Re: [Vo]:Russ George in New York Times
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 04 May 2007 07:06:01 -0700: Hi, [snip] Terry, looking to buy a new Hybrid Vimana I'd be happy with a second hand antique one. :) The second image down on this page: http://www.crystalinks.com/vedic.html ... shows an ancient vimana that looks suspiciously like one of those so-called black helicopters: At least three other aircraft form part of the same image. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_helicopters More fantastic still is the information given in the ancient Chaldean work, The Sifrala, which contains over one hundred pages of technical details on building a flying machine. It contains words which translate as graphite rod, copper coils, crystal indicator, vibrating spheres, stable angles, etc. See also the claim here (http://www.amazon.com/Secrets-Lost-Races-Discoveries-Civilizations/dp/1572581980) that The Sifrala is an invention of David Hatcher Childress. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:The Ecliptic and Mass Extinctions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 6 May 2007 02:41:17 -0800: Hi, [snip] Further, the hypothesis doesn't give a reason the major extinctions start about 600 My ago. I didn't think there was much life around to extinguish prior to 600 MY ago. (Or if there was, then probably mostly bacterial, and we wouldn't notice an extinction event anyway.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re:the times, they are a changin'
In reply to Paul Lowrance's message of Mon, 07 May 2007 10:34:39 -0700: Hi, [snip] I'm curious if any physicist has truly calculated the probability at room temperatures? I doubt it's once per billion years. The probability changes according to duration and material amount, correct? [snip] I have seen figures quoted for the fusion time of the Deuterium molecule of about 1E80 years. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:OT: 70 Years Ago (with commentary)
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 08 May 2007 12:34:48 -0400: Hi, [snip] To the south, between Gettysburg and Washington, there are no good places to arrange an ambush. The mountains stop abruptly, and the land is flat, thanks to a meteor strike millions of years ago. So I take that oil is found under these plains? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:OT: 70 Years Ago (with commentary)
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 08 May 2007 18:30:14 -0400: Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: The mountains stop abruptly, and the land is flat, thanks to a meteor strike millions of years ago. So I take that oil is found under these plains? No oil, and not much water either. Then they obviously haven't drilled deep enough yet. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:PHEVs not a good solution
In reply to Jeff Fink's message of Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:38:58 -0400: Hi, [snip] 'There are old pilots and bold pilots, but no old, bold pilots.' ...but plenty of auld bald pilots. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Runaway Breakdown ionospheric energy tap
In reply to William Beaty's message of Wed, 9 May 2007 14:25:28 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Also, here's something odd: Wardenclyffe as an FE device: No instruments have been installed as yet in the transmitter, nor has Mr. Tesla vouchsafed any description of what they will be like. But in his article he announces that he will transmit from the tower an electric wave of a total maximum activity of ten million horse power. This, he says, will be possible with a plant of but 100 horse power, by the use of a magnifying transmitter of his own invention and certain artifices which he promises to make known in due course. Cloudborn Electric WaveletsTo Encircle the Globe New York Times, 27 March 1904. If certain artifices were large vacuum globes creating an upwards- directed beam, then Wardenclyffe was not so much a 'transmitter' but instead was more like a 'giant FET' which periodically shorts out the Earth/ionosphere voltage, chopping it at high frequency to convert its natural DC into an AC output. This may not have been necessary. Since he was creating a resonance in the Earth-ionosphere cavity anyway, he may have discovered that the resonance was naturally fed by the energy already stored there. IOW, the cavity resonated at the natural frequency, and provided energy at that frequency to a resonant load (an electric motor would run nicely at the Schumann resonance frequency :- 400-500 rpm). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Runaway Breakdown ionospheric energy tap
In reply to William Beaty's message of Wed, 9 May 2007 11:23:07 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Normally a large Tesla coil sends out fractal plasma streamers: sparks based on electron avalanche of air molecules as well as UV ionization. The tips of the streamers grow relatively slowly, on the order of tens of KPH. However, if supplied with relativistic electrons as a seed, where the electron velocities/energies are above 1MeV, then a second form of breakdown occurs. MeV electrons collide with air molecules and release more MeV electrons. [snip] Paint a beta-emitter on the outside of the tesla-coil torus? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Runaway Breakdown ionospheric energy tap
In reply to leaking pen's message of Wed, 9 May 2007 23:08:54 -0700: Hi, [snip] wouldnt most safe to use paintable beta emitters have much less energetic particles? AFAIK there is no such thing as a safe to use paintable beta emitter. I was suggesting a new process. The paint would have to be very thin BTW. A nano powder deposited on a sticky substrate might work best. There are beta emitters with MeV energies. On 5/9/07, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [snip] Paint a beta-emitter on the outside of the tesla-coil torus? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Runaway Breakdown ionospheric energy tap
In reply to William Beaty's message of Fri, 11 May 2007 20:43:59 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] and if Tesla ever achieved miles-long power transmission as the stories say, I speculate that the device in the patent drawing accidentally harnessed Runaway Breakdown physics. [snip] Everything I've read on Tesla suggests that he achieved long distance energy transmission by resonating the Earth. Think of it as a one wire transmission line, terminated by resonant cavities where the Earth itself is the transmission line. In short he used the ground as a conductor, so his energy transmission was not wireless, it was a wired transmission, which explains why it was reasonably efficient. The towers were simply large doorknob capacitors which provided the capacitance in the tank circuit on the transmitting end. They had to be on towers because the voltage was so high, and he wanted to avoid a short to ground (around the generator that stood on the transmitting end between the resonant cavity and the ground connection into which the power was fed). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Runaway Breakdown ionospheric energy tap
In reply to William Beaty's message of Sat, 12 May 2007 19:32:44 -0700 (PDT): Hi Bill, [snip] On Sat, 12 May 2007, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Everything I've read on Tesla Please point out where Tesla gives all the details behind this diagram: http://amasci.com/graphics/tes_radpat3.gif You won't find any. I wasn't really looking for any. My speculations are based on the assumption that Tesla was very secretive during his Colorado Springs period, so we have to look for clues, rather than just assuming that Tesla put his key secrets in articles for competitors to take. suggests that he achieved long distance energy transmission by resonating the Earth. It's been tested and doesn't work. Something is missing. See below. [snip] The missing pieces of the puzzle could be the large single-electrode tubes described in Colorado Springs Notes. What was their purpose? Why was Tesla trying to operate these x-ray tubes at extreme high power, while trying to use metal toroid shields to solve the problem of their destruction by glass perforation? In hindsight there is a simple possibility: the tubes provided seeds in the form of relativistic electrons, and allowed the creation of sparks KMs long. With such sparks to produce regions of conductive plasma it becomes possible to create an immensely tall virtual antenna tower. Without such a tower, Tesla coils don't emit much energy. (If they did, the FCC would ban them!) Nowadays they probably would, however the FCC didn't exist in his day. Think of it as a one wire transmission line, terminated by resonant cavities where the Earth itself is the transmission line. Go see my article http://amasci.com/tesla/tmistk.html Precisely. Note also that the balls attached to the ends act as doorknob capacitors, resulting in tuned tank circuits on both ends of the transmission line. Energy is temporarily stored in these tank circuits before being shuttled off back down the line during the next part of the cycle. Tesla also spoke of keeping the leakage of the capacitors to a minimum. That doesn't really agree well with your notion of creating huge discharges. In short he used the ground as a conductor, so his energy transmission was not wireless, it was a wired transmission, which explains why it was reasonably efficient. The towers were simply large doorknob capacitors which provided the capacitance in the tank circuit on the transmitting end. They had to be on towers because the voltage was so high, and he wanted to avoid a short to ground (around the generator that stood on the transmitting end between the resonant cavity and the ground connection into which the power was fed). Hobbyists have built tens of large TCs (perhaps hundreds), and nobody has duplicated any of Tesla's long distance wireless transmission claims. Why? I say it's because of a key element that Tesla patented separately but carefully avoided discussing. [snip] I think the reason that no one else has succeeded is because they didn't approach it on a grand enough scale. It takes a lot of power to resonate the whole planet. A half-hearted attempt will just result in the signal being absorbed. That's why Tesla's towers were so big. IOW though a fairly good medium, the planet isn't perfect, and until enough power is put in to overcome the losses, any potential resonance will be damped out of existence. Besides, there is another (speculative) aspect to this. When resonating the planet, the magnetic field part of the resonance may interact with the natural magnetic field of the Earth itself, and through that with the Van Allen belts, thereby allowing the energy of the Solar wind to be tapped. Another source of energy potentially coupled to the Earth's magnetic field is the geothermal energy in the Earth's core. The Earth's field might be used to magnetically cool the core of the planet, with the energy being dumped into an electrical load as the cold side. 2LOT isn't violated because the core of the Earth is much hotter than the load (i.e. the surface). Either (both) of the above may explain why he is purported to have gotten more out than he put in. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:*******VIDEO LINK TO THE NEW ENERGY MACHINE DEMONSTRATION
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 18 May 2007 13:04:27 -0500: Hi, [snip] Newman rediscovered the metaphysics of the siphon: Gravity can work for you, instead of you always working against gravity. This brings up the economic issue of charging for joules (energy) which I mentioned before. e.g. What gives an hydro electric company the right to forever charge for joule consumption? The fact that you are apparently willing to pay for it. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Scientists one more step closer to realising invisible technology
Hi, http://www.physorg.com/news97945163.html quote:- This happens because the metamaterial that makes up the cloak stretches the metrics of space, in a similar way to what heavy planets and stars do for the metrics of space-time in Einsteins general relativity theory. ...sounds like a warp to me. Before you know it they'll discover that it eliminates inertia. :)
Re: [Vo]:Star Flashers
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 24 May 2007 09:58:18 -0700: Hi, [snip] Then there is the problem of 'rithmatic. Adding alphas to carbon to get to 18O seems to be utterly impossible without three body reactions and free neutrons. Yet -- a quick look at the transmutation products, which are often found in LENR matrix 'condensed-matter' reactions, which includes deuterium in a Pd matrix, indicates that many of these rare isotopes - are the end products of multiples of alpha particles. How they got that way is anybodies' guess. Three particle reactions may be common in condensed matter or else the femptosecond intermediary is there - which has 'plenty of time' to re-react. A femptosecond at sub-angstrom dimensions is a rather long time, comparatively. There may be a simpler explanation:- O16 + D - F18 + 7.5 MeV F18 decays to O18. This would require circumstances which favor the rapid formation of D. (Rapid compression of lots of Hy?). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Star Flashers
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Fri, 25 May 2007 01:34:04 -0500: Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 24 May 2007 09:58:18 -0700: There may be a simpler explanation:- O16 + D - F18 + 7.5 MeV F18 decays to O18. This would require circumstances which favor the rapid formation of D. (Rapid compression of lots of Hy?). Hpw about O16 plus a deuteron - F18 Gee, now why didn't I think of that. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Giffen's Paradox/ was VIDEO LINK...
