[Vo]:Terawatt.com, magnetic-based power production device

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Serendipitously  came across this company. anyone familiar with them?  

  http://terawatt.com/ecm1/index.php?option=com_content
 &view=article&id=17&Itemid=187

 

They have a very impressive group of people working for them, and
third-party testing.

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]:Obscure possible LENR explosion

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Just two things of interest:

 

1)  This doesn't take extreme conditions of pressure and temp to make
the diamonds. the 'bulk' mixture came up to 120degC, and was at atmospheric
pressure; so it must be the extreme conditions inside the cavitating bubbles
that is causing the diamond production.

2)  The author cites several papers from Taleyarkhan.

 

[12] R.I. Nigmatulin, I.Sh. Akhatov, A.S. Topolnikov, N.K. Vakhitova, R.T.
Lahey, R.P. Taleyarkhan, 

 Phys. Fluids 17 (2005) 107106.

[13] R.P. Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin,
R.C. Block, Science 295 (2002) 1868.

[14] R.P. Taleyarkhan, J.S. Cho, C.D. West, R.T. Lahey Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin,
R.C. Block, Phys. Rev., E 69 (2004) 036109.

[16] R.I. Nigmatulin, R.P. Taleyarkhan, R.T. Lahey, J. Power Energy 128
(2004) 345

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 10:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Obscure possible LENR explosion

 

Graphite-to-diamond transformation induced in 10 nanoseconds

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/pt/diamond/pdf/drm17-931.pdf

Graphite-to-diamond transformation induced by ultrasound cavitation

 

RE: [Vo]:Rossi said...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

"Would that be Russell's Teapot you're referring to?"

 

Oh heavens no. 

It's the Mad Hatter's (aka, Richard Garwin) teapot, of course.

 

From: Jeff Berkowitz [mailto:pdx...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 10:14 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi said...

 

Would that be Russell's Teapot you're referring to?  ;-)

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:

And tea kettle.

T

 

RE: [Vo]:a new interview with Defkalion

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Key statement in the DGTG interview:

 

"The result of such triggering is first of all the "disguise" of the
Hydrogen's proton to a neutron for a very short period of time, that can
then interact with other nuclei without the barriers of the Coulomb law."

 

". on different states of the Hydrogen or the actual 'shape' of its electron
trajectory."

 

Yep, what an electron actually is, is what will come out of all this. and
what I've been harping on for years is that what we currently PERCEIVE as an
electron is only an 'averaged', smoothed-out view due to its small size,
it's frequency of oscillation, and the limits of the manner in which we look
at (detect) electrons.  However, recent work with femto-second imaging and
synchronized lasers is beginning to reveal the true nature of the electron.

 

Synchronized X-ray and optical lasers measure how light changes matter on
atomic scale

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-synchronized-x-ray-optical-lasers-atomic.html#n
wlt

 

-Mark Iverson

 

 

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 4:37 AM
To: CMNS; VORTEX; Daniele Passerini; David Nygren; Mats Lewan; doug marker;
dagmar.k...@gmx.de; Mike Carrell; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian;
jeff aries; Arik El Boher; Roy Virgilio; Roberto Germano; Steven Krivit;
vlad
Subject: [Vo]:a new interview with Defkalion

 

My dear Readers

 

I have published a new interview with the CTO of the  Defkalion company.

 

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2012/08/defkalion-says-heni-is-more-proper-n
ame.html


 

Due to my communication with DGTG I am on a very steep learning curve

ascending between surprises and discoveries...and at the end of this

Interview I had a kind of revelation-secular but a bit shocking, re

the Long Wait in Cold Fusion.

Peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

 

RE: [Vo]:a new interview with Defkalion

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Axil wrote:

"The field of cold fusion and free energy systems has been a free for all
filled with some wild and crazy guys."

 

And it's that kind of chaotic environment that breeds innovation and will
bring forth the technologies that will make the world a better place for the
masses;  it will not be governments nor large corporations - they will only
regulate it, or refine it.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 31, 2012 11:45 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a new interview with Defkalion

 

Dear Eric,

 

Satire and flame baiting is one of the most difficult ambitions for a writer
to achieve. The reader almost always assumes that you are serious. It is
always wise the say what you mean and mean what you say. 

 

But sometimes the opposite happens. When a serious posit is taken as satire,

 

When I read this sentence as you might read it:

 

It's important to not permit the SCAMS of yesterday to effect the LENR
systems of tomorrow.

 

I could not stop laughing.ROTFL.

 

The field of cold fusion and free energy systems has been a free for all
filled with some wild and crazy guys. When you look at this unusual state of
affairs with a well-honed sense of humor as you oftentimes do, I can see how
lots of humor can spring forth.

 

Cheers:  Axil

RE: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I’d like to note a few observations about the later half of this vid:

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqG-TL0WnjE

 

-  As far as I can tell, there are an equal number of magnets on each 
side of the circumference of the drum.  Each one looks to be the same size 
magnet.  There are only two differences as far as I can see:

o   The spacing between the two magnets which are at the same location on the 
circumference, and

o   There is one location where there are 4 magnets in-line at a given location 
on the circumference.

 

-  At 2:02 one can see that the two widely-spaced magnets and the two 
narrowly-spaced ones are in-line, so you have double the weight at that 
location on the circumference of the drum (the drum is not circumferentially 
uniform as far as rotating mass).  

 

-  It is not clear from the vid, but would help to know if the entire 
drum assembly is balanced.  At 2:14 one can see what looks to be the head of a 
brass screw just inside the circumferential plate near the bottom of the drum.  
It is approximately opposite the 4 in-line magnets.  Perhaps this is a 
‘balance’ weight, and at  2:22 one can see what looks like a hole drilled thru 
the inner structure; again something that might indicate an attempt to balance 
the drum assembly.



-  There are at least 6 places of energy-robbing friction: 

o   2 Drum bearings,  (don’t see bearings per se, but can see what looks like a 
brass plate embedded in each wooden structural post)

o   White oblong wheel rubbing against metal (bearing?) on wooden top bar, 

o   Top bar’s vertical post rubbing in its guide on the side of the structural 
post

o   The top bar’s loose end rubbing against the groove in the wooden vertical 
structural post

o   White oblong wheel pushing on the metal arm at the bottom to raise the 
‘teeter-totter’ looking assembly mounted to clear plastic base. 

 

-  If unbalanced, and the larger circumferential mass is where the 4 
in-line magnets are, then this increased mass is placed at the top, so it will 
provide an initial force when the pin is pulled; it will fall due to gravity. 
However, would not that force be counteracted after half a revolution when that 
weight is now going up against gravity??? 
I.e., if you eliminated the cross-bar above the drum, and whatever is under the 
drum, and just pulled the pin, I seriously doubt if the drum would even make it 
past one full revolution; it would go up almost to its starting position, and 
then reverse direction and basically oscillate back and forth until it came to 
a stop. This would be a simple way to prove that the unequal circumferential 
mass is NOT the cause for continuous motion.

 

-  The device accelerates for at least 2 or 3 revolutions after he 
pulls the pin to enable rotation to start.  Where is the force coming from to 
accelerate the drum, especially taking into consideration that it might not be 
mass-balanced? 

 

If real, I doubt if this concept is going to generate serious energy, however, 
I’d like to see this unit put inside a locked clear display case and allowed to 
run continuously to see how long it will run.

 

-Mark

 

From: Jouni Valkonen [mailto:jounivalko...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 11:31 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

 

There is interesting thing to note, that the rotation of the wheel is 
oscillating. This probably means that the oscillation is chaotic and is 
governed by nonlinear dynamics. This also means that system is not freely 
rotating, but there are significant friction forces that resist the rotation of 
wheel. But magnetic pushing forces in the track are stronger than resisting 
magnetic forces. Thus the work needed to be done to lift the driving magnet is 
probably not the strongest force that is acting against the rotation.

 

Therefore this is not only very good proof of concept for perpetual motion 
machine, but it is also very educational demonstration of chaotic oscillation 
of rotation. Nonlinear dynamics in chaos theory is probably even more 
interesting and more revolutionary idea to classical physics than perpetual 
motion machine is. 

 

This is indeed very interesting idea, because it shows, that the concept of 
work in classical mechanics is ill-defined. Quantum mechanics is way more 
interesting. Also QM does not comment on energy conservation of macroscopic 
systems. It just states that energy is conserved in quantum systems. Why this 
energy conservation principle cannot be applied to macroscopic system is 
evident if we understand the concept of emergence.

 

Other interesting example for similar phenomenon is the formation of spiral 
galaxies. It is needed huge amount of work to form spiral galaxy, but gravity 
can still do it without consuming energy. Conservation of energy is failing at 
macroscopic systems also if we look expanding universe as whole. Photons are 
losing their energ

RE: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Bottom line:
Mark Goldes is assuming it's the same group of guys and therefore, don't
bother with it!
-Mark Iverson



-Original Message-
From: Mark Goldes [mailto:mgol...@chavaenergy.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 4:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

This is almost certainly the same group of scammers. They keep changing the
device and the device is easily faked in a video.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: James Bowery [jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 4:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

These are not indictments of the device in the video I cited.

Is device in that video, whether or not legitimately claimed by Magniwork,
Lutec or others, a device that has been shown to be incapable of
self-sustaining motion?  If it has been so shown, where is the demonstration
of that fact?

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 5:02 PM, Mark Goldes
mailto:mgol...@chavaenergy.com>> wrote:
They keep changing but here are a few of the stories...

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Buyer_Beware


Magniwork

Feature: Electromagnetic / Buyer Beware > Magniwork >
Open letter to Clickbank regarding Magniwork scam involvement -- Warning
of possible legal action - For the past year, Magniwork and others have been
using Clickbank to sell $49 DIY plans for a device alleged to cost less than
$100 in parts and which can power a house. Clickbank continues to allow this
to go on, despite our warnings that the plans are bogus and that we've
received no evidence to support the claim. (PESN; May 24, 2010)

Electromagnetic > Magniwork >
Magniwork Energy internet scam - Internet fraudsters are raking in
thousands of dollars a day with a scam selling plans for what alleges to be
an electromagnetic free energy machine capable of powering a house. One
estimate puts sales of the guide as high as 5,000 copies a month, making the
scam worth up to $3m a year. (Off-Grid; Oct. 8, 2009) [We've not yet
received a scrap of evidence supporting the claims.]

Featured: Buyer Beware > Electromagnetic > Magniwork >
ACTION: Report Magniwork (Scam) Ads to Google and Clickbank - Easy steps
presented for you to be able to lodge a complaint about the fraudsters who
are selling plans for what alleges to be an inexpensive electromagnetic free
energy machine capable of powering a house, though no supporting evidence
has been given. Let's stop these hucksters who prey on the free energy
believers and give the field a bad name. (PESWiki; Nov. 5, 2009)

Buyer Beware > Electromagnetic > Magniwork >
Lutec Disavows Magniwork - Lutec posted the following notice on their
home page in a marquee text: [all caps] "Be Warned - 'Magniwork' is not
related in any way to Lutec Australia, doe not sell plans for our equipment
and is not authorized to use our videos on their site!" (PESWiki; Nov. 10,
2009)

Featured: Electromagnetic > Bedini SG >
Magniwork free energy plans = bogus claim; say they'll remedy that -
Magniwork has been selling a set of plans for a free energy device they say
could be scaled to power an entire house. However, it turns out that the
device is nothing more than the Bedini SG circuit, which, though
interesting, has never been embodied in a self-looped system with energy
left over for practical use. They've apologized and removed the Bedini
stuff. (PESWiki; June 2, 2009)


Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: James Bowery [jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 2:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

It looks very similar to the device currently under discussion in that it
has a ramp of magnets with a discontinuity at the full cycle.

Are they the same scam?

Where can one read about the "well known scam"?

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:52 PM, Mark Goldes
mailto:mgol...@chavaenergy.com>>> wrote:
That site is the latest version of a well known scam.


Mark Goldes
Co-founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute
301A North Main Street
Sebastopol, CA 95472

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: James Bowery
[jabow...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 04, 2012 2:49 

RE: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Perhaps the energy is stored in the field?
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/engfie.html

As an example, an ignition coil (a step-up transformer) on a car is
energized with 12V, and draws a steady current, which generates a magnetic
field around the coil.  When the current is interrupted, the field collapses
and induces a voltage in the secondary coil in proportion to the number of
windings between the primary and secondary coils.  

If one looks at the mag-field as the 'spring', the current flow causes a
'stretching of the spring' (i.e. the field, as revealed using iron filings),
which springs back (field collapses) when the current is interrupted.

I would also posit that the mag-field is a polarization of the vacuum, which
takes energy (current flow) to maintain, and which will go back to
randomness (no field) when that energy is stopped... 

-Mark 

-Original Message-
From: Jouni Valkonen [mailto:jounivalko...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 11:46 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Perpetual motion machine

On Sep 5, 2012, at 9:18 PM, James Bowery  wrote:
> OK since no arithmetic seems plausible, what about actually obtaining the
device in question and running the obvious test:  Let it run for a very very
long time?
> 
Easy test would be to construct three identical perpetual motion machines
and then run one in sauna at 60‹C temperature, other at room temperature
and the third in freezer at -18‹C. If there is difference in duration how
long the motion will last, then it would show clearly that it is indeed
perpetual motion machine. Of course this kind of test is only necessary if
you do not believe theoretical a priori argument that magnets do not store
potential energy, but magnetism is just matter of information.

\Jouni

RE: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy patent granted in China

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Jones wrote:
"When depleted the average mass of hydrogen will have been reduced to may
~937 MeV."

Will the proton gain back that lost mass?  Apparently from the ZPF/vacuum?

-Mark
_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2012 8:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy patent granted in China



-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder 

> P+P->2He->P+P

If this reaction is always exothermic, wouldn't this mean the average
the mass of the proton is decreasing with time?

Harry,

Yes, exactly - but even a tiny fraction of ~1GeV per atom can provide tens
of thousands of times more energy than chemical and yet without
transmutation. 

The underlying hypothesis for ultimate gain is mass-to-energy conversion,
but with little or no fission, beta decay, non-reversible fusion, or
transmutation. The proton mass is not quantized and is in the vicinity of
938.272013 MeV on average. In QNF, this value becomes what is really an
"average mass," with expected variations higher and lower. Imagine a bell
curve of mass around the average of 938.27 MeV with one or two MeV either
way.

The "overage" fraction is in play for conversion into energy - via QCD and
Goldstone bosons which convert to magnons. It could amount to a third of all
the atoms. When depleted the average mass of hydrogen will have been reduced
to may ~937 MeV. That is what makes the theory falsifiable.

This becomes the mystery energy source for Ni-H reactions, whether they be
from Mills, Rossi, DGT, Piantelli, Celani, or Thermacore and more to come.
BTW - this particular solar proton reaction produces it tiny excess by
quantum spin - and it takes approx 10^16 reversible reactions to provide
every eV, but fortunately, they can happen sequentially at approx 10^20
times per second.

Jones


<>

[Vo]:FYI: An electromagnetic analysis of total solar eclipse...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Just an FYI for those interested in solar science and gravitation...

-Mark

 

The Wang anomaly during a total Solar eclipse: an electromagnetic analysis

Thierry De Mees

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Mechanics%20/%20Elec
trodynamics/Download/4287

 

"The gravity measurement of Qian-shen Wang during the total eclipse of the
Sun on 9 March 1997 showed a strange diagram-shape over time. In this paper,
I investigate this shape by setting up a simple scenario: the double
shielding of the used gravimeter didn't totally exclude an induction of the
fast electrons of the Sun's corona. The passage of the Moon shielded the
fields.  Neither the hypothesis of a gravitational shielding, nor a
temperature effect can be maintained."

 

 

<>

[Vo]:FYI: New Unified Theory, Dark Matter/Energy and Einstein's field equations

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-mathematicians-theory-dark-energy-einstein.html
#nwlt

 

Some interesting comments about this new theory:

 

“… the law of energy and momentum conservation in spacetime is valid only
when normal matter, dark matter and dark energy are all taken into account.
For normal matter alone, energy and momentum are no longer conserved, they
argue.

 

While still employing the metric of curved spacetime that Einstein used in
his field equations, the researchers argue the presence of dark matter and
dark energy—which scientists believe accounts for at least 95 percent of the
universe—requires a new set of gravitational field equations that take into
account a new type of energy caused by the non-uniform distribution of
matter in the universe. This new energy can be both positive and negative,
and the total over spacetime is conserved, Wang said.

 

The researchers postulate that the energy-momentum tensor of normal matter
is no longer conserved and that new gravitational field equations follow
from Einstein's principles of equivalence and general relativity, and the
principle of Lagrangian dynamics, just as Einstein derived his field
equations. Wang said the new equations were the unique outcome of the
non-conservation of the energy-momentum tensor of normal matter.

 

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1206.5078v2.pdf

 

GRAVITATIONAL FIELD EQUATIONS AND THEORY OF DARK MATTER AND DARK ENERGY

TIAN MA AND SHOUHONG WANG

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to derive a new set of gravitational
field equations and to establish a new unified theory for dark energy and
dark matter. The new gravitational field equations with scalar potential ϕ
are derived using the Einstein-Hilbert functional, and the scalar potential
ϕ is a natural outcome of the divergence-free constraint of the variational
elements. Gravitation is now described by the Riemannian metric gij , the
scalar potential ϕ and their interactions, unified by the new gravitational
field equations.  Associated with the scalar potential ϕ is the scalar
potential energy density < equation > which represents a new type of energy
caused by the non-uniform distribution of matter in the universe. The
negative part of this potential energy density produces attraction, and the
positive part produces repelling force. This potential energy density is
conserved with mean zero:

< equation >

The sum of this new potential energy density

(c^4 / 8πG) * Φ

and the coupling energy between the energy-momentum tensor Tij and the
scalar potential field ϕ gives rise to a new unified theory for dark matter
and dark energy: The negative part of this sum represents the dark matter,
which produces attraction, and the positive part represents the dark energy,
which drives the acceleration of expanding galaxies. In addition, the scalar
curvature of space-time obeys 

   R =  (8πG/c^4)*T + Φ. 

Furthermore, the new field equations resolve a few difficulties encountered
by the classical Einstein field equations.

 

<>

RE: [Vo]:ECat convention (Report day 1)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Thanks Haiko… 

we much appreciate the time you took to post this report!

-Mark Iverson

 

From: h...@haikolietz.de [mailto:h...@haikolietz.de] 
Sent: Sunday, September 09, 2012 1:02 AM
To: c...@googlegroups.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:ECat convention (Report day 1)

 

Report from day 1 of the ECat Convention in Zürich

Andrea Rossi presented a report by „independent parties“ („professors of 
universities“ and „engineers from military environments“), signed by nuclear 
engineer Fabio Penon. All parties that participated in the report are still 
operating to complete their analyses and operations. The document will soon be 
online. Here's a few things I noted:

- The classic ecat is stable at low temperature. „it has been safety certified 
from SGS for all Europe“. But applications require hot temperatures: the „hot 
cat“
- hot cat: analysts were allowed to dismantle the whole reactor system before 
and after operation. Rossi said he was only a observer and did not operate the 
system. But Fulvio Fabiani operated the security and control systems, as the 
report states.
- It's problematic to store hydrogen in such a system (especially if you want 
to receive a safety certificate). Therefore, they had to develop a storage 
device that takes up hydrogen and releases it at a certain temperature.
- Calorimetry: infrared camera (military devp for missiles). Therefore, the 
reactor must be ablack body. Paint had to be developed that stays black at 
1200°C and was developed with the help of a company that produces paint for 
fighter engines.
- Convection energy was measured (with border pixels) and corrected for.
- All in all, Rossi was flowing, didn't have to think what to say, told an 
anecdote. „the hot cat is a war ship, not a cruise ship“. „I'm investing in it 
and I believe in this product“

By now the report is online: 
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/09/high-temperature-e-cat-report-published/

LEONARDO engineer Flavio Fabiani spoke about security and controls, (made many 
jokes,) and left all questions to be answered by Rossi. Also Rossi's entourage 
from PROMETEON srl (Italian branch) didn't answer questions. It's up to the 
boss and will happen today:

- One Central Control Single Unit per ecat in a fat cat controls: (a) water 
inflow, (b) temp in exchanger (reactor), (c ) security valves, (d) pressure 
inside the reactor, (e) dryness of steam, (f) input voltage and amperage. The 
CCSUs supervise single modules and bring them down if they malfunction
- All CCSUs ae LAN connected and can be internet remote controlled
- A fat cat (MW1) has 90 modules, 3 of them sleeping. „sleeping modules“ will 
automatically turn on when another module turns off (eg when fault), 
stabilizing output

There may be flaws in my report.

Haiko

 

 

[Vo]:FYI: Solar Cycle induced by Rotating Medium

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Those of you interested in modeling all things astronomical, here's an
interesting PDF:

http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Astrophysics/Downloa
d/1063

 

A physicist friend from academia responded to the above by saying this:

---

"I gave a talk two years ago on the solar cycle and that the planets are
tugging the sun about the central mass of the solar system. I have seen at
least two more publications that dealt with  this subject. It is essentially
a 'celestial dance' of the planets with the sun, where Jupiter, the most
massive planet, sets the stage. The solar cycle is also very close to the
period of Jupiter.

