Re: Easter
Lets get back to science. Richard Amen to that! s
Re: [OT] Re: Easter
I can't claim to speak for Mr. Macauley, who is perhaps more clear in his position than I have been, but for myself, proclaiming the deity of Christ is essential to the faith. Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him will I confess before My Father who is in heaven. But, whoever denies Me before men, him will I also deny before My Father who is in heaven. Matt. 10:32-33 - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2005 12:27 AM Subject: [OT] Re: Easter What compels you to do this? --- RC Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I confess that Jesus has come in the flesh, __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: ...water into wine...
In his post of 22 February 2005 (attached below) Jones outlined a farsighted procedure for harnessing the Beta-atmosphere/ZPE using extremely energetic mechanical failure, which can be due to brittle failure, or to phase- shift (allotrope) failure. Jones points out the large energy available by using Ice 9. Recently studying Professor Chaplin's phase diagrams on http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html I have realised that there is a relatively simple way to harness the huge strain energy inherent in liquid water which is partially released when water turns to normal hexagonal ice, Ice Ih. With reference to the lower of the two phase diagram at the above URL, consider the box bounded by 0 and 200 MPa (30,000 psi) and -20 and 0 degrees C. Interestingly enough, 30,000 psi, the maximum pressure at which water remains a liquid, is also at the high-end injection pressure for a HEUI diesel (30,000 psi) http://www.dieselpage.com/art1110ds.htm (see Beene's post below) so the necessary equipment is available for injection of supercooled water into a cylinder. If the pressure on the supercooled high pressure water is released fast enough one could expect the equivalent of brittle failure since the Beta-atmosphere pressure responsible for the tensile strain energy component of ice Ih will not have time to organise the water fragments. If you think about it, the essential difference between isothermal volume change and adiabatic volume change is the value of dv/dt. If a volume is expanded very rapidly then there is no time for heat to enter or leave the space, no time for equilibrium to be reached with the external environment. At the other extreme, if a volume is expanded very slowly then, irrespective of any insulation, temperature equilibrium will be reached with the external environment. There is a rather amusing passage I came across whilst researching the Carnot cycle that illustrates the importance of the rate of heat transfer to cylinders. = The conceptual value of the Carnot cycle is that it establishes the maximum possible efficiency for an engine cycle operating between TH and TC. It is not a practical engine cycle because the heat transfer into the engine in the isothermal process is too slow to be of practical value. As Schroeder puts it So don't bother installing a Carnot engine in your car; while it would increase your gas mileage, you would be passed on the highway by pedestrians. 8-) = Now, evidently, there is a wide range of regimes that one might adopt for the amount of pressure drop to be used in exploding the supercooled high pressure water and the amount to be used for driving pistons or turbine. The optimum conditions can only be established by experimentation, or less likely in the short term, by an adequate theoretical analysis. The trouble is, existing theory is nowhere near being able to achieve the later aim because the existing concepts of temperature, energy, spectrum of hierarchical aether pressure, just ain't up to it (IMNSHO). ;-) This is why, for instance, the three equations of state for water vapour remained undiscovered for so long. The concept of temperature was so wedded to the Kelvin straightjacket that the recognition one was really dealing with inverse environmental pressures simply didn't arise. As for the idea that there was nothing absolute about absolute zero temperature, anyone suggesting such a thing would doubtless be branded anathema. That various terms that have been used to express the energy available in the aether Beta-atmosphere- Casimir - Zero-Point_ Energy, is really a case of Big Enders and Little Enders, to use a Lilliputian analogy. I have approached aether pressure from the big end specifically tests on concrete - and you can't get much bigger eggs than 12 inch cylinders, whereas ZPE approaches the egg from the little end. The advantage of the big end is you can get the spoon in and see what you are doing. It may also involve one dimensional scalar waves rather than two dimensional transverse waves. I imagine the waste product of a water engine would be ice crystals though whether this would lead to attenuation of global warming or not is difficult to say. 8-) I believe that if anyone takes up this experimental challenge seriously then progress will be much faster than mining the aether on a finer scale, such as cold fusion. The only trouble is, once someone demonstrates a working model, oil shares are likely to take such a hammering that a horrendous stock market instability might result. Frank Grimer === Re: ZPE-Pumped Cryogenic Mass Increase Explosive Antimony From: Jones Beene (view other messages by this author) Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 11:18:03
Gaia, ver.1.1.5 - an Easter offering
