Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[H LV]

There are many ways to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels.
Maybe I am just sentimental, but I think if we electrified everything life
would be clean but sterile.

Personally I think there is market for synthetic fuels (which have net zero
carbon emissions), because
the distribution system is already in place and they still have a greater
energy density then batteries.
Synthetic fuels can be used to power internal combustion engines which will
be used to charge batteries
and the batteries will power electric motors.

Harry

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:55 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
>
> For the record, Lazar's Corvette with hydride storage for the ICE engine.
>
> https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4
>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Robin]

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Sat, 13 Jun 2020 13:51:39 -0400:
Hi,
>Oh, and I have been hoping for hydrogen hype for three decades now.  So far
>we are just as likely to have warp drive powered by di-lithium.

Imagine the consequences of running into a pebble, or even a gas cloud, at near 
light speed. How much matter do you
think such a vessel would encounter between here and e.g. Proxima Centauri?

I'm afraid "shielding" is at least as big a problem as actually achieving light 
speed.

A worm-hole that actually allowed matter to pass through it unchanged, and 
bypassed the intervening space altogether
would IMO be a much better alternative than "warp drive".

Besides do we really need to go anywhere at all? 

If information can be sent at superluminal speeds, then societies that have it 
can exchange enough information to
satiate their curiosity, without going anywhere.

Our own Solar system provides adequate materials to meet our needs essentially 
for ever. Going to the stars for material
goods is a dream of juvenile civilizations.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

For the record, Lazar's Corvette with hydride storage for the ICE engine.

https://youtu.be/Ytg23mDd1a4

>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

Oh, and I have been hoping for hydrogen hype for three decades now.  So far
we are just as likely to have warp drive powered by di-lithium.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jürg Wyttenbach]

Fuel cell cars will run much farther the Li powered battery car as the 
tank in cargo vehicle has no real size limit.


On the other side the Chinese leader in battery technology just 
announced a 90$ /kwh battery. This is a turning point where all electric 
cars become much cheaper than ordinary fuel cars. (Also island home 
solutions!)


I leave it to you to find out what Elon did with this...

But the race is open and the only path to get rid of excess wind current 
is producing Hydrogen/Methanol. Further we just wait for better 
materials to store Hydrogen without pressure. As the LENR folks might 
know Palladium did only fail due to strange degradation  But others 
are in the pipeline. Nickel sponge?


J.W.

Am 13.06.20 um 19:17 schrieb Jones Beene:
Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be 
on the opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly 
critical of the potential of H2 in transportation.


But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that 
point. However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is 
the possibility that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital 
methods - Mills, Holmlid, etc.


When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 
eV per atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg 
or similar power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, 
which... come to think of it... could be a semantic version of 
"Orchestrated Objective Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...



Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t 
Work 










Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells
Won’t Work

Sissi Cao

“Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.




Terry Blanton wrote:

> However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best 
immigrant scientist of the last millennium, NiKola 
Tesla...Nikolamotor.com and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to 
work.  Even Germany is banking on H2 for the future; but, frankly 
Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave up on hydrogen 
when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered embrittlement.





--
Jürg Wyttenbach
Bifangstr.22
8910 Affoltern a.A.
044 760 14 18
079 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

Hmmm, I guess my humor is unclear...you spelled 'Nikola' as 'Nicola'.

However, I will give you partial credit for bringing the thread back on
topic with your Orch OR analogue.

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 1:17 PM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be on
> the opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly critical
> of the potential of H2 in transportation.
>
> But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that
> point. However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is the
> possibility that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital methods -
> Mills, Holmlid, etc.
>
> When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 eV
> per atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg or
> similar power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, which...
> come to think of it... could be a semantic version of "Orchestrated
> Objective Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...
>
>
> Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work
> 
>
> Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work
>
> Sissi Cao
>
> “Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.
>
> 
>
>
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
> > However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best
> immigrant scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla...Nikolamotor.com
> and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even Germany is banking
> on H2 for the future; but, frankly Scarlett...wait...that's no longer
> allowed...I gave up on hydrogen when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves
> suffered embrittlement.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jones Beene]

 Given the incredible track record of the guy - I would not want to be on the 
opposite side of any argument with Elon... and he is strongly critical of the 
potential of H2 in transportation. 