 

Another article showed time-series analysis of temperature measurements on
earth and compared this with the time-series analysis of the movement of the
center mass of the solar system. You could see all the planetary orbital
frequencies in the temperature data - only the moon was an addition to the
frequencies in the earth's temperature variation. Most interesting!"

---

 

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:Website on LENR Fuel Preparation

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

RE: why triangular shaped?

Pointed edges increase the electric field strength...

 

-Mark Iverson

 

 

From: Robert Lynn [mailto:robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:34 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Website on LENR Fuel Preparation

 

OK, I'll bite Why gold coated and why does it need to be of triangular
form?  Basically why would that make any positive difference?

 

Adding gold coating is the antithesis of trying to find a cheap fuel, and
Celani has been doing fine using round wires - also seems that round that
would give more opportunity for consistent processing and for the hydrogen
to get in around the wires.

 

On top of which I don't think that you want large thick bundles of fuel in a
reactor if there is a positive temperature coefficient to the reaction.
Want thin layers with good cooling everywhere to prevent run-way hot spots
from forming, or perhaps powder in a fluidised bed where the powder rapidly
convects. 

 

Doesn't really seem to be adding much to the public knowledge base (unless I
missed something).

 

On 13 September 2012 15:01, Ron Kita  wrote:

Greetings Vortex-L,

 

I hope that this is new:

http://lenr-coldfusion.com/2012/09/12/universal-lenr-reactor-fuel-preparatio
n/ 

 

Respectfully,

Ron Kita, Chiralex

Doylestown PA

 

[Vo]:FYI: too many taus for Standard Model...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

 

Researchers at SLAC find too many taus decay from bottom quarks to fit
Standard Model

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-slac-taus-bottom-quarks-standard.html

 

"Muons are generally produced in abundance in such collisions, whereas taus
are rare, and it's the amount of them that were produced in the collisions
at SLAC that has cast doubts on the Standard Model.  Instead of the 20%
frequency rate predicted for D mesons, the researchers found a 31% rate (and
a 25% rate for D* mesons instead of the predicted 23%).  These differences
are significant enough to cause pretty serious problems for SUSY."

 

"To explain the differences between the theories and observed results the
researchers suggest that perhaps another Higgs Boson is at work; SUSY
suggests there may be as many as four, though research at CERN is still
ongoing to prove that what was observed earlier this year was in fact an
actual Higgs."

 

So they are working on justification for an even BIGGER collider to find the
4 new Bosons!  Big science is just as bad as government. continual growth,
even to the detriment of those which it is supposed to serve.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: too many taus for Standard Model...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Daniel asks:

"Anyway, why is big science bad?"

 

Had the hundreds of billions of dollars spend on hot fusion and massive
particle colliders been put into material science, nanotech, graphene,
alternative fuels, etc., we would probably be much closer to sustainable
clean energy by now.  Putting all your eggs in one or two baskets is just
not that likely to pay off.

 

-Mark

 

From: Daniel Rocha [mailto:danieldi...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2012 8:49 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: too many taus for Standard Model...

 

Well, they do not have a significance to claim to justify that SM is
incorrect. Besides, they are talking about decay rates of mesons, which are
bound states of mesons, meaning strong force interaction which is very prone
to errors in theoretical rate calculations. In the case of a growing
divergence, more calculations need to be done.

 

Anyway, why is big science bad? Without comparing to big government.

2012/9/14 MarkI-ZeroPoint 

 

Researchers at SLAC find too many taus decay from bottom quarks to fit
Standard Model

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-slac-taus-bottom-quarks-standard.html

 

"Muons are generally produced in abundance in such collisions, whereas taus
are rare, and it's the amount of them that were produced in the collisions
at SLAC that has cast doubts on the Standard Model.  Instead of the 20%
frequency rate predicted for D mesons, the researchers found a 31% rate (and
a 25% rate for D* mesons instead of the predicted 23%).  These differences
are significant enough to cause pretty serious problems for SUSY."

 

"To explain the differences between the theories and observed results the
researchers suggest that perhaps another Higgs Boson is at work; SUSY
suggests there may be as many as four, though research at CERN is still
ongoing to prove that what was observed earlier this year was in fact an
actual Higgs."

 

So they are working on justification for an even BIGGER collider to find the
4 new Bosons!  Big science is just as bad as government. continual growth,
even to the detriment of those which it is supposed to serve.

 

-Mark Iverson

 





 

-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ

danieldi...@gmail.com

 

RE: [Vo]:New Wired UK article

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave Roberson wrote:

"I guess I am not sure how to give transmutation at low energy the respect
it might deserve."

 

This might help.

 

The general topic of transmutation (not linked to LENR) has been discussed
within the Collective many times.  and has been mired in obscurity for
decades (gee, sound familiar???), because we all know that transmutation is
simply another name for alchemy. and we've all been told by the masters that
that is just a bunch of hooey.  given what you now know about LENR, and the
consistent, and wrong, view of LENR, do you all still trust the mainstream's
view so completely???

 

One of the earliest and well researched efforts was Kervan's work with
biological transmutations. here's the contents of the Collective's memory on
this topic:

 

http://www.mail-archive.com/search?l=vortex-l%40eskimo.com

&q=kervan

 

you might start with this thread by the ever-belaboring Mr. Bean himself!

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg00791.html

 

Dig in!!

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2012 10:00 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Wired UK article

 

Jeff, you have pointed out some interesting papers that allowed me to
reconsider the transmutation concept.  Thus far I have placed most of these
experiments in the same category as ghosts and other difficult spirits to
capture.  Like the other phenomena, it is impossible to accept unless I
witness it several times myself.  I and I assume many others have read the
articles and placed them in the bin labeled "Something must have gone wrong
with that test!" 

 

This type of physics might be relatively common but not accepted due to the
lack of understanding.  If it is real, then we have a great deal of new
things to learn about the natural world.  I honestly have no idea about the
validity of these papers and my tendency is to assume that there are
operator errors.  As soon as that assumption is applied, we are back to
normal physics where transmutations are not happening under these low energy
conditions.  We find ourselves in a position similar to that of the main
line physicists who refuse to waste time reading about LENR since it can not
be true. 

 

I guess I am not sure how to give transmutation at low energy the respect it
might deserve.  Your bringing it up again for discussion might help resolve
the issue.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jeff Berkowitz 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sun, Sep 16, 2012 12:05 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Wired UK article

I'm old, so I'm old school. I'm not a physicist, just an experienced
observer with a basic science education.

 

After a few months of intensive reading, I'm squarely in the "transmutation
don't get no respect" camp.

 

I particularly like this one:
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/Castellanonucleartra.pdf

 

No "particle acceleration". No electrolysis. In fact, no use of electricity
in the experimental setup. No disputable calorimetry - in fact no claims of
excess heat. The description of the experimental setup clearly implies
reasonable skill in materials handling and laboratory technique.

 

Result: a wide range of heavy-element transmutations. Wtf!?

 

And not just these guys. Also here:

 

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTanomalousia.pdf

 

and here:

 

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MileyGHnucleartra.pdf

 

and here:

 

http://newenergytimes.com/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/ICCF-17-Dash-Effect%20o
f%20Recrystallization-Paper.pdf

 

These results seem objective, widely replicated, and afaik inexplicable via
existing condensed-matter physics. Yet they get very little attention. I'm
new in this group, so help me out. The way I learned it, there ain't no
philosopher's stone, leaving aside well-understood high-energy fusion and
fission reaction processes.

 

What am I missing?

 

Jeff

 

 

On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 8:30 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

To me 250 electron volts of energy in the form of electron projectiles is
incredibly small.  The neutron generators that can be had all operate with
something like 100 keV which is fairly close to 1000 times larger,  and they
use deuterons as the projectiles.   Why would we think that electrons
impacting atoms would generate mutations when there is not enough energy to
produce energetic X-rays?  If we assume that the elevated temperature of the
plate material is responsible, then perhaps so, but the battle to prove that
LENR exists in the first place has been difficult.  It just seems likely
that anyone who has witnessed the transmutation of elements within a low
power tube would accept LENR without much question.

 

I would like to see proof that the tube transmutation effect is real and an
explanation for its occurrence.  Again, how could low energy electrons cause
this to happen?  If one calculates the expected transmutation rate at the
energies we are spe

RE: [Vo]:Godes/McKubre 100% reproducability

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Mark Gibbs asks rather impatiently,

"Can anyone explain why this system isn't being refined and promoted at the
very least as proof of CF/LENR?"

 

Very simply and obvious reasons.  lack of details of exactly how, and patent
infringement!

The testing at SRI is getting underway and hopefully will go a long way to
achieving what you ask.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: mark.gi...@gmail.com [mailto:mark.gi...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Mark
Gibbs
Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 11:20 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Godes/McKubre 100% reproducability

 

If the Godes/McKubre system has 100% reproducibility why isn't it the poster
child for CF/LENR?! And why hasn't the CF/LENR research community
exhaustively investigated the system and built working models that would
show, irrefutably, that CF/LENR is real? In following this list I've read
about scores of theoretical systems and theories that it seems no one has
actually made work reliably and here you're claiming the Godes/McKubre
system not only works but works reliably!

 

Can anyone explain why this system isn't being refined and promoted at the
very least as proof of CF/LENR?

 

[mg]

On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:03 AM, Jed Rothwell 
wrote:

Alan J Fletcher  wrote:

 

Is this the first paper in which one group has reported100% success in
multiple tests (over 150)?

 

Yup, it may be. I do not recall seeing such a high success rate before.

 

There may have been a few poorly documented reports of 100% success that I
suspected were 100% instrument artifacts. I seem to recall some, but I do
not remember who made these claims. They did not publish a paper. I do not
remember uploading anything like that. I think I would remember it.

 

Normally I would be very suspicious of an effect that appears every time, on
demand. But when it comes from a a top-notch lab such as SRI I am not going
to worry about it.

 

- Jed

 

 

[Vo]:Scandal in Wikiland...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

FYI:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57514677-93/corruption-in-wikiland-paid-pr-
scandal-erupts-at-wikipedia/

 

.and this is probably more common than we think:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-19527797

 

As with anything on the net, if you want ALL the facts, you need to visit a
number of sites which are discussing a given issue and use them as a kind of
'debate', where each site has its own slant.  Reading the comment section
can also be quite helpful.

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:The Human Fauna

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I've been following Dr. Marshall's research for a few years now and I think
he's a pioneer in understanding just how microbes affect our health, and are
likely the cause for chronic conditions... and a treatment protocol.

http://www.trevormarshall.com/

He presents some clinical results here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rFmAMDdbjs
for multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, rheumatoid arthritis,
ankylosing spondylitis.

Autoimmune Research Foundation
http://autoimmunityresearch.org/

-Mark

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:48 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:The Human Fauna

And how important it is to health:

http://goo.gl/HAC8c

RE: [Vo]:The Human Fauna

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Here is a more detailed presentation about a specific metabolic pathway (the
Vitamin-D Receptor), and how its down-regulation, caused by the
incorporation of bacterial DNA into the human DNA, leads to various chronic
ailments:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2yEwnZy8B8


-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:49 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:The Human Fauna

I've been following Dr. Marshall's research for a few years now and I think
he's a pioneer in understanding just how microbes affect our health, and are
likely the cause for chronic conditions... and a treatment protocol.

http://www.trevormarshall.com/

He presents some clinical results here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rFmAMDdbjs
for multiple sclerosis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, rheumatoid arthritis,
ankylosing spondylitis.

Autoimmune Research Foundation
http://autoimmunityresearch.org/

-Mark

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 4:48 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:The Human Fauna

And how important it is to health:

http://goo.gl/HAC8c

[Vo]:FYI: article on Majorana particles...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

FYI:

 

Signature of long-sought particle that could revolutionize quantum computing

http://phys.org/news/2012-09-signature-long-sought-particle-revolutionize-qu
antum.html#nwlt

 

"A Purdue University physicist has observed evidence of long-sought Majorana
fermions.."

 

-mark iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:Good Alloy for Celani type reaction costs 5 cents : Chuck Sites

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

This is not bad news. this establishes a baseline if your calcs agree with a
conventional explanation.  If this or a subsequent test, whether the same or
somewhat modified, begins to show different results, then at least we have a
baseline to compare to. keep on it!!!

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Good Alloy for Celani type reaction costs 5 cents : Chuck
Sites

 

Unfortunately I have not seem any measurable rise above the electrolyte
temperature yet.  My experiment has been running for about 36 hours so far. 

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Alan J Fletcher 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Sep 27, 2012 6:18 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Good Alloy for Celani type reaction costs 5 cents : Chuck
Sites

At 02:18 PM 9/27/2012, David Roberson wrote:



I also placed my connections above the bath.  With Borax, they had to be
fairly close together to get 1 amp.  I estimate from memory about 1/2 inch
maximum.  


Thanks --- have you observed HOT NICKELS yet? 

RE: [Vo]:Ancient Stream found on Mars

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Don't think that's right Robin...
Water erosion of rocks produces rounded edges; wind erosion more angular
edges.

-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2012 8:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ancient Stream found on Mars

In reply to  Ron Kita's message of Thu, 27 Sep 2012 18:09:34 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
>Greetings Vortex-L,
>
>An ancient stream found on Mars:
>http://news.yahoo.com/mars-rover-curiosity-finds-signs-ancient-stream-1
>90805936.html

Dust blown in the wind will also round off sharp edges, especially if has
billions of years in which to do it.
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

RE: [Vo]:Open Source Papp Update

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Unless both Papp and the Rohners are engaging in disinformation... both are
telling us to use what doesn't work, and even specifically saying that H
doesn't work when in fact is the only gas that does work.
-mi

_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2012 3:02 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Open Source Papp Update


It's not exactly a proof of principle - and in fact it is closer to a
disproof of principle.

He gets little to no effect from the Noble gas mixture, but gets an
interesting effect from hydrogen. It is probably a hydrino effect. The
violet color is indicative of UV emission, which is the signature of the
Mill's f/H reaction.

Papp says over and over that he does not use hydrogen in his mix, and the
Rohner's agree. Therefore since hydrogen gives a rather strong effect, and
the Nobel gas mix gives almost none, by comparison, this amounts to a rather
compelling disproof of principle for Papp and/or a putative NGE.

Jones

From: Axil Axil 


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBWiWftGknI&list=UULuDKTNDFfat7iO7KGE7fQA&in
dex=1&feature=plcp

<>

RE: [Vo]:WLT Disproof

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I don't know Jones. I read it differently.

 

Unless there is some subtle sarcasm which is obscured by the jargon of
nuclear physics, at least they, being hot fusion mainstream physicists and
affiliated with CERN, have taken one of many LENR theories and provided
polite, professional criticism.  This is good, even if it raises concerns
for just one LENR hypothesis!  It may break down the 20+year impenetrable
wall put up by the few 'respectable' journals; might even cause authors to
resubmit papers to those journals.

 

Let me note a few specifics about the paper:

 

-  they actually stated several times that the W-L proposal is a
'very intriguing effect'.  Why use that verbiage in a scientific paper if
you really didn't think that?  If this isn't sarcasm, then they find W-L
intriguing. for mainstream nuclear physicists from CERN to be intrigued is a
good thing!

-  just after equation (1) is the statement,
"This process cannot, of course, take place in a Hydrogen atom in vacuum."
Are they thinking that W-L assumes this condition, or are they stating that
their analysis is NOT in a vacuum?  This is unclear.

-  After equation (6) they state,
"the proton localized in our lab and the electron on Mars. We present a
calculation of the rate of (1) done in two independent ways."
WTF?  I'll assume it's my lack of knowledge of nuclear physics that wonders
why the distance between Mars and their lab has anything to do with nuclear
physics! There has to be at least 20 orders of magnitude difference.
Perhaps it's a, 'Starting from an Infinite separation' sort of thing?

-  After equation (7) they state,
"where σ is the unpolarized cross section for process"
OK, so do that calculations and then look at the polarized condition.

-  After equation (10) they state, 
"the electron should be confined within its Compton radius, which is
completely unrealistic."
Is it all that unrealistic to propose that packing H/D atoms into a rigid
metal lattice could easily restrict the electron's radius?   I can see why
this would be 'unrealistic' in hot fusion; in plasmas where things are much
less dense and free to fly about.  But this is rigid condensed matter, so
does their analysis apply here?  
If it is realistic in vacuum conditions, then have they thought about the
space in microfractures which could provide that condition.

-  After equation (25) they state,
"Values of β (beta) of the order or even larger than twenty are certainly
unusual in condensed matter physics, especially for bound electrons."
Unusual, but not impossible.  They could have easily said 'highly unusual'
or some such verbiage, but they didn't.

-  Finally, the conclusion seems to indicate that there is some
remote possibilities which they feel might be possible, but to come to a
definitive conclusion would require a detailed analysis.
"it is questionable that values of β can be realized, in particular for
bound electrons, so large as to give rise to useful nuclear transmutation
rates.  A more detailed analysis of the attainable values of β is needed to
obtain more definite conclusions on this interesting phenomenon, should it
exist at all."

 

Again, they refer to it as an 'interesting' phenomenon. are they just being
polite here?  They could have just left that verbiage out, so I read this to
be they are truly intrigued by the W-L hypothesis, and although they see
some issues with it, they are intrigued by its 'framework' and feel it
worthwhile to explore in a more detailed manner.

 

I may have missed the sarcasm in this paper, but I think not, so it appears
to me to be a sincere and polite critique.  ***Isn't this what the LENR
community has asked for, for decades?***  Let's all hope now that it will
get published in a 'reputable' journal (likely, considering the authors'
affiliations?), ALONG WITH THE REBUTTAL.  With the attention and support
that LENR has had over the past few years, I seriously doubt that the
rebuttal would not be published.Can't wait to read it!

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2012 8:06 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:WLT Disproof

 

.merely 200x fewer neutrons . but that does present a "very strong
objection," no?

 

Even the guillotine did not provide instant death.

 

http://www.theguillotine.info/articles/livingheads.php

 

 

 

From: Daniel Rocha 

 

It doesn't rule out. They just find lower neutron production rates, which
are merely 200x smaller.

 

Gigi DiMarco wrote"

 

The following paper:

Low Energy Neutron Production by Inverse-beta decay in Metallic Hydride
Surfaces 

S. Ciuchi  , L.
Maiani  , A. D.
Polosa  , V.
Riquer  , G.
Ruocco 

[Vo]:Livermore Lab Ignition Facility's woes

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I don't have a subscription to Physics Today (no loss there), but an article
was published with the title:

"Ignition effort may be slowed as Livermore facility misses milestone",
David Kramer, October 2012, page 28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.1747

 

As one would expect from a mainstream rag, the title downplays the problems.
However, a quick search on the web led me to this article in August which
doesn't mince words:

http://www.sfgate.com/science/article/Livermore-Lab-Ignition-Facility-s-woes
-3797461.php

 

Contrast the wording in the mainstream press, 

"may be slowed", 

with the statements from the sfgate article, 

   "a new report by the U.S. Department of Energy, which oversees the
Livermore lab, now concludes that the probability that National Ignition
Facility leaders can meet this deadline [end of 2012] is "extremely low."

 

And this one,

   "A second report from the National Ignition Facility's own technical
review committee warns that deadlines for such complex experimental efforts
are 'unrealistic' because the project is working in a realm filled with many
scientific unknowns."

 

Like nearly all venues of reporting, even scientific news is subject to its
own slant, agenda, and half-truths.  Fortunately due to the internet, one
can quickly and easily search for and read opposing viewpoints to become
better informed.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:Relativistic magnetic field

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Just to make things even more confusing. see 

 

"Trouble with Maxwell's Electromagnetic Theory: 

Can Fields Induce Other Fields in Vacuum?"

http://vixra.org/pdf/1206.0083v4.pdf

 

Excerpt below.

-Mark

-

"In this work I will argue that the idea of electric and magnetic fields
inducing each other without the mediation of electrical charges is false
because it is not based on experimental evidence.  Pure electric fields,
varying or not, are not known to produce pure magnetic fields in regions of
space where electrical charges do not exist.  Neither are pure magnetic
fields known to produce, in regions of space where electrical charges do not
exist, pure electric fields.  It is only through the mediation of electric
charges and currents that these phenomena can happen.  I will take excerpts
from the works (mainly textbooks)

of authors who support the present day theory and I will point out where
their argument fails."

 

"What produces radio waves is known - rapidly changing electric currents in
a conductor. But what is not known with certainty is  how exactly radio
waves are generated from these changing electric currents, how the waves
detach themselves from the antenna and what radio waves really are when
traveling through space. These, I contend, are problems still open for
argument and will be discussed here."

-

 

From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2012 4:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Relativistic magnetic field

 

I was pondering something and wonder if anyone here has any insight on the
subject.

 

In a wire coil, an electric current consists of a slow movement of
electrons, the electric field from these charges though not detectable due
to the presence of the electric field from the protons, never the less fills
space both near and very very far from the wire.