This is my 2-part offering for the occasion an on-topic Easter offering (to the god-of-energy, one must presume, whether or not Abraham knew this feature was part of the package) not to mention, to his over-worked mistress, Gaia. The details of this next-gen reactor design have been more like an egg-walk than an egg hunt, but they are coming together, little by little. The underlying premise of the Gaia effort is this: without a major breakthrough capable of getting us off of fossil-fuel dependence, one is advised to have a viable fallback position, no? All I can say for certain that the fallback will not be found in hot fusion, the biggest disappointment and money drain of all time (non-war money drain). And if other budding technologies like ZPEcapture or CF do not help, then Lovelock is absolutely correct in his assertion that nuclear fission will have to suffice as the best of all of the remaining unsatisfactory options. But this project goes way beyond Lovelock into emphasis on redesign... and is capable of stretching Uranium resources to about 50,000 years for a world of 10 billion consumers dependent on only Uranium and nothing else it is that much more efficient compared to the standard US design or should I say, sub-standard design - thanks mostly to the General Electric Corporation (the yet-to-be-caught Enron) and their PAC-paid pals in congress. As an intellectual process, it is extraordinarily complicated to attempt to find a viable next-gen design by peering a few years ahead into the realm of the easily possible in order to estimate what is doable without a major breakthrough, and what is impossible without such. But that daunting task is the nature of accurate foresight, isnt it? An accurate vision for the next-gen reactor design could save us a decade of valuable time. The Gaia fission reactor design has been a work-in-progress, intended to present a feasible next-generation compact alternative power source, not only to the standard PWR, but more specifically to burning coal or methane, both of which release tons of radioactivity directly into the atmosphere. It is intended to be a small, super-safe, sub-critical, terrorism resistant, rail-mounted, full-burnup (breeder), natural U-fueled, direct-conversion (steam-less and un-pressurized) with in-situ cleanup for ongoing fuel reprocessing. Now, that's a mouthful. Everybody's favorite wish-list combined into one package... everything but simple, that is... but complexity is the unavoidable necessity for making Lovelock's dream of a future ecologically sound power source into a reality... unless CF/ZPE comes along first. In fact, this design depends on a Fusor-based makeup neutron source, combined with a small homogeneous reactor and three-stage neutron multiplier and beam-line. But that concept is derivative from real devices and could be proved or disproved within 6 months, given funding. This will be the subject of part 2 of this post in a few days a makeup neutron source. This is the key component for which the greatest leap of the imagination as to what currently possible, is required. Assuming this overall design is deemed possible with a national commitment (most likely not here in the USA but abroad, given the GE monopoly and political power) the possible part will require about four to five significant improvements - not breakthroughs, at all but improvements which have been demonstrated in principal. These are not proven in combination and are from a number of overlapping fields. Given this status, then what are the major stumbling blocks? The number one problem, as mentioned, is the robust *makeup neutron* source. A super-safe subcritical design requires a robust external sources of neutrons. The goal is for an external neutron flux of at least 10^11 neutrons per second delivered to the subcritcal reactor, which contains 90% of the fuel. This neutron source will cost as much as the rest of the reactor, but it is worth every penny ! as it is the key which makes the whole subcritical full burnup design work. This neutron source will be the subject of the next part of this posting, but first - a few more features of Gaia worth mentioning. Because it does not require the steam cycle, and depends on direct conversion - the rail-car size is both possible and advantageous - but for other reasons than transportation. Having it rail-mounted means that the power plant operator can perform periodic scheduled swap-outs to send a lower-producing unit back to a central location for more complete fuel-reprocessing. A substantial on-site and ongoing reprocessing is also built-in but with natural U, the fuel must be kept very clean. This major reprocessing at a central location will be required for non-proliferation concerns. The two cleanup regimes, are necessary to get a complete burnup using natural U (rather than about a 5% burnup as is currently done using enriched fuel). This can be accomplished
Re: [OT] Re: Easter
Terry Blanton wrote: What compels you to do this? Pack-hunting predator instinct. - Jed
Re: Oil Crash
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 12:26, Mike Carrell wrote: Stephen wrote: Terry Blanton wrote: This article says that the Canadian Sands won't save us because you can't squeeze it out fast enough: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/ Fascinating. Does anyone here know what the effect of peak oil is likely to be on global warming? Lack of oil will ruin the economy and lead to WWIII -- but will it also save the polar bears? Or have CO2 levels already gone so high that a methane burp followed by a total meltdown is inevitable? Take note of the cover story of the last Scientific American. The author uses deep ice core data to measure the cyclic methane and carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere over may millenia. It is cyclic, the cycles synchronous with variations in the solar illumination due to interactions