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 25 May 2007 16:18:55 -0500: Hi, [snip] Giffen makes the mistake of measuring demand by the total amount spent on the product rather than the actual number of items traded. Giffen paradox (c.1895) Proposed by Scottish economist Sir Robert Giffen (1837-1910) from his observations of the purchasing habits of the Victorian poor, Giffen paradox states that demand for a commodity increases as its price rises. Giffen paradox is explained by the fact that if the poor rely heavily on basic commodities like bread or potatoes, when prices are low they might still have some disposable income for purchases of other items. As bread or corn prices rise, these other purchases are no longer possible, thereby forcing the poor to concentrate all their purchasing power on the bread or corn. It should not be confused with products bought as status symbols or for CONSPICUOUS CONSUMPTION. Source: R Giffen, Economic Inquiries and Studies (London, 1904) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:What's up with Denny Klein
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 27 May 2007 12:37:09 -0800: Hi, [snip] Anybody know what's up with Denny Klein? See especially a highly questionable ad: http://hytechapps.com/aquygen/hhos [snip] See also http://hytechapps.com/aquygen/science . It sounds a bit like the opposite of administratium. :) In the statement: Aquygen Gas instantaneously melts tungsten, bricks, and other highly refractive substances. In particular, measurements have established the remarkable capability of combusted Aquygen Gas to instantaneously reach temperatures over 10,000° F, under which virtually all substances on Earth can be sublimated. ..they make the mistake of misidentifying the behavior with regard to tungsten, as I have previously pointed out here. This mistake is likely also the reason behind the claim of 10,000° F. Furthermore, I believe refractive should be refractory. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Giffen's Paradox/ was VIDEO LINK...
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 28 May 2007 21:17:21 -0500: Hi, [snip] Marshall wrote in the 1895 edition of Principles of Economics: As Mr. Giffen has pointed out, a rise in the price of bread makes so large a drain on the resources of the poorer labouring families and raises so much the marginal utility of money to them, that they are forced to curtail their consumption of meat and the more expensive farinaceous foods: and, bread being still the cheapest food which they can get and will take, they consume more, and not less of it. That may well be true, however I suspect that if the price of bread went up to that extent, then probably the price of everything else did as well. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Comments on LENR/CANR, Hora and Miley
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 29 May 2007 12:28:49 -0800: Hi, [snip] Regarding D + Pd cold fusion cathode conditions, Hora and Miley write [1]: The screened deuterons are mutually repulsed by their Coulomb field at distances less than 2 pm, but thanks to their screening are moving like neutral neutrons. Any attraction by the Casimir effect [29] is too small. But calculating the gravitational attraction for the deuteron masses at the 2 pm distance arrives at values of about ten times higher energy than the thermal motion at room temperature. [snip] The gravitational energy between two deuterons at a distance of 2 pm is 2.3E-33 eV. This is about 1E31 times less than the kinetic energy at room temperature. Methinks the authors slipped more than one decimal. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Li cell question
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Tue, 29 May 2007 20:09:54 -0500: Hi, [snip] Vortexians; I was in stupid mode when I failed to realize that 3 Li - would produce 1 O18. I'm wondering if this is the reaction Jones was talking about? If this is the case, what kind of energy relase are we talking about? I assume that O18 a rare isotope, so an isotopic analysis of gas coming off of a Li ion battery would reflect this production? [snip] 3 X Li6 = F18, though of course this would rapidly decay to O18. Nevertheless this reaction is not likely to be responsible for much O18 IMO, because Li6 is only about 7% of Li, which means that even in the unlikely event that 3 Li atoms fuse, there is only 1 chance in 3000 that all three will be Li6. (unless of course Li6 and Li7 are usually formed in more equal proportions, and the Li7 is left over on Earth because all the Li6 fused. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Giffen's Paradox/ was VIDEO LINK...
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Wed, 30 May 2007 13:41:29 -0500: Hi, [snip] On 29/5/2007 12:01 AM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Mon, 28 May 2007 21:17:21 -0500: Hi, [snip] Marshall wrote in the 1895 edition of Principles of Economics: As Mr. Giffen has pointed out, a rise in the price of bread makes so large a drain on the resources of the poorer labouring families and raises so much the marginal utility of money to them, that they are forced to curtail their consumption of meat and the more expensive farinaceous foods: and, bread being still the cheapest food which they can get and will take, they consume more, and not less of it. That may well be true, however I suspect that if the price of bread went up to that extent, then probably the price of everything else did as well. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant. Your position is a giffen good only exists a mistake of interpretation. Not quite. Giffen suggested that people bought more bread because the price of bread went up. I'm saying that the more likely reason is that the price of everything went up, and they only had money for bread, which was still cheaper than everything else. If only the price of bread had gone up, then they would likely have shifted to e.g. potatoes, which would then have been relatively cheaper. Westerners have become so dependent on oil consumption that we will continue to buy more of it even as the price rises. This is only true to some extent, see Jed's reply. It is too late to expect rising oil prices to reduce the demand for oil. People complain and complain about the price but still the demand rises. Is the demand rising in the US? World wide it certainly is, but I think this is primarily a consequence of the economic boom in India and China resulting in lots more people being able to afford cars. Reducing the demand for oil will require government supported and _mandated_ technological shifts. The demand for oil will drop when a cheaper alternative becomes available. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Should Congress support cold fusion? I vote no!
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 30 May 2007 12:35:01 +0200: Hi, [snip] - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 11:24 PM Subject: [Vo]:Should Congress support cold fusion? I vote no! ... But, by the same standard, I suppose 1% of the public believes in perpetual motion machines such as the one Joe Newman claims he has. I would not want to see the government spend research money on that sort of thing. Some polls indicate that half of the public believes in creationism instead of evolution, but I would not want to see government money spent on creationism. (I suspect these polls exaggerate the support for creationism.) You're right Jed, the public believes in many silly things, so why the hell do you want to rely on them to decide which research should be publicly funded? ...because the public believes in many silly things...and some silly things only turn out not to be silly after the research has been funded. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:D2 direct to Fe ?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 04 Jun 2007 08:33:06 -0700: Hi, [snip] Heavy metals, particularly iron, have been confirmed by a NASA solar mission, squirting out of the sun in Solar Flares in amounts which are up to 10,000 times higher than predicted. The results are evidence in favor of Xavier's EMRP gravity theory, and the iron-rich sun model. [snip] Note that the determination of what the Sun is spewing out is probably based upon spectroscopic evidence, and as Mills has already pointed out, at least one Hydrino line is easily confused with an Fe line. Now which is more likely to be present on the Sun in large quantities, Fe or H? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:D2 direct to Fe ?
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 5 Jun 2007 02:19:03 -0800: Hi, [snip] or the Sun's magnetic field reverses every 11 years, which is the true cause of the sunspots. On Jun 4, 2007, at 10:49 PM, Michel Jullian wrote: Interesting, how is the 11 year periodicity of the sunspots explained in this theory? Jovian trash haulers peak their trash dumping into the sun every 11 years, or ... Jupiter perturbs a high eccentricity asteroid band once per orbit, or ... it is caused by a roughly 11 year orbital period for a high eccentricity asteroid group that is dispersed throughout its orbit. Maybe it is just asteroid belt debris from a planet that exploded long ago and far far away ... Regards, Horace Heffner Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:D2 direct to Fe ?