But that relates only to fuel cells and he is probably correct on that point. 
However, the one (huge) tech which he could be overlooking is the possibility 
that H2 could be used in one of the shrunken orbital methods - Mills, Holmlid, 
etc.
When used in a fuel cell - H2 can return something in the range of 1 eV per 
atom net power. The potential is much more favorable if Rydberg or similar 
power levels become available viable catalyzed shrinkage, which... come to 
think of it... could be a semantic version of "Orchestrated Objective 
Reduction"... as in hydrogen orbital reduction...


Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Elon Musk Mocks Nikola’s Hydrogen Cars, Explains Why Fuel Cells Won’t Work

Sissi Cao

“Fuel cells=fool sells,” Musk tweeted.
 |

 |

 |



Terry Blanton wrote:  
 > However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best immigrant 
 > scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla...Nikolamotor.com and Toyota 
 > really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even Germany is banking on H2 for 
 > the future; but, frankly Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave 
 > up on hydrogen when Bob Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered 
 > embrittlement.

  

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 11:08 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> OK in a world where paper companies with much less to offer (Nicola Motors
> for instance) can raise billions on a worthless IPO, then the sorry record
> of Mills is not such a scandal. Just a major disappointment.
>

Back in the day, I would accuse you of hijacking my thread; but,
considering that this is the ONLY active thread on Vortex, a formerly
whirlwind list, you are forgiven.

However, I cannot forgive you for disgracing the name of the best immigrant
scientist of the last millennium, NiKola Tesla.

Nikolamotor.com and Toyota really want the fuel cell tech to work.  Even
Germany is banking on H2 for the future; but, frankly
Scarlett...wait...that's no longer allowed...I gave up on hydrogen when Bob
Lazar's modified Vette's valves suffered embrittlement.

It's hell having a good memory.  Where's the dementia the good Dr. D
promised? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Demento

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jones Beene]

 bobcook39923 wrote:  
 
> “OBFUSCUTION” is the name of the game these days, I’m sorry to say.  The 
> Nordskies are no exception.
   
Well yes, but they (Norront) are not a University nor charitable organization. 

They are investing major private funds in the hopes of getting a good return. 
We should not expect them to divulge trade secrets or other details which give 
away a competitive edge. Holmlid, however, has many dozens of quality papers 
out there to work from.

Of course, all of us would like to see better evidence that they (anyone) have 
made a major breakthrough after all these years. Norront have been more 
forthcoming with useful info than either BLP or Brillouin - but at this stage, 
they must ship real prototype devices to potential customers even if some 
details remain trade secret. 

Let's hope Norront (or anyone else) can produce decent results which are 
replicated soon. From a practical standpoint, I do not see any justifiable hope 
for Mills' present work. Everything he publishes sounds like a broken record. 
The old vinyl kind. In retrospect, he has run through what must be $200 million 
or more since 1990 without a single significant and verifiable breakthrough.

OK in a world where paper companies with much less to offer (Nicola Motors for 
instance) can raise billions on a worthless IPO, then the sorry record of Mills 
is not such a scandal. Just a major disappointment.

  
   

RE: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones---

“OBFUSCUTION” is the name of the game these days, I’m sorry to say.  The 
Nordskies are no exception.

Bob Cook




From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 7:14 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

Just to clarify - Norront is not exactly a hot fusion company. Their website 
gives that impression and it may be intentional.

In one version they have licensed the discovery of Holmlid of an efficient way 
to produce muons. They have other processes as well - which look more like cold 
fusion.

The "cheap muons" can be used in one of the oldest "proven" versions of hot 
fusion, which is muon catalyzed fusion. This version works on a small scale 
geometry and does not require the expense of plasma magnetic confinement 
although it could provide an enormous boost to say a Tokamak (or to ICF).

http://www.norrontfusion.com/

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jones Beene]

 Just to clarify - Norront is not exactly a hot fusion company. Their website 
gives that impression and it may be intentional.

In one version they have licensed the discovery of Holmlid of an efficient way 
to produce muons. They have other processes as well - which look more like cold 
fusion.