But owing to the (slow) movement of the electrons through the wire a Lorentz
contraction takes place which changing the strength and shape of the
electric field, it is now no longer neatly countered by the static proton
field and what we term a magnetic field is born.

 

That was the long way of saying that the electron drift creates a magnetic
field due to relativistic effects, this is accepted conventional physics.

 

Now let's say we have a circuit that consists on a battery in series with 2
inductors also in series, one is composed of very fat wire and the other is
composed of extremely thin wire, possibly a different metal and possibly not
a metal but something with a much higher electron drift velocity, the ideal
of course would be some kind of vacuum tube where the electron velocity
could near the speed of light.

 

Now because these 2 inductors (well, coils) are in series the same current
must flow through each, which means that the same number of electrons must
flow through each of them.

Now magnetic fields are meant to be caused by Ampere Turns, both of these
inductors would have the same amps and could be given  the same number of
turns, so both should create equal magnetic fields.

 

This is curious for several reasons, first off the degree of pancaking (the
relativistic cause of the magnetic field) is very different and it seems
unlikely that this very real difference would lead to no notable difference
in some cases.

Also while the coil with the high drift speed electrons would at any time
have fewer electrons making it's field I find it a little odd that it would
not have a more powerful magnetic field.

 

The reason is that when we double the velocity of a mass we have 4 times the
energy, so if we have half the number of electrons travelling at twice the
speed (to create the same number of electrons past a point every second, the
same amps) we have still doubled the inertial energy tied up in moving those
electrons .vs the slower moving coil. (yes, electrons have very little mass)

 

If there is a difference, could this explain various anomalies?

I heard once that a coil of one metal somehow created a stronger field than
the same current through the same number of turns through a copper coil,
though I forget the metal it would have had a higher drift velocity.

I also recall someone I think on Vo long long ago saying that they could not
detect the expected magnetic field around a long flouro bulb compared to the
wiring leading up to it.

 

There are of course many possibilities of this turning up in Tesla coils (HV
and many thin turns) and various other systems that have had reports of
unusual effects.

 

I would assume that Ampere and the others who established this field,
established it from results primarily with copper coils of regular gauge
under mostly sustainable currents.

How much work has been done on magnetic fields from high drift speed
currents?

 

Of course a permanent magnet (or electromagnet with a steel core) creates
magnetic fields from various different high speed electron and prot

RE: [Vo]:A123 systems goes bankrupt

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Some Chinese company bought a 49% stake in A123 very recently, so is that in
addition to Johnson Controls???

-Mark

 

 

From: Jeff Berkowitz [mailto:pdx...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 10:16 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A123 systems goes bankrupt

 

I haven't followed this story carefully, but a friend of mine (who has)
wrote the following:

 

"Uh, you should look into A123 Systems, who started it and what they did
before criticizing them.  These guys developed and improved the Lithium Iron
Phosphate battery chemistry while at MIT, then spun out a startup company to
commercialize their advances.  They were chosen by GM to engineer and build
the Volt batteries.  These guys aren't some fly by night outfit who just
blew smoke up some government officials asses to get that loan.  They were a
prime startup candidate and had already received many millions of dollars in
venture capital backing.  And they are being purchased by Johnson Controls
for $125 Million, they have assets of $460 Million and debts of $376
Million, plus patents in the battery technology field.

 

It's disappointing to see stuff like this turned into a political football
for electioneering purposes.  And even more disappointing to see educated
people swallowing it whole..."

 

Jeff

 

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 7:04 AM, ChemE Stewart  wrote:

Before I started forecasting earthquakes, hurricanes and sinkholes I
predicted A123 was a loser.  I think Terry jumped in and told me they had
new investors and might be a great buy.  I hope he did not buy the stock...
They were providing Fisker's batteries, another colossal Obama losermobile
company.  If they go under too Justin Bieber might have to ride a bicycle to
work, which would be safer for everyone...

 

Stewart

Darkmattersalot.com

 

 

 

 

On Sun, Oct 21, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Alain Sepeda 
wrote:

Wgat is happening of the LiFePO4 battery family.
It was looking very promising. Robust Li batteries that don't explode even
under fire, crash or explosion... comparable energy density.  good power
density... good endurance... 
are there other palyes ?
did A123 battery division colapse too? or is it only the solar side?

(NB: I've been interested in LiFePO4 for hi-power bike lighting)



2012/10/21 

 

The great green solar and battery society that our goverment has put its
hopes on is going bankrupt one player at a time. 

 

I was going to buy A-123 stock.  I am glad I did not.

 

I was going to by Bezer Home for 30 cents a share,  I could

kick myself to missing 80 times my investment.

 

Who knows!  Maybe someday I'll get lucky.  

 

Frank Z

 

 

 

[Vo]:Hypothetical 'quantum harmonic oscillator' not so hypothetical

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

FYI:

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-neutron-unprecedented-quantum-oscillations.html
#nwlt

 

NOTE that the quantum in this case is 50meV (small 'm').

 

-Mark Iverson

 

-  now to quote excerpts from the article --

Researchers at the Department of Energy's Oak Ridge National Laboratory have
found that nitrogen atoms in the compound uranium nitride exhibit
unexpected, distinct vibrations that form a nearly ideal realization of a
physics textbook model known as the isotropic quantum harmonic oscillator. 

 

In the experiment on the uranium nitride crystal-with each of the light
nitrogen atoms centered in a cage of heavier uranium atoms-neutron
scattering at ORNL's Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) revealed an unexpected
series of distinct and evenly spaced oscillations: The nitrogen atom
vibrates like a molecular-level ball on a spring.

 

"Students of physics are familiar with this idealized quantum 'mass on a
spring,' but it is very unexpected to find such a precise literal version of
this theoretical model in a real experiment," said Steve Nagler, director of
ORNL's Quantum Condensed Matter Division of the Neutron Sciences Directorate
and a co-author on the paper, published in the journal Nature
Communications.

 

The new data, obtained using SNS's wide angular-range chopper spectrometer
(ARCS) and fine-resolution Fermi chopper spectrometer (SEQUOIA) instruments,
revealed up to 10 equally spaced energy levels [quantized in 50 meV lumps]
corresponding to oscillations of individual nitrogen atoms in different
quantum states. The team was "astonished" to find this series of high-energy
vibrational modes in uranium nitride-particularly in an experiment that
originally set out to investigate magnetism in the material.

 

"We learn about the quantum harmonic oscillator in undergraduate physics
courses, but you never believe you will find such a good example in nature,"
said Adam Aczel, a postdoctoral fellow within the Quantum Condensed Matter
Division and lead author on the paper.

RE: [Vo]:Hypothetical 'quantum harmonic oscillator' not so hypothetical

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Jones:

Don't think its 50meV/atom, but the same atom excited to different energy
levels.

 

RE: of mtns and molehills.

.and a butterfly's flapping in California causes a monsoon in India.

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:03 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hypothetical 'quantum harmonic oscillator' not so
hypothetical

 

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 

 

FYI:

http://phys.org/news/2012-10-neutron-unprecedented-quantum-oscillations.html
#nwlt

 

NOTE that the quantum in this case is 50meV (small 'm').

 

Even so, if it were 50meV of actual gain per atom, which it isn't, then a
mole of the nitrogen oscillations gives one a pretty impressive coherent
"wiggle." Not to mention. being coherent, the radiation could be useful for
certain things - and it would not be a surprise if this will be or has been
considered for  . well . cough, cough . maybe an n-ray laser J

 

Talk about making a mountain out of molehill..

 

 

RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave,

Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized
water?

-mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

 

That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel.  Jack, I will follow
your procedure  after I complete a couple of experiments. 

 

I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further.  I
acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC
current periodically to see how the coatings behaved.   I let current flow
until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then
reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction.
This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles.  Initially, a green
coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then
flaked off by the reverse current.  A significant amount of green material
was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking.

 

The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from
the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing.  The
resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I
write.  The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish
as typical.

 

This post is a quick update.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Chuck Sites 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

Jack,  that is just about right.   

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:

Dear Dave, 

 

You wrote:

Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the
CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the
nickel surface selectively?  It might be possible to selectively erode the
copper leaving NAE in large quantities.

 

I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as
the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper.
The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch.  

 

My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours.
Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch.  Then slow treat with hydrogen as
the cathode and low current DC for a few days.  Then switch to AC.

 

With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off.  But I
have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some
of the surfaces of the nickels.

 

Take care,

Jack 

 

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days
and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting.  I performed a
small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing
electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green
coating that was so evident with DC.  Instead, there was a jet black coating
being formed upon the nickels.  Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green
coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel
connected to the positive terminal.  I allowed this process to continue for
a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish
looking finish where the old coatings were.  This finish has a rough
appearance. 

 

So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC
drive in this system.  I can definitely see boiling electrolyte temperatures
between the two nickels with AC drive while far fewer bubbles of gas are
released by the active mechanisms as compared to DC drive.  With AC, the
effective resistance of the combination remains much lower than with DC
current.  The high resistance appears to correspond with the deposition of
the green coating that follows DC current flow.

 

My present transformer will not allow me to achieve the 100-140 volt drive
levels so that would have to be achieved by some other means.  I have a few
ideas regarding the use of an adjustable transformer, but that would be
difficult to handle.  I do not feel comfortable with direct connection by
metallic path to the AC mains.  It would be too easy to become electrocuted
with one careless maneuver.

 

My AC RMS voltage is 21 volts for these tests so the resistance must remain
less than 10 ohms between the terminals if I am to drive the system with 2
amps of current.  I am able to achieve this goal without too much difficulty
when the green coating is absent.  I need to perform more experimentation
with this combination.

 

The salts you suspect are interesting.  Do you suspect that the normal
oxides of the nickel and copper are suppressed?  Also, I am not aware of any
visual change to the surface of the nickel if hydrogen has entered.  Would
anyone expect a color change or other indication when this happens?

 

I would love to see the glow that Horace mentions and perhaps 

RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I asked because as 'clean and pure' as you might think your tap water is,
there's a lot of minerals and other stuff that will likely be attracted to
your electrodes.

 

What's the difference between distilled and deionized?

 
http://www.distilleddeionizedwater.com/deionized-water-vs-distilled-water/ 

 

"Deionized water is deeply demineralized, ultrapure water with the
resistivity close to 18 megohm-cm. It is used in microelectronics, printed
circuit boards, instrument manufacture, pharmacy, washing liquids, etc."

 

Most supermarkets have some kind of distilled water (commonly used in steam
irons).

 

Deionized water can be obtained from any chemical supply house.

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2012 10:11 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

 

Hello Mark, 

 

I have been using regular tap water.  Your question makes me reconsider the
alternatives.  Where can I find a source for distilled water that is readily
available?

 

I assumed that the large quantity of Borax or other electrolyte would
dominate the reaction and the water at my location is of excellent quality
and exhibits an extremely large impedance until the powders are added.

 

Dave



-----Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Oct 26, 2012 1:43 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

Dave,

Sorry if I missed it, but are you using tap water, or distilled/deionized
water?

-mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?>
] 
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 9:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

 

That appears like a pretty good process for the nickel.  Jack, I will follow
your procedure  after I complete a couple of experiments. 

 

I tried something interesting today that I plan to investigate further.  I
acted like a manual switch for a couple of nickels where I reversed the DC
current periodically to see how the coatings behaved.   I let current flow
until the resistance reached about 50 ohms in one direction and then
reversed the current until the same value was seen in the other direction.
This procedure was carried out for about 5 cycles.  Initially, a green
coating was deposited upon the positively connected nickel which was then
flaked off by the reverse current.  A significant amount of green material
was deposited within my electrolyte due to the cyclic coating and flaking.

 

The AC was then applied and I noticed that very little gas was escaping from
the electrodes even though a current of 1 to 2 amps was flowing.  The
resistance remained low during the AC testing which is in process as I
write.  The electrolyte evaporated twice to a level that had to be replenish
as typical.

 

This post is a quick update.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Chuck Sites 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Oct 25, 2012 11:33 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Experiment Started

Jack,  that is just about right.   

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 4:27 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:

Dear Dave, 

 

You wrote:

Chuck, have you given consideration to some process that might treat the
CuB2O3 or NiB2O3 differently so that the copper might be taken away from the
nickel surface selectively?  It might be possible to selectively erode the
copper leaving NAE in large quantities.

 

I think you can get this with the oxidization process with using a nickel as
the anode with DC for a couple of hours to form the green oxidized copper.
The green oxidized copper can then be burned off with a torch.  

 

My approach has been to first use the nicked as an anode for 1 to 2 hours.
Burn off the oxidized copper with a torch.  Then slow treat with hydrogen as
the cathode and low current DC for a few days.  Then switch to AC.

 

With respect to the B2O3, I've found that most of this will burn off.  But I
have some that simply melted into a transparent clear blob adhering to some
of the surfaces of the nickels.

 

Take care,

Jack 

 

On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 2:10 PM, David Roberson  wrote:

Thanks Chuck, the experimentation has been going on now for a couple of days
and I did notice unusual behavior that I was not expecting.  I performed a
small experiment using AC with new nickels that had not been undergoing
electrolysis at any time and saw that they did not show any of the green
coating that was so evident with DC.  Instead, there was a jet black coating
being formed upon the nickels.  Then, I applied DC to my cell and a green
coating began to form over top of the previous black coating upon the nickel
connected to the positive terminal.  I allowed this process to continue for
a few hours and then scraped off the net coating to get a orange copperish
looking finish where the old coatings were.  This finish has a rough
appearance. 

 

So far the bottom line is that AC drive behaves far differently than DC
drive in this system.  I can defini

RE: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Hi Dave,

EQ prediction is possible with very low frequency geomagnetic monitoring.

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg47319.html

Is it any surprise that when the earth fractures, or is under stress to the
point of fracture, it causes disturbances in its mag-field?  

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 3:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

 

If prediction of earthquakes were a solid accurate science then perhaps they
should be punished, but that is clearly not the situation.  No one has been
able to reliably make such a prediction with anything that resembles
regularity so these poor guys should not be held in too much disregard.  I
think that it would be prudent to ask ones self how many times has a series
of small quakes occurred when a major event did not follow up?  Throwing the
dice would likely be as accurate as quake science is currently in this
field. 

 

Anyone is capable of predicting that a major earthquake is going to occur in
California soon.  The pattern has been established if you look at the
behavior of the "ring of fire".  Should everyone evacuate the area because
of the danger?  Who should we incarcerate when it happens?

 

Dave

RE: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave wrote:

“If your friend has discovered a simple trick that works, he should be ready to 
demonstrate it to these guys.  Please do not tell me that EQ geologists behave 
like physicists when the subject of LENR is brought up.”

 

The technique was actually developed by Elizabeth Rauscher and Bill Van Bise… 
they used to live here in Reno many years ago and my friend and I visited with 
them several times.

 

Yes, I’m sad to say that at least some EQ geologists behave just like 
physicists…

 

I think Rauscher and van Bise published over in Japan; I know they at least 
presented the results at a conference there since she gave me a copy of the 
paper.  They used three identical antennas and multiple locations to get the 3D 
vectors of the geomag-fld, and felt that it was possible to at least 
triangulate to the region where the geomagnetic disturbances were occurring.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 1:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

 

That is quite a story Mark.  I am not sure why the magnetic field was modulated 
prior to an EQ but I could readily expect that behavior during one.  The 
measurements your friend performed might have indicated that movement of the 
earth was slowly occurring over a very large fault distance and I have read 
somewhere long ago that slow creep of the fault sides happens sometimes. 

 

The problem of knowing when these movements precede large quakes seems to be 
difficult to pin down.  Crying wolf too many times is not good for your health!

 

I know that many knowledgeable geologists have been seeking a technique to 
predict dangerous quakes for many years but they suggest that none has been 
found.  If your friend has discovered a simple trick that works, he should be 
ready to demonstrate it to these guys.  Please do not tell me that EQ 
geologists behave like physicists when the subject of LENR is brought up.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Oct 30, 2012 11:44 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

Hi Dave,

EQ prediction is possible with very low frequency geomagnetic monitoring…

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg47319.html

Is it any surprise that when the earth fractures, or is under stress to the 
point of fracture, it causes disturbances in its mag-field?  

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?> ] 
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2012 3:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mischaracterizations of verdict against seismologists.

 

If prediction of earthquakes were a solid accurate science then perhaps they 
should be punished, but that is clearly not the situation.  No one has been 
able to reliably make such a prediction with anything that resembles regularity 
so these poor guys should not be held in too much disregard.  I think that it 
would be prudent to ask ones self how many times has a series of small quakes 
occurred when a major event did not follow up?  Throwing the dice would likely 
be as accurate as quake science is currently in this field. 

 

Anyone is capable of predicting that a major earthquake is going to occur in 
California soon.  The pattern has been established if you look at the behavior 
of the "ring of fire".  Should everyone evacuate the area because of the 
danger?  Who should we incarcerate when it happens?

 

Dave

RE: [Vo]:The Quantum Soul?

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

John Berry wrote:

"Based on research and experimentation I am doing it is clear to me that
quantum waves aren't just probability waves but are real waves in an actual
gas/fluid/superfluid aether."

 

Do tell John.

Many Vorts love new hypotheses, especially when they have some data to go
along with them.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: John Berry [mailto:berry.joh...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 10:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The Quantum Soul?

 

Since there have been results of consciousness effecting quantum level
events multiple times, why should it be so absurd.

 

Based on research and experimentation I am doing it is clear to me that
quantum waves aren't just probability waves but are real waves in an actual
gas/fluid/superfluid aether.

 

And while most Vorts would probably be unable to get their minds around
this, it really does explain everything very neatly.

 

 

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 1:25 PM, Terry Blanton  wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Giovanni Santostasi
>  wrote:
>
>> Orch-OR is not the best theory of consciousness.
>
> So, who wins that prize?

Well, while we await Giovanni's response, for those Vorts interested
in the development of the concept, here is a list archive that I
followed for years:

http://listserv.arizona.edu/archives/quantum-mind/

Start at the bottom and just peruse the list and you will see famous
and infamous physicists and philosophers who participated in the
discussions.

I found it absolutely fascinating.

 

RE: [Vo]:[OT] Vote for Mitt Romney If You Want Cold Fusion

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Adrian,
Why don't you go live in Israel for the next year or two... I think you need
to see it from their perspective.
With the nutcase in Iran stating over and over in public, even when speaking
at the UN, that he is working toward the annihilation of Israel, you might
well start to look at it from Israel's point of view.  How ANY country's
leader could make those kinds of statements in the modern world, and not get
shunned by the world community is unbelieveable...
-Mark Iverson  

-Original Message-
From: a.ashfield [mailto:a.ashfi...@verizon.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 10:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Vote for Mitt Romney If You Want Cold Fusion

It doesn't matter much what either candidate says, they will follow the
advice of DoE or NASA.  DoE in particular STILL don't think ELNR happens.
At least that is their current official position.
See what I wrote here
http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2012/08/20/opinion/doc50319a7792549847984
557.txt?viewmode=fullstory

The problem with voting for Romney as that he is much more likely to get us
into war in the Middle East.  He is Netanyahu's pal don't forget.

Adrian Ashfield

RE: [Vo]:Amusing analysis of CF/LENR in the world

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Pretty good summary of the 'players' in this game.

 

Given the cleverness (aka, deviousness) of the human animal, and the very
high stakes that LENR involves, I think anything you can imagine happening
has or will play out. 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Jeff Berkowitz [mailto:pdx...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 8:21 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Amusing analysis of CF/LENR in the world

 

I have a friend, very smart guy, who I've been working on over time with
occasional CF/LENR tidbits and arguments. Lately he wrote this, and gave me
permission to send it along.

 

- - -

 

So, let's identify all the groups involved here, from the seekers to the
suckers. :-) 

We have the seekers, people like Jeff who think this just might be real,
more likely than not that LENR can be used for some good, but are aware of
all the hucksters out there.

We have the hopefuls, like me, that hope it can be found but don't have a
whole lot of faith, will be tickled to death (by a large neutron beam) if it
is found to be possible.

We have the sloppy scientists who want it to be true but are so sloppy in
their work they can't tell, but claim they have actually done it and are
open about how.  Some want investors, some don't.  Some scientists can't
reproduce the results, other sloppy scientists can sort of on occasion tend
to kinda verify the results.

We have the hucksters (used to sell water powered cars) who claim to be able
to do it, but always leave out some details so no one can actually try to
reproduce their results.  They want investors!  They almost exclusively have
something they are putting energy into and claim to be  getting more out
(says the math).

We have the naysayer scientists who just know it isn't possible, and dismiss
anything without such inspection, just as I wouldn't spend too much time
looking over a new perpetual motion machine.  Can't be done, don't waste
anyone's time.

We may have the evil forces of the current energy cartel that want us to buy
their gasoline and coal, the same guys that bought and buried the 150 MPG
carburetor.  They want no discussion

And last, we may have the good scientists that really have found how to do
this, and are fighting their way through all the "bad press" the sloppies
and the hucksters create.  Can't speak in public forums because they have
been tarred with the same brush used on the hucksters.