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 5 Jun 2007 14:48:34 -0800: Hi, [snip] or the Sun's magnetic field reverses every 11 years, which is the true cause of the sunspots. If that's the sole cause, then how is it we get big sunspots at the reversal point, when the ? Perhaps *because* the magnetic field is highly reduced? Regards, Horace Heffner Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:D2 direct to Fe ?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:34:50 -0700: Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Note that the determination of what the Sun is spewing out is probably based upon spectroscopic evidence, and as Mills has already pointed out, at least one Hydrino line is easily confused with an Fe line. Now which is more likely to be present on the Sun in large quantities, Fe or H? But even Mills sez that the Hy formation is a coronal effect - and not a core effect. The lines in question are seen only in flares erupting from the core, and are not in (abundant) evidence otherwise (apparently, or they would have been mentioned). How do they know the flares come from the core? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Rout ICCF3 paper
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 05 Jun 2007 12:24:20 -0700: Hi, [snip] Electrons of a few hundred volts, which is the best explanation offered by the author, has the problem you mention: absence of the radiation signature in a vacuum. Unless, that is, the electrons are not primary (from the sample) but instead are coming from the oxygen (air) itself. How could that be? Why wouldn't electrons also come from helium? Is this a supra-chemical reaction similar to an Auger cascade? [snip] I would offer the following suggestion. Hydrino molecules fuse with either O18 from Oxygen/air, or with D2 in Hydrogen gas to create either energetic alphas in the case of O18, or (T p)/(He3 n) in the case of D2. These in turn ionize the surrounding gas releasing low energy electrons. When alphas ionize gasses they typically lose about 400 eV per atom, which isn't a bad match for the purported electron energy. There is no reaction with Helium because no nuclear reaction is possible. None occurs with Argon because the central charge may be too high, and the reaction would take so long as to be undetectable. There is no reaction in vacuum because there is nothing to fuse with. Not sure about Nitrogen. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Rout ICCF3 paper
In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Thu, 07 Jun 2007 08:21:58 +1000: Hi, [snip] Oops. I would offer the following suggestion. Hydrino molecules fuse with either O18 from Oxygen/air, or with D2 in Hydrogen gas to create either energetic alphas in the case of O18, or (T p)/(He3 n) in the case of D2. The D2 reaction is of course wrong. H2 + D probably - He3 + fast electrons/ gammas. (One proton from the Hy2 tunneling into the D nucleus). Note also that the reported reaction under H2 is likely to be weaker due to the scarcity of D in Hydrogen gas, compared to the relative abundance of O18 in Oxygen. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Tesla Revisted
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:00:21 -0500: Hi, [snip] I can't explain it with em theory, but it behaves like a simple pendulum. Ignoring friction, once the pendulum is set in motion it will keep swinging with the same amplitude until the pendulum is used to power a clock or some other device. Precisely, so if no power is drawn, then none is transmitted (theoretically). The trick is that the inductance of the transmitting coil remains high until a resonant load is attached. Since most things in the environment are out of resonance the impedance stays high, and the transmitter itself appears as a high impendence to its own power source. Essentially it's a transformer primary winding with an open secondary winding. BTW this implies that losses can be reduced even further by increasing the Q factor of both transmitter and receiver. The effect of which is to narrow the bandwidth, ensuring that even less spurious receivers are to be found in the environment, and consequently less loss. Of course the flip side is that it's harder to match the resonant frequency of the receiver to that of the transmitter. Harry On 8/6/2007 11:27 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: Maybe it would be possible for the emitter/primary to know there is a receiver/secondary around drawing power from it, if none it could turn off, and turn on for a brief time every few seconds to check of it's needed. Maybe it could even modulate its output power to fit the needs? On the how it works side, has anybody understood the difference between this MHz resonant magnetic coupling device and a radio emitter with a tuned receiver? They say energy is not radiated away if it's not used by a receiver, I can't really see why. I suspect that the receiver is within a wavelength of the transmitter, so that this is a near field effect, which would imply that greater distances could be achieved by using lower frequencies, though I suspect that one of the corollaries of Murphy's law says that as the frequency drops, so does the energy transfer efficiency. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Tesla Revisted
In reply to Jeff Fink's message of Sat, 9 Jun 2007 07:00:25 -0400: Hi, [snip] So, why cant people living within a few hundred feet of high voltage transmission lines tap useful free power with a 60 Hz receiver circuit? [snip] Are you sure they can't? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Witricity scheme (was Re:Tesla Revisted)
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Sat, 9 Jun 2007 19:26:17 +0200: Hi, [snip] Whatever the shape of the wire a DC current can't emit radio waves AFAIK. The witricity experimental device uses AC at MHz frequencies (cf the link I provided, here it is again http://www.mit.edu/~soljacic/MIT_WiTricity_Press_Release.pdf ) Michel I see no reason why a MHz device wouldn't also emit common radio waves since the transmitting coil can be seen as a multi-coil hoop antenna. Unfortunately I don't know the formulae governing the efficiency of such antennae, however my guess is that one could design the coil such as to make it as inefficient as possible as a normal antenna (e.g. choose the wavelength to be a bad match for the actual size of the antenna - a transcendental number comes to mind e.g. Pi thus also eliminating transmission at harmonic frequencies). However I also think that the impedance of the transmitter will be much lower when a tuned receiver is present than when it isn't. Another means of keeping the normal radio transmission losses to a minimum is to lower the frequency. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:em waves and pocket calculators/was Witricity scheme
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sat, 09 Jun 2007 22:07:05 -0500: Hi, [snip] Many years ago, before ipods and mp3 players, I had a sony walkman with a radio turner. I found that if a pocket calculator were switched on and placed on top of the walkman I could move the tuner's dial to particular frequency and hear a faint thump...thump...thump... sort of like a heartbeat. Different calculators generated a similar pattern of sounds. What was going on? [snip] Calculators have their own inbuilt clock which is a quartz oscillator, and also divider circuits, so they produce a number of radio frequencies. If the Walkman is tuned to a frequency close to one of those generated by the calculator, then a slow difference frequency will be generated which could be the thump-thump sound. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Tesla Revisted
In reply to John Berry's message of Sun, 10 Jun 2007 11:34:57 +1200: Hi, [snip] Look into Earl Ammann if your interested in distant transmission of electrical energy. [snip] I did, and combined this with Tesla to come up with the following based on the MIT work. Most of the kinetic energy in the Solar wind is carried by protons. When these interact with the Earth's magnetic field they produce Synchrotron radiation. However because of the large mass of the protons and the weakness of the Earth's magnetic field the frequency generated is low. For a local magnetic field strength of 0.1 gauss, the frequency is about 150 Hz. This increases up to about 1 kHz at field strengths up to at most 0.65 gauss. Now the wavelength of a 1 kHz wave is 300 km. For 150 Hz this is 2000 km. Since 2000 km is far enough (straight up) to encompass some of those trapped protons, any tuned receiver would be within 1 wavelength, and hence amenable to the MIT process. IOW the protons in the Solar wind supply the power, and we pick it up with a tank circuit tuned to the matching frequency. This may be what many free energy claims were based on, as well as some of Tesla's work. (This may coincidentally also be the source of purported free energy in Joseph Newman's motor, which contains a huge coil. He could be running on a sub-harmonic.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Tesla Revisted
Hi, BTW, the lower Van Allen belt extends from about 700 to 1 km above the surface, so the average distance is about 5000 km, which matches a frequency of 60 Hz. Tesla's magic number anyone? ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Firestorm Plug
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Sat, 09 Jun 2007 22:52:04 -0500: Hi Thomas, [snip] Vortexians; My friend has been working with Robert Krupa, the inventor of the Firestorm spark plug. He showed me a paper written by the inventor. It contains some pictures (drawings.) I was unable to find a digitized version of the paper. Given the claims of a 30+% increase in fuel efficiency from an ICE equipped with these plugs, I've decided to post the comments next to the pictures and see if what Mr. Krupa says makes sense to any of you people. Any idea where these plugs can be obtained? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Tesla Revisted
Hi, My previous post stated that the frequency varied from about 150 Hz to 1 kHz. In fact due to the weakening of the Earth's field with altitude, the frequency actually remains fairly well constrained within a range of 300-350 Hz over the altitude interval where the effect would work. Below 700 km there isn't much of the van Allen belts to speak of, and beyond about 1000 km one gets beyond 1 wavelength, but only slowly. By 2000 km the ratio is 1.4 and the frequency has dropped to about 200 Hz. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Firestorm Plug
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Sun, 10 Jun 2007 02:01:06 -0500: Hi, [snip] Any idea where these plugs can be obtained? Regards, If they were commercially available we could pretty much stop foreign oil imports. /It's not part of the establishment's agenda to do that. / I repeat my question. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Tesla Revisted
Hi, BTW this energy transfer method probably also fits the energy transfer from a hydrogen atom to a catalyst atom during Hydrino formation. Both transmitter and receiver are high Q resonant systems. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Firestorm Plug
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 10 Jun 2007 05:02:02 -0800: Hi, [snip] I don't know who's ripping off whom, but check out the Bosch plugs: http://www.boschautoparts.com/Products/SparkPlugs/IrFusion.htm http://www.boschautoparts.com/Products/SparkPlugs/Platinum4.htm Thanks Horace, that's probably as close as I'm going to get. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Tesla Revisted
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:14:36 -0500: Hi, [snip] Could the electron and the nucleus as a magnetically coupled resonant systems explain why energy states are quantized? [snip] Energy states are quantized IMO because the De Broglie wave of the electron needs to be in phase with itself as it wraps around the circumference of the atom. If it gets out of phase, then it tends to annihilate itself at the radius at which it is out of phase, thus ensuring that only certain radii are stable. Therefore electrons can only permanently reside at certain radii, and must jump from one to the next when gaining or losing energy. Consequently energy is absorbed or lost in fixed amounts, i.e. it is quantized. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:em waves and pocket calculators/was Witricity scheme
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:16:47 -0500: Hi, [snip] Calculators have their own inbuilt clock which is a quartz oscillator, and also divider circuits, so they produce a number of radio frequencies. If the Walkman is tuned to a frequency close to one of those generated by the calculator, then a slow difference frequency will be generated which could be the thump-thump sound. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant. ok, thanks for that explanation, but can you say bit more about difference frequency? When two frequencies affect one another, then modulation occurs, and as a consequence both sum and difference frequencies arise. If the two frequencies happen to be very close together, then the difference can be quite low and easily audible. You can hear this when slowly tuning an AM radio in to a weak station. There is a whistling sound, which drops in pitch as you get closer to the station, well at least there used to be on old radios. In modern radios, I think they build in suppression circuits which prevent any sound coming from the speakers until you are actually directly on the station. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Proven OU ?