The "cheap muons" can be used in one of the oldest "proven" versions of hot 
fusion, which is muon catalyzed fusion. This version works on a small scale 
geometry and does not require the expense of plasma magnetic confinement 
although it could provide an enormous boost to say a Tokamak (or to ICF).

http://www.norrontfusion.com/



| 
 |   |

  

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 5:33 PM Robin 
wrote:

> In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 3 Jun 2020 20:30:34 + (UTC):
> Hi Jones,
> [snip]
> > I think these guys are positioned to get to market ahead of anyone else
> who is trying to commercialize dense hydrogen.
> >
> >http://www.norrontfusion.com/
> >
> I'm not so sure about that.
>

Hot fusion companies are a dime-a-dozen these days:

https://www.hb11.energy/

And whatever happened to Lockmart's CFR?


Virus-free.
www.avast.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Robin]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 3 Jun 2020 20:30:34 + (UTC):
Hi Jones,
[snip]
> I think these guys are positioned to get to market ahead of anyone else who 
> is trying to commercialize dense hydrogen.
>
>http://www.norrontfusion.com/
>
I'm not so sure about that. The copyright on their web page is 2016. If they 
had something workable, it should have made
a bigger splash by now. Furthermore they claim that it's clean, but I doubt 
that is possible given the vast number of
high energy neutrons they would be producing. Furthermore they appear to expect 
the energy to be released in their
reactor, but most of it is going to end up in the neutron shielding, so the 
design would need a major re-work before it
should be built.

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jones Beene]

 I think these guys are positioned to get to market ahead of anyone else who is 
trying to commercialize dense hydrogen.

http://www.norrontfusion.com/


Robin  wrote:  
 
 In reply to  Ken Deboer's message of Wed, 3 Jun 2020 11:04:44 -0600:
Hi Ken,

You might also want to check out this site:-

https://brilliantlightpower.com/

If this pans out it would supply humanity with energy for billions of years, as 
would CF.

>I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great admiration
>for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the population
>problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the viewpoint of
>future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly able to judge
>fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar 'standard'
>ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in "Quest" dont
>say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in 50 years?
>regards, ken deboer
[snip]
  

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Robin]

In reply to  Ken Deboer's message of Wed, 3 Jun 2020 11:04:44 -0600:
Hi Ken,

You might also want to check out this site:-

https://brilliantlightpower.com/

If this pans out it would supply humanity with energy for billions of years, as 
would CF.

>I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great admiration
>for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the population
>problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the viewpoint of
>future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly able to judge
>fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar 'standard'
>ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in "Quest" dont
>say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in 50 years?
>regards, ken deboer
[snip]

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jürg Wyttenbach]

On 03.06.2020 19:04, Ken Deboer wrote:
I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great 
admiration for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, 
the population problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from 
the viewpoint of future energy sources. The only one I am at all even 
partly able to judge fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind 
and similar 'standard' ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like 
Daniel Yergin in "Quest" dont say much about it. What do y'all see as 
real possibilities in 50 years? regards, ken deboer 


Classic nuclear energy is not cost efficient in many ways and thus more 
than dead. It's uphold for political (= private corruption) needs as 
seen e.g.  in UK. The main reason is that you invest (for construction 
maintenance - fuel production - decommissioning) at least 30% of the 
total energy produced by the nuke what makes a new nuke a true 
contribution earliest after about 6 years now. Of course there is no 
real solution yet to handle the waste. (Best in Sweden). Nuclear energy 
was introduced by the military complex to get "free Plutonium" for bombs...


Hot fusion is the biggest fraud as all (e.g. energy of sun) what the 
physicists do claim is a blatant lie. Already 40 years ago people knew 
that hot D+T fusion is impossible due to the high rate of very hot 
neutrons produced what will affect all material of the reactor. ITER is 
just a sun & fun project for obedient physicists.


There is a good chance that finally only cold fusion will survive as we 
now understand how it works. But we still have great difficulties to 
produce a stable long time working reaction. Cold fusion produces no 
nuclear waste. Of course cold fusion still is suppressed ( by the sun 
and fun physicists + military/oil complex )  and the projects do run 
with minimal money and resources. And many are run under the surface by 
the various military complexes world wide.


We only can hope that Fukushima was the last accident. But this is just 
a wish ...


J.W.



-- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 
18 +41 79 246 36 06

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

Just one word:  Thorium.  :)

https://youtu.be/PSxihhBzCjk?t=32

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:48 PM Bob Higgins  wrote:

> This would be a good question to pose to Jed Rothwell.  Jed has
> studied and written much about the energy landscape - history & present -
> and probably has a lot to say about the future.  He monitors this list.
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:05 AM Ken Deboer  wrote:
>
>> I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great
>> admiration for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the
>> population problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the
>> viewpoint of future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly
>> able to judge fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar
>> 'standard' ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in
>> "Quest" dont say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in
>> 50 years? regards, ken deboer
>>
>>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Bob Higgins]

This would be a good question to pose to Jed Rothwell.  Jed has studied and
written much about the energy landscape - history & present - and probably
has a lot to say about the future.  He monitors this list.

On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 11:05 AM Ken Deboer  wrote:

> I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great
> admiration for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the
> population problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the
> viewpoint of future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly
> able to judge fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar
> 'standard' ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in
> "Quest" dont say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in
> 50 years? regards, ken deboer
>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Ken Deboer]

I have an open-ended question for this group, which I have great admiration
for. I'm a biologist and am writing a book on, especially, the population
problem. One of the chapters is on energy, mainly from the viewpoint of
future energy sources. The only one I am at all even partly able to judge
fairly is biomass, and to some extent solar, wind and similar 'standard'
ones. I am helpless about nuclear, and like Daniel Yergin in "Quest" dont
say much about it. What do y'all see as real possibilities in 50 years?
regards, ken deboer

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 10:30 AM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
> Thanks for the update!  I hope Jack is in good health.  He should be
> around  80 yrs.
>
> Did anyone on the current Vort list participate in the Quantum Mind forum
> at the University of Arizona in the early 90's.  Not long ago, that list
> was available still and I intended to d/l it; however, I can no longer find
> it.  
>
> Those were fun times, including the summer Sarfatti invited Shipov to
> California to discuss torsion fizzicks!  :)
>
> Cheers!
>
> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:45 AM ROGER ANDERTON <
> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> History of it is alternative physics.
>>
>> Mainstream physics based on ignoring Einstein's search for unified field
>> theory (UFT).
>>
>> But this alternative physics is built on it.
>>
>> Bohm was student of Einstein taking up UFT research. But Bohm ran into
>> problems of being called a communist and ran foul of McCarthy Witch hunt.
>> Similarly, Bohm's student Vigier ran into same sort of problem.
>>
>> Vigier Conferences named after physicist Vigier known as "The Heretic of
>> France".
>>
>> Latest problem being looked at seems to be: the failure of Einstein's
>> Equivalence Principle et al. When heat an object by E=mc2 would expect its
>> mass to increase, but the opposite seems to happen. Paper abstract for this
>> year's presentation at: http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/LoXII.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:27:35 BST, ROGER ANDERTON <
>> r.j.ander...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> many of them now go to Vigier Conferences, this year's organization of
>> conference messed up by covid19
>>
>>
>> Vigier 12 <http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/index12.html>
>>
>> Vigier 12
>>
>> <http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/index12.html>
>> I video many of the talks.
>>
>> I think main theory being promoted (at moment) is Rowland's theory, talk
>> by Michael Houlden:
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sIV5lgW00=youtu.be>
>>
>> Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5sIV5lgW00=youtu.be>
>>
>> Sarfatti hasn't been to Vigier Conference in ages.
>>
>>
>> There is also ANPA Conference:
>>
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural
>> Philosophy Association <http://anpa.onl/>
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural
>> Philoso...
>>
>> Alternative Natural Philosophy Association
>> <http://anpa.onl/>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:17:39 BST, Terry Blanton 
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'll answer for Jonesie.
>>
>> It's a bit older than that:
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Fysiks_Group
>>
>> On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:09 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
>> bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Jones—
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR
>> Forum organized?
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Jones Beene 
>> *Sent: *Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
>> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction
>>
>>
>>
>> all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged
>> into a single quantum entangled meme...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Terry Blanton wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> ...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[ROGER ANDERTON]

 History of it is alternative physics.
Mainstream physics based on ignoring Einstein's search for unified field theory 
(UFT).
But this alternative physics is built on it.
Bohm was student of Einstein taking up UFT research. But Bohm ran into problems 
of being called a communist and ran foul of McCarthy Witch hunt. Similarly, 
Bohm's student Vigier ran into same sort of problem.
Vigier Conferences named after physicist Vigier known as "The Heretic of 
France".
Latest problem being looked at seems to be: the failure of Einstein's 
Equivalence Principle et al. When heat an object by E=mc2 would expect its mass 
to increase, but the opposite seems to happen. Paper abstract for this year's 
presentation at: http://www.noeticadvancedstudies.us/LoXII.pdf
















On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:27:35 BST, ROGER ANDERTON 
 wrote:  
 
  many of them now go to Vigier Conferences, this year's organization of 
conference messed up by covid19

Vigier 12

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Vigier 12


 |

 |

 |

I video many of the talks.
I think main theory being promoted (at moment) is Rowland's theory, talk by 
Michael Houlden:


Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory


 |

 |

 |


Sarfatti hasn't been to Vigier Conference in ages. 


