocks diffusion. Hyperconducting referes to superconductivity at a specific frequency. -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Edmund Storms Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 10:28 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe This is a nice imaginative theory described in the article, Frank, but it does not prove that Bose Condensates of hydrogen exist. In fact, such structure should show up as anomalies in diffusion, which they do not. If a structure containing H(D) can move through the lattice without resistance, the material should also become a super-diffuser, which it is not. In addition, PdD is superconducting in the normal way at about 10°K, not at room temperature where the BC structures have to exist to be useful for CF. I still see no evidence that these structures exist in PdD.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
- Original Message - From: Edmund Storms Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:16 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe > To avoid making yourself ill with worry, let me add a bit of > optimism. Cold fusion has left the garage level of research and > entered the level of a well funded laboratory. This is progress. > The > theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of > > the trained professional. This is also progress. This is similar > to > the development of all technologies. You would not consider > developing > a commercial airliner in your basement or be able to contribute to > an > understanding or aeronautical engineering would you? All the *progress* to date has occured at the professional level, even if it has been conducted at the margins of the professional community. I am waiting for progress to emerge at the "garage level of research". Harry
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Try "quantum tunneling". Terry On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 11:09 AM, OrionWorks wrote: > My knowledge of quantum effects is rather provincial, so please take > this into consideration concerning the quality of my question. > > I've heard of a phenomenon akin to subatomic particles being able to > "bore" effortlessly through atoms in a manner roughly similar to > playing croquet, where you place your foot on a ball and whack it with > the hammer causing an adjacent physically touching ball to go flying > across the lawn. It's my understanding there is a phenomenon that > describes traveling subatomic particles which, under appropriate > conditions, seem to be able to pass effortlessly through an atom and > magically reappear on the other side where they can continue > unhindered on their original trajectory. It is as if no resistance was > experienced while the subatomic particle was in intimate contact with > the atom. Such a phenomenon, if I am describing it correctly, seems to > bring up questions in regards to what the hell happened to the Coulomb > barrier. > > Makes me wonder if the phenomenon, if better understood, might be able > to avail itself to tricking the nucleus into doing weird things... > like possibly rearranging the proton/neutron ratio. ...or perhaps > finessing a few out or in. > > Several googled attempts to locate literature related to "quantum > boring" and related phrases were unsuccessful. All I seem to get are > critiques on the recent James Bond flick, "Quantum Solace", and how > "boring" they thought it was. > > Regards > Steven Vincent Johnson > www.OrionWorks.com > www.zazzle.com/orionworks > >
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
My knowledge of quantum effects is rather provincial, so please take this into consideration concerning the quality of my question. I've heard of a phenomenon akin to subatomic particles being able to "bore" effortlessly through atoms in a manner roughly similar to playing croquet, where you place your foot on a ball and whack it with the hammer causing an adjacent physically touching ball to go flying across the lawn. It's my understanding there is a phenomenon that describes traveling subatomic particles which, under appropriate conditions, seem to be able to pass effortlessly through an atom and magically reappear on the other side where they can continue unhindered on their original trajectory. It is as if no resistance was experienced while the subatomic particle was in intimate contact with the atom. Such a phenomenon, if I am describing it correctly, seems to bring up questions in regards to what the hell happened to the Coulomb barrier. Makes me wonder if the phenomenon, if better understood, might be able to avail itself to tricking the nucleus into doing weird things... like possibly rearranging the proton/neutron ratio. ...or perhaps finessing a few out or in. Several googled attempts to locate literature related to "quantum boring" and related phrases were unsuccessful. All I seem to get are critiques on the recent James Bond flick, "Quantum Solace", and how "boring" they thought it was. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
This is a nice imaginative theory described in the article, Frank, but it does not prove that Bose Condensates of hydrogen exist. In fact, such structure should show up as anomalies in diffusion, which they do not. If a structure containing H(D) can move through the lattice without resistance, the material should also become a super-diffuser, which it is not. In addition, PdD is superconducting in the normal way at about 10°K, not at room temperature where the BC structures have to exist to be useful for CF. I still see no evidence that these structures exist in PdD. Ed On Jun 19, 2009, at 8:08 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: try this link Ed..there is a lot out there on proton superconductivity if you care to look http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18624984.400-superconductors-have-no-need-to-be-negative.html -Original Message- From: fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 9:38 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe Ed you need to search for "Heavy Fermion Superconductivity" to find out what the non-cold fusion community is doing with proton superconductions. Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary? If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency? Dell Inspiron 15: Now starting at $349 Dell Inspiron 15: Now starting at $349
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
try this link Ed..there is a lot out there on proton superconductivity if you care to look http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg18624984.400-superconductors-have-no-need-to-be-negative.html -Original Message- From: fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 9:38 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe Ed you need to search for "Heavy Fermion Superconductivity" to find out what the non-cold fusion community is doing with proton superconductions. Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary??If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency?? Dell Inspiron 15: Now starting at $349
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Ed you need to search for "Heavy Fermion Superconductivity" to find out what the non-cold fusion community is doing with proton superconductions. Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary??If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency??