I think that's it?  Who do you think shuts down discussions -- the naysayers
or the evil forces?   Do you think they even go so far as to spawn hucksters
to help discredit the whole field?

 

- - -

 

Jeff

 

[Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

FYI:  they're beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times
here, you don't need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just
a wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase).

 

http://phys.org/news/2012-11-supercharge-atoms-x-ray-laser.html

Just as a stretched guitar string can vibrate and sustain a note, a specific
tuning of the laser's properties can cause atoms and molecules to resonate.
The resonance excites the atoms and causes them to shake off electrons at a
rate that otherwise would require higher energies.

 

While it is common knowledge that triggering resonances in atoms will affect
their charged states, "it was not clear to anybody what a dramatic effect
this could have in heavy atoms when they are being ionized by a source like
LCLS," Rolles said. "It was the highest charge state ever observed with a
single X-ray pulse, which shows that the existing theoretical approaches
have to be modified."

 

"Ultra-efficient ionization of heavy atoms by intense X-ray free-electron
laser pulses"

Abstract from published paper:

http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphoton.2012.261.ht
ml

 

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Another problem Terry is that if one is using a source that is a subharmonic
then you cannot hit it with a continuous train of EM; you have to use
pulses, as they did in this experiment.

-mark iverson

 

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

 

 

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

FYI:  they're beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times
here, you don't need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just
a wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase).

 

 

Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius

triggers in the H2 atom.  

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Another thing that has confused the situation is the difference of how
frequency is represented as one goes to higher and higher frequencies in the
EM spectrum… it uses Hertz up to microwave/millimeterwave frequencies; but
then changes to 'wave number' when it gets into optical frequencies…  maybe
this will help:

Name Wavelength Frequency (Hz)Photon Energy (eV)
Gamma rayless than 0.01nm   >10 EHZ  100keV - 300+  GeV
X-Ray 0.01 nm to 10 nm   30 EHz - 30 PHZ 120 eV - 120   keV
Ultraviolet  10 nm - 390 nm  30 PHZ - 790 THz  3 eV - 124eV
Visible 390 nm - 750 nm 790 THz - 405 THz  1.7   eV -   3.3  eV
Infrared750 nm - 1 mm   405 THz - 300 GHz  1.24 meV -   1.7  eV
Microwave 1 mm - 1 meter300 GHz - 300 MHz  1.24 µeV -   1.24meV
Radio 1  m - 100,000km  300 GHz -   3  Hz 12.4  feV -   1.24meV


From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into
their think collective theoretical skulls!


On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:
FYI:  they’re beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times
here, you don’t need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just
a wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase)…


Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius
triggers in the H2 atom.  

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

It might not be as simple as 350degs. if applied continuously as the heat
is, then exact frequencies are essential, thus, one probably needs something
like 350.01282874934 degs!

-mark iverson

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

 

 

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

FYI:  they're beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times
here, you don't need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just
a wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase).

 

 

Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius

triggers in the H2 atom.  

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I don’t think this experiment would fit into that explanation though, would it? 
 This was a coherent laser source at a specific energy (aka, frequency) of 
1.5kev. 

 

Regardless of how the heat is being applied (cond, conv, rad) in something like 
the eCAT, it ultimately ends up in lattice vibrations… which are nothing more 
than quantums of heat randomly being ejected from one atom into another.

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:26 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

If you actually apply heat as in joule heating, the energy covers a wide range 
of frequencies.  There is a limited amount at any one narrow band, but all of 
the bands have at least a small amount. 

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 14, 2012 10:55 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

It might not be as simple as 350degs… if applied continuously as the heat is, 
then exact frequencies are essential, thus, one probably needs something like 
350.01282874934 degs!

-mark iverson

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com <mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com?> ] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

 

 

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:

FYI:  they’re beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times 
here, you don’t need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just a 
wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase)…

 

 

Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius

triggers in the H2 atom.  

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Here’s the excerpt from the abstract:

“we report an unprecedentedly high degree of ionization of xenon atoms by 1.5 
keV free-electron laser pulses to charge states with ionization energies far 
exceeding the photon energy.”

 

Also keep in mind that this is a coherent light source…  

 

Wonder if it’d have the same effect if they simple rotated the barrel 90 
degrees?

-Mark

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:06 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

I don’t think this experiment would fit into that explanation though, would it? 
 This was a coherent laser source at a specific energy (aka, frequency) of 
1.5kev. 

 

Regardless of how the heat is being applied (cond, conv, rad) in something like 
the eCAT, it ultimately ends up in lattice vibrations… which are nothing more 
than quantums of heat randomly being ejected from one atom into another.

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:26 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

If you actually apply heat as in joule heating, the energy covers a wide range 
of frequencies.  There is a limited amount at any one narrow band, but all of 
the bands have at least a small amount. 

 

Dave

-Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 14, 2012 10:55 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

It might not be as simple as 350degs… if applied continuously as the heat is, 
then exact frequencies are essential, thus, one probably needs something like 
350.01282874934 degs!

-mark iverson

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com <mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com?> ] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

 

 

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:

FYI:  they’re beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times 
here, you don’t need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just a 
wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase)…

 

 

Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius

triggers in the H2 atom.  

 

RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into their think collective theoretical skulls!

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

There’s “Supplemental Info”, which is a freely downloadable PDF…

 

http://www.nature.com/nphoton/journal/vaop/ncurrent/extref/nphoton.2012.261-s1.pdf

 

-mark

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

Here’s the excerpt from the abstract:

“we report an unprecedentedly high degree of ionization of xenon atoms by 1.5 
keV free-electron laser pulses to charge states with ionization energies far 
exceeding the photon energy.”

 

Also keep in mind that this is a coherent light source…  

 

Wonder if it’d have the same effect if they simple rotated the barrel 90 
degrees?

-Mark

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 10:06 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

I don’t think this experiment would fit into that explanation though, would it? 
 This was a coherent laser source at a specific energy (aka, frequency) of 
1.5kev. 

 

Regardless of how the heat is being applied (cond, conv, rad) in something like 
the eCAT, it ultimately ends up in lattice vibrations… which are nothing more 
than quantums of heat randomly being ejected from one atom into another.

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:26 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

If you actually apply heat as in joule heating, the energy covers a wide range 
of frequencies.  There is a limited amount at any one narrow band, but all of 
the bands have at least a small amount. 

 

Dave

-Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 14, 2012 10:55 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

It might not be as simple as 350degs… if applied continuously as the heat is, 
then exact frequencies are essential, thus, one probably needs something like 
350.01282874934 degs!

-mark iverson

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com <mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com?> ] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 6:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:FYI: its all about resonances... it's finally getting into 
their think collective theoretical skulls!

 

 

 

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:26 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:

FYI:  they’re beginning to discover that, as I have expressed several times 
here, you don’t need to hit an atom with a sledgehammer to ionize it.  Just a 
wee bit of energy at the right frequency and timing (phase)…

 

 

Indeed.  So, look at what frequency 350 deg Celsius

triggers in the H2 atom.  

 

RE: [Vo]:Engineering varying LENR reaction strengths.

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Axil:

 

The figure of 1 you gave for permittivity, is relative permittivity.

The absolute figure is  8.854187817 × 10^−12 F/m  (Farads/meter)

 

-mark

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2012 3:06 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:Engineering varying LENR reaction strengths.

 

Engineering varying LENR reaction strengths.  

The plasmoid is another engineering mechanism that can be added to the design 
of a LENR system to increase the intensity of power production by amplifying 
long duration electric charge separation. 

This charge separation is the underlying cause of LENR reactions, either as a 
consequence of charge masking of the coulomb barrier and/or the reduction of 
the permittivity of space far below the norm of 1.

IMHO, experimentation conducted over the years associated with the LENR 
reaction makes it apparent that there is a direct relationship between the 
various LENR reaction engineering tools applied to produce charge separation 
and the variation in the strength of the LENR reaction.

This LENR reaction strength is directly proportional to the level of charge 
separation  intensity that can be achieved in the various implantations of the 
LENR systems.

For example, Deuterium/palladium systems have low LENR reaction level because 
palladium supports relatively few absorbed hydrogen ions. 

In this low strength regime, the LENR reaction becomes apparent when the 
loading of ions goes beyond a certain loading level (.7)

The same is true in the nickel/hydrogen systems.

These hydrogen ion reactions can be strengthened with the addition of various 
externally applied catalytic ionic clusters.

Still further LENR reaction strengthening can be achieved when plasmoids are 
added as a product of burst high current spark discharges that include currents 
of catalytic ionic clusters providing a positive nucleus surrounded with a 
cloud of electron currents.

When coupled with plasmoid production, such cluster generation catalysts such 
as water, Potassium, Cesium, Krypton, Argon, and Xenon are used as ionic 
cluster producing reaction enhancers.

Combining all these various types of Plasmoid enabled cluster based LENR system 
tools has produce the most powerful LENR reactions so far engineered.

 

 

Cheers:   Axil




 

RE: [Vo]:NASA: We think we found something . . .

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

"... but it will be weeks before we can tell you"

Sounds like a little bit of Rossi has rubbed off on NASA...

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 10:12 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:NASA: We think we found something . . .

. . . but it will be weeks before we can tell you:

http://www.npr.org/2012/11/20/165513016/big-news-from-mars-rover-scientists-
mum-for-now

(I hate it when they do that!)

RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not nuclear

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I just remembered something that ties in with the 430Khz. and anomalous
effects with water and piezos.

 

When I was involved with the International Tesla Society back in the 80s, we
would meet once a month to discuss fringe topics, and a few of the group
were hacking together some experiments. nothing earth shattering ever came
of their work that I know of.

 

One of the regulars was a very introverted guy, physics degree, who was
quite intelligent; worked in the semiconductor industry.  He told us about
something he'd heard of a way to 'aetherize' water. went from liquid to
'nothing' w/o boiling. Had to use a fused quartz cylindrical tube (6"L by
~1.5" I.D.), water (pure?), 500+W signal generator hooked up to piezo
transducer which was glued/epoxied to one open end of the quartz tube.  Fill
tube with water, but had to calc the wavelength of the sound wave and keep
the water level at least at a multiple of the wavelength. what was the
frequency  ~41Khz to 43Khz!  Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

 

Could it be done at any frequency so long as the height of the water column
was a multiple of the wavelength of the sound waves generated by the piezo
transducer?  Don't think so. but we never got as far as trying it.  I moved
out of the area and shortly thereafter the Tesla Society went belly-up.
Never heard anything more about it.

 

Oh, the story was that it wasn't a good idea to put your hand over the
quartz tube when operating.. When the water 'aetherized', it pretty much
instantly disappeared from the quartz tube, apparently as an
'aether-bullet', and put a hole thru whatever was in the 'line of fire'
(e.g., the ceiling and roof).  yeah, that's what I thought too, but the vids
that Jones posted about Davey and WITTS, makes me wonder if that spherical
stainless steel contraption is somewhat related. just slightly out-of-tune
so as not to aetherize the water.

 

It's all about resonance.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 2:10 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Steven Jones: Excess heat is real, but probably not
nuclear

 

Curiously, 430 kHz is also in the range which is considered to be
ultrasound.

 

That frequency turns up as a signature of one form of LENR, according to
recent revelations - and it would be a mistake to over-generalize from that
alone; but . there are a number of principles of reciprocity which turn up
in electromagnetism, so it is not at stretch to imagine that this frequency
would be of interest when used as input. 

 

From: David Roberson 

 

Thinking of acousticsIf the hemispheres are very accurately machined
then any ultrasonic excitement of the surface that is symmetrical will form
waves that collide at the center of the device.  

 

[Vo]:FYI: DOE funding being moved from Hi-E physics to new projects

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Science

23 November 2012: 

Vol. 338  no. 6110  p. 1017 

News & Analysis

High-Energy Physics

DOE Shifts Money From Research Grants to New Projects

Adrian Cho 

 

The U.S. Department of Energy has decided to cut funding for high-energy
physics research to free up money for new projects. The shift will reduce
the number of researchers it supports on the teams working with the world's
largest atom smasher-the Large Hadron Collider at the European particle
physics laboratory, CERN.



 

Let's hope that a significant chunk of that is going into LENR work!!!

 

-Mark Iverson

 

RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Time travelling at the movies

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Very interesting Terry!!
And there is much more evidence of anomalous 'history' about the human
species and its presence on the planet.
Read "Forbidden Archeology" or the condensed version, "Hidden History of the
Human Race"

This is a comment from the Amazon.com page on Hidden History... 
and this is from a geologist!


In a sentence: If even a small part of this is true it turns evolution on
its ear.

I was given this book by a friend for no particular reason and immediately
scoffed at it. As a geologist, I had learned quite a bit about evolution and
the filtered information regarding the "accepted" evidence. I eventually
started reading it and what I read in this book makes my hair stand on end.
The lack of documentation regarding "true" discoveries of human antiquity by
the elite of archeology and anthropology is as astounding as the categorical
dismissal of other evidence is deplorable. To dismiss evidence of greater
antiquity of man because it doesn't fit existing data and "just can't be" is
a tragedy of the ages. Makes me wonder how much of this goes on in my own
profession.


The real point is that 'ALL' of the evidence should be openly displayed and
discussed and studied, not just what some elite scholar or museum
administrator thinks we should see.

Also more support for how LENR was suppressed... it's really the norm for
science when the evidence is way outside the paradigm.

-Mark

[Vo]:microelectronic radiation dosimeter

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

For those of you wanting to build your own radiation detector.

 

http://www.teledynemicro.com/space/space_micro_dosimeter.asp

 

With a footprint of 1.4" x 1.0" x 0.040" and a total weight of 20 grams,
Teledyne Microelectronics' new Class "K" Space qualified radiation Micro
Dosimeter is the smallest, lightest radiation measurement device on the
market today. 

 

Measures

*   Electrons
*   Protons
*   Cosmic Rays
*   Gamma Rays
*   X-Rays

Don't know the cost, but it probably ain't cheap.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

[Vo]:New way to look at electron orbital filling and the periodic table...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

For those chemists out there.

 

http://vixra.org/pdf/1211.0158v1.pdf

 

-Mark Iverson

 

[Vo]:Tesla still inspiring from the grave

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Tesla-inspired bladeless ceiling fan, crowdfunded, the internet at its best.
who needs governments or large corporations!

 

http://exhalefans.com/see_the_innovation.html

 

-Mark

[Vo]:RE: [Vo]:[Defkalion GT] "Το ΒΗΜΑ-science" article of December 2nd, 2012 (in English)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I saved the PDF as well...
-mark

-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa [mailto:shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 3:34 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[Defkalion GT] "Το ΒΗΜΑ-science" article of December 2nd, 
2012 (in English)

On 2012-12-04 23:34, Terry Blanton wrote:

> Well, well.  When I go to their site I see a page announcing a new web 
> site coming "soon".
>
> Did you save the .pdf?  If you could send to me I can post on google 
> docs.  Or you could if you do that sort of thing.

I expected that something like this would happen sooner or later, so I saved a 
copy as soon as I displayed the pdf in my web browser:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ebiqjspd3qkiywo/20121102_Cold%20fusion%20-ENG.pdf?m

Cheers,
S.A.

RE: [Vo]:What is SRI (Stanford Research Institute)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Alain,

SRI International is a nonprofit research institute established by Stanford
University in 1946.

Mike McKubre works there.

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SRI_International

 

-Mark Iverson

 

 

From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com [mailto:alain.coetm...@gmail.com] On Behalf
Of Alain Sepeda
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 1:02 PM
To: Vortex List
Subject: [Vo]:What is SRI (Stanford Research Institute)

 

Hi,

I have followed the adventure of Brillouin, and heard of SRI...
For what i understand SRI is an innovation "incubator" of research results,
which is special because it does not reject LENR without looking...
I have heard other saying that it was created at the begining of CF
controversy to host the cold fusion research at stanford...


Can you all precise me what is the legal status, the real activity, and the
history of SRI...

Is it possible to say that it is simply a research group helping to create
innovation startup on many domains...
or rather that is is a more specific group...

By the way whar are the exactlink with McKubre, and Brillouin.
It seems McKubre is member of SRI and Brillouin use SRI competente for test,
and now investments...

Thanks for all, because I think it will be interesting for others too...

RE: [Vo]:oops

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Time to get the tin-foil hats out of storage...
;-)
-Mark

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 7:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:oops

Well... Not sure how much faith to put into this kind of story, but the sad
part is that the military could do this kind of R&D - whereas the energy
sector could not even think about it due to cost and interference from
special interests - so there are scary implications that demonstrate the
kind of mess this country in.

Curious that they surmise that the missile payload is a "super-powerful
microwave" oven. Geeze, why not use that kind of power supply for LENR, or
hot fusion, or subcritical fission - instead of mischief (knocking out a
bunch of antique computers)?



-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 

No longer bogosity:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2241525/The-Boeing-blitzing-d
rone-cripple-nations-electronics.html

"Down the years and across the universe, the heroes of science-fiction
classics from Dan Dare to Star Wars and The Matrix have fought intergalactic
battles with weapons that wipe out enemy electronics at the touch of a
button.

Now scientists have turned fantasy into reality by developing a missile that
targets buildings with microwaves that disable computers but don't harm
people.

Aircraft manufacturer Boeing successfully tested the weapon on a one-hour
flight during which  it knocked out the computers of an entire military
compound in the Utah desert."

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Interesting - yes. Bogosity index - extreme.
>
>
>
> A tomahawk cruise missile leaves no massive contrail. Most experts 
> agreed the amount of visible vapor was either coming from a solid fuel 
> rocket or
a
> large jet. The contrail from a cruise missile would be two orders of 
> magnitude less visible, based on the fuel burned and it would be lower 
> on the horizon.
>
>
>
> A blogger did find a commercial flight that could have been 
> responsible,
but
> why this info did not immediately come from the FAA is a mystery. 
> Another blogger suggested it was Meg Whitman's reaction to the final 
> bill from her campaign ..
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Terry Blanton
>
>
>
> This is a far more interesting explanation:
>
>
>
> Chinese EMP Attack Prompts US Missile Strike After Cruise Ship 
> Crippled
>
>
>
> http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1421.htm
>
>
>
>
>
> T

RE: [Vo]:oops

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

>From the article, the damage to the electronics is permanent.

My understanding is that the intense MW EM induces large voltage transients
inside the ICs, probably causing dielectric breakdown or discharges inside
it, ultimately 'frying the chip'. 

 

Oh, the Al-foil hats are for my computers, test equipment and cell phone,
not me!  ;-)

 

-Mark

 

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 9:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:oops

 

Your suggestion to put on the aluminum hats begs a few questions.  What is
the instantaneous output power of the emitter?  How many joules of energy
would be deposited into that hat of yours due to this device?  Is the damage
to the electronics permanent or does it just cause a reset?  If the damage
is permanent, why? 

 

I could think of many more questions, but I have a feeling that there are
going to be few answers submitted.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Thu, Dec 6, 2012 12:24 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:oops

Time to get the tin-foil hats out of storage...
;-)
-Mark
 
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net <mailto:jone...@pacbell.net?>
] 
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2012 7:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:oops
 
Well... Not sure how much faith to put into this kind of story, but the sad
part is that the military could do this kind of R&D - whereas the energy
sector could not even think about it due to cost and interference from
special interests - so there are scary implications that demonstrate the
kind of mess this country in.
 
Curious that they surmise that the missile payload is a "super-powerful
microwave" oven. Geeze, why not use that kind of power supply for LENR, or
hot fusion, or subcritical fission - instead of mischief (knocking out a
bunch of antique computers)?
 
 
 
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 
 
No longer bogosity:
 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2241525/The-Boeing-blitzing-d
rone-cripple-nations-electronics.html
 
"Down the years and across the universe, the heroes of science-fiction
classics from Dan Dare to Star Wars and The Matrix have fought intergalactic
battles with weapons that wipe out enemy electronics at the touch of a
button.
 
Now scientists have turned fantasy into reality by developing a missile that
targets buildings with microwaves that disable computers but don't harm
people.
 
Aircraft manufacturer Boeing successfully tested the weapon on a one-hour
flight during which  it knocked out the computers of an entire military
compound in the Utah desert."
 
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 12:26 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Interesting - yes. Bogosity index - extreme.
> 
> 
> 
> A tomahawk cruise missile leaves no massive contrail. Most experts 
> agreed the amount of visible vapor was either coming from a solid fuel 
> rocket or
a
> large jet. The contrail from a cruise missile would be two orders of 
> magnitude less visible, based on the fuel burned and it would be lower 
> on the horizon.
> 
> 
> 
> A blogger did find a commercial flight that could have been 
> responsible,
but
> why this info did not immediately come from the FAA is a mystery. 
> Another blogger suggested it was Meg Whitman's reaction to the final 
> bill from her campaign ..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Terry Blanton
> 
> 
> 
> This is a far more interesting explanation:
> 
> 
> 
> Chinese EMP Attack Prompts US Missile Strike After Cruise Ship 
> Crippled
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1421.htm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> T
 
 
 
 

RE: [Vo]:(Video) Iwamura presents LENR transmutations at Nov ANS

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

NOTE that this presentation was about transmutation, not the excess energy
aspect of LENR.
Dr. Iwamura is with Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, which has an interest in
radioactive remediation of nuclear fuel; this particular presentation
focused on the transmutation of Cs and Ba isotopes into Pr and Sm.