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:21:09 -0700: Hi, Claimed COP = 1.75 Anyone see the main problem with that claim ? http://www.blazelabs.com/n-aquagen.asp [snip] Helium has been detected by other researchers. a sure sign that either some Hydrino based fusion is going on, or four bound hydrinos are masquerading as Helium. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Britannica electrolysis concise article corrected
Forwarded to Vortex on behalf of Michel who seems unable to get through. -- On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:36:57 +0200, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Britannica electrolysis concise article corrected From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 11:19:10 +0200 Lots of good creative ideas (the triode idea seems complicated though, and resistances will dissipate), but the electrolysis-through-insulators (e.g. glass plates) concept looks the most magical to me, do keep us updated if you get around to trying it. Wrt carbon electrodes, it seems that all they do is produce a small amount of CO2 so they probably aren't harmful, see: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/may98/893445065.Ch.r.html The electrodes we use are either platinum, which does not react with anything in the system, or carbon, which reacts some of the oxygen produced but still allows most of the gas to escape Michel Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Goose bumps at the surface of a polarized liquid submitted to a field
Forwarded to Vortex on behalf of Michel who seems unable to get through. -- On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:36:57 +0200, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Goose bumps at the surface of a polarized liquid submitted to a field From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:08:24 +0200 Bill wrote: ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpBxCnHU8Ao Beautiful video. The bumps at the beginning (threshold field presumably) may be relevant to your airthreads phenomenon. Such bumps are known to arise with distilled de-ionized (DI) water. But for tap water, there is no molecular alignment because the e-fields within the water are zero when opposite ions are attracted to the surface, serving as a conductive shield. Good point, tap water is conductive so it can't be the same phenomenon. ... I've played with a large quantity of ferrofluid. The spines are very similar to the spines seen when a magnet picks up quantities of iron powder. Yes, only more fluid-looking as would be expected. One huge blob of iron powder is unstable, and instead the blob breaks into two spines which repel each other, then those break up as well, ideally forming an array. (Oddly enough, ferrofluid forms square arrays of spines, rather than hexagonal close-packing.) Wrt the hollow you unambiguously observed by laser reflection, might it have been a valley between several bumps or the inside of a volcano-like structure? I guess I wasn't clear enough.When a relatively huge flow of electric wind blows from a metal needle, it blasts a huge hole in the mist layer (many cm diameter) with lots of easily observed turbulent stirring of the fog. And at the same time, it pushes a valley into the water. This is not the air threads or filaments I observed. Instead it's a high-current phenomenon on the scale of microamps or hundreds of nanoamps. It only appears when a metal needle is held appx 10cm from the water surface. The air threads or fibers which create mm-wide holes in the fog... those don't create any easily-detected changes in the water surface. These threads are created by holding a sharp, high-resistance non-metal object appx 30cm from the water surface. I used carbon fibers, torn paper edges, and human hairs (especially eyelashes) to create the thread-like phenomena. I only conducted a brief test when looking for water surface deflections. Perhaps an experiment more carefully performed than my own will detect a pimple or a valley. OK I get it, thanks for clarifying the differences. About the low current phenomenon, it occurs to me that a sufficiently low current ion stream, where the ions would form a clearly discrete dotted line rather than a continuous-looking stream, would not expand sideways by self repulsion as we have been assuming all along. Each ion would just follow the previous one at comfortable distance, only sigzaging slightly along the line of maximum field while it collides with neutrals every micron or so. Could this reconcile the ion wind theory with your observations? Michel Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Filament ion jets
Forwarded to Vortex on behalf of Michel who seems unable to get through. -- On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 10:36:57 +0200, Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Filament ion jets From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 10:24:53 +0200 Applications of EHD to aircraft aerodynamics has been a subject of intense research recently, lookup e.g. OAUGDP. Why _piezo_ ceramic tiles BTW? Michel - Original Message - From: William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 11, 2007 8:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Filament ion jets On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Horace Heffner wrote: I just got around to reading the experimental results at: http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airexp.html I was surprised to see: - I can't see any effects from a 3/4 neodymium magnet. At 10nA, the magnetism around each thread must be incredibly small. That's an indication the ratio of q/m is very small. A very tiny current still makes for a large deflection if q/m is large. That's only for vacuum environment. If fluid mechanics plays a role in the forming of the narrow flow pattern, then perhaps the EM forces might be insignificant when compared to the fluid forces. If so, then a magnet might have no noticable effect on the charged stream in air, while it would have a huge effect if the same stream was flying through a vacuum. Looks like you have a large molecular chain made of polar molecules, maybe made of H20 or CO2 or both, with very high resistance. Or it could just be a fairly slow flow of charged matter. Such a stream might have a narrow shape which is stable, just as narrow fluid laminar jets are a stable shape. I strongly suspect that these filaments are fluid jets which would normally become turbulent, but somehow the electrostatic forces are somehow suppressing any turbulence. Somehow the EM forces would make any kinks in the flow pattern become smaller, rather than growing as they usually would. If so, then the same electrostatic forces might suppress turbulence on aircraft surfaces if those aircraft could be coated with ions and subjected to a strong e-field. Others like JL Naudin think that the military uses this to suppress sonic booms. But what if it suppresses turbulence as well? On high-RE devices such as aircraft surfaces, most friction is due to turbulence and not do to viscous drag. If turbulence is gone, then fuel use is drastically lowered, and a long-distance bomber could be very small (not like a B-52.) One way to do such a thing would be to cover an aircraft with piezo ceramic tiles, drive the fuselage with high voltage AC to create a plasma layer in the air adjacent to the tiles, then charge the fuselage to one HV polarity to create the DC electrical forces. (And perhaps add a bit of carbon in the tile ceramic to allow some microamps of DC leakage.) I had the above idea in my head for years, and now recently someone has found pieces of tile pucks which look much like I imagine, and which also appear to have suffered a high voltage burn-through that could have been the reason the tiles fell from the sky: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Eyewitness2007 (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 425-222-5066unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:51:10 -0800: Hi, [snip] On Jun 14, 2007, at 6:51 AM, R.C.Macaulay wrote: Howdy Vorts, With all the energy info rhetoric emanating out of D.C. and news sources do you sense the public is expecting too much from the energy industry? It is a case of much too little much too late. Agreed, but that's a direct consequence of the average intelligence of humanity. We always do too little too late. What is your predicted time line for the first really serious bump in the road ? It appears to me we probably don't have long to wait. If the surge doesn't work then trouble is imminent. Basically, it has already failed. Congress will force a pull out, maybe even sooner. Some obvious possible follow-on scenarios, in random order, include (a) destruction of oil infrastructure by civil war, Probable. (b) Iran running rampant in Iraq and elsewhere Improbable IMO. However indirect support for the Shia population in Iraq is probable. (c) preemptive strikes against Iran nuclear facilities by Israel followed by who knows what, They might want to, but Iran has learned from the bombing of the Iraqi reactor. Most Iranian sites are very well buried, which means that ordinary air strikes are unlikely to have much effect. Furthermore, Israel can't really use nukes, because of the likelihood of suffering from the fallout themselves. That ensures that their nukes are a last ditch defensive measure, not a tactical tool. (d) general embargo of oil to the US out of general hatred of our culture and spite for our policies, Very likely. (e) Iran gets the bomb, or one is used, followed by nuclear warfare, I doubt that Iran would be that stupid. First they know as well as anyone else roughly what Israel has (not to mention that the US is just itching for an opportunity to test it's latest designs in the field). Even if Iran had a few bombs, that would never constitute a successful first strike capability. At best all they could hope for is that it would serve as a deterrent. Despite the fact that the Western media makes a meal of Ahmadinejad's rhetoric, I seriously doubt that he is a fool. Not to mention that Iran would suffer exactly the same problem that Israel would, i.e. fallout from their own bombs. (f) a successful terrorist attack followed by rounds of retribution, and the election of a sudden dark horse demagogic war mongering president, You missed the possibility of cancelled elections and a president that stays on forever as a dictator. a draft, etc., (g) disintegration, chaos, and genocide in Lebanon and the West Bank, Given that this is already happening, and the only side to benefit from it is Israel, it wouldn't surprise me in the least of it were Mossad lighting the matches. followed by intervention by who knows and then by who knows and then by who knows..., (h) a general all out conventional Naval and Air strike on Iranian military and infrastructure in an effort to prevent or minimize any or all of the above for a while. The air strike may well eventuate, and doubtless the reason you give is the excuse that would be used, however it wouldn't be the real reason. The real reason would be that the Siamese twins - the US and Israel (joined at the hip pocket) want complete control over all middle-eastern oils supplies, and elimination of any potential threat to Israel. It is just a matter of months, no more than 18. Then that's about how long we have to make CF commercial. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