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Harry Veeder wrote: There are plenty of retired scientists/engineers enjoying comfortable > pensions right now. If enough of them contributed a fraction of their income > to a fund for cold fusion research . . . We don't need their money. We need their support. We need them to read papers, learn about the subject, write letters to professional journals and editors, contact elected officials, and so on. We need them to counterbalance the "skeptics," in short. When a magazine like Sci. Am. attacks cold fusion, we need many educated subscribers to contact the magazine and tell them they are wrong. One or two people such as Krivit and I alone will have no effect. Dozens or hundreds would get their attention. Back when I was lobbying the incoming Obama administration, if I could have attracted hundreds or even thousands of signatures and intelligent comments in the Citizens Briefing Book it might have had an impact. As I said in the book, cold fusion will not survive without broad public support. The same kind of professional activism was needed before things like automobile safety standards could be pushed through over the objections of manufacturers. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
There are plenty of retired scientists/engineers enjoying comfortable pensions right now. If enough of them contributed a fraction of their income to a fund for cold fusion research something significant could be accomplished besides improving their golf game. ;-) harry - Original Message - From: Chris Zell Date: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:56 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe > So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing > anything to cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way > been conceived to power a vehicle with it.(??!) > > Many of us have to worry about having any savings, job or > retirement at all, much less hundreds of thousands for a > professional lab. Is there any point to discussing cold fusion? > Was Parksie right in a practical way, that it's just a curiosity? > > Where's my Prozac? > > > >
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:31 AM, Edmund Storms wrote: > Well Frank, such ideas have value only when they show why and how most > observed behaviors occur and how to make the behavior occur more > consistently and at higher levels. All theories I know about met only a > small fraction of this requirement. > It is funny, just contributed a post to this subject at another list, the only other list I was on. In the opinion of a poster and myself with a big fat "ME TOO" post the key to coming up with a theory that fits everything is to simply put yourself in the way of as much evidence and information as possible, have as little opinion of how things work so you can just let whatever if there impact you however long it takes don't reach for this, just wait for something to hit you no matter how odd and no matter how fuzzy the picture might be, don't try and force this picture to fit already established concepts. That picture for me started of as an extraordinarily fuzzy yet compelling image and has now come into some acceptable detail though not enough for any equations so I doubt that any scientist not willing to listen to a ton of crackpot experiments and observations from nature as evidence would find any interest in it. > If you can have better success in this requirement, your theory will have > value. > Most theories are useful guides and do suggest useful approaches, but the > use of assumptions to allow the data to be fit, i.e. to allow a claim to be > made for predictions of behavior, greatly reduces the value. If I > understand your approach, you use conventional and accepted theory to arrive > at a new constant, which you assume is as fundamental as Planck's constant. > You claim that the logic associated with this constant allows you to make > novel predictions. You may be right. However, I would like to know, based > on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them > in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated, i.e. > how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the > resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. If > you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be > interested. > > Ed > > On Jun 18, 2009, at 9:06 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: > > The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the > trained professional. This is also progress > Ed > > So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to > cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power > a vehicle with it.(??!) > > Not so I am an amateur and I am going to add to the new understanding > produced by this process. > My introduction to be published by IE. in sept. > > Max Planck’s constant qualifies the angular momentum of the stationary > atomic state.9 The path of the transitional quantum state has been > unknown. Albert Einstein described the energy of a photon with Planck’s > constant.3 Niels Bohr applied these ideas to the atomic structure. Bohr’s > quantum condition states that the angular momentum carried by a stationary > atomic orbit is a multiple of Planck’s constant.2 The quantization of > angular momentum is a postulate, underivable from deeper law. Its > validity depends on the agreement with experimental spectra. Werner > Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger extended these ideas and qualified the > intensity of a spectral emission. These great scientists found that the > frequency and the amplitude of the emitted photon is a function of the > differential in energy through which the electron drops. The frequency and > amplitude of a classical wave is that of the emitter. The correspondence > principle was invented in an attempt to explain this discrepancy. It states > the frequency and amplitude of a classical system is equivalent to the > energy drop within a quantum system. These constructs form the foundation > of modern physics. The structure built upon this foundation considers the > classical regime to be a subset of the quantum realm. > > Frank Znidarsic’s constant Vt qualifies the velocity of the transitional > quantum state. The transitional velocity is coupled with a frequency and > a displacement. The energy levels of the atom were shown, in the body of > this paper, to be a condition of the transitional frequency. The > intensity of spectral emission was shown to be a function of the > transitional amplitude. The action of the transitional quantum state > replaces the principle of quantum correspondence. An extension of this > work would universally swap Planck’s and Znidarsic’s constants. There would > have to be a compelling reason make this change as it would confound the > scientific community. There are two good reasons for doing so. Velocity > is a classical parameter. The structure built upon this foundation > considers the quantum regime to be a subset of the classical realm.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