I was more interested in hearing the QnA session, and who was asking
questions...
Of those I could hear and understand, questions were posed by the Aerospace
Corporation and Bradley Engineering.

The man from Aerospace Corp complemented Iwamura on his presentation... he
indicated that as the presentation was made he was formulating questions,
and by the end of the presentation all those Qs were answered except one,
which he said was rare.

It is good to see people from the private sector (not govt/academia) showing
an interest in LENR work...

-Mark Iverson 

-Original Message-
From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com [mailto:pagnu...@htdconnect.com] 
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 10:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:(Video) Iwamura presents LENR transmutations at Nov ANS

(Video)
2012 - Yasuhiro Iwamura Presentation at American Nuclear Society Meeting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VefCEaLAkRw&feature=youtu.be

RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be doing more personal harm than previously thought

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

As a few here are aware, I've been involved in a technology which uses (very
LOW power) RF and microwave frequencies to noninvasively measure blood sugar
levels. so I've got hundreds of references in my lib, and considerable
background on the electrical properties of biological tissues.

 

The following paper is out of my reference library and explains why some
SPECIFIC frequencies don't behave as the models show, most likely due to a
standing wave phenomenon when wavelengths are a multiple of the physical
boundaries involved.  I think the concern is reasonable, and that further
research should be done to determine what frequency ranges exhibit this kind
of amplified effect, and to ban those ranges from the consumer product
space.  This paper was a serendipitous discovery for me, and explains some
of the unusual signals we see with our system.

 

Biological tissue is mostly salt water, which is a very lossy (i.e., heavily
damped) medium, thus, barring any resonant effects as explained above, the
energy is simply dissipated as heat. and it takes a lot of RF energy (tens
to hundreds of watts) to cause any significant heating.  Most modern cell
phones are between 1W and 4W.   This from Wikipedia:  ". a GSM handset can
have a peak power of 2 watts, and a US analogue phone had a maximum transmit
power of 3.6 watts."  And modern phones vary their xmt power depending on
signal strength. if closer to cell tower then the phone can use lower xmt
power.

 

Here's the reference:

"Mechanisms of RF Electromagnetic Field Absorption in Human Hands and
Fingers"

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 60, NO. 7, JULY
2012

 

Abstract:

The absorption of electromagnetic fields in the hand is investigated over
the 900 to 3700 MHz frequency range.  This enables the determination of the
envelope of the peak spatial specific absorption rate in the hand.  It also
provides a basis for deriving measurement procedures for evaluating
compliance of wireless devices with specific absorption rate limits in the
hands.  Both plane waves and dipole antennas are used to investigate the
patterns of RF absorption in hand and finger tissue models for far and
near-field exposures. The results demonstrate that absorption enhancements
are found in the hand that are not present in a standardized flat phantom.
Enhancements of several decibels are observed, depending on the model
parameters.  A method to conservatively estimate the exposure in the hand
based on flat phantom measurements is proposed.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Adrian Sampaleanu [mailto:asam...@yahoo.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:51 PM
To: David Roberson; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be
doing more personal harm than previously thought

 

Hi Dave,


I'm curious if you've actually watched the movie in its entirety or if your
response is just the first reaction at something that, at least at surface
level, seems to be the usual and typical alarmist news.

 

>> "On occasions someone will state that cellular phones cause cancer and
make the news only to be shown to be stretching the facts to get the results
that they wish.  No one has been successful in that endeavor, but it is not
because of lack of trying."

 

One of the points made in the documentary is that the wrong question has
been asked - it should not be "How are cell phones (and other RF sources of
certain frequencies) causing cancer?", but rather "How is RF (of certain
frequencies) stopping the body from protecting itself against cancer?"

 

>> "And I can assure you that engineers do take the potential dangers
associated with RF seriously.  Just ask cellular design teams about the many
hours spent trying to reduce the exposure of users of their products.  And I
know of many hours and concerns being expended toward keeping the magnitude
of the high level magnetic transmit fields that are used in electronic
article surveillance equipment at a level that minimizes danger to those
with pacemakers."

 

I'm sure that engineers (btw, that's my background as well) do take the
potential dangers of RF seriously. The problem, as detailed in this film, is
that the legislation that sets the "safe" limits to which engineers adhere
is created around the knowledge of what RF energy can do when it comes to
ionization or thermal effects on molecules and does not account for the
clearly demonstrated effects on DNA construction as well as melatonin
(antioxidant) production. Additionally, again as discussed by "Resonance",
cancer from exposure to RF is something that would need to be looked at
after > 10 years of significant exposure to certain kinds of RF. We are just
now getting there if you look back at how long most people have been using
cell phones. 

 

Also, the effect RF can have on magnetically sensitive molecules which
certain creatures (bees, butterflies, among others) use for compass-like
orientation wrt Earth's magnetic field are als

RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be doing more personal harm than previously thought

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave:

I sent you the paper PDF via personal email so you can see if there’s enough 
detail to answer your questions…

 

I’m used to dealing with signals < .01dB, so when I see a signal that is 
‘several dBs’ above what is expected, that’s a good thing!!

J

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 6:25 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

 

Mark, you are working on an interesting project and I wish you great success.  
As you suggest, biological tissue is assumed to be very lossy and for that 
reason the levels due to resonances can not become too large I would think.  
Standing waves exist due to reflections that reinforce each other.  If the 
material is very lossy then a wave reflecting off the far surface must by 
definition be reduced significantly before it returns to the opposite source 
surface.  Any triple transit reflections would pretty much be unimportant.   If 
you assume that the reflection is attenuated by 6 dB, which is 3 dB for each 
path, the maximum would be 3.5 dB above the input level.  This calculation is 
assuming a low loss case of 3 dB so I would think that any reasonable 
attenuation would result in relatively little excess. 

 

Do you recall any examples supplied by the paper that can be analyzed?  I bet 
they do not assume much attenuation before the first reflection even though the 
wavelength is still fairly long at those frequencies.

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Mon, Dec 10, 2012 8:28 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

As a few here are aware, I’ve been involved in a technology which uses (very 
LOW power) RF and microwave frequencies to noninvasively measure blood sugar 
levels… so I’ve got hundreds of references in my lib, and considerable 
background on the electrical properties of biological tissues.

 

The following paper is out of my reference library and explains why some 
SPECIFIC frequencies don’t behave as the models show, most likely due to a 
standing wave phenomenon when wavelengths are a multiple of the physical 
boundaries involved.  I think the concern is reasonable, and that further 
research should be done to determine what frequency ranges exhibit this kind of 
amplified effect, and to ban those ranges from the consumer product space.  
This paper was a serendipitous discovery for me, and explains some of the 
unusual signals we see with our system…

 

Biological tissue is mostly salt water, which is a very lossy (i.e., heavily 
damped) medium, thus, barring any resonant effects as explained above, the 
energy is simply dissipated as heat… and it takes a lot of RF energy (tens to 
hundreds of watts) to cause any significant heating.  Most modern cell phones 
are between 1W and 4W.   This from Wikipedia:  “… a GSM handset can have a peak 
power of 2 watts, and a US analogue phone had a maximum transmit power of 3.6 
watts.”  And modern phones vary their xmt power depending on signal strength… 
if closer to cell tower then the phone can use lower xmt power.

 

Here’s the reference:

“Mechanisms of RF Electromagnetic Field Absorption in Human Hands and Fingers”

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 60, NO. 7, JULY 2012

 

Abstract:

The absorption of electromagnetic fields in the hand is investigated over the 
900 to 3700 MHz frequency range.  This enables the determination of the 
envelope of the peak spatial specific absorption rate in the hand.  It also 
provides a basis for deriving measurement procedures for evaluating compliance 
of wireless devices with specific absorption rate limits in the hands.  Both 
plane waves and dipole antennas are used to investigate the patterns of RF 
absorption in hand and finger tissue models for far and near-field exposures. 
The results demonstrate that absorption enhancements are found in the hand that 
are not present in a standardized flat phantom.  Enhancements of several 
decibels are observed, depending on the model parameters.  A method to 
conservatively estimate the exposure in the hand based on flat phantom 
measurements is proposed.

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: Adrian Sampaleanu [mailto:asam...@yahoo.com <mailto:asam...@yahoo.com?> ] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 3:51 PM
To: David Roberson; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

 

Hi Dave,


I'm curious if you've actually watched the movie in its entirety or if your 
response is just the first reaction at something that, at least at surface 
level, seems to be the usual and typical alarmist news.

 

>> "On occasions someone will state that cellular phones cause cancer and make 
&

RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be doing more personal harm than previously thought

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

We were using an Agilent N5230A for all our testing:

  http://www.home.agilent.com/en/pd-415192/4-port-pna-l-series

 

Key Features & Specifications 

- Integrated 4-port, balanced measurements

- 103 dB dynamic range and < 0.004 dB trace noise

- 4.5 usec/point measurement speed, 32 channels, 16,001 points

- Automatic port extension automatically corrects for in-fixture measurements

 

All fully automated via code running on a PC to eliminate human error when 
running tests…

This thing can scan from 300Khz to 20Ghz and sample 16,000 frequencies in 7 
seconds, making a simultaneous reflection and transmission measurement at each 
frequency!

 

The calibration process, if done properly, eliminates all spurious reflections 
from connectors and cables, so what you get is a measurement at a ‘reference 
plane’, which is your DUT…

 

“Do I understand properly that you have a forward moving RF signal that is at 
some level, and that the reflections must not cause the primary signal 
amplitude to vary by more than .01 dB?”

 

No.  The changes in the electrical properties of biological tissue (the finger 
in our testing) when your glucose goes from 80mg/dL to 100mg/dL is probably 
less than .01dB!  Sensitivity with the diabetics we tested ranged from <20mg/dL 
to about 40… FDA requirements are somewhat in flux, but they are about 10mg/dL 
when your glucose gets below 80mg/dL, so we aren’t too far from regulatory.

 

RE: More Fun with More Power!!!

A friend’s early career was as a technician at a commercial radio station 
(50KW)… said occasionally the amp would go into oscillations and the 4 or 6 
inch copper buss-bar from the amp to the base of the antenna would end up in 
small, fairly regular-sized pieces!  

   Ampere-Neumann electrodynamics?  

See http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0012029

 

-mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 11:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

 

It sounds like you are being RF level starved Mark!  I was working on a PIN 
diode band switch once where I felt like I could measure to that degree of 
accuracy.  I am not sure that I could actually reach that level of performance 
since any equipment reflection totally over whelmed the signal.  

 

You need to play with more power if you want to have some fun.  I once received 
an RF burn from a 100 watt VHF transmitter that I was load pulling.  That put a 
hurt on me! 

 

Do I understand properly that you have a forward moving RF signal that is at 
some level, and that the reflections must not cause the primary signal 
amplitude to vary by more than .01 dB?  Wow!

 

Dave

-Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 11, 2012 1:13 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

Dave:

I sent you the paper PDF via personal email so you can see if there’s enough 
detail to answer your questions…

 

I’m used to dealing with signals < .01dB, so when I see a signal that is 
‘several dBs’ above what is expected, that’s a good thing!!

J

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?> ] 
Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 6:25 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

 

Mark, you are working on an interesting project and I wish you great success.  
As you suggest, biological tissue is assumed to be very lossy and for that 
reason the levels due to resonances can not become too large I would think.  
Standing waves exist due to reflections that reinforce each other.  If the 
material is very lossy then a wave reflecting off the far surface must by 
definition be reduced significantly before it returns to the opposite source 
surface.  Any triple transit reflections would pretty much be unimportant.   If 
you assume that the reflection is attenuated by 6 dB, which is 3 dB for each 
path, the maximum would be 3.5 dB above the input level.  This calculation is 
assuming a low loss case of 3 dB so I would think that any reasonable 
attenuation would result in relatively little excess. 

 

Do you recall any examples supplied by the paper that can be analyzed?  I bet 
they do not assume much attenuation before the first reflection even though the 
wavelength is still fairly long at those frequencies.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Mon, Dec 10, 2012 8:28 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Those EMP weapons (and your cellphone) could actually be 
doing more personal harm than previously thought

As a few here are aware, I’ve been involved in a technology which uses (very 
LOW power) RF and microwave frequencies to noninvasively measure blood sugar 
levels… so I

RE: [Vo]:Chemistry- Quantum Tunneling - Hydrogen and Schroedingers Cat

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Ron and Eric:

 

This is old news. although worth bringing up again.

 

The original article came out in June of 2011, and was reported to the Vort
Collective in this article:

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg47722.html

 

You see, there's not much that escapes the watchful eyes of the Collective!

J

 

And the follow-up question to the above posting was:

 

So the $64M question is...

   "What are the conditions that make it favor the QM-tunneling mechanism as
opposed to the

traditional chemical processes" 

 

Ponder that in your sleep.

 

Happy Holidays to all,

-Mark Iverson

 

 

From: Ron Kita [mailto:chiralex.k...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2012 8:11 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:Chemistry- Quantum Tunneling - Hydrogen and Schroedingers Cat

 

Greetings Vortex-L,

 

Chemistry - Quantum Tunneling , Hydrogen and Schroedinger s Cat:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/12/quantum-tunneling-driving-some-chemical.htm
l

 

Respectfully,

Ron Kita, Chiralex

Doylestown PA

[Vo]:Weather takes a turn for the worst on Friday...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

 

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/12/17/329391-best-mayan-cal
endar-jokes-and-memes-people-find-end-of-the-world-funny.jpg

 

Which is 12/21/2012.

;-)

 

<>

RE: [Vo]:Weather takes a turn for the worst on Friday...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave:

If you skip shopping for the wife’s anniversary gift, I think Friday’s weather 
will have been a walk in the park come Saturday eve…

BTU = Blow-Torch Uniform

J

Happy Anniversary, and Merry Christmas!

-mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 4:53 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Weather takes a turn for the worst on Friday...

 

I am not sure there is anywhere to hide from that one Mark.  I had to replace 
my heat pump this summer so at least it is capable of maximum performance.  How 
many BTU's do you think it will take to make it through Friday? 

 

Saturday is my wedding anniversary, perhaps I can skip shopping for a gift?  
What do you think?

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 18, 2012 7:43 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Weather takes a turn for the worst on Friday...

 

http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2012/12/17/329391-best-mayan-calendar-jokes-and-memes-people-find-end-of-the-world-funny.jpg

 

Which is 12/21/2012…

;-)

 

<>

RE: [Vo]: [OT] New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global Warming ....

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Note that I've added the [OT] (off-topic) flag to the Subject Line.

Please try to remember that when replying to any off-topic msg that was NOT
marked [OT], add the [OT] marker to the "Subject:" line.

 

Dave Roberson stated.

". where I live it is outright lying to not mention all of the facts if you
know of them."

 

I call it, lying by omission.

It's an integral part of politics and politicians... seriously.

And yes, it should be abhorrent to any scientist, but unfortunately, to many
it is not.

I pretty much assume that ALL politicians are there to feather their own
nest, and all else is secondary.

 

RE: AG and the carbon credits sham. that's old news, but I'll bet many here
were unaware of it.

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]:there is something funny go one out there

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Frank:

 

I read your paper "THE  ELASTIC LIMIT OF SPACE AND THE QUANTUM CONDITION"
and have two comments:

 

1- please find someone to proofread your papers before posting; there are
numerous grammatical errors and typos and missing words.

   If they aren't too long I would be willing to do so next time.
perceptions are important!

 

2- RE: your comment that, "I am seeing something in the equations but I know
not what it is."

Have you thought about incorporating the vacuum into your equations?  The
vacuum has a permittivity and permeability, so it is not nothing.  How does
your elastic limit relate to the known properties of the vacuum (zero-point
field)?

 

-Mark Iverson

 

From: fznidar...@aol.com [mailto:fznidar...@aol.com] 
Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2012 8:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:there is something funny go one out there

 

You can believe it or not, but I produced the quantum condition from a set
of classical principles.  According to this train of thought the probability
of transition is proportional to the amplitude of vibration at a dimensional
frequency of 1,094,000 hertz -meters per second.  It sort of like a house of
cards.  The higher you build it the greater the probability that it will
fall down.  In the case of the house of cards, a vibration, a gust of air,
or somersetting gives it a nudge and it falls.  What nudges an atom?  There
is no wind or external vibration on the atomic scale.  Yet, there is a
chance that a low vibration low probability reaction will proceed and there
is a chance that high vibration high probability reaction will not proceed.
What is nudging the vibration.  Life proceeds through a series of quantum
transitions.  In a baby these traditions appear to be random and the baby
moves without purpose.You could simulate a baby with a random number
generator driving its actions.  As we develop these transitions manifest
their self's with a purpose.  The purpose can be years, decades or centuries
down the road. 

What gives the quantum transitions of life a purpose?  What is nudging them
with a purpose?  Is it the moon god or the sun god?  I am an atheist and
can't believe that.  What is it ...help...what is driving the probability of
transition in the direction of sententious.  I see that this is happening in
my math.  Why does life want to live?  Atoms want to go in the direction of
increasing entropy, yet life struggles to maintain its low entropy living
state.  Why do not atoms of life want to transient in the direction of
increasing entropy?  Why is the desire of the hole not the some of its
parts?

 

 

I am seeing something in the equations but I know not what it is.

 

Frank Znidarsic

 

RE: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave:

Couldn't agree more, that there will never be agreement. and that's ok, but
take the debate elsewhere, guys.

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 24, 2012 9:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age

 

Guys, I would very much prefer it if this thread were to be terminated.  It
is apparent that there will never be agreement between the parties involved
in the dispute and highly unlikely that one or the other will modify his
beliefs.  Why not just shake hands (electronically of course) and change the
subject to LENR or something else more interesting. 

 

I suspect that I am not the only one with this opinion.

 

Dave

RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave:

Can you perform some stats on the model vs reality and give us the std
deviation?

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 9:15 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

 

During the night Santa brought me a gift!  A thought occurred to me that
there is a very good explanation for the 30 to 40 second time constant
exponential waveform that I have been seeking.  In order to get the best
curve fit to the exact solution of the differential equation I have been
forced to modify the constant of integration slightly away from the ideal
value as determined by steady state measurements.  This seemed strange, but
now I realize that it is required to compensate for the displacement of the
rising edge due to the above delay. 

 

It is necessary to add back the initial plug of energy lost when the best
differential equation solution is followed.  This ideal solution for the
best overall data match must start at a value that is below the actual
temperature of the cell at t=0 in order to accommodate the delayed behavior.
The addition of this missing energy is exactly the amount required!

 

So now I can say with confidence that there exists a delay mechanism which
retards the reading of the temperature at the outer glass surface.  This
delay is in addition to the ideal non linear differential equation solution
time domain response which is discussed below.  So, another way to envision
the effect is to realize that it takes 30 to 40 seconds before the addition
of heat  applied to the cell is registered at that test point.  An
exponential smoothing (filtering) factor is applied.

 

My suspicion is that the extra pulse of heat must be distributed within the
gas and then result in a temperature reading at the outer glass monitor
after heating the envelop.  The heating of the other structure elements may
also be involved in the overall action.

 

A careful review of the waveform hints that the test might be demonstrating
an excess power of about 1 watt during the experiment that supplied the
data.  This is a small amount of excess power and only additional, careful
analysis would enable me to be sure.  At least it is in the right direction!
My virtually perfect curve fit to the data tends to support this conclusion.

 

Merry Christmas!

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: David Roberson 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 2:13 am
Subject: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

The data has been flooding in from the MFMP and I have been seeking a time
domain model of the system behavior when power to the Celani replication
device is modified.   Most of my effort has been exerted by analyzing the
rising edge of the time domain waveform when the drive power is stepped up
by a significant amount.  The temperature follows a certain path as it ramps
up to the value required to balance the input and output power of the cell. 

 

We have been fortunate in this particular case to find that the relationship
between temperature and input power is well behaved and follows a second
order curve to a remarkable degree.  It is not uncommon to see a curve fit
with R^2=. or better in many independent test runs.  I initially was
expecting to see a power series that included a forth order term of
significance due to the S-B radiation equation.  This has not ever been
dominate in any test and I still am trying to understand why this is true.
For the time being I will accept this gift happily.

 

A quick glance at the shape of the rising edge of the temperature curve
suggests that it follows an exponential.  I thus began my model by making
that assumption and got fairly reasonable results.  It was always evident
that my curve fit contained holes, but a couple of degrees of error did not
seem too excessive at that time.  Being a perfectionist, I decided to
improve the situation and to determine how well a model could match the real
life test.

 

I very soon added a second exponential to the mix and noticed that the fit
improved remarkably.  Also, I noticed that the second real frequency was
close to the second harmonic of the first one determined by my earlier work.
A light went off inside my head and I realized that this would be expected
since the non linearity is mainly of second order in the relationship
between variables.  Now, I saw that the accuracy of my model was becoming
very acceptable.  There remained a short period of time at the initial power
increase where the fit was not as good as I hoped.  To fix this problem I
added another exponential with an associated time constant of about 40
seconds.  With this model, I could obtain an excellent match between my
simulation and the real world data.