would achieve absolutely nothing directly, yet would result in retaliatory strikes from all sides. This would be a severe case of Israel shooting itself in the foot. Pakistan already has a bomb and is visibly teatering. Imagine a nuclear armed Pakistan run by President Osama Bin laden. A wild flight of fancy. Osama is and always has been a CIA stooge. Just check out the family connections, and why do you think he has never been captured? And have you noticed that he puts out nice little videos when Dubya's popularity is dropping in the poles? He is the mandatory foil, the face of the enemy. If he didn't exist, they would have to, and did, invent him. That is not to say that he isn't a real person, of course he is, but he's a puppet. He knows where the action is. No wonder. If we see a real war in the middle-east oil will go to prices that will be spectacular but we now have hundreds of companies ready to go with solutions. Yet most of these are still lab solutions. Few have been tested on a sufficiently large scale to know whether or not they are going to be able to hack it in the real world. If oil goes to $150 a barrel the debate about subidies would be over; the rush to clear the red tape will be on and those that stand in the way of the new green giant will be stomped on. Probably true. :) The real battlelines will not be about oil; it will be Coal verses the hundreds of new energy technologies. The Coal miners will be a greater threat than the industry. This won't necessarily be a problem. While the coal industry is dying, lots of other new industries will be starting up and hiring those who lose employment in the coal industry, so there will be a slide sideways rather than a dole queue. With plenty of work becoming available elsewhere, people won't mind leaving the coal industry. [snip] In Order to defuse the coal/ greenhouse problem it needs to be very cheep. No, it's not even a desirable solution. The first time there's an earthquake where the CO2 is stored, the whole lot will return to the surface in one vast cloud, and being heavier than air it will settle across the surface of the ground in a layer meters deep, suffocating thousands in the process. Then it will slowly mix with the air, and we will be right back to square one. That's why there is no such thing as clean coal, and why those who seek refuge in it are delusional. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:03:46 -0800: Hi, [snip] It eliminates the need for occupation. What does this mean? Regards, Horace Heffner Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:46:31 -0800: Hi, [snip] On Jun 15, 2007, at 12:39 AM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:03:46 -0800: Hi, [snip] It eliminates the need for occupation. What does this mean? It means if you wipe out the population you don't need to occupy the country with massive amounts of troops. If you drop enough nukes to wipe out the country you have committed genocide and the land itself is useless as well because it is uninhabitable for thousands of years. (This already happened once before - see Ur). Furthermore, the jet stream will carry the fallout around the planet, and millions of your own population will also die of radiation poisoning and cancer. Perhaps needless to say, the perpetrators could well be among them. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:25:03 -0800: Hi, [snip] It eliminates the need for occupation. What does this mean? It means if you wipe out the population you don't need to occupy the country with massive amounts of troops. If you drop enough nukes to wipe out the country you have committed genocide and the land itself is useless as well because it is uninhabitable for thousands of years. And your point regarding occupation is? I only asked what it meant, I didn't say you were wrong. I don't disagree with you that it would have that result. I do however disagree with the ethics, the legality, and with the original premise that any form of occupation is necessary to begin with. [snip] (This already happened once before - see Ur). Furthermore, the jet stream will carry the fallout around the planet, and millions of your own population will also die of radiation poisoning and cancer. Perhaps needless to say, the perpetrators could well be among them. This is possibly not necessarily true. It is only necessarily true for lots of massive air blast weapons. Growing up I lived for years in the path of fallout from nuclear testing. Sure, lots of people probably have died from cancer from the tests, but the world goes on. Few think of it today. This sort of reasoning leads to total annihilation of the human race. Sure the World may go on, but then again it also may not. There is a considerable difference between a few nuclear tests, and all out nuclear war. And even if a few hardy souls do manage to survive, what sort of a hell are they condemned to live in? Is this really such an inviting picture that we should invite it by casual use of weapons of mass destruction? The infrastructure of a country the size of Iran can probably be knocked out using a few 20 megaton bombs and lots of underground burst weapons followed up with periodic neutron bombs and conventional weapons. Why would it even be desirable to do this? What is it exactly about little Iran that has America so terrified? Surely you are no longer sucked in by the words of a President that has already proven that much of what he says is pure propaganda designed to mislead his own people? BTW if you are implying that an underground burst weapon is safer than an ordinary nuke, then consider that all weapons designed to do this have to enter through a hole in the surface, and the nuclear explosion itself is going to enlarge this hole and spew radioactivity into the air. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:18:36 -0800: Hi, [snip] My point was not about ethics at all though, merely that pursuit of nuclear weapons capability is a *stupid* strategy for a country like Iran. But how do you know they are pursuing nuclear weapons? All I have seen is western propaganda that says they are. Inspectors from the IAEA say there is no evidence of it. Jut as they said there was no evidence of such in Iraq. And they were right. My only intended involvement here was to predict possible scenarios, not consider ethics. Ethical or not, when any state starts an unlimited war then that war is unlimited. A point the US would do well to pay heed to. A small power has great disadvantages in such a war. True. Asymmetric conventional wars are more sensible for small power war mongers that insist on having their wars, and of course no war at all is way better. ...and the Iranians agree whole heartedly. The only question is whether or not Israel and the US will leave them alone. [snip] condemned to live in? Is this really such an inviting picture that we should invite it by casual use of weapons of mass destruction? Of course not. But any use or seriously threatened use of such a weapon is almost certain to evoke an extreme response. Once again, the Iranians have never made any such threat. How can they, they don't even have any nukes. All the media is full of is stories about how the US and Israel *think* they are trying to produce nukes. To me, it is blindingly obvious that this is just a rehash of the same excuse that was used to invade Iraq. Surely any thinking American must be able to see this too? That seems to me to be an obvious fact. Making such threats, or even positioning to make such threats, thus seems to me to be a stupid strategy. ...and it would be if it were true. BTW if the US really believes that Iran is trying to make nukes, then there is simple way to call them on it. Stop the war mongering (US fleets in the Persian Gulf), and then ask them to let the IAEA inspectors back in. If their nuclear program is indeed peaceful, then they should have no objections. [snip] BTW if you are implying that an underground burst weapon is safer than an ordinary nuke, then consider that all weapons designed to do this have to enter through a hole in the surface, and the nuclear explosion itself is going to enlarge this hole and spew radioactivity into the air. Yes, you are right, it is. Radioactivity will also be emitted from ground fractures for years, and any water tables polluted as well. But there is a big difference between Bikini and Chernoble when it comes to air pollution. Underground nukes would not be thermonuclear. Actually there is an even bigger difference. Deliberate underground tests are much deeper than would be achieved by a weapon, and the hole is always filled in before the test is conducted. Consequently an underground test is not a good analogy for a bunker busting bomb. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 16 Jun 2007 22:22:20 -0800: Hi, [snip] On Jun 15, 2007, at 8:00 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 15 Jun 2007 16:18:36 -0800: Hi, [snip] My point was not about ethics at all though, merely that pursuit of nuclear weapons capability is a *stupid* strategy for a country like Iran. But how do you know they are pursuing nuclear weapons? As much as you seem to wish I had said Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons, I did not. What I did was list some obvious possible follow- on scenarios, in random order, including the possible scenario that Iran gets the bomb, or one is used, scenario (e). As much as it appears you would like to put words into my mouth and convert a *requested* prediction, provided in my case as a set of energy related scenarios and an associated guess at a maximum time to a bump, into an off topic ethno-political argument, I dislike it. Horace if I misread your intentions while reading between the lines, then I apologize. I would much prefer to hear your (and other's) answer to the question, your predicted time line to the first serious bump in the energy road, and why: On Jun 14, 2007, at 6:51 AM, R.C.Macaulay wrote: Howdy Vorts, With all the energy info rhetoric eminating out of D.C. and news sources do you sense the public is expecting too much from the energy industry? What is your predicted time line for the first really serious bump in the road ? Richard [snip] If people can refrain from fighting one another, then I think a gradual increase in the price of gasoline, and a concomitant increase in alternative fuels is more likely than an actual bump. With the tar sands in Canada and the shale oil in the US there is actually enough (more or less expensive?) oil to last for decades, during which time alternatives can be brought online. Though I don't like admitting it, there's a possibility that current price rises are being deliberately introduced in order to provide a price signal that will hasten the introduction of alternatives, and concurrently help to alleviate global warming. IOW someone may actually be doing some long term planning and manipulating the market accordingly. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Future energy predictions