I actually wondered if that could be the reason you already had not done so, of course now I have to wonder if it is specific to the idea or rather general, though I suppose I would need to leave that up to my imagination to work out.. On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 2:18 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > *From:* John Berry > > > > Jones, have you read my variable capacitor post, subject: On Topic in > any detail? > If so can I have your opinion on it? I think it was you that actually > identified the > > patent co-invented by JLN? > > > > > > Cannot comment on that now due to a contractual agreement, John - but would > like to clarify the comment that Jed makes about the need for, or rather the > perceived inability of the “garage level” inventor to make a positive > contribution to LENR. > > > > This is both true and false. > > > > It is true that meaningful incremental advances, based on understanding the > minutiae of the process, demand a top-notch lab. It is also true that > accurately documenting positive energy gain or the nature of transmutation > products demands the best and most accurate equipment. It is also true that > other high-level scientists whose opinion matters (as to funding) are most > impressed when the work they are reading about comes from peer level labs, > like their own – if not from peers. > > > > Having said that – my strong belief is that the real breakthrough in LENR, > which will be the quantum jump so to speak – the one that serves to push > LENR into commercial reality - will come not from the University or > well-equipped lab, but instead from someone operating in a garage-type of > setting. > > > > By real breakthrough, I am referring to the situation where “serendipity > meets synergy” due to an inspired vision that is based on what has gone > before, but is totally off-the-wall in terms of the normal kind of > “incremental advance” that big-science likes to use as its prime motivator. > > > > It will probably not even originate from an attempt to use P&F type of LENR > principles at all. It will most likely be the discovery of an energy anomaly > which is later shoehorned back into LENR (or the hydrino) for explication of > the source of the anomaly. If you followed the iESi story, where the > reaction involved a hydraulic fluid – that is the “kind of” mash-up scenario > where a breakthrough can happen that is “commercializable”. Even the Arata > situation could be modified into commercial breakthrough – say by combining > the key feature of it (nano-particles at the Forster radius) with another > “synergy not anticipated thus far” – such as the addition of RF, lasers or > ultrasonics. > > > > Years ago, older vorticians may remember that Vince Cockeram almost made > such an paradigm shift. He witnessed a true runaway reaction that portended > the gigantic kind of breakthrough which will happen soon. Had he been better > funded to continue that work (and/or had air-conditioning in his work-shed) > he might have succeeded then … > > > > … but IMHO the real breakthrough, when it arrives, will most likely arrive > from what can be called the “fringe-of-the-fringe” - and NOT from that > million dollar lab setting which is so good at making the incremental > advance or documenting the details. > > > > The big “enabler” here is the internet itself… to first disseminate info > from the big labs – and then to host the focused discussion (fringe) groups > that stimulate the imagination of the ““fringe-of-the-fringe” inventor > genius. > > > > Long live the fringe… > > > > Jones > > > > > > >
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Let me see if I can explain what you are saying in your paper. 1. You accept that Planck's constant describes the energy of photons. 2. You propose that your constant describes the geometry (size) of the emitting structure. 3. You assume the size of the photon is given by rp, as defined in Equation 1, which relates energy to centrifugal force of an electron in a circular orbit having a radius of rp. Since rp has different dimensions in different quantum states within atomic orbits, the size of the photon is also variable in a quantum way based on your approach. 4. You then calculate the gravitational field Einstein would expect to result from this force. You lost me at this point. A gravitational field induces a force, not the other way around. The force you have calculated in Equation 1 is a centrifugal force, which does not have any detectable gravity associated with it when it is produce in the normal world. Are you proposing that gravity, as we know it, is produced by the motion of electrons in their atomic orbits? Ed On Jun 18, 2009, at 1:13 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Answer:? Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. How do we do this?Must and inverse Bose condensate have mobile protons? Will phonon vibrations within the lattice provide enough mobility? I don’t know. There must be energy levels with the condensate. The difference between the energy level must equal the energy required to spin bond two protons. What is this ene rgy?I do know the frequency. Its determined by the megahertz-meter relationship. Perhaps the delta E can be extracted from the frequency. How are these energy levels established, I don’t know. Can the reaction be simulated on a much large scale (lower frequency) with a mechanical apparatus? Perhaps this is ball lightning. I tried to do this and failed. Perhaps all of these details will become clear. As for now they are hazy. Frank Z -Original Message- From: fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated Answer: Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. , i.e. how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. Answer: The range of the strong nuclear force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. The energy is downshifted. This knowledge will allow for cold fusion device that emit energy in the radio frequency band. I have been trying to do this. If you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be interested. Thank you Ed. Cold fusion is a small part of what I put forward. I have derived the energy levels of the hydrogen as a condition of electromagnetic and gravitomagnetic accessibility. I have applied this vibrating Bose condensate thing to the hydrogen atom. Many things come out of the analysis, such as; It explains why the electron does not spiral into the nucleus. Quantum physics can be built on a structure of the stationary quantum states de fined by Plancks constant.. I have shown quantum physics can be built on a structure defined by the velocity of transitional quantum state. This velocity = the fine c/twice the fine structure constant. So what is the big deal? I have just rearranged known values. The big deal is that the transitional velocity is a classical constant. It is set by the velocity at which disturbances propagate within the electron. Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday! Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