 

I could have left it in this state, but it is hard to accept imperfection.
To pursue the matter further I used a LTSpice model of the system.   I
guessed correctly in my first try with the model and was rewarded with a
wel

RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Thanks Dave!

So one sigma is ~0.25 degsC, and that's for several thousand points, so
confidence level is high. 

No need for any other calcs at this time; just wanted to get an idea of the
level of uncertainty.

 

Your model and the noise level are tied to the experimental setup and
process; if any changes are made to the setup, your model may no longer
apply. but I'm sure you know all that!  Hope the ones doing the tests
understand all this.

 

-Mark

 

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 11:24 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

 

Mark, I just let Excel run a standard deviation for all the points of the
data series throughout the range of the experiment and obtained .24916
degrees C.  This includes a time frame that begins at 0 seconds and
continues to 9541 seconds.  Each point is typically 2 to 3 seconds away from
it's neighbors.  The total number is 5508 data points for the standard
deviation calculation. 

 

Do you wish for me to perform additional tests upon the output?

 

Dave



-Original Message-
From: David Roberson 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

Mark, I can give you a hint as to how well the model matches the actual real
life data.  I have plotted a curve of the difference between the actual data
and my model prediction.  The difference looks like random noise that is
more or less evenly distributed about 0 volts throughout the entire power
input to temperature output transition.  This includes the case I analyzed
beginning at 48.2 watts and ending with 82.7 watts.  I see no evidence of
any curvature associated with the error between my simulation and the real
data.  There is a small, almost sinusoidal, signal hidden deeply within the
noise that continues throughout the entire time frame which in this case is
9541 seconds long. 

 

The total noise peaks tend to be in the vicinity of .5 degrees C while the
average of the flat noise is more in line with .2 degrees C.  Perhaps I
should make a plot of the output and send it for you to review.   It is
pretty impressive to see consistent noise when the large time domain
transition signal is balanced out.

 

My mention of the possible excess power is based upon my having to include
an additional 1 watt of input power for my model to achieve the perfect
match.  It is quite obvious that the extra power is required for the curve
to fit so perfectly.

 

The data I used was from 11/30/2012 at 2200 hours according to my download
from the MFMP replication site.  I used the history points for my curve
fitting and analysis.  I fitted the transition between the two power levels
shown above.  I just took a look at the small noisy sinusoidal signal hidden
within the noise and it appears to be in the ballpark of 2000 seconds in
period.   Maybe this corresponds to the cycle time for the heating system.

 

I guess I can attempt an RMS noise measurement which will be next on my
list.  The small sinusoidal interference will color that result a bit.  I
will report the results of the test when completed.

 

Dave



-Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 12:18 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

Dave:

Can you perform some stats on the model vs reality and give us the std
deviation?

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?>
] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 9:15 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

 

During the night Santa brought me a gift!  A thought occurred to me that
there is a very good explanation for the 30 to 40 second time constant
exponential waveform that I have been seeking.  In order to get the best
curve fit to the exact solution of the differential equation I have been
forced to modify the constant of integration slightly away from the ideal
value as determined by steady state measurements.  This seemed strange, but
now I realize that it is required to compensate for the displacement of the
rising edge due to the above delay. 

 

It is necessary to add back the initial plug of energy lost when the best
differential equation solution is followed.  This ideal solution for the
best overall data match must start at a value that is below the actual
temperature of the cell at t=0 in order to accommodate the delayed behavior.
The addition of this missing energy is exactly the amount required!

 

So now I can say with confidence that there exists a delay mechanism which
retards the reading of the temperature at the outer glass surface.  This
delay is in addition to the ideal non linear differential equation solution
time domain response which is discussed below.  So, another way to envision
the effect is to realize that it takes 30 to 40 seconds before the addition
of heat  applied to the cell is re

RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Dave:

That 1000 second sine wave period is ~16.7 minutes…  Is it an artifact of the 
model, or are there any physical properties of the materials used that would 
account for that oscillatory period?  Any insight to its cause?  Does the 
period decrease with time?

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 2:32 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

 

OK Mark, 

 

Yes, the model does depend upon having accurate parameters obtained by 
calibration.  The model will need to be modified if the cell is changed, but 
that is to be expected since it attempts to match the performance of the cell.

 

I just began working on the EU cell and the results are pretty good so far.  My 
first attempt was to use the calibration run on 12/7/2012 to define the 
quadratic values.  They again were accurate to R^2=.9998 or so which is pretty 
good.  With these a, b, c terms I used my model to predict the time domain 
response.  The first run with with the power changing from .036 watts to 28.9 
watts during the calibration run matched with an error of .5 degrees or so.   I 
think the 0 power level gives the program a tough point to work with.  Next I 
went from 28.8 watts to 38.6 watts for the second step of their run.  Here the 
curve was beautiful as with the USA cell.  The noise level was less than .25 
volts with a sinusoidal addition again that dominated the noise.  The period of 
the sine wave was roughly 1000 seconds.  I would estimate that the sine wave 
was about equal to the average noise alone.

 

I am very encouraged by these results.  It will be most interesting when my 
simulation is applied to the systems with expected excess power.  It should 
stand out very well against the calibration data.

 

Dave 



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 4:25 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

Thanks Dave!

So one sigma is ~0.25 degsC, and that’s for several thousand points, so 
confidence level is high… 

No need for any other calcs at this time; just wanted to get an idea of the 
level of uncertainty.

 

Your model and the noise level are tied to the experimental setup and process; 
if any changes are made to the setup, your model may no longer apply… but I’m 
sure you know all that!  Hope the ones doing the tests understand all this…

 

-Mark

 

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com <mailto:dlrober...@aol.com?> ] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2012 11:24 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

 

Mark, I just let Excel run a standard deviation for all the points of the data 
series throughout the range of the experiment and obtained .24916 degrees C.  
This includes a time frame that begins at 0 seconds and continues to 9541 
seconds.  Each point is typically 2 to 3 seconds away from it's neighbors.  The 
total number is 5508 data points for the standard deviation calculation. 

 

Do you wish for me to perform additional tests upon the output?

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: David Roberson 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Dec 25, 2012 2:08 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Non Linear Model of Celani Device

Mark, I can give you a hint as to how well the model matches the actual real 
life data.  I have plotted a curve of the difference between the actual data 
and my model prediction.  The difference looks like random noise that is more 
or less evenly distributed about 0 volts throughout the entire power input to 
temperature output transition.  This includes the case I analyzed beginning at 
48.2 watts and ending with 82.7 watts.  I see no evidence of any curvature 
associated with the error between my simulation and the real data.  There is a 
small, almost sinusoidal, signal hidden deeply within the noise that continues 
throughout the entire time frame which in this case is 9541 seconds long. 

 

The total noise peaks tend to be in the vicinity of .5 degrees C while the 
average of the flat noise is more in line with .2 degrees C.  Perhaps I should 
make a plot of the output and send it for you to review.   It is pretty 
impressive to see consistent noise when the large time domain transition signal 
is balanced out.

 

My mention of the possible excess power is based upon my having to include an 
additional 1 watt of input power for my model to achieve the perfect match.  It 
is quite obvious that the extra power is required for the curve to fit so 
perfectly.

 

The data I used was from 11/30/2012 at 2200 hours according to my download from 
the MFMP replication site.  I used the history points for my curve fitting and 
analysis.  I fitted the transition between the two power levels shown above.  I 
just took a look at the small noisy sinusoidal signal hidden within the noise 
and it appears to be in the ballpark of 2000 seconds in period.   Maybe this 
corresponds to the cycle time for 

RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Thanks for posting!!!

-Original Message-
From: ecat builder [mailto:ecatbuil...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:25 AM
To: vortex-l
Subject: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

Live webcast
http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/

Currently on air: (starts 16:30 CET)
2012.03.22 16:30
Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in Low Energy Nuclear
Reactions (LENR) live from Main Auditorium (click on the title for more
details)

http://webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast/

RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Terry, you beat me to it!

The first thing that came to mind is that I certainly hope that person isn't
a scientist... if we have scientists that think a failed experiment PROVES
or OVERRIDES the positive ones, then we've got serious problems.  What was
frustrating is that, due to Celani's inability to express himself clearly
and concisely in English, I felt his explanation was too long and
disjointed. But he was right, in that all the failed experiments occurred
early on when the proper conditions for successful replication were still
unknown... as the field learned more and more, reproducibility increased, as
one would expect.  I think that the skeptic-in-question got Celani's point,
but he still thinks that failed experiments trump successful replications...
one more example where theories become a religious belief system, and
 forbid you challenge that belief.

-M

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 10:17 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

It sounded like one audience member got a bit, er, heated during the Q&A
session.  He insisted that the presentation was favoring the positive
results and that the negative results should be presented.

Maybe he was a hot fusioner and feared for his job at the ITER?

T

RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Finlay:

There were many that failed early on; Princeton, CalTech, supposedly MIT
(but this is highly questionable), even some of the Nat'l Labs. it took many
years before enough successful ones had been done so scientists could look
for common denominators that were present in the successful ones. But that
analysis did occur, the required conditions were identified and published,
and replicability increased.

 

-mark

 

From: Finlay MacNab [mailto:finlaymac...@hotmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 10:30 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

 

Hello,  Long time lurker here.

 

The question was absurd.  I am disappointed that a professional scientist
would ask such a question.  

 

Almost every new technology that is not well understood suffers from poor
reproducibility, it took decades to achieve reproducible results with field
effect transistors and fiber optics.  The hidden variables associated with
these technologies are now well known.  

 

Incidentally, what published experiments that failed was the questioner
referring to?

> Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 13:17:09 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR
> From: hohlr...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> It sounded like one audience member got a bit, er, heated during the
> Q&A session. He insisted that the presentation was favoring the
> positive results and that the negative results should be presented.
> 
> Maybe he was a hot fusioner and feared for his job at the ITER?
> 
> T
> 

RE: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Perhaps the protons can form cooper pairs which are not affected by the
coulomb barrier. 

-Mark

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 8:31 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

 

I have a feeling 'Reliable' that know the ANSWER and have not told us
because you are either a masochist taking pleasure in watching us struggle
to get the ANSWER or you are constrained by a non-disclosure agreement by
somebody.

So this is my take on what you are getting at. 

The act of hydrides forms Rydberg crystals all the time. Rossi has come up
with a way to produce large numbers of these crystals by using a catalytic
process that centers on using his secret sauce. This catalyzer produces
Rydberg crystals that in turn generate hydrogen based Rydberg matter through
a strong coupling as suggested by Bob Higgins. 
Being a condensate, these coherent molecules of Rydberg matter each acts as
a single super-atom since all the member atoms that comprise this Rydberg
matter are entangled and coherent,

But these atoms all have their full complement of orbiting electrons in tack
because the crystal is not ionized. Being a super atom, once sufficient
energy is applied to it, it will go through a collective quantum jump and
become an ion. Like any ion many of the electrons will leave and what
remains is a coherent rich proton based condensate. 

This condensate acts as a super proton having a tremendous positive charge.

The trick is to ionize the Rydberg crystal after it is formed by adding
additional energy. This can be done by applying a pulse of energy that may
include an infrared wave packet or RFG or laser pulse.

When the high temperature Rydberg crystal becomes an ion, this is when the
coulomb barrier weakens and cold fusion occurs in matter in close proximity
to this ion.  

I now know why the hydrated powders of Mills and Arata require a energy
spike to ignite heat production.

This energy spike, say a laser blast, will turn sleeping Rydberg crystals
near the spike into Rydberg ions. 

The heat from the localized ignition location will cause more Rydberg ions
to form. Before you know it, the entire volume of the powder is consumed
with heat and transmutation as a result.

This ionization of Rydberg matter is how a Rossi type Reactor becomes
supercritical. Increased heat begets more Rydberg ionization which produces
more heat in a runaway explosion. 

Rossi and DGT must keep their reactors in the proper temperature range in
order to control Rydberg ionization. LeClair on the other hand has little
control of the ionization process and his Rydberg ions run amok. All his
Rydberg crystals are born ionized and they do great damage to the reactor
and produce intense gamma radiation.

 



 

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 6:52 PM, integral.property.serv...@gmail.com
 wrote:

Here I go again:

Hydride ion anyone? Oscillate or I will kick you with a spark, infrared wave
packet or RFG.
NS<=>SN
Nude, without clothes, look see:  http://chan.host-ed.me/

Warm Regards,

Reliable



Axil Axil wrote: 

Post 8

Bob Higgins stated:  The Rydberg matter seems to be going in the wrong
direction.  Normal ground state atoms have a smaller mean orbital radius.
Outside of this radius the atom appears net neutral.  If you get inside of
this radius, there is a strong electric field.  To get fusion to occur, the
nuclei must be much much closer than the the radius of the the ground state
hydrogen orbital.  The + nuclear charge is only screened as long as you are
outside the orbital.  In Rydberg atoms, the orbital is HUGE.  This allows
them to easily couple and form condensates.  However, it also means that the
nuclei cannot get as close to another nucleus as a ground state atom because
the orbital is bigger.  The instant you are inside the orbital you have the
nuclear repulsion.  From this perspective, Fran's Inverse Rydberg state
(orbital smaller than ground state) makes more sense - it would allow the
nuclei to become closer before the orbital is crossed exposing the repulsive
electrostatic forces.  I think the Inverse Rydberg "matter" would be
natually less likely to form a condensate than a ground state atom due to
the shrunken orbital which I think decreases the coupling coefficient.  The
Inverse Rydberg state would seem to fit better into a theory of the solid
state effects inside the lattice of nickel or palladium and is going in the
right direction to explain proton insertion into another nucleus.
.
.
.

In the case of the LeClair reactor, the crystalline formation at extremely
high pressure & mass density is interesting and it is at such tremendous
pressure that, there is a large potential energy in its release.  In the
cavitation, plasmas are formed, and it would certainly be possible to find
an intermediate form of matter (Rydberg) between the plasma state and the
ground state for the atoms.  It is not clear at all how this is complicit in
LENR.  I have not he

RE: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Terry,
Thanks for reminding me

There was one slide, towards the end of Celani's talk at Cern, that caught
my eye.

There was a (spreadsheet) table with about 8 rows and 6 columns...
The left-most column was temperature (degC), and I don't remember what the
other columns were, but what caught my eye was that the measured variable on
the right-most column was clearly temperature dependent, and it peaked at
535C. So, yes, I think the negative temperature coefficient of (electrical)
resistance is a major clue...

-Mark

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 5:50 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Quantum mechanics results in some strange and unexpected stuff that is 
> counter intuitive.

I continue to watch these discussions with great interest.

I believe there is a clue in the negative resistance temperature coefficient
discovered by Celani.

T

RE: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Bingo... That be the one!!
Great minds think alike... you're just faster on the trigger!
-m

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 9:29 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rydberg matter and the leptonic monopol

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:45 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:
> Terry,
> Thanks for reminding me
>
> There was one slide, towards the end of Celani's talk at Cern, that 
> caught my eye.

Da nada.  Would this be the slide:

http://i.imgur.com/2qXQS.png

(I did screen captures on some of the stuff I found interesting.)

T

RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's...

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 2:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Alan J Fletcher  wrote:
> Videos are now at :
>
> Overview of Theoretical and Experimental Progress in LENR / 
> Srivastava, Yogendra (speaker) (University of Perugia Perugia Italy) < 
> http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1433865>

Thanks, Alan.  I joined too late to see Srivastava's presentation live.  I
imagine it was painful to some of his audience.  :-)

T

RE: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

LoL
To the dungeon with him!
No, burn him... He's obviously possessed or crazy mad! It might be
infectious.
-m

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 3:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:CERN Live WebCast - Experimental Progress in LENR

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 6:03 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:
> I could understand Sri's enunciation much better than Celani's...

Me too.  But the pain comes from the various examples of transmutation he
presented.

Oh, the heresy!

T

RE: [Vo]:the desktop supernova

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

This is the very interesting quote by LeClair.

"The experiment gave off powerful crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave
soliton wave packages that were doubly periodic and followed the Jacobi
Elliptic functions exactly, mostly in the form of large doubly-periodic
vortices. Hundreds of wave trains and vortices appeared everywhere and are
permanently burned into walls, objects and trees surrounding the lab.  -Mark
LeClair,  Nanospire"

I don't know. "crested cnoid de Broglie Matter wave soliton wave packages".
too many hi-falutin' words all in one sentence!

 

What are LeClair's credentials?  From his own statement, he worked at the.

"Lockheed Missiles and Space Fluid Dynamics Group, I'm not afraid to say
that my knowledge of physics and mathematics rivals anyone else in the
field."

 

Given that he's probably a pretty sharp cookie, his statement about the
"wave trains and vortices being permanently burned into walls, objects and
trees surrounding the lab" is really quite astounding.  I'd like to see some
piccys of the walls, objects and trees.

 

Interesting legal conundrum.

If he gets sued for causing health problems to people living or working
nearby, or even property damage to neighboring buildings, and government or
expert witness physicists testify that he couldn't possibly be causing any
nuclear reactions, then how does one connect his activities with the claimed
negative health affects and property damage?

 

-Mark

 

From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 7:30 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:the desktop supernova

 

 

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Terry Blanton  wrote:

 

Looks like Mr. Zweig has taken some liberties with the truth.

 

 

My apologies to Mr. Zweig.  I misread his blog statement.  The claims of
tree damage come from a letter sent to Krivit:

 

 
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/31/new-energy-times-issue-36-letters/


 

by LeClair (half way down).  If true (I would love to see photographs), Mr.
Zweig is right to be concerned about the health of the public in nearby
public facilities.

 

T 

[Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum plasmas

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Hot off the press!

Not sure is this is relevant to LENR, but think it could be.

When ions get closer: New physical attraction between ions in quantum
plasmas

Quantum plasmas extend the area of application to nano-scales, where
quantum-mechanical effects gain significance. This is the case when, in
comparison to normal plasmas, the plasma density is very high and the
temperature is low. Then the newly discovered potential occurs, which is
caused by collective interaction processes of degenerate electrons with the
quantum plasma. Such plasmas can be found, for example, in cores of stars
with a dwindling nuclear energy supply (white dwarfs
 ), or they can be produced
artificially in the laboratory by means of laser irradiation
 . The new negative
potential causes an attractive force
  between the ions, which
then form lattices. They are compressed and the distances between them
shortened, so that current can flow through them much faster.

The findings of the Bochum scientists open up the possibility of
ion-crystallization on the magnitude scale of an atom. They have thus
established a new direction of research that is capable of linking various
disciplines of physics. Applications include micro-chips for quantum
computers, semiconductors, thin metal foils or even metallic
nano-structures.

More information: P. K. Shukla and B. Eliasson (2012): Novel Attractive
Force Between Ions in Quantum Plasmas, Physical Review Letters 108, in
press.

Gee, you mean there are still new things to discover?  Science still has
things to learn?  I'm being sarcastic here.

 

This is why when anyone, especially a scientist, states that something isn't
possible because it contradicts laws of physics, they are just flat-out
wrong.  ALL one is justified in ever saying in that situation is that it's
very unlikely.  if they don't speak in probabilities, then they are probably
wed to their theories as much as any person is to their religion.  it's ok
to 'not know'.

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum plasmas

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Hi Fran,

Reduced, or completely masked?  Don't know yet.

It's still 'in press' so I doubt PRL will have an abstract yet. 

 

What's interesting is this:

"The new negative potential causes an attractive force between the ions [of
the plasma], which then form lattices. They are compressed and the distances
between them shortened, so that current can flow through them much faster."

 

So the (degenerate electron) quantum plasma forms *its own lattice*!?  A
nano/micro-scale lattice of plasma. now that ought to have some interesting
properties being that the ions are much free-er (is that a word?) that in
condensed matter.  If this plasma lattice encompasses the first several
layers of atoms in the condensed matter (Ni, Pd, etc), could the compression
of the plasma lattice physically force protons to cross the Coulomb barrier?

 

Could this be the nuclear active areas that LENR researchers have discussed?
A quantum plasma lattice juxtaposed or co-physical with a condensed matter
(metal) lattice.  Obviously, it would take specific conditions to bring this
about, and on a small volume, and probably short lived with the disruptive
randomness of quantums of heat energy being shuffled about inside the metal
lattice.  This quantum lattice could certainly be the 'collective
oscillations' that McKubre and others have hypothesized. same phenomenon,
different name. Or does the plasma 'lattice' imply additional properties not
considered by LENR researchers?

The other interesting clue which could be relevant to LENR is this:

"Such plasmas .. can be produced artificially in the laboratory by means of
laser irradiation."

 

Remember that some LENR work (SPAWAR?) has looked at laser stimulation, and
it seemed to have a positive effect.

 

I think the problem with the lack of good theoretical basis for LENR comes
from the fact that we really are discovering an entirely new field of
physics, and there are numerous interactions that can occur. which just
serves to confuse things. too many effects to coordinate into a qualitative
model that can then be quantitatively explored and modeled.  