In reply to Wesley Bruce's message of Sun, 17 Jun 2007 12:28:07 +1000: Hi, [snip] Good post Robin, I disagree on some points but a good post. We will see. I hope fusion will save the day as you do but its wise to consider the options. A few points: 1. If earth quakes could not dislodge oil and natural gas from the ground significantly why does anyone think CO2 will be as easily dislodged. Partly because the only way to get the CO2 down there is to drill down from the surface creating a hole in the cap-stone. This provides a weak point that is likely to fail during an earth quake. You might counter that we would notice this while drilling for gas. However gas production doesn't last forever. IOW frequently the production period of any given well is less than the mean time between serious quakes, so the chances of the two occurring simultaneously may not be very high. CO2 repositories OTOH have to last forever, so sooner or later they are bound to coincide with a major quake. Furthermore, methane is lighter than air, so when it does escape, it tends to rise up until it eventually mixes with the air and slowly oxidizes. CO2 is heavier than air, so it will hug the surface. 2. The wave power cables I'm talking about are true power system cables, facilitation for university and private projects, not a power link to Tasmania, same technology. The governments meager contribution to wave power. Perhaps there's a delay I'll look for the site data. Thanks. [snip] My somewhat sarcastic post is based on the simple idea that solutions exist, putting all our eggs in one basket is a bad idea, even cold fusion is a risk if it becomes our only solution. Maybe, but that would only happen over the long term anyway, as at present the many options available will all get tried, and some will make enough headway to provide a mix of options for a while. Eventually the best options will prove themselves as survivors. I agree the coal miners can work elsewhere and the coal companies can invest elsewhere. But some has them convinced that both the miners and the shareholders are too stupid to do anything but dig up dirty black stuff. The PM is also concerned about the balance of payments. Coal is the stable part of our balance of payments. I actually wrote to them pointing out that Australia could become a major exporter of Solar derived energy, with a bit of a push from government, but who listens to me? ;) As you know, we have vast tracts of desert country that would be ideal for Solar, and are good for little else. We could easily supply the entire planet with energy if need be. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Gravity article
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:02:14 -0800: Hi, [snip] http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225771.800 At that strength, says Overduin, we would expect to see gravitomagnetic effects throughout the cosmos. Perhaps that's force that affects galaxies giving rise to the necessity for dark matter? To make the graviton massive would limit the distance it can travel, and since all astronomical observations suggest that gravity travels the entire breadth of the universe, there is a big conflict to resolve. Does this mean that neutrinos have a problem traversing the universe? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Drive a plug-in hybrid
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sun, 24 Jun 2007 10:40:55 -0400 (GMT-04:00): Hi, [snip] Ok, agree to let them build a coal plant or a battery plant in your backyard then. Plug-ins and hybrids just transpose the pollution problem away from where actual consumption is taking place. That is incorrect for two reasons that we have often discussed here, and that you will find at the plug in hybrid web sites: 1. Plug-in hybrids and regular hybrids use far less energy per mile, so even with coal-based electricity they produce less CO2 and other pollution per mile. 2. In California, where the Google plug-in hybrid initiative is being launched, they do not have any coal-fired electricity. It is all natural gas, hydro, fission and wind. Therefore it produces much less pollution per mile. At Google headquarters they will use solar electricity to recharge the plug-in hybrids, so there will be virtually no pollution per mile. There is another reason too. When fusion becomes viable (in whatever form), it may not be possible to put generators in cars (at least right away). Consequently it does no harm to introduce cars now that rely at least to some extent on battery technology. That gives the battery industry both incentive and opportunity to improve on their product, and the time may come when we need to rely on it more heavily. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Message never showed up . . .
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:05:12 -0400: Hi, [snip] A couple of days ago I received a message telling me that I had been removed from vortex-l because my emails were bouncing. This occurs when eskimo is blacklisted. Upon reporting this to my ISP and requesting that the blacklisting be removed, I was informed that they don't control it themselves, but rather subscribe to a central service which does that. The blacklisting is normally lifted after a few hours, if the spam has stopped. I had to resubscribe to vortex. I post this as fair warning to others, so that if your mail suddenly stops, it may be an indication that you too have been removed from the list (and you haven't received notification because eskimo is blacklisted - catch 22). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Neutron Properties
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 28 Jun 2007 08:55:41 -0700: Hi, [snip] oops - (my copy editor is late arriving, once again) and so the neutron being about ~1838 times more massive ... should be more massive than an electron... and there are certain to be other errors of haste. BTW in one Physics model the proton, with 3 constituent quarks, has 3 times the mass of up and down quarks (the up and down quark constituent masses being equal), and the proton/electron mass ratio is calculated to be: 3 x 2 pi^5 = 6 pi^5 = 1,836.12 The actual proton/electron mass ratio is 1.8361528E+3 only off in the sixth decimal place. My bet would be that the formula has an excellent chance of being significant. Perhaps one implication is that each that each quark comprises a pair of particles, each with a mass Pi^5 times that of the electron. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Neutron Properties
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 2 Jul 2007 17:34:49 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] --- Robin van Spaandonk Perhaps one implication is that each that each quark comprises a pair of particles, each with a mass Pi^5 times that of the electron. Well... Don't keep us in suspense...or are we supposed to put on a copy of Firesign and try to guess the disease before it's too late ? ;-) Sorry, I don't know the program. I don't have an answer, I have already given all I have. It's still tumbling around in my subconscious. There must be a geometric solution, but I have no idea what it is. Like you, I sense the relevance, but can't quite put it all together. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:The H2O Dimer
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 02 Jul 2007 09:40:41 -0700: Hi, [snip] Good points made by Michel and Horace, as I was heavily influenced in this thought (at the time I read the Paynter paper) by the Graneau work. Even now, I am not sure whether their assertion is wrong or right, but the same general idea of the bond formation process absorbing energy is also made in the Paynter article (which was admittedly scanned as opposed to being studied). Perhaps the bond itself stores additional energy over and above it also being a lower energy state. This needs some careful analysis due to the implications. If there is a resolution which would favor Graneau, it exist in that difference, or gap which exists between between binding energy and dissociation energy, which we often assume to be merely different sides of the same coin but which may provide the answer to this paradox, on which Graneau depends. BTW Graneau was peer-reviewed in a number of prominent journals. IMO, it's simple. Horace is correct, and the Graneau's are clutching at straws, because they can't conceive of a different energy source. However Hydrinos provide a ready and logical explanation for their results, it's just that they either have never heard of them, or they won't go there out of pride. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Newton's Cradle Nuclear Sausage
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 17 Jul 2007 10:34:30 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] I would almost guarantee that anyone curious about physical anomalies, real or imaginary, or should I say: 'curious enough to post outlandish and unproven ideas to this forum' - has owned a Newton's Cradle at one time or another: http://www.outerarm.demon.co.uk/graphics/newtons_cradle_1_640x480.jpg Why on earth - that particular silly observation should sound logical to me is unknown, but anyway, moving on to the next one ... Since you are on the topic of nuclear structure, you may find this of interest: http://checkerboard.dnsalias.net/ [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Lithium titanate battery (was Re: Cheap solar a couple years away?)