On Jun 18, 2009, at 2:15 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary? If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency? You have missed a point. It is not an electronic Bose condensate. It is a protonic inverse Bose condensate. The massive protons travel at much lower thermal velocities. The bonding between the slow moving protons takes place at room temperatures. Then, I assume you are proposing a novel structure. Do you know of any evidence that such structures exist in hydrogen containing materials? I have never seen this idea applied to explaining any property of PdD. The strength of the phonons that bind the protons can be reinforced with external stimualtion. This is the link between cold fusion, the electronic atomic structure, and the transtional velocity. I'm not sure why mobile protons are requied. Perhaps it is not, it may be its the spacing of the protons that matters. That could lead us down the path to new materials. I agree, the NAE is a new material. However, this realization is not very helpful without knowing something about this uniqueness other than that it initiates nuclear reactions. Answer: The range of the strong nuclear force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. This is circular reasoning, so I'm still looking for an answer. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. It is not. The only way to avoid an transtional energy emission is to extend the range of the nuclear forces beyond the coumbolic. Yes, this is obvious. This occures within the bounds of the nuclear active environment. Again, this is obvious. The strength of the nuclear force also deceses with increasing range. This is well known. The range of a force field is not a conserved property of the universe. I don't know what you mean by this statement. We used to know only how to modifiy the range of the electromagnetic; with a dielectric, We now know modify the range of all of the force field. It process effects the gravity also. Stong local gravitomagentic fields can be generated. This is a major new understanding. not a circular argumant. Making obvious statements and then reaching the expected conclusion is circular. I would like to know exactly, based on your model, how strong local gravitomagentic fields can be generated, for example. I get the impression you hope your model will eventually provide these answers, but right now you have no idea how to make the expected results happen. This is ok and is a limitation of most models. I'm just trying to find out if you have taken your model to the next level beyond the imagination. Ed Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary??If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency?? You have missed a point.? It is not an electronic Bose condensate.? It is a protonic inverse Bose condensate.? The massive protons travel at much lower thermal velocities.? The bonding between the slow moving protons?takes place at room temperatures. The strength of the phonons that bind the protons can be reinforced with external stimualtion.? This is the link between cold fusion, the electronic atomic structure, and the transtional velocity. I'm not sure why mobile protons are requied.? Perhaps it is not, it may be its the spacing of the protons that matters. That could lead us down the path to new materials.? Answer:? The range of the strong nuclear? force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. This is circular reasoning, so I'm still looking for an answer. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. ? It is not.? The only way to avoid an transtional energy emission is to extend the range of the nuclear forces beyond the coumbolic.? This occures within the bounds of the nuclear active environment.? The strength of the nuclear force also deceses with increasing range.? The range of a force field is not a conserved property of the universe.? We used to know only how to modifiy the range of the electromagnetic; with a dielectric,? We now know modify the range of all of the force field.? It process effects the gravity also.? Stong local gravitomagentic fields can be generated.? This is a major new understanding.? not a circular argumant. ?
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
You are proposing more than downshifting. You are proposing the 24 MeV is converted instantly to a large collection of photons by some process. What is this process? ?Why does the photon energy reside in the RF band and not in the optical or X-ray regions? ?In addition, energetic particles are in fact observed. Why? Good question.? It is a fundamantal one.? The frequency of an emitted photon is much lower than the orbital frequency of the orbiting election.?How is the orbital energy transferred to many?photons.? ?This is a central quantum mystery.? It has been?glossed over for 100 years?by?the correspondence principle.? My use of a transition velocity c/2alpha has shown that the frequency of the emitted photon is that of the transtional quantum state.? This state has a frequency and dimeninsion associated with it. The analysis of the frequency of photon emission can be applied to macroscopic bodies.? The wavelength can be adjusted by setting the size of the quantum emitter.? Since you cant read the paper, Ed, none of this will make any sence for now.? We will just have to wait until september when the paper comes out. Frank
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Thanks for the preprint Frank. Unfortunately some of the equations are not visible, no doubt because I use a Mac. On Jun 18, 2009, at 12:08 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated Answer: Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. Several people have suggested that a Bose Condensate is involved. I have trouble with this concept because these structures are expected to have very low bonding energy, hence have been observed only near absolute zero. In addition, such a structure based on hydrogen is still pure speculation. This structure, if it is possible, obviously forms only under very rare and special conditions within the CF environment. What are these conditions and why are they necessary? If such a structure should form, how do I get it to vibrate exactly at the right frequency? , i.e. how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. Answer: The range of the strong nuclear force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. This is circular reasoning, so I'm still looking for an answer. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. The energy is downshifted. This knowledge will allow for cold fusion device that emit energy in the radio frequency band. I have been trying to do this. You are proposing more than downshifting. You are proposing the 24 MeV is converted instantly to a large collection of photons by some process. What is this process? Why does the photon energy reside in the RF band and not in the optical or X-ray regions? In addition, energetic particles are in fact observed. Why? If you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be interested. Thank you Ed. Cold fusion is a small part of what I put forward. I have derived the energy levels of the hydrogen as a condition of electromagnetic and gravitomagnetic accessibility. I have applied this vibrating Bose condensate thing to the hydrogen atom. Many things come out of the analysis, such as; It explains why the electron does not spiral into the nucleus. I agree, you apply your idea to several problems. However, in each case I suggest you need to answer questions having similar detail and relationship to observation. Without these answers, your model is just another of many exercises in imagination. Ed Quantum physics can be built on a structure of the stationary quantum states defined by Plancks constant.. I have shown quantum physics can be built on a structure defined by the velocity of transitional quantum state. This velocity = the fine c/twice the fine structure constant. So what is the big deal? I have just rearranged known values. The big deal is that the transitional velocity is a classical constant. It is set by the velocity at which disturbances propagate within the electron. Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Answer:? Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. How do we do this? Must and inverse Bose condensate have mobile protons? Will phonon vibrations within the lattice provide enough mobility? I don’t know. There must be energy levels with the condensate. The difference between the energy level must equal the energy required to spin bond two protons. What is this energy? I do know the frequency. Its determined by the megahertz-meter relationship. Perhaps the delta E can be extracted from the frequency. How are these energy levels established, I don’t know. Can the reaction be simulated on a much large scale (lower frequency) with a mechanical apparatus? Perhaps this is ball lightning. I tried to do this and failed. Perhaps all of these details will become clear. As for now they are hazy. Frank Z -Original Message- From: fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jun 18, 2009 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fringe However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated Answer: Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate=2 0at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. , i.e. how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. Answer: The range of the strong nuclear force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. The energy is downshifted. This knowledge will allow for cold fusion device that emit energy in the radio frequency band. I have been trying to do this. If you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be interested. Thank you Ed. Cold fusion is a small part of what I put forward. I have derived the energy levels of the hydrogen as a condition of electromagnetic and gravitomagnetic accessibility. I have applied this vibrating Bose condensate thing to the hydrogen atom. Many things come out of the analysis, such as; It explains why the electron does not spiral into the nucleus. Quantum physics can be built on a structure of the stationary quantum states defined by Plancks constant.. I have shown quantum physics can be built on a structure defined by the velocity of transitional quantum state. This velocity = the fine c/twice20the fine structure constant. So what is the big deal? I have just rearranged known values. The big deal is that the transitional velocity is a classical constant. It is set by the velocity at which disturbances propagate within the electron. Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated ? Answer:? Construct an inverse Bose condensate of protons and vibrate that condensate at a frequency determined by the dimensional constant of 1.094 megahertz-meters. ? ? , i.e. how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. ? Answer:? The range of the strong nuclear? force is extended beyond the range of the coulombic. This is done in a di-force field medium that consists of a vibrating Bose condensate. ? Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. ? The energy is downshifted.? This knowledge will allow for cold fusion device that emit energy in the radio frequency band.? I have been trying to do this. ? If you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be interested. ? Thank you Ed.? Cold fusion is a small part of what I put? forward.? I have derived the energy levels of the hydrogen as a condition of electromagnetic and gravitomagnetic accessibility. ?I have applied this vibrating Bose condensate thing to the hydrogen atom.? ?Many things come out of the analysis, such as; It explains why the? electron does not spiral into the nucleus. ? ? Quantum physics can be built on a structure of the stationary quantum states defined by Plancks constant..? I have shown quantum physics can be built on a structure defined by the velocity of transitional quantum state.? This velocity = the fine c/twice the fine structure constant. ? So what is the big deal?? I have just rearranged known values.? The big deal is that the transitional velocity is a classical constant.? It is set by the velocity at which disturbances propagate within the electron.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
Well Frank, such ideas have value only when they show why and how most observed behaviors occur and how to make the behavior occur more consistently and at higher levels. All theories I know about met only a small fraction of this requirement. If you can have better success in this requirement, your theory will have value. Most theories are useful guides and do suggest useful approaches, but the use of assumptions to allow the data to be fit, i.e. to allow a claim to be made for predictions of behavior, greatly reduces the value. If I understand your approach, you use conventional and accepted theory to arrive at a new constant, which you assume is as fundamental as Planck's constant. You claim that the logic associated with this constant allows you to make novel predictions. You may be right. However, I would like to know, based on your model, exactly which kinds of atoms and how I need to arrange them in a solid or living cell to cause a nuclear reaction to be initiated, i.e. how the Coulomb barrier is overcome. Also, I would like to know how the resulting energy is dissipated without producing significant radiation. If you can answer these questions without too many assumptions, I would be interested. Ed On Jun 18, 2009, at 9:06 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the trained professional. This is also progress Ed So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power a vehicle with it.(??!) Not so I am an amateur and I am going to add to the new understanding produced by this process. My introduction to be published by IE. in sept. Max Planck’s constant qualifies the angular momentum of the stationary atomic state.9 The path of the transitional quantum state has been unknown. Albert Einstein described the energy of a photon with Planck’s constant.3 Niels Bohr applied these ideas to the atomic structure. Bohr’s quantum condition states that the angular momentum carried by a stationary atomic orbit is a multiple of Planck’s constant.2 The quantization of angular momentum is a postulate, underivable from deeper law. Its validity depends on the agreement with experimental spectra. Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger extended these ideas and qualified the intensity of a spectral emission. These great scientists found that the frequency and the amplitude of the emitted photon is a function of the differential in energy through which the electron drops. The frequency and amplitude of a classical wave is that of the emitter. The correspondence principle was invented in an attempt to explain this discrepancy. It states the frequency and amplitude of a classical system is equivalent to the energy drop within a quantum system. These constructs form the foundation of modern physics. The structure built upon this foundation considers the classical regime to be a subset of the quantum realm. Frank Znidarsic’s constant Vt qualifies the velocity of the transitional quantum state. The transitional velocity is coupled with a frequency and a displacement. The energy levels of the atom were shown, in the body of this paper, to be a condition of the transitional frequency. The intensity of spectral emission was shown to be a function of the transitional amplitude. The action of the transitional quantum state replaces the principle of quantum correspondence. An extension of this work would universally swap Planck’s and Znidarsic’s constants. There would have to be a compelling reason make this change as it would confound the scientific community. There are two good reasons for doing so. Velocity is a classical parameter. The structure built upon this foundation considers the quantum regime to be a subset of the classical realm. Znidarsic’s constant describes the progression of an energy flow. An understanding of this progression may lead to the development of many new technologies. Dell Days of Deals! June 15-24 - A New Deal Everyday!