 

Truly exciting times!  This will probably dwarf the importance of the
transition in understanding when going from the Bohr model of the atom to
quantum mechanics nearly 100 years ago.

 

-Mark

 

From: Roarty, Francis X [mailto:francis.x.roa...@lmco.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 10:19 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum
plasmas

 

Mark,

    Is this proof of a reduced coulomb barrier?

Fran

 

From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 1:08 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: [Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum
plasmas

 

Hot off the press!

Not sure is this is relevant to LENR, but think it could be.

When ions get closer: New physical attraction between ions in quantum
plasmas

Quantum plasmas extend the area of application to nano-scales, where
quantum-mechanical effects gain significance. This is the case when, in
comparison to normal plasmas, the plasma density is very high and the
temperature is low. Then the newly discovered potential occurs, which is
caused by collective interaction processes of degenerate electrons with the
quantum plasma. Such plasmas can be found, for example, in cores of stars
with a dwindling nuclear energy supply (white dwarfs
<http://www.physorg.com/tags%0d%0a/white+dwarfs/> ), or they can be produced
artificially in the laboratory by means of laser irradiation
<http://www.physorg.com/tags/laser+irradiation/> . The new negative
potential causes an attractive force
<http://www.physorg.com/tags/attractive+force/>  between the ions, which
then form lattices. They are compressed and the distances between them
shortened, so that current can flow through them much faster.

The findings of the Bochum scientists open up the possibility of
ion-crystallization on the magnitude scale of an atom. They have thus
established a new direction of research that is capable of linking various
disciplines of physics. Applications include micro-chips for quantum
computers, semiconductors, thin metal foils or even metallic
nano-structures.

More information: P. K. Shukla and B. Eliasson (2012): Novel Attractive
Force Between Ions in Quantum Plasmas, Physical Review Letters 108, in
press.

< p class=MsoNormal>Gee, you mean there are still new things to discover?
Science still has things to learn?  I'm being sarcastic here.

 

This is why when anyone, especially a scientist, states that something isn't
possible because it contradicts laws of physics, they are just flat-out
wrong.  ALL one is justified in ever saying in that situation is that it's
very unlikely.  if they don't speak in probabilities, then they are probably
wed to their theories as much as any person is to their religion.  it's ok
to 'not know'.

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum plasmas

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Axil:

 

You’re a bit loose with your wording… an example is your following statement:

 

“Ionic crystals are the agent that causes cold fusion.”

 

Of course this is just your speculation, but you always seem to phrase things 
as if you have irrefutable evidence, and in most cases, this is just not the 
case.  Now, being overly confident in your statements is not a crime, but it is 
a bit misleading.  I would only suggest that you try to be a little more 
accurate with how you phrase things… the scientists and engineers that I admire 
always choose their wording carefully and accurately.

 

Keep up the creative and technical postings…

 

-Mark 

 

From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 12:19 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New physical attraction between ions in quantum plasmas

 

Novel Attractive Force Between Ions in Quantum Plasmas

http://arxiv.org/pdf/1112.5556.pdf 

This is the paper behind the article. 

This paper explains the theoretical basis of a new form of matter called ionic 
crystals. 

Ionic crystals are the agent that causes cold fusion. 

The article says: Quantum plasmas extend the area of application to 
nano-scales, where quantum-mechanical effects gain significance. This is the 
case when, in comparison to normal plasmas, the plasma density is very high and 
the temperature is low.

Axil says: 

This is what we have in the Rossi type reactor. The hydrogen envelope is very 
high density plasma with a very low temperature. The population of degenerate 
electrons in this envelope is high due to the high pressure of the hydrogen 
gas. 

These degenerate electrons force Rydberg atoms together into a condensate and 
keep this condensate together when the crystal ionizes.

These degenerate electrons produce a force field at long range that pushes 
protons together to form cooper pairs. This attractive electron field also 
forces naked positively charges nuclei together that have had their coulomb 
barrier stripped as described in my post titled “the magnetic monopole.”

When these naked nuclei come into contact, the nuclear force takes over to form 
new elements.  

Degenerate electrons are attributable to the Pauli Exclusion Principle. The 
pressure maintained by a body of degenerate matter is called the degeneracy 
pressure, and arises because the Pauli principle prevents the constituent 
particles from occupying identical quantum states. Any attempt to force them 
close enough together that they are not clearly separated by position must 
place them in different energy levels. Therefore, reducing the volume requires 
forcing many of the particles into higher-energy quantum states. This requires 
additional compression force, and is made manifest as a resisting pressure. 

Therefore, since according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle ΔpΔx ≥ ħ/2 
where Δp is the uncertainty in the particle's momentum and Δx is the 
uncertainty in position, then we must say that their momentum is extremely 
uncertain since the particles are located in a very confined space. Therefore, 
even though the plasma is cold, the electron must be moving very fast on 
average. This leads to the conclusion that if you want to compress an object 
into a very small space, you must use tremendous force to control its 
particles' momentum. 

This is what the micro-cavities in the micro powder do; compress electrons into 
the degenerate state.

The article says: The new negative potential causes an attractive force between 
the ions, which then form lattices. 

Axil says:

This is why Rydberg ions are formed so readily in a pressurized hydrogen 
envelope. 

The article says: They are compressed and the distances between them shortened, 
so that current can flow through them much faster.  

Axil says:

This is why electrical resistances drops as the temperature increases in cold 
fusion material. 

 

 

 

 

On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:34 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint  wrote:

Hi Fran,

Reduced, or completely masked?  Don’t know yet…

It’s still ‘in press’ so I doubt PRL will have an abstract yet… 

 

What’s interesting is this:

“The new negative potential causes an attractive force between the ions [of the 
plasma], which then form lattices. They are compressed and the distances 
between them shortened, so that current can flow through them much faster.”

 

So the (degenerate electron) quantum plasma forms *its own lattice*!?  A 
nano/micro-scale lattice of plasma… now that ought to have some interesting 
properties being that the ions are much free-er (is that a word?) that in 
condensed matter.  If this plasma lattice encompasses the first several layers 
of atoms in the condensed matter (Ni, Pd, etc), could the compression of the 
plasma lattice physically force protons to cross the Coulomb barrier?

 

Could this be the nuclear active areas that LENR researchers have discussed?  A 
quantum plasma lattice juxtaposed or co-physical with a condensed matt

RE: [Vo]:STS-115 Unknown Objects

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

At about 6:10-6:20 into the video, the astronaut makes the following
statement when referring to two of the objects:
   "...they're the ones we had the late 'Tally-Ho' on..."

Tally-Ho?  Must be NASA-speak for "Nothing important, just another 'visitor'
spacecraft sighting"!
:-)

Seriously, what could 'TH' stand for in this context?

-Mark  


-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 9:45 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:STS-115 Unknown Objects

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981250151

Jump the vid to 4:45 when the crew PTZs to the unidentified objects.
Interesting is the look on the faces of the flight director and others at
the end of the vid just prior to the daily briefing.

T

RE: [Vo]:Remote Joule heating in Carbon nanotubes

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

The experiments used DC current, which is why the 'remote' heating was
unexpected.

-m

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2012 10:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Remote Joule heating in Carbon nanotubes

 

Inductive heating usually requires a time changing current in order to heat
the nearby conductor.  Maybe the current in this case is more like a series
of quantum pulses which might have the time varying property required.  A
great deal of the effect would depend upon the relative magnitude of the
current and thus the flow characteristics of electrons within.

 

I assumed that the basic experiment consists of a DC current instead of AC.
AC current could certainly be used to generate inductive heating.

 

The thought occurred to me that the uncertainty principle might allow a
portion of the electron current to flow within the nearby conductors
effectively bypassing the nanotube.  If this theory is correct then the
effective size of the electrons must be such that they extend outside of the
tube.

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Jojo Jaro 
To: Vortex 
Sent: Tue, Apr 10, 2012 11:22 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Remote Joule heating in Carbon nanotubes

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this just some kind of Inductive Heating?
I don't see why this would be something new.

 

 

RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Where does the charge go?

Perhaps 'charge' is an effect which only occurs or manifests when spin and
angular momentum are combined...

-m

_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 6:19 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron


-Original Message-
From: Alan J Fletcher

Terry Blanton wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/19/splitting_the_electron/

But where does the CHARGE go ... either? both? If it were to go ONE way then
the other would be charge-less and could maybe enter a proton. Once in, it
could call its charged buddy to come and join it.

(Usual ignorant speculation disclaimer comes here). 

It is a good question, and the "buddy system" is not far off metaphorically
(as in a "condensate"). In 1997 we saw the first modern direct evidence that
electric current can be carried by "quasiparticles" with fractional charge
(Weitzman Inst). But older experiments including those of Robert Millikan
himself, probably saw found this. Here is a good article with relevant
background:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasiparticle

Millikan is regarded by some as one of the founders of American science -
but 
he was also guilty of pathological science, ignoring evidence and fudging
experiments. 
He held-back progress for a half-century on fractional charge, partly
because of an underserved reputation, not to mention the flawed experiment
(he only used about a third of his actual results - the ones where data fit
into the desired outcome). 

An updated, automated (and equally flawed) Millikan-type experiment was
undertaken at SLAC but it was seriously doomed by the assumption that
nothing less than about 15% of the electron charge would be found. And
nothing was found by them. That constraint changed the way the experiment
can be meaningfully run, since - given the ubiquity of the fine structure
constant, they should have designed a wide range experiment that would at
least look for charge as low as e/137.

The results of the many experiments agree with a theory which was formulated
by Robert 
Laughlin to explain the fractional quantum Hall effect FQHE. According to
Laughlin, 
electrons in strong magnetic fields form an exotic collective state, similar
to 
the BEC state. This does not rule out Shoulder's claims.

But any BEC-like agglomeration of electrons, although it may fit in with the
experimental work of Ken Shoulders, will need to "hide" charge somewhere.
Where? You ask.

The sea, of course. 

Dirac's sea. Probably located "just around the corner" in reciprocal space


Jones

<>

RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Thanks Dave. I even have a hat that has the phrase, "Think outside the Box"!

 

I've haven't been able to contribute to the idea-tossing within the
Collective for awhile because I've been busy with discussions/presentations
with an investment group for our technology to do noninvasive (painless)
glucose measurement for diabetics.  So far, I've presented the technical
evidence three times, the latest to the CTO, so we're making it up the
decision-maker hierarchy.  Wish us me luck!

 

We have been working quietly for the last two years, but are preparing to
make our results more widely known. to that end, I have begun to put
together a website with some details and no frills nor advertisements. I'd
appreciate some feedback on the site as to whether the information is
succinct and understandable. does it communicate the results to the reader
in an understandable manner?

 

http://webpages.charter.net/markiverson/index.htm

 

Thanks,

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 10:20 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

 

It is an excellent idea to think "out of the box" Mark as in this case.
Keep your ideas coming!

 

Dave

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Apr 20, 2012 1:14 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

Where does the charge go?
 
Perhaps 'charge' is an effect which only occurs or manifests when spin and
angular momentum are combined...
 
-m

RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Aren't angular momentum and orbital momentum are the same thing?
-m

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton [mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 11:41 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 1:14 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:
> Where does the charge go?
>
> Perhaps 'charge' is an effect which only occurs or manifests when spin 
> and angular momentum are combined...

The article speaks about orbital momentum.

T

RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Hi Reliable,
Thx for the feedback...

I understand the suggestion and the link to an example... I have hundreds of
peer-reviewed and other literature on noninvasive glucose,
bioelectromagnetics, the effects of poor glucose control on a person's
biology, etc...

The history of noninvasive glucose is quite interesting (and frustrating for
me)... The paper you linked to is all about optical technologies. Over the
last 30 years, well over a billion dollars, and probably closer to $2B or
$3B, has been put into the field, and 95% of that has been for optical
(mostly near-IR) based technologies.  We are using RF and microwave
frequencies which do not have the drawbacks that light-based technologies
have.  I don't think that ANY of the optical techs that I've seen have been
able to achieve predictive accuracy over weeks and months without a
Recalibration finger stick or two... if we had these kinds of results back
in the 90s when I was also working on this same tech, we would have had no
problem getting funding.

-Mark

-Original Message-
From: integral.property.serv...@gmail.com
[mailto:integral.property.serv...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2012 2:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron

Mark,

Perhaps adding references to your web page such as : 
http://photonicssociety.org/newsletters/apr98/overview.htm
may allow a viewer to grasp the complexity and and importance of your
efforts.

Warm Regards,

Reliable

MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
>
> Thanks Dave. I even have a hat that has the phrase, "Think outside the 
> Box"!
>
> I've haven't been able to contribute to the idea-tossing within the 
> Collective for awhile because I've been busy with 
> discussions/presentations with an investment group for our technology 
> to do noninvasive (painless) glucose measurement for diabetics. So 
> far, I've presented the technical evidence three times, the latest to 
> the CTO, so we're making it up the decision-maker hierarchy. Wish us 
> me luck!
>
> We have been working quietly for the last two years, but are preparing 
> to make our results more widely known. to that end, I have begun to 
> put together a website with some details and no frills nor 
> advertisements. I'd appreciate some feedback on the site as to whether 
> the information is succinct and understandable. does it communicate 
> the results to the reader in an understandable manner?
>
> http://webpages.charter.net/markiverson/index.htm
>
> Thanks,
>
> -Mark
>
> *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, April 20, 2012 10:20 AM
> *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron
>
> It is an excellent idea to think "out of the box" Mark as in this 
> case. Keep your ideas coming!
>
> Dave
>
> -Original Message-
> From: MarkI-ZeroPoint  <mailto:zeropo...@charter.net>>
> To: vortex-l mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
> Sent: Fri, Apr 20, 2012 1:14 pm
> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Spinon + Orbiton = Electron
>
> Where does the charge go?
>  
> Perhaps 'charge' is an effect which only occurs or manifests when spin 
> and angular momentum are combined...
>  
> -m

RE: [Vo]:Ignition

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

I’m not sure if this is outdated knowledge, but in order for the liquid fuel to 
‘burn’ in the combustion chamber (CC) of an ICE, it must have oxygen attached.  
One major function of a carburetor is to mix the liquid droplets with O2 from 
the air.  The problem is that the liquid fuel (regardless of how small the 
droplets are) has considerably more mass than the O2, and if there are any 
sharp bends in the intake manifold, the O2 has less inertia and can make those 
turns whereas the heavy liquid fuel droplets cannot, and you get 
fuel-air-separation.  Liquid droplets w/o attached O2 will not ‘burn’.   There 
are several ways that the industry has reduced the fuel-air-separation problem:

-  Fuel injection which does a much better job of atomizing the liquid 
fuel, and injecting it closer to CC so less likely to get separation.

-  Intake manifolds which eliminate (as much as possible) any bends in 
the passageways.

 

-Mark

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 10:05 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ignition

 

 

On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 9:59 PM,  wrote:

 

Actually, the liquid gasoline never burns. Only vapor burns. This is true in an
engine as well. The smaller the droplets, the more easily they evaporate and
provide the necessary vapor.

 

Does this follow from the fact that the reaction is an oxidation reaction, in 
which oxygen is required?  Since insufficient oxygen is contained in the 
liquid, only vapors oxidize?

 

Eric

 

[Vo]:Hot fusion crowd trying to justify continued funding...

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Wouldn't you know it. Princeton's Plasma Fusion Lab is trying to hang on to
funding.  

 

"Physicists see solution to critical barrier to fusion"

 

http://phys.org/news/2012-04-physicists-solution-critical-barrier-fusion.htm
l

 

"An in-depth analysis by scientists from the U.S. Department of Energy's
Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) zeroed in on tiny, bubble-like
islands that appear in the hot, charged gases-or plasmas-during experiments.
These minute islands collect impurities that cool the plasma. And it is
these islands, the scientists report in the April 20 issue of Physical
Review Letters, that are at the root of a long-standing problem known as the
"density limit" that can prevent fusion reactors from operating at maximum
efficiency."

 

-mark

 

[Vo]:A basic equation of electricity and magnetism is wrong... maybe.

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

27 April issue of Science opens this way:

 

A basic equation of electricity and magnetism is wrong, one scientist
claims. The classic formula for the force exerted by electric and magnetic
fields-the so-called Lorentz force-clashes with Einstein's special theory of
relativity, says Masud Mansuripur, an electrical engineer at the University
of Arizona in Tucson. Others doubt the claim but have not found a flaw in
the simple argument that challenges century-old textbook physics.

 

http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition/science_and_the_media/em_science_e
m_magazine_news_report_textbook_electrodynamics_may_contradict_relativity

Stephen Barnett, a theorist at the University of Strathclyde in Glasgow, UK,
says, "If it's true, it's astonishing"-though he suspects there's a "subtle"
explanation not at odds with relativity.  But Rodney Loudon, a retired
theorist from the University of Essex, UK, says, "As far as I can tell, [the
analysis] is right."

 

-Mark

 

RE: [Vo]:Hagelstein's editorial

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Steven:

What I was thinking as I was reading your most eloquent explanation and
question to Josh, was not quite so eloquent.

. what a waste of good brain cells.

-Mark

 

From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2013 8:15 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Hagelstein's editorial

 

My vortex-l posting habits has gone down significantly within the last six
months due to the fact that I need to focus on my own personal research as
compared to constantly getting ensnared in another "discussion" thread.
(Vortex-l can be so "addictive"!)

 

Nevertheless, every now and then, something still catches my eye.

 

I noticed that Ed Storms recently asked Joshua:

 

> So, I ask, what is the reason behind this lengthly

> critique of what Peter says? 

 

To which Joshua replied:

 

> It's caught my interest. Other people become experts at

> video games; I've gotten similarly addicted to cold fusion

> debunking.

 

Joshua, this recreational "hobby" of yours - someone who appears to have
become "addicted" to cold fusion debunking... The short reply would be to
suggest that there are recovery programs that can help such addicts overcome
these kinds of afflictions.

 

But here's a more detailed response:

 

I'm certainly not suggesting that in your case "recovery" might imply that
you would suddenly find yourself becoming more accepting of some
little-understood LENR / CANR reactions that certain researchers have
concluded may be occurring in Nature. Far from it.

 

What I am, however, trying to suggest is that if you believe this
"addictive" hobby of yours is altruistic because as a science apologist you
are attempting to defend the true objective principals of scientific
investigation, I would suggest you might want to consider pursuing a
different hobby. Instead of relentlessly performing in the role of an
"armchair debunker" why not consider focusing your apparent boundless energy
on some really worthy hobbies like pursuing actual laboratory work on a
subject that fascinates you, or your own or theoretical research. Or have
you done this already? If so, please point us to some of your work. I
suspect many on this list might be interested in looking into your
accomplishments.

 

As a matter of disclosure, while some on this list may think of me as
nothing more than an astronomical artist, one of my other personal
"hobbies", a hobby I have pursued since the mid 1980s has been theoretical
research into the nature of celestial mechanics and the various algorithms
and formulas used to generate orbital paths. I have pursued this rather
obscure branch of study because of my own unique collection of personal
predilections. Personal quirks or not, it is my hope that my personal
research may eventually end up making a useful contribution to the knowledge
base of humankind, but who really knows. I have on occasion hinted at some
of the observations I've stumbled across OFTEN BY ACCIDENT I might add, as
occasionally described within Vortex-l list over the past decade.
Nevertheless, I must confess the fact that I don't yet know if what I seem
to have stumbled across will actually turn out to be beneficial to society,
or not. Hopefully, I'm getting closer to actually publishing something
useful and informative. However, publication is still a year or so away - at
best. In the end, it's all a gamble. It is nevertheless a personal risk of
mine I'm willing to take with my own limited life span.

 

So, I ask you, Josh. What risks are you willing to take... take with your
own limited life span? I would suggest focusing your energies on pursuing a
hobby of armchair debunking the laboratory research of "cold fusion"
researchers is not likely to make all that much of a useful contribution to
society, considering the extremely limited lifespan we all have to contend
with on this planet. Why not make your life span count for something?

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

svjart.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/

[Vo]:Of prescience and perfect liquids

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

In an attempt to trigger some out of the box thinking, let me contribute the
following...

 

Excerpt from Brookhaven National Lab:

-

   http://www.bnl.gov/rhic/newPhysics.asp

 

A "Perfect" Liquid 

 

RHIC scientists had expected collisions between two beams of gold nuclei to
mimic conditions of the early universe and produce a gaseous plasma of the
smallest components of matter - the quarks and gluons that make up ordinary
protons and neutrons. But instead of behaving like a gas, the early-universe
matter created in RHIC's energetic gold-gold collisions appears to be more
like a liquid. And it's not just any liquid, but one with coordinated
collective motion, or "flow," among the constituent particles.

 

Scientists describe this fluid motion as nearly "perfect" because it can be
explained by the equations of hydrodynamics for a fluid with virtually no
viscosity, or frictional resistance to flow. In fact, the high degree of
collective interaction and rapid distribution of thermal energy among the
particles, as well as the extremely low viscosity in the matter being formed
at RHIC, make it the most nearly perfect liquid ever observed.

 END OF EXCERPT -

 

Note the phrase in the second paragraph:

  "a fluid with virtually no viscosity, or frictional resistance to flow."