of the eccentriciey of the the Eartth's orbit and its precession of the rotation axis -- both cosmic effect, beyond control of man. Following those cycles, Earth should have entered a cooling phase some 5-8000 years ago, headed for an ice age. That trend has been counterbalanced by the rise of agriculure, producing mathane from rotting crops and increasing carbon dioxide through deforestation. Thus we have ha a nice climate, due the presence of Man. We overdid it with the industrial age and massive use of fossil fuel, and may now face consequences. However, if the peak oil scenario is as bas as advertised, then the use of fossil fuels will decline, and we may continue down the cosmic cooling cycle toward another ice age. Thus even though there may be a near term victory for LENR and BLP to arrest the peak in global warming, the ride can still be bumpy. And to think there is a comepetition as to who can build the scariest roller coaster rides :-). Mike Carrell When the oil runs out, we will go nuclear. There will be some civil problems as folks for and against the nuclear option 'interact', but the nuclear option will be excersized. Yes there probably will be terrorists, but that is what National Guard troops are for. By then, the political climate of starving and cold masses huddling in the dark (while not fleeing south and becoming the new breed of John Steinbeck's 'Okies') will have profoundly changed; and the changes will be ominous for a previousely democratic society. In tough times they send for the sons of bitches! will be the operation phrase. If you think the 1930's were badwait. The Romans had laws to deal with the lawless, just like we Americans dealt with looters in the 1940's and 1950's. We called them outlaws and shot them on sight! That is what will happen to anti nuclear hooligans in the future. Stalin did not put up with economic saboteurs, and in the dark world of the near future neither will we. Come soon or come late. The only choice that we have is how destitute and cold and hungry and how willing to accept foreign domination will we be before we either build the plants ourselves or allow our conquerors to do it to us. For an energy poor country is a weak country. Every day we let the Chinese and Japanese proceed apace with their programs without strongly pursuing our own is one more day behind we get in the economy of the future. The French are will ahead of all of us on this. The Armenians know what happens when winter comes and there is no energy except nuclear available. Several years ago they almost froze until they restarted their Tchernobl type reactor and pulled themselves by their bootstraps out of trouble with no help from a world that criticized them from their comfortable armchairs of energy affluence. All the while there were no shortage of these comfortable critics telling the Armenians that they should just lay down and die before they started their 'unsafe' reactor.the reactor that saved their lives! Standing Bear
Re: Oil Crash
Standing Bear wrote: When the oil runs out, we will go nuclear. There will be some civil problems as folks for and against the nuclear option 'interact', but the nuclear option will be excersized. All else remaining as it is, this would not do us a bit of good. Oil is only used for transportation. Nuclear power cannot (at present) be used to power automobiles or aircraft. In the future it may be used to produce hydrogen, which can be used for transportation. Or we could use electric cars. However, we might as well use electricity from something cheaper than nuclear power, such as wind or even coal. In other words, when oil runs out, we may go nuclear, but if we want to spend six times less money, we will turn to wind power instead. That seems a lot more likely. Because oil is only used for transportation, it is much less important than people realize. Replace automobile engines with something better and the need for oil practically vanishes. The use of oil to generate electricity peaked in 1979 at 3,283 trillion Btu, and it has declined to 1,200 trillion Btu. See: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec8_18.pdf See also Fig. 5.14. Heat content of petroleum consumption by product by sector: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec5_34.pdf Note that the vertical scales differ. The figure on the bottom right shows the dramatic decline in petroleum consumption to generate electricity. All four sectors are shown together here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec5_28.pdf The only substantial use of oil is in industry and transportation. Some of the Industrial sector petroleum is used to generate electricity, in combined-heat-and-power plants (cogenerators). Most is for things like petrochemical feedstocks, which could easily be replaced if cheap wind energy becomes available (and will surely be replaced if CF becomes available). See Table 5.13b: http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec5_31.pdf - Jed
[OT] Re: Easter
That is one of the most compelling and insightful things I have ever seen you say. I would find it extemely humorous did I not fear that I am the quarry. --- Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Pack-hunting predator instinct. __ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: [OT] Re: Easter