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Wed, 18 Jul 2007 20:47:43 +0200: Hi, [snip] More on these miracle batteries: http://www.phoenixmotorcars.com/news/2007/pr_070510.html [snip] ...and a data sheet page from the manufacturer. http://www.altairnano.com/markets_amps.html#recharge Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo] Lithium titanate battery
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 19 Jul 2007 11:08:37 -0800: Hi, [snip] It's stuck in the polyethylene oxide? Hmmm... I wonder what the anode reaction is then. I'm utterly confused - but it still seems worth posting because O18 might play some role in all this. It will be interesting to see if the lithium titanate battery continues to have some heating problems despite replacement of the cathode. [snip] I think chemical exchange mechanisms occur at the atomic rather than the nuclear level. IOW whole atoms or ions of the same element simply bump one another aside as the energy required to break the old chemical bond matches that released by formation of the new bond. That means that normal thermal energy is enough to bring about the exchange. However slight binding energy differences between isotopes could easily lead to enrichment over time, especially if the binding energy of the heavier isotope to the electrode material is slightly greater than that of the respective lighter isotope. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo] Lithium titanate battery
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 20 Jul 2007 03:58:27 -0800: Hi, [snip] bring about the exchange. However slight binding energy differences between isotopes could easily lead to enrichment over time, especially if the binding energy of the heavier isotope to the electrode material is slightly greater than that of the respective lighter isotope. This could certainly be true. However, even if true, I still think the dual (e- and D) fugacity concept has some merit on its own. That said, isn't it true though that D makes stronger bonds? AFAIK, yes (see below), however that's exactly what I said here above. Bonds involving deuterium and tritium are somewhat stronger than the corresponding bonds in light hydrogen... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium Despite this stronger bond, I think a small amount of pure D20 added to H2O becomes DHO very fast. If the proton were infinitely massive, then the ionization energy of H would be 13.606 eV. However due to the finite mass of the proton, which results in a reduced electron mass, the ionization energy of H is only 13.598 eV. The difference is thus about 7.7 meV (not MeV ;). Because the deuterium nucleus is about twice as heavy as the proton, the electron mass is not reduced as much, and consequently I would expect the ionization energy of deuterium to be closer to the 13.606 eV. That in turn implies that D forms slightly stronger bonds than H. With average thermal energies at room temperature on the order of 25 meV, the difference between the bond energy of D and H is fairly easily overcome (but they are of the same order of magnitude). Perhaps needless to say, the difference in reduced mass of the electron for different isotopes of heavier elements is going to be far smaller than that for hydrogen, so any such chemical effect would also be far smaller in those cases. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Degenerate electrons, electron fugacity, and cold fusion
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 22 Jul 2007 21:38:09 -0800: Hi Horace, [snip] I think Bill has a device somewhere on his web page that can create very high momentary voltages. Perhaps long enough to bring about fusion in the cathode (though as you pointed out, a gas cell may work better). The device comprises two coupled capacitors. One of the two is a door-knob type, the other is a sheet of foil wrapped around a fluorescent tube. When the tube is lit the plasma forms a second electrode separated from the foil by the glass wall of the tube. The foil is wired to the door-knob cap. When the tube is lit, the foil can be charged negatively relative to ground. If the tube is turned off, the plasma electrode disappears (its charge going to ground), and the charge on the foil is no longer balanced. This results in the charge spreading itself as thinly as possible over the metal surfaces with which it is in contact, including the door-knob cap. Because a single pole capacitor has a much smaller capacitance than a plate capacitor, the voltage jumps enormously. Now if this door-knob cap. happens to be made of e.g. nickel, and furthermore is already saturated with Hydrogen, then fireworks may ensue. :) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Toyota announces plug in hybrid
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 25 Jul 2007 15:43:18 -0400: Hi, While you are momentarily on the topic of busted URLs, most can be fixed by simply replying to the email, so that the URL shows up in editable form in your email client. Then one can edit it till it's fixed and use it directly. Of course this only works when it's obvious what it should have been (i.e. wrapping problems etc.). Horace Heffner wrote: Weird. Not busted on the email I got back from vortex-l. Is it busted for you below (and if so in the same place): Yup. Could be a Eudora problem. On the other hand, the copy I sent out came back intact. No biggie. - Jed Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]: Pantone Mods
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 27 Jul 2007 07:20:48 -0700: Hi, [snip] However, none of this may be needed with a highly catalytic reactor tube. I doubt that many of the mods have actually plated Pd or Pt as a catalyst. That is expensive - but hey - maybe then you also get a small LENR or hydrino effect! [snip] Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if some hydrinos were always formed in combustion engines, especially when they run hot, and recycling the exhaust is a good way to reuse them, increasing the production next time around. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Electron fugacity, deuteron fugacity, and applied fields
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:03:48 -0800: Hi, [snip] The method of applying high electron fugacity to deuterium loaded cathodes has the objective of creating an energy focusing effect, forcing co-centered wavefunction collapse, resulting in electron catalyzed fusion: D + e- + D - He + e- + gamma If the electron is so intimately involved in the fusion event, then there is also a chance that it will carry away he energy of the reaction, at least some of the time. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Some truly fringe thinking
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 29 Jul 2007 12:13:33 -0800: Hi Horace, [snip] The important point has to do with cold fusion. Suppose we build a powerful A field generating torus. Regardless of choice of gauge, A, or at least the effects of A, must then be very strong either on the inside or the outside of the torus. My bet is on the inside. This powerful A should have a dramatic effect on orbital shape, similar to a powerful B field. It should energetically foster wave function collapse and fusion. Well, that's it for this fringe thinking. Time to unload the dryer. [snip] ...sounds like you've just invented the Tokamak. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:active C-39 was: Electron fugacity
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 02 Aug 2007 07:55:13 -0700: Hi, [snip] In the world of plastics, the various polycarbonate grades and variations are somewhat of an anomaly and singularity in physical properties. It (Lexan is one trade name) is far stronger than it should be. It is the bullet-proof material used instead of glass in the CEO's limo, for instance. Plus it is somewhat unusual for having that C=O double bond. Wiki has an entry: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycarbonate Therefore - let me add this remote possibility into the SPAWAR mystery, and invite Robin to expound on this point - the double bound oxygen which is located in an exposed portion of the polymer chain presents an open invitation for a hydrino (deuterino) hole which would itself benefit from having a few Pd atoms adjacent in order to provide monatomic D. [snip] In an organic acid (which also has a C=O bond), the doubly bonded O tends to draw an electron away from the O-H bond leaving it weak, which is why it is an acid (H+ is easily removed). This implies IMO that the C=O bond in polycarbonate is if anything liable to be more negative than other bonds. I would see this as probably making it less likely to form O++. However the same can be said for O in water. In either case, It would IMO take a brute force interaction with ionizing radiation to form O++. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Power from RadWaste
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 05 Aug 2007 11:54:42 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] Hey, sports fans -- that is actually FAR more energy per molecule than burning gasoline in air (since you have all that nitrogen which doesn't contribute). What am I missing here? [other than greed] [snip] Much of the energy in the rad waste is lost in the form of alpha particles, and these have a very short range in solid matter. That means that most of them lose their energy in the form of heat in the crystal lattice without coming anywhere near an oxygen molecule. The situation is somewhat better for beta radiation, and much better for gamma radiation, but the latter 2 are usually only a small part of the total. You might have better luck dissolving all the rad waste in solution, and collecting the radiolysis products, though radiolysis normally also tends to be a rather inefficient process (5 %?)...still, 5% may be better than 0%, depending on the cost of the facility per unit energy retrieved. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:A MSWL hypothesis : was active CR-39
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:14:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] palladium-coated plastic beads as a cathode. Not sure Patterson ever divulged which plastic was used. The term polysulphonate comes to mind, though I could have mangled it. :) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:active CR-39 was: Electron fugacity
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 02 Aug 2007 08:36:55 -0700: Hi, [snip] Two corrections so far - subject line and this: then this makes the below-ground-state excursion and the possibility of a resultant faux D (from light water) or Faux dineutron (from heavy water) at least arguable. In Faux D, a hydrino is coupled to a proton, and the resultant molecular ion has an additional neutralizing electron in a normal ground state or shrunken orbital. If you use heavy water iso light water, then you get Faux H4, and depending on how small the orbitals are, this should fairly rapidly react to produce either He4 or He3/T (usual suspects). I think the closest you will come to a Faux dineutron is simply a well shrunken deuterino (deutrino? see also http://www.chowk.com/interacts/u/28969 with reference to the Holy Quran - cyclic history?) see also: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980liep.rept.T - apparently Mills wasn't the first to come up with this name (or is this simply a typo?) In the light water SPAWAR cell, presumably the interaction of monatomic hydrogen (which has been split-off via the deposited Pd) when it occurs with the O++ ion (from the polymer) would then result in a faux n (false-neutron) which is to say a subthermal highly shrunken hydrogen atom which is closer to a neutron in size and physical properties than it is to hydrogen and which entity has already given up (in the form of UV photons) much of its original mass-energy. This faux n is simply a Hydrino. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:active CR-39 was: Electron fugacity