 

I've been saying for well over a decade that the vacuum behaves like a fluid
that is under extreme pressure, and virtually no viscosity... and  that
subatomic particles are localized oscillations of that 'fluid', and that due
to the no viscosity character of the fluid, the damping factor is also
nearly nonexistent, so once 'created', those oscillations would continue for
a very, very long time.  Those oscillations also likely causing polarization
of the surrounding vacuum which we interpret as E and B fields... 

 

The mainstream is coming around... albeit, slowly and expensively!

J

 

Another interesting phrase that might relate to LENR is:

  "rapid distribution of thermal energy among the particles"

 

-Mark Iverson

 

<>

[Vo]:Was polywater all just a mistake?

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Polywater may come back to embarrass the so called 'competent' scientific
community...

 

As was originally brought up by Bill Beatty (this list's founder) in 2008,
unbeknownst to me, and later that year by me in this thread:

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg27994.html

is the work of Dr. Gerald Pollack, who happens to be at the Univ of
Washington where Mr. Beatty works.

 

He was selected for a faculty award from the UofW, and his presentation is
quite interesting:

"Water, Energy, and Life: Fresh Views From the Water's Edge"

That presentation can be seen on youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVBEwn6iWOo

 

I did a search of the vortex archives and came up with ~40 postings on this
phenomenon... there is probably nothing in sci/tech that this diverse
collection of inquisitive minds hasn't discussed.

I have not read any of the literature on polywater, so I'm not here to
judge, but could it be that what was seen back then was this phenomenon,
which also was difficult to reproduce since they didn't realize what was
necessary to make it come about?  The material is out there so I am just
alerting the Collective to its existence...

 

What I can say, is that I've listened to Dr. Pollack's presentations and
read a few papers, not only of his work but now quite a few others who have
contributed to a more complete understanding of how water is 'structured'
near an interface.  I strongly suggest anyone interested in science, and
especially if they work with systems (living or not) which involve water and
interfaces, to look into this body of research.  Water near an interface
(out to perhaps several thousand to a million molecules length) is very
different from the bulk water --  it is more like a gel or 'liquid crystal'.

 

"We found something astonishing," Pollack recalls. A few of his scientific
predecessors had proposed that a charged surface could cause water molecules
to line up, as they do in a crystal, as far out as 100 molecules. But his
experiments showed dissolved particles disappeared and light waves behaved
differently -- two clues that the water molecules are lined up -- in a layer
1 million molecules wide. That's more than 10,000 times what was previously
believed."

 

So those who so smugly use polywater as an example of how even scientists
can be deluded, and how the 'mainstream' scientists saved the day, might end
up eating crow for dinner... time will tell.

 

When something so 'simple' and ubiquitous as water, something making up
2/3rds of the earth's surface, something that has been probed and studied by
all our sophisticated scientific instruments, is still the source of
significant new insights and discoveries, then how can any rational
scientist think that we know the minutest fraction of what the nucleus is
hiding

 

-Mark

<>

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Ed:
Two things...

1. I don't think Fran's explanation adequately explained the Casimir
effect... (sorry Fran).
Theory posits that the vacuum is made up of almost an infinite range of
frequencies (some have proposed a cutoff frequency, probably approaching the
Plank frequency).  Closely spaced, parallel conducting plates will ONLY
exclude vacuum frequencies LARGER than the spacing between the plates.  This
is what creates the unbalanced forces which want to push the plates
together.  All vacuum frequencies are pushing on the outside surfaces of the
plates, but a limited range of frequencies are between the plates, so forces
pushing plates apart is less than outside forces pushing plates together.
This effect only becomes significant for very small plate separation.

2. Empirical evidence for the Casimir effect is now fairly well established,
and has been tested by several groups, including Steve Lamoreaux from your
old stomping ground of Los Alamos.  It has also become a practical issue now
that nanotechnology has reached the commercialization stage. The following
is from the Wikipedia article:
-
One of the first experimental tests was conducted by Marcus Sparnaay at
Philips in Eindhoven, in 1958, in a delicate and difficult experiment with
parallel plates, obtaining results not in contradiction with the Casimir
theory,[22][23] but with large experimental errors. Some of the experimental
details as well as some background information on how Casimir, Polder and
Sparnaay arrived at this point[24] are highlighted in a 2007 interview with
Marcus Sparnaay.

The Casimir effect was measured more accurately in 1997 by Steve K.
Lamoreaux of Los Alamos National Laboratory,[25] and by Umar Mohideen and
Anushree Roy of the University of California at Riverside.[26] In practice,
rather than using two parallel plates, which would require phenomenally
accurate alignment to ensure they were parallel, the experiments use one
plate that is flat and another plate that is a part of a sphere with a large
radius.

In 2001, a group (Giacomo Bressi, Gianni Carugno, Roberto Onofrio and
Giuseppe Ruoso) at the University of Padua (Italy) finally succeeded in
measuring the Casimir force between parallel plates using
microresonators.[27]
---

-Mark

-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 9:42 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Thanks for the description Fran. Let's focus on one subject at a time, in
this case the Casimir effect.

While you use and value theory, I see no value in a theory unless it fits an
observation. So, let's look at the Casimir effect in this context.  The
evidence for the theoretical idea called the Casimir effect is based on a
force being measured between two slabs of material that form a narrow gap
between them. The assumption is that the material blocks the vacuum energy
from entering the gap. As a result, more force is pushing inward than
outward. Such a force results from all atoms in the material being affected,
not just those atoms you might identify as part of a quantum process.

This model assumes the material blocks the vacuum radiation. However, such
blocking has no justification. If no blocking or only partial blocking
occurred, the measurements would have no relationship to the proposed
theory.  Yet, people carry on as if this measurement supports the theory.
This looks like an idea that is accepted only because it was expected based
on an assumption - the assumption being that energy exists in vacuum that is
blocked by matter. As with all ideas, anything can be explained with a few
assumptions and the mathematical tools that are available, whether the
effect is real or not.  That is why the initial assumptions have to be
correct.

Let's go one step further. Let's assume energy does exist in the vacuum,
which I agree is likely to be the case. This energy will  
obviously have many effects. The question is: What are the effects?   
If the energy is blocked by matter, then it can not get into materials and
affect any process that takes place inside of any container or inside of any
material, such as radioactivity as you proposed. If matter is transparent,
the radiation can affect behavior inside of containers but not produce the
Casimir effect. If matter is opaque, the Casimir effect would work, but
nothing inside of a container or solid material could be affected by the
radiation.  In other words, the idea seems to have a logical conflict. How
is this conflict resolved?

Ed Storms


On May 17, 2013, at 9:42 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:

> Hi Ed,
>   Vacuum energy can never be totally blocked by Casimir geometry or 
> anything physical, even an ideal metal with optimum geometry won't 
> totally block vacuum energy since it needs to permeate all matter in a 
> Wave Structure of Matter kind of way -cant have matter [a persistent 
> waveform / canoe stuck in the

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Yes, **wavelengths** larger (=lower frequencies) than the plate spacing will
be excluded...
Thx for the correction Andy!
-m

-Original Message-
From: Andy Findlay [mailto:andy_find...@orange.net] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 11:25 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Hi Mark,

Possible typo alert:

I think you meant to say 'wavelengths', not 'frequencies'.

Andy.

On 17/05/13 18:22, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
> Closely spaced, parallel conducting plates will ONLY exclude vacuum 
> frequencies LARGER than the spacing between the plates.

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Yes, it's called inertia.

Bernie Haisch and Alfonso Rueda derived it (F=ma), and published it in
Physical Revue A in 1994.

-mark

 

From: Harry Veeder [mailto:hveeder...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 11:44 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

 

Assuming the casimir force  is the best explanation of the observed force on
the plates, wouldn't the vacuum energy produce a drag on all moving bodies? 

 

Harry

 

On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 1:22 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint 
wrote:

Ed:
Two things...

1. I don't think Fran's explanation adequately explained the Casimir
effect... (sorry Fran).
Theory posits that the vacuum is made up of almost an infinite range of
frequencies (some have proposed a cutoff frequency, probably approaching the
Plank frequency).  Closely spaced, parallel conducting plates will ONLY
exclude vacuum frequencies LARGER than the spacing between the plates.  This
is what creates the unbalanced forces which want to push the plates
together.  All vacuum frequencies are pushing on the outside surfaces of the
plates, but a limited range of frequencies are between the plates, so forces
pushing plates apart is less than outside forces pushing plates together.
This effect only becomes significant for very small plate separation.

2. Empirical evidence for the Casimir effect is now fairly well established,
and has been tested by several groups, including Steve Lamoreaux from your
old stomping ground of Los Alamos.  It has also become a practical issue now
that nanotechnology has reached the commercialization stage. The following
is from the Wikipedia article:
-
One of the first experimental tests was conducted by Marcus Sparnaay at
Philips in Eindhoven, in 1958, in a delicate and difficult experiment with
parallel plates, obtaining results not in contradiction with the Casimir
theory,[22][23] but with large experimental errors. Some of the experimental
details as well as some background information on how Casimir, Polder and
Sparnaay arrived at this point[24] are highlighted in a 2007 interview with
Marcus Sparnaay.

The Casimir effect was measured more accurately in 1997 by Steve K.
Lamoreaux of Los Alamos National Laboratory,[25] and by Umar Mohideen and
Anushree Roy of the University of California at Riverside.[26] In practice,
rather than using two parallel plates, which would require phenomenally
accurate alignment to ensure they were parallel, the experiments use one
plate that is flat and another plate that is a part of a sphere with a large
radius.

In 2001, a group (Giacomo Bressi, Gianni Carugno, Roberto Onofrio and
Giuseppe Ruoso) at the University of Padua (Italy) finally succeeded in
measuring the Casimir force between parallel plates using
microresonators.[27]
---

-Mark

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Hi Ed,

I want to extend a sincere thank you for engaging the inquisitive minds here
and helping to focus some of the discussions.  I have been too busy to
participate in what have been some very good exchanges, and fortunately too
busy so as to avoid others!  ;-)  Most of the regular-posting Vorts are
open-minded, but not without a healthy level of skepticism.  We also are not
concerned about discussing potentially 'career limiting/destroying' topics.

I will be starting a new vortex thread and I want to ask (you) some very
specific questions about the NAE; please look for it.  Now on to your
question...

RE: "I assume its "normal" EM radiation?"
Not sure... but I don't think 'vacuum quantum fluctuations' are considered
normal EM radiation.
  
I think the best (i.e., most accurate) explanation should come from the
experts, like Lamoreaux and Peter Milonni (also LANL).  The LANL Directory
shows both as Retired Fellows... perhaps one of them is still in the area,
and you could meet up for lunch to discuss in more detail?

Here's a youtube presentation by Dr. Milonni, and a few papers if you want a
more accurate explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12yjbyunRdM
"Casimir Effects: Peter Milonni's lecture at the Institute for Quantum
Computing"

http://cnls.lanl.gov/casimir/PresentationsSF/Force_Control-talk.pdf
"Precise Measurements of the Casimir Force: Experimental Details"
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dalvit/Talks_files/Piriapolis_09.pdf
"Towards Casimir force repulsion with metamaterials"   
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dcr/CasimirDrag_ContPhys.pdf
"... research suggesting that scattering quantum fluctuations might cause
drag in a superfluid moving at any speed."


-Mark Iverson

-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 11:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Thanks Mark, this is making more sense. But I have a few more questions. I'm
sure all of these issues have been addressed.

I assume the radiation is normal photon radiation, but at a higher frequency
than is normally encountered.  When such radiation passes through a
material, the radiation is either absorbed, creating heat in the material,
or it passes through without any change in energy or any effect on the
material.  Your description proposes that a certain size gap blocks a
fraction of the radiation coming from a particular direction.  In other
words, the photons are stopped in the gap and their energy heats the walls
of the gap.  The other photons pass right through the material without
interacting or producing a force.

  What produces the force?  The photons that are captured by the gap pass
through the material without interacting until they reach the gap. Only at
the gap is their presence felt by the material, but in the form of heat
energy.  For a force to be felt by the material, the photons must interact
and transfer momentum.  Does this mean all vacuum photons change direction
when passing through a material and the gap simply removes a momentum vector
such that a net force remains perpendicular to the gap?

If this is the explanation, we have still another assumption - a photon can
bounce off an atom without changing its energy (frequency) and in the
process transfer momentum to the atom while the photon goes in a different
direction.  Normally, a photon interacts with an electron, sending it in a
different direction but at the same time ionizing the atom to which the
electron was attached. Why does this process not occur when the vacuum
photons interact with matter?

Ed Storms


On May 17, 2013, at 11:22 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:

> Ed:
> Two things...
>
> 1. I don't think Fran's explanation adequately explained the Casimir 
> effect... (sorry Fran).
> Theory posits that the vacuum is made up of almost an infinite range 
> of frequencies (some have proposed a cutoff frequency, probably 
> approaching the Plank frequency).  Closely spaced, parallel conducting 
> plates will ONLY exclude vacuum frequencies LARGER than the spacing 
> between the plates.  This is what creates the unbalanced forces which 
> want to push the plates together.  All vacuum frequencies are pushing 
> on the outside surfaces of the plates, but a limited range of 
> frequencies are between the plates, so forces pushing plates apart is 
> less than outside forces pushing plates together.
> This effect only becomes significant for very small plate separation.
>
> 2. Empirical evidence for the Casimir effect is now fairly well 
> established, and has been tested by several groups, including Steve 
> Lamoreaux from your old stomping ground of Los Alamos.  It has also 
> become a practical is

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Let's put some numbers to it...

>From Dr. Milonni's YouTube presentation:

F = ((pi^2)*hbar*c) / (240d^4)  (force per unit area, Casimir original
derivation in 1948) 

F = 0.013 dyne for 1cm square plates separated by 1um.
Which is comparable to the Coulomb force on the electron in the H atom.

-mark

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 3:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Hi Ed,

I want to extend a sincere thank you for engaging the inquisitive minds here
and helping to focus some of the discussions.  I have been too busy to
participate in what have been some very good exchanges, and fortunately too
busy so as to avoid others!  ;-)  Most of the regular-posting Vorts are
open-minded, but not without a healthy level of skepticism.  We also are not
concerned about discussing potentially 'career limiting/destroying' topics.

I will be starting a new vortex thread and I want to ask (you) some very
specific questions about the NAE; please look for it.  Now on to your
question...

RE: "I assume its "normal" EM radiation?"
Not sure... but I don't think 'vacuum quantum fluctuations' are considered
normal EM radiation.
  
I think the best (i.e., most accurate) explanation should come from the
experts, like Lamoreaux and Peter Milonni (also LANL).  The LANL Directory
shows both as Retired Fellows... perhaps one of them is still in the area,
and you could meet up for lunch to discuss in more detail?

Here's a youtube presentation by Dr. Milonni, and a few papers if you want a
more accurate explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12yjbyunRdM
"Casimir Effects: Peter Milonni's lecture at the Institute for Quantum
Computing"

http://cnls.lanl.gov/casimir/PresentationsSF/Force_Control-talk.pdf
"Precise Measurements of the Casimir Force: Experimental Details"
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dalvit/Talks_files/Piriapolis_09.pdf
"Towards Casimir force repulsion with metamaterials"   
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dcr/CasimirDrag_ContPhys.pdf
"... research suggesting that scattering quantum fluctuations might cause
drag in a superfluid moving at any speed."


-Mark Iverson

-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 11:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Thanks Mark, this is making more sense. But I have a few more questions. I'm
sure all of these issues have been addressed.

I assume the radiation is normal photon radiation, but at a higher frequency
than is normally encountered.  When such radiation passes through a
material, the radiation is either absorbed, creating heat in the material,
or it passes through without any change in energy or any effect on the
material.  Your description proposes that a certain size gap blocks a
fraction of the radiation coming from a particular direction.  In other
words, the photons are stopped in the gap and their energy heats the walls
of the gap.  The other photons pass right through the material without
interacting or producing a force.

  What produces the force?  The photons that are captured by the gap pass
through the material without interacting until they reach the gap. Only at
the gap is their presence felt by the material, but in the form of heat
energy.  For a force to be felt by the material, the photons must interact
and transfer momentum.  Does this mean all vacuum photons change direction
when passing through a material and the gap simply removes a momentum vector
such that a net force remains perpendicular to the gap?

If this is the explanation, we have still another assumption - a photon can
bounce off an atom without changing its energy (frequency) and in the
process transfer momentum to the atom while the photon goes in a different
direction.  Normally, a photon interacts with an electron, sending it in a
different direction but at the same time ionizing the atom to which the
electron was attached. Why does this process not occur when the vacuum
photons interact with matter?

Ed Storms


On May 17, 2013, at 11:22 AM, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:

> Ed:
> Two things...
>
> 1. I don't think Fran's explanation adequately explained the Casimir 
> effect... (sorry Fran).
> Theory posits that the vacuum is made up of almost an infinite range 
> of frequencies (some have proposed a cutoff frequency, probably 
> approaching the Plank frequency).  Closely spaced, parallel conducting 
> plates will ONLY exclude vacuum frequencies LARGER than the spacing 
> between the plates.  This is what creates the unbalanced forces which 
> want to push the plates together.  All vacuum frequencies are pushing 
> on the outside sur

RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

[MarkI-ZeroPoint]

Agreed, and it *is* only a matter of time... 
but can they please hurry up since I want to see it happen!
-m

-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] 
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 4:13 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Mark,

A force is provocative -- but a dynamic effect is what we want to see for
"free" energy.

Recently, the DCE or dynamical Casimir effect has been shown to be real

http://phys.org/news/2013-03-nihilo-dynamical-casimir-effect-metamaterial.ht
ml

Is it only a matter of time... ?



-Original Message-----
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint 

Let's put some numbers to it...

>From Dr. Milonni's YouTube presentation:

F = ((pi^2)*hbar*c) / (240d^4)  (force per unit area, Casimir original
derivation in 1948) 

F = 0.013 dyne for 1cm square plates separated by 1um.
Which is comparable to the Coulomb force on the electron in the H atom.

-mark

-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 3:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Hi Ed,

I want to extend a sincere thank you for engaging the inquisitive minds here
and helping to focus some of the discussions.  I have been too busy to
participate in what have been some very good exchanges, and fortunately too
busy so as to avoid others!  ;-)  Most of the regular-posting Vorts are
open-minded, but not without a healthy level of skepticism.  We also are not
concerned about discussing potentially 'career limiting/destroying' topics.

I will be starting a new vortex thread and I want to ask (you) some very
specific questions about the NAE; please look for it.  Now on to your
question...

RE: "I assume its "normal" EM radiation?"
Not sure... but I don't think 'vacuum quantum fluctuations' are considered
normal EM radiation.
  
I think the best (i.e., most accurate) explanation should come from the
experts, like Lamoreaux and Peter Milonni (also LANL).  The LANL Directory
shows both as Retired Fellows... perhaps one of them is still in the area,
and you could meet up for lunch to discuss in more detail?

Here's a youtube presentation by Dr. Milonni, and a few papers if you want a
more accurate explanation:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12yjbyunRdM
"Casimir Effects: Peter Milonni's lecture at the Institute for Quantum
Computing"

http://cnls.lanl.gov/casimir/PresentationsSF/Force_Control-talk.pdf
"Precise Measurements of the Casimir Force: Experimental Details"
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dalvit/Talks_files/Piriapolis_09.pdf
"Towards Casimir force repulsion with metamaterials"   
(Presentation format so has excellent graphics)

http://cnls.lanl.gov/~dcr/CasimirDrag_ContPhys.pdf
"... research suggesting that scattering quantum fluctuations might cause
drag in a superfluid moving at any speed."


-Mark Iverson

-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Friday, May 17, 2013 11:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nickel Aluminum (NiAl)

Thanks Mark, this is making more sense. But I have a few more questions. I'm
sure all of these issues have been addressed.

I assume the radiation is normal photon radiation, but at a higher frequency
than is normally encountered.  When such radiation passes through a
material, the radiation is either absorbed, creating heat in the material,
or it passes through without any change in energy or any effect on the
material.  Your description proposes that a certain size gap blocks a
fraction of the radiation coming from a particular direction.  In other
words, the photons are stopped in the gap and their energy heats the walls
of the gap.  The other photons pass right through the material without
interacting or producing a force.

  What produces the force?  The photons that are captured by the gap pass
through the material without interacting until they reach the gap. Only at
the gap is their presence felt by the material, but in the form of heat
energy.  For a force to be felt by the material, the photons must interact
and transfer momentum.  Does this mean all vacuum photons change direction
when passing through a material and the gap simply removes a momentum vector
such that a net force remains perpendicular to the gap?

If this is the explanation, we have still another assumption - a photon can
bounce off an atom without changing its energy (frequency) and in the
process transfer momentum to the atom while the photon goes in a different
direction.  Normally, a photon interacts with an electron, sending it in a
different direction but at the same time ionizing the atom to which the
electron was attached. Why does this process not occur when the vacuum
photons interact with matter?

Ed Storms


On May 17, 2013, at 11:22 AM, MarkI