Terry Blanton writes: Pack-hunting predator instinct. I would find it extemely humorous did I not fear that I am the quarry. Lol! Seriously (okay, somewhat seriously) they do not want to hunt you, they want you to join their pack and follow their leadership and their initiative. In other words, they want to make you a subordinate member of their hierarchy. As far as I know, only predators who cooperatively hunt in packs exhibit this behavior. Solitary hunters do not care what other members of their species do. When they encounter other individuals, they simply drive them off. Pack hunters such as wolves and people have highly developed, complex patterns of interaction with emphasis on controlling member behavior. I believe that instinct accounts for the urge to proselytize religion and make others conform to your own culture. Herd animals such as deer have social hierarchy, but it is less developed, and there is little leadership or coordination. When a herd is attacked, all members flee. They seldom organize to defend the herd or shelter young animals. (Elephants do defend the herd, and elephants also! have more complex social hierarchy than other herbivores.) - Jed
NigeriaWorld article lauds cold fusoin
Prof. Sam Ejike Okoye has written an article in NigeriaWorld praising cold fusion. It includes detailed information from Ed Storms, which leads me to think the author must have contacted Storms. This article is way better than most articles published in the U.S. mass media in the last five years. See: http://nigeriaworld.com/articles/2005/mar/271.html - Jed
Wolves and Wolverines
Introducing theanalogy of wolves to humans as a predator species andcomparing their difference to solitary hunters is a stretch. The wolf is one of natures marvels. Arctic wolves follow the migrating caribou for food. This amazing animal eats little of their cull , leaving most for other animals not endowed with stamina and endurance, and also for the scavengers such as the wolverine( badger family). The wolverine emits a skunk odor that spoils the meat for other animals except the buzzards. A wolf will not fight a wolverine, not from fear, butbecause of the risk of injury which in the Arctic is tantamount to starvation. Of the true dangerous animals on earth, the wolverine and the Cape buffalo rank tops because their sensory perceptiongives them the uncanny abilityto know when they are being " stalked" and in turn began stalking the stalker. A wolf does NOT stalk a wolverine. A wolverine is a solitary hunter. They are known for their utter ruthlessness and cruelty, their ability to spoil and destroy without remorse. Their ability to enter a dairybarn and kill every animal without feeding on their kill is known,but not understood. Making an analogy between humans and wolves permits an expansion of the analogy to include wolverines and humans. Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif
RE: Detroit Pushing Diesel Hybrids
If I were to hazard a guess, it's likely an emissions problem. Hyper efficient engines typically burn fuel more completely and therebyrun cleaner, but that is not always true. This is a carbureted engine design so not sure what nasties are being left behind in the exhaust. -j -Original Message-From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 4:16 PMTo: vortex-L@eskimo.comSubject: Re: Detroit Pushing Diesel HybridsRobin van Spaandonk wrote: The only thing preventing this from being adopted across theautomobile industry is the will to do it.And politics. And -- I suppose -- pressure from the oil industry. But if the price of gasoline goes up to $5 per gallon these impediments will vanish.- Jed
RE: Detroit Pushing Diesel Hybrids
I would be careful next time you decide to vandalize someone's car like that (yes, it's only free speech when you do it to your own car). Saw some poor chap get the crap kicked out of him for doing that very thing. Seems the ex-marine didn't take too kindly to the passivist message being foisted upon his truck. -j -Original Message- From: leaking pen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 10:51 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Detroit Pushing Diesel Hybrids no, the support the troop ribbons are all magnetic. next time you see one, peel it off to see. (or, do like i do. i printed up several 8x10 sheets of bumpersticker paper with small sections that say bring them home now. i simply put that on their car right underneath support our troops. ) On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 22:51:40 -0500, Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Entertaining idea, but a typical sticker doesn't weigh an ounce. More like a gram, which would cut that million pounds down to about 30,000 pounds. Only a gram? 10 sheets of 8 x 11.5 paper weigh 46 grams. A 3 page letter in an envelope weighs an ounce. I have not weighed a sticker, but aren't they magnetic? No, the ones you see on cars are more like decals -- they're just a film of plastic, or possibly paper, with sticky stuff on one side. Probably more than a gram, it's true :-) but not a whole lot more, I'd guess. The Fish Wars had the potential to be more expensive, I suppose, since the bumper-fish (both Darwin and IXOYE fish) appear to be rather thick plastic plaques. I kept meaning to get one of each, and let them fight it out on the back of our car, but I waited too long and now the back of the car's completely covered with political bumper stickers, so both fish lost out. I'll bet the biggest energy flag cost is the cost of all those flags on cars flapping in the wind. Fortunately, they have mostly frayed and you do not see them often anymore. Yeah -- I wish I could say the same thing for the gas-station flags, and the flags in restaurants, and the flag in the barber shop, and the flags at the copy shop, and I suppose they'd be useful if one occasionally forgot what country one was in, and needed to be reminded, but that's not a problem I find I have. - Jed -- Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write Voltaire -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.2 - Release Date: 05/03/25