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 7 Aug 2007 09:15:08 -0800: Hi Horace, [snip] In http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/PhotonMills.pdf you write: It makes no sense that there is a photon in there. That further makes no sense because there is no room for a low energy photon inside the hydrino. Not by a log shot, because the (minimum) 47 keV is not available to make the photon that is small enough to fit in there, as we shall see. I think Mills is implying that there is initially a 7-800 keV photon in there, representing all the potential energy if the electron were to shrink to the radius of the nucleus, and when it does shrink (a little), some of the energy of that photon is released. At least, that's my interpretation of what he says. However as you are aware, on my web site I avoid the issue entirely by not using trapped photons at all. In order to accommodate a shrunken Hydrogen atom, at least one of the basic assumptions about the Hydrogen atom has to change. There is at least one model out there in which the mass of the electron changes. Mills model uses an increase in virtual charge. My (for the sake of brevity) model changes the assumption that the electron De Broglie wave does only a single orbit before reconnecting with itself, which assumption then allows the r ~ n^2 relationship to be maintained. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:active CR-39 was: Electron fugacity
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 07 Aug 2007 07:49:40 -0700: Hi, [snip] If the faux-n has a significantly larger spatial near field - how does that change the cross section? The most logical answer would be to enhance. Yes, but there is a snake in the grass. Since Faux-n is not really n, the near field of the electron will only suffice to bring it closer to the nucleus. But this may only happen once. Consider that the electron is still tied to the proton by it's electric field, and hence is equally subject to the electric field of the larger nucleus. IOW there is every chance that the shrunken electron will jump ship at the first opportunity, forming an even tighter orbit around the heavy nucleus, and resulting in the proton simply being expelled by the repulsive force of the larger nucleus. This is a hydrino destroyer, and it may be the reason that transmutation reactions are still rather rare. OTOH of course there is a considerable energy release when the electron jumps ship, which in itself may still be useful as a fuel source, especially if the larger nucleus is of a common element such as Oxygen or Silicon. BTW this process may also have the net effect of *appearing* to transform the element in question to one which is one lower on the periodic table, but with the same mass. The transformation would effect chemical reactions, but should have little influence on e.g. naa. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Faux-n
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:04:38 -0700: Hi, [snip] It should be noted that lead (Pb) and oxygen double positive ions are both Mills catalysts, but they are higher level (54.4 eV and above), so that a population of preshrunk or deflated hydrogen would be needed for them to be useful. There are no low level Mills catalysts in a lead acid battery. That is where Spence/Dufour/QED come-in. [snip] It isn't necessary to have preshrunk hydrinos when using an m=2 catalyst. Such a catalyst works just fine on ordinary Hydrogen, changing it from H[n=1/1] (a Hydrogen atom) to H[n=1/3]. The only consequence of being an m=2 catalyst is that two shrinkage levels are done at once. BTW IMO Pb is not likely to be a good Mills catalyst (if at all), because it would require the removal of the first three electrons at once to work. Since IMO, such catalytic action is frequency based, and only the outer two p electrons will be orbiting at the same frequency, which won't match the Hydrogen frequency anyway, I don't see this working well. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Mainichi: Japan to increase anti-global warming funding
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:43:47 -0400: Hi, [snip] Amari said during a press conference after a regular Cabinet meeting on Wednesday morning that the projects include the development of technology to store carbon dioxide under the sea floor. [snip] Since Japan is located in a very seismically active area, this is not a good idea. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Jones paper on 9/11 and cold fusion
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:19:38 -0800: Hi Horace, [snip] On Aug 14, 2007, at 5:52 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: See: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JonesWTC911SciMethod.pdf The tables of values of Ue in the above appear to be screening potentials observed in different metals. He footnotes S.E. Jones, E.P. Palmer, J.B. Czirr, D.L. Decker, G.L. Jensen, J.M. Thorne, and S.F. Taylor J. Rafelski, Observation of Cold Nuclear Fusion in Condensed Matter, Nature 338: 737-740 (April 1989). This article or something like it is apparently not available on the web? It is available at http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v338/n6218/pdf/338737a0.pdf , but one has to pay for it. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Solar activity vs. seismic
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Fri, 10 Aug 2007 10:39:48 -0800: Hi, [snip] I have been trying to catch up a bit on older posts. There is one direct link between solar weather and seismic activity. Interactions of the solar wind with the Earth's magnetic field result in variations in telluric currents, which in turn either via the magnetostrictive effect, or through localized heating, or possibly through heating caused by variations induced in decay rates, may result in stresses in the crust. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:The meaning of in
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Wed, 8 Aug 2007 13:16:11 -0800: Hi, [snip] Probably deservedly so. Isn't the committee fairly strict about credentials though? Mills is an MD working outside his field isn't he? Most _breakthroughs_ come from people working outside their field. This is because they are less likely to know what can't be done. Slow steady improvement usually comes from people working within their field. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Aliens on the Moon
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Thu, 23 Aug 2007 15:11:54 -0400: Hi, [snip] Or more CGI? An alleged lunar mining machine: http://www.paranormalnews.com/article.asp?ArticleID=1185 (scroll down for vid). Terry http://www.astronautix.com/flights/apollo20.htm Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:An example of what we are up against
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Thu, 23 Aug 2007 18:14:21 -0400: Hi, [snip] You wonder how the human race will survive. What makes you think it will? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Ultra-efficient Electrolysis
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:53:35 -0700: Hi, [snip] Faraday's hydrogen output is 2.4 watts / hour / liter of gas (STP). ^^^ This should be 2.363 Watt*hr/L of combined gasses. My replication cell: 12 volts x 0.51 amps = 6.12 watts [he does not indicate how this was calculated, and he does not appear to have used a dedicated power analyzer] the gas generation is around 7 cc/sec of H2 + O2 [not sure that he has eliminated water vapor] The temperature would be useful here. This converts to 4.66 CC of H2/sec which converts to 16.776 Liters/hour [doubtful] 16.776 x 2.4 watts (Faraday/lit/hour generation) = 40.262 Watts Well I seem to be generating the equivalent of 40.2 watts as per Faraday with just 6.12 Watts. I dont know if im right but I seem to be generating 550% excess as the above works out to 40.2/6.12 x 100 = 656.86% 656.86 - 100 (Faraday) = 556.86% OU ! [snip] Ravi Was Ravi the kid with the egg? If so, there may be a GHz component that he doesn't know about. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:The meaning of in
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Mon, 20 Aug 2007 16:00:18 -0800: Hi, [snip] I think breakthroughs often come from the young folks in the field. My question, though, is that, regardless the value of the work, isn't it true the committee is not likely to give a prize to someone without substantial credentials in the field, at least in physics. I don't recall any fringe stuff ever making it. I suspect you are correct. The committee appears to be very conservative, to the point that prizes are often awarded for work decades after the fact, when the work has already long become a part of established lore. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [VO]: Hydrogen outlook?
In reply to Stiffler Scientific's message of Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:30:53 -0500: Hi, [snip] I was not clear on this below @@ Eg - energy gain This is not to be considered Power, rather it is -I or negative current that exceeds input and can be used to do a secondary operation. I also should have added that this at this time ranges from 13 - 18% above input. Hope that will make it somewhat clear. [snip] Just to muddy the waters a little, consider the following. In any cell there are capacitances and inductances present, such that the cell can be considered to be a tank circuit. When feeding a tank circuit with AC (or pulsed DC), it is possible to get a current flowing in the tank that considerably exceeds the input current, particularly when the frequency of the driving source lies near the resonance point of the tank circuit. Since the tank current also passes through the electrolyte, the Faraday efficiency may appear to be much higher than one would calculate based upon the power supply current. However for this to function, the power has to come from somewhere, and it comes from the voltage, as the resonant cell appears to have a high impedance resulting in the power supply needing to use a high voltage just to drive a small power supply current through the cell. This phenomenon may be what is taking place in the Meyer cells. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Gray Matter
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:36:31 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] Jones Beene wrote: Robin van Spaandonk wrote: You might argue that free energy is always preferable to even cheap oil, but the practical problem with the Gray device is low battery life. The longest mentioned run was 200 hours. How many man-hours of engineering would it take to increase that by an order of magnitude? I didn't write that. Not only that, AFAIK, Gray was under a cloud. The D A in L A (?) indicted him on fraud. There is the matter of feasibility too, I talked to two of the academics who assisted him, one believed that it would work, the other didn't. --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! --- Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:resonant electrolyzer
Hi, A simple question for Ed Storms, or anyone else who has an answer: When metals such as Pd, Ti, Ni etc. absorb Hydrogen, it gets split into atoms (AFAIK). Where does the energy for the splitting come from? (For H2 we are looking at more than 4 eV / molecule, which is far in excess of average thermal energies.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:resonant electrolyzer
In reply to Robin van Spaandonk's message of Tue, 28 Aug 2007 08:20:43 +1000: Hi, [snip] Hi, A simple question for Ed Storms, or anyone else who has an answer: When metals such as Pd, Ti, Ni etc. absorb Hydrogen, it gets split into atoms (AFAIK). Where does the energy for the splitting come from? (For H2 we are looking at more than 4 eV / molecule, which is far in excess of average thermal energies.) Brain must have been momentarily on blank. The answer is probably that it comes from the energy of formation of the metal hydride. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Gray Matter
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:08:19 -0700: Hi, [snip] There is more than a cursory similarity between the lead-acid battery presumed functionality and the SPAWAR functionality (Widom/Larsen hypothesis) - assuming that some kind of enhanced or stimulated beta-decay is at work in either case. Don't forget that the SPAWAR (apparent) beta decay tracks occurred with plain hydrogen, as well as deuterium. [snip] Just muddying the waters again:- Pb can at least in theory alpha decay to Hg. The average decay energy would be about 0.6 MeV (varies depending on isotope). Perhaps electro-shock therapy is stimulating the decay? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Gray Matter
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:19:09 -0800: Hi, [snip] The idea of a low energy bound hydrex, faux neutron, hydrino, blah blah blah, acting like a neutron and drifting through the cloud of electrons about