There is also ANPA Conference: 


Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural Philosophy 
Association

| 
| 
|  | 
Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural Philoso...

Alternative Natural Philosophy Association
 |

 |

 |








On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:17:39 BST, Terry Blanton  
wrote:  
 
 I'll answer for Jonesie.
It's a bit older than that:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Fysiks_Group
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:09 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com 
 wrote:


Jones—

 

Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR Forum 
organized? 

 

Bob Cook

 

From: Jones Beene
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

 

all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged into 
a single quantum entangled meme...

 

 

Terry Blanton wrote:

 

...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[ROGER ANDERTON]

 many of them now go to Vigier Conferences, this year's organization of 
conference messed up by covid19

Vigier 12

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Vigier 12


 |

 |

 |

I video many of the talks.
I think main theory being promoted (at moment) is Rowland's theory, talk by 
Michael Houlden:


Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Michael Houlden talk on Rowlands' theory


 |

 |

 |


Sarfatti hasn't been to Vigier Conference in ages. 


There is also ANPA Conference: 


Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural Philosophy 
Association

| 
| 
|  | 
Alternative Natural Philosophy Association - Alternative Natural Philoso...

Alternative Natural Philosophy Association
 |

 |

 |








On Sunday, 31 May 2020, 16:17:39 BST, Terry Blanton  
wrote:  
 
 I'll answer for Jonesie.
It's a bit older than that:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Fysiks_Group
On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:09 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com 
 wrote:


Jones—

 

Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR Forum 
organized? 

 

Bob Cook

 

From: Jones Beene
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

 

all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged into 
a single quantum entangled meme...

 

 

Terry Blanton wrote:

 

...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)

 

 

 

  

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

I'll answer for Jonesie.

It's a bit older than that:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Fysiks_Group

On Sun, May 31, 2020 at 11:09 AM bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Jones—
>
>
>
> Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR Forum
> organized?
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
> *From: *Jones Beene 
> *Sent: *Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction
>
>
>
> all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged
> into a single quantum entangled meme...
>
>
>
>
>
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>
>
> ...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—

Is the  Fysics group you referenced the one that Allen Smith at LENR Forum 
organized?

Bob Cook

From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Saturday, May 30, 2020 10:53 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged into 
a single quantum entangled meme...


Terry Blanton wrote:

...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Jones Beene]

 all the members of the "Fundamental Fysiks Group" [sic] reportedly merged into 
a single quantum entangled meme...


Terry Blanton wrote:  
 ...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)

  

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

...and what ever happened to Jack Sarfatti?  :)

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:56 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

> But likely not...
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
> from 2014.
>
> On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:54 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:
>
>> Might have taken a hit..
>>
>> Dr. Hameroff will be pleased.
>>
>> *Anesthesia's effect on consciousness solved, settling century-old
>> scientific debate*
>>
>>
>> https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-anesthesia-effect-consciousness-century-old-scientific.html
>>
>> Temporary exposure to anesthesia causes the lipid clusters to move from
>> an ordered state, to a disordered one, and then back again, leading to a
>> multitude of subsequent effects that ultimately cause changes in
>> consciousness.
>>
>>
>> or not  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
>> (2014)
>> 
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:Orchestrated Objective Reduction

[Terry Blanton]

But likely not...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188from
2014.

On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:54 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

> Might have taken a hit..
>
> Dr. Hameroff will be pleased.
>
> *Anesthesia's effect on consciousness solved, settling century-old
> scientific debate*
>
>
> https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-05-anesthesia-effect-consciousness-century-old-scientific.html
>
> Temporary exposure to anesthesia causes the lipid clusters to move from an
> ordered state, to a disordered one, and then back again, leading to a
> multitude of subsequent effects that ultimately cause changes in
> consciousness.
>
>
> or not  https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188
> (2014)
> 
>
>