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the trained professional. This is also progress Ed So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power a vehicle with it.(??!) Not so I am an amateur and I am going to add to the new understanding produced by this process. My introduction to be published by IE. in sept. Max Planck’s constant qualifies the angular momentum of the stationary atomic state.9 The path of the transitional quantum state has been unknown. Albert Einstein described the energy of a photon with Planck’s constant.3 Niels Bohr applied these ideas to the atomic structure. Bohr’s quantum condition states that the angular momentum carried by a stationary atomic orbit is a multiple of Planck’s constant.2 The quantization of angular momentum is a postulate, underivable from deeper law. Its validity depends on the agreement with experimental spectra. Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger extended these ideas and qualified the intensity of a spectral emission. These great scientists found that the frequency and the amplitude of the emitted photon is a function of the differential in energy through which the electron drops. The frequency and amplitude of a classical wave is that of the emitter. The correspondence principle was invented in an attempt to explain this discrepancy. It states the frequ ency and amplitude of a classical system is equivalent to the energy drop within a quantum system. These constructs form the foundation of modern physics. The structure built upon this foundation considers the classical regime to be a subset of the quantum realm. Frank Znidarsic’s constant Vt qualifies the velocity of the transitional quantum state. The transitional velocity is coupled with a frequency and a displacement. The energy levels of the atom were shown, in the body of this paper, to be a condition of the transitional frequency. The intensity of spectral emission was shown to be a function of the transitional amplitude. The action of the transitional quantum state replaces the principle of quantum correspondence. An extension of this work would universally swap Planck’s and Znidarsic’s constants. There would have to be a compelling reason make this change as it would confound the scientific community. There are two good reasons for doing so. Velocity is a classical parameter. The structure built upon this foundation considers the quantum regime to be a subset of the classical realm. Znidarsic’s constant describes the progression of an energy flow. An understanding of this progression may lead to the development of many new technologies.
RE: [Vo]:Fringe
From: John Berry > Jones, have you read my variable capacitor post, subject: On Topic in any detail? If so can I have your opinion on it? I think it was you that actually identified the patent co-invented by JLN? Cannot comment on that now due to a contractual agreement, John - but would like to clarify the comment that Jed makes about the need for, or rather the perceived inability of the "garage level" inventor to make a positive contribution to LENR. This is both true and false. It is true that meaningful incremental advances, based on understanding the minutiae of the process, demand a top-notch lab. It is also true that accurately documenting positive energy gain or the nature of transmutation products demands the best and most accurate equipment. It is also true that other high-level scientists whose opinion matters (as to funding) are most impressed when the work they are reading about comes from peer level labs, like their own - if not from peers. Having said that - my strong belief is that the real breakthrough in LENR, which will be the quantum jump so to speak - the one that serves to push LENR into commercial reality - will come not from the University or well-equipped lab, but instead from someone operating in a garage-type of setting. By real breakthrough, I am referring to the situation where "serendipity meets synergy" due to an inspired vision that is based on what has gone before, but is totally off-the-wall in terms of the normal kind of "incremental advance" that big-science likes to use as its prime motivator. It will probably not even originate from an attempt to use P&F type of LENR principles at all. It will most likely be the discovery of an energy anomaly which is later shoehorned back into LENR (or the hydrino) for explication of the source of the anomaly. If you followed the iESi story, where the reaction involved a hydraulic fluid - that is the "kind of" mash-up scenario where a breakthrough can happen that is "commercializable". Even the Arata situation could be modified into commercial breakthrough - say by combining the key feature of it (nano-particles at the Forster radius) with another "synergy not anticipated thus far" - such as the addition of RF, lasers or ultrasonics. Years ago, older vorticians may remember that Vince Cockeram almost made such an paradigm shift. He witnessed a true runaway reaction that portended the gigantic kind of breakthrough which will happen soon. Had he been better funded to continue that work (and/or had air-conditioning in his work-shed) he might have succeeded then . . but IMHO the real breakthrough, when it arrives, will most likely arrive from what can be called the "fringe-of-the-fringe" - and NOT from that million dollar lab setting which is so good at making the incremental advance or documenting the details. The big "enabler" here is the internet itself. to first disseminate info from the big labs - and then to host the focused discussion (fringe) groups that stimulate the imagination of the ""fringe-of-the-fringe" inventor genius. Long live the fringe. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
To avoid making yourself ill with worry, let me add a bit of optimism. Cold fusion has left the garage level of research and entered the level of a well funded laboratory. This is progress. The theory has left the amateur level of ideas and entered the level of the trained professional. This is also progress. This is similar to the development of all technologies. You would not consider developing a commercial airliner in your basement or be able to contribute to an understanding or aeronautical engineering would you? The field is growing in spite of such people as Robert Park, who is only a visible member of a group of people who fight all new ideas simply because they have such limited imaginations. These people represent one of the characteristics of the human mind that has evolved as a defense from the other extreme that wants change without bothering to consider the consequences. Ed On Jun 18, 2009, at 6:56 AM, Chris Zell wrote: So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power a vehicle with it.(??!) Many of us have to worry about having any savings, job or retirement at all, much less hundreds of thousands for a professional lab. Is there any point to discussing cold fusion? Was Parksie right in a practical way, that it's just a curiosity? Where's my Prozac?
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
So, individually, we stand almost no chance of contributing anything to cold fusion, nor has any particularly practical way been conceived to power a vehicle with it.(??!) Many of us have to worry about having any savings, job or retirement at all, much less hundreds of thousands for a professional lab. Is there any point to discussing cold fusion? Was Parksie right in a practical way, that it's just a curiosity? Where's my Prozac?
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > John Berry wrote: > > > I do not think a skilled amateur or professional can contribute anything to > cold fusion without access to a fully equipped profession grade laboratory > and hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment. > > - Jed > Though I believe some are suggesting suggesting otherwise generally I tend to agree, though it is not impossible. Actually and I know I am not alone in this, I think that nuclear materials can be made more susceptible to nuclear fission/fusion/decay by various electro/aetheric influences. But obviously I am less interested in nuclear forms of energy...
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
John Berry wrote: > Piece of cake. The only thing preventing it is politics and lack of >> knowledge. >> > > I guess we have different opinions on how plausible a change of politics > is, or for that matter getting the right knowledge to the right places. > I mean that technically making small scale cold fusion engines is a piece of cake. (Probably -- they are all small scale now.) As you say, changing the politics and getting the information out is a conundrum. > I don't know if your dedicated contribution to Vortex has anything to do > with this change though. > I doubt that my contribution to Vortex has had an effect. However, the existence of LENR-CANR has had a direct effect in some cases that I am aware of, and probably others that I did not hear about. The existence of LENR-CANR is 1% my doing, and 99% to the credit of the researchers who wrote the papers and granted permission to upload them. In work hours I am sure the ratio is 1000:1! > Just making a point that there should be more interest in subjects that can > lead to experimentation by the averagely skilled amateur experimentalist . . > . > I do not think a skilled amateur or professional can contribute anything to cold fusion without access to a fully equipped profession grade laboratory and hundreds of thousands of dollars of equipment. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > John Berry (he who signs not his name) wrote: > >> >> Cold Fusion is somewhat fringe, but as much respect as I have for Jed's >> dedication I can not imagine either in a technological nor >> political-business-economic way in which cold fusion would be what powers >> our houses or cars . . . > > > Piece of cake. The only thing preventing it is politics and lack of > knowledge. > I guess we have different opinions on how plausible a change of politics is, or for that matter getting the right knowledge to the right places. > Besides, even if some technical glitch prevented small scale use, it would > still lower primary energy costs effectively to zero (but not distribution > or equipment costs). > > > >> even if the science were totally sorted, further the experimentation is * >> generally* beyond that which can be achieved outside of a good lab or >> without good expertise. > > > Far beyond. No point in discussing it. If you don't have a roomfull of > gadgets such as SEM and mass spectrometers, forget it. > > The academic political opposition that has held back cold fusion is -- > finally! -- starting to crumble. I can see signs of it every week. Venture > capitalists and the like are coming out of the woodwork in unprecedented > numbers. Agencies that have not funded research since 1989 are funding it, > and others are seriously considering it. New experiments are underway. A lot > of this stuff is just starting up and I cannot talk about it, but in the > next few months I hope I can. There will be some discussion of new work at > the MIT seminar this Saturday. > Well that gives a rosier picture that I would have expected. I don't know if your dedicated contribution to Vortex has anything to do with this change though. Just making a point that there should be more interest in subjects that can lead to experimentation by the averagely skilled amateur experimentalist (of which I am not, sadly) and can in theory lead to a grass roots FE (or AG) revolution.
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > > *From:* John Berry > ... on the contrary, this is probably the "only" board on the net (one of > the few, anyway), where there are enough open-minded scientists and serious > thinkers to give these subjects a measure of due-diligence, yet without the > gullible naivete of the new-age mentality, nor the automatic rejection of > the ivory-tower pedants. I can think of no other for the subjects you > mention. > Neither can I but I don't believe that it is an ideal balance of those 2 qualities either. While I am glad I have attracted some quality replies I do wish there was some more attention to the variable capacity overunity research however. > > > That is probably why the political issues cut so deep here. But let's not > go there ;-) > > Sure, there are plenty of sites populated by enthusiastic but average > commentators, or else by overly-educated professorial types, where these > subjects receive either zero acceptance or zero criticism, but that is not > why most of us tune-in here, on occasion. > > Case in point: read Bill B's comments on "orgone" if it is still available > online, yet transposing the word "hydrino" in places where it could fit, > realizing that well over half of the online information purporting to be on > orgone is totally bogus and the accurate information may relate to a real > particle. > I may look into that, I have my own appreciation for the real functioning of such. > > This may enlighten your understanding of two very nebulous species, if you > separate fact from fiction. The key trait to appreciate this forum can be > call "discrimination" of the good-kind ... (plus having a good kill-filter) > ... and being able to sort out the small-% of wheat from the large excess of > chaff ... so to speak. > Jones, have you read my variable capacitor post, subject: On Topic in any detail? If so can I have your opinion on it? I think it was you that actually identified the patent co-invented by JLN?
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
John Berry (he who signs not his name) wrote: > > Cold Fusion is somewhat fringe, but as much respect as I have for Jed's > dedication I can not imagine either in a technological nor > political-business-economic way in which cold fusion would be what powers > our houses or cars . . . Piece of cake. The only thing preventing it is politics and lack of knowledge. Besides, even if some technical glitch prevented small scale use, it would still lower primary energy costs effectively to zero (but not distribution or equipment costs). > even if the science were totally sorted, further the experimentation is * > generally* beyond that which can be achieved outside of a good lab or > without good expertise. Far beyond. No point in discussing it. If you don't have a roomfull of gadgets such as SEM and mass spectrometers, forget it. The academic political opposition that has held back cold fusion is -- finally! -- starting to crumble. I can see signs of it every week. Venture capitalists and the like are coming out of the woodwork in unprecedented numbers. Agencies that have not funded research since 1989 are funding it, and others are seriously considering it. New experiments are underway. A lot of this stuff is just starting up and I cannot talk about it, but in the next few months I hope I can. There will be some discussion of new work at the MIT seminar this Saturday. No one would accuse me of being Dr. Pangloss. I am seldom optimistic without a good reasons. I think that a long last we are seeing good reasons to hope for more rapid progress in cold fusion. And if we trigger a tsunami of research, with thousands of people participating, you will see more progress every week than you see now in a year. That is what happened with airplanes in 1911, and transistors in 1954. It can happen now. My goal is to trigger that kind of uncontrolled free-for-all tsunami of competitive research. Many of today's cold fusion researchers do not want to see that happen, but frankly I hope they are swept aside. I think the researchers know what questions to ask, and what experiments are needed to make progress. Some of the researchers do, anyway. If many more enter the field some of them will do what is needed. The ones who go off on a tangent doing the wrong experiments and rushing down dead-end streets will not matter. If we could only push aside the politics and get funding, I think cold fusion would make very rapid progress. Mike McKubre thinks so too, as he said on CBS, and reiterated in remarks to me at the recent U. Missouri conference. He has more credibility than I do, to say the least. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
From: John Berry > If I mention say "Orgone" or "Chi" I expect most here to indeed point and > laugh, it is not that these things might not have some very real evidence and > even prototypical theories to explain what they are [snip] ... on the contrary, this is probably the "only" board on the net (one of the few, anyway), where there are enough open-minded scientists and serious thinkers to give these subjects a measure of due-diligence, yet without the gullible naivete of the new-age mentality, nor the automatic rejection of the ivory-tower pedants. I can think of no other for the subjects you mention. That is probably why the political issues cut so deep here. But let's not go there ;-) Sure, there are plenty of sites populated by enthusiastic but average commentators, or else by overly-educated professorial types, where these subjects receive either zero acceptance or zero criticism, but that is not why most of us tune-in here, on occasion. Case in point: read Bill B's comments on "orgone" if it is still available online, yet transposing the word "hydrino" in places where it could fit, realizing that well over half of the online information purporting to be on orgone is totally bogus and the accurate information may relate to a real particle. This may enlighten your understanding of two very nebulous species, if you separate fact from fiction. The key trait to appreciate this forum can be call "discrimination" of the good-kind ... (plus having a good kill-filter) ... and being able to sort out the small-% of wheat from the large excess of chaff ... so to speak. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
> I don't believe my reluctance is hard to explain, I simply don't expect to > find most here very open minded. (and indeed my experience of people in > general including scientists is that their beliefs are not changed by logic > or evidence sometimes up to and even beyond something becoming puclical > knowledge) I have written my best paper. "The control of the Natural Forces".? It will be published by Infinite Energy this Septerber. There is a 15% change that it will change the basis of physial laws and lead to new methods of propulsion and energy.? Some of the facts stated in the paper were picked up right here off of this list. It must happen Frank Znidarsic -Original Message- From: OrionWorks To: vortex-l@
Re: [Vo]:Fringe
>From John Berry: Excerpts: ... > Ask yourself what are we here for? ... > If I mention say "Orgone" or "Chi" I expect most here to indeed point and > laugh, it is not that these things might not have some very real evidence > and even prototypical theories to explain what they are, rather it is that > truth, logic and evidence take a back seat and instead prejudice and emotion > does the driving. > > I can tell you that I initially found such ideas to feel very unscientific, > it seemed uncomfortable compared to the clean neat model of the universe I > had learnt, but then again Quantum physics had the same 'weird' feeling to > it too. > > Of course not all are opposed but I do feel some should take another glance > at the message on the door you ignored when you came in. > > While no one has any reason to believe me, personally I believe I have > solved the essential physics behind most of these "weird" devices (AG, FE) > but by in large I wouldn't dream of sharing it here (the variable cap thing > is a bit different). > > I don't believe my reluctance is hard to explain, I simply don't expect to > find most here very open minded. (and indeed my experience of people in > general including scientists is that their beliefs are not changed by logic > or evidence sometimes up to and even beyond something becoming puclical > knowledge) > > I have also found that negativism and skeptisism can always find excuses to > be believed, evidence to back up the belief, and indeed it seems to be a > part of the human condition in this society to be resigned, defeatist and > sceptical. (and suspiscious at all the wrong times) > Indeed my above paragraph is it's self defeatist. > > Ok, I had better wind down my rant here, but I think this shake up of the > list is a good thing if it makes everyone re-evaluate why we are here, what > the point is of this list. > > John (seldom signs his posts) Berry > Pretty decent rant, John. I think some of the reasons I'm here is to learn as much as I can from others, and also to practice the skill of communication as effectively as I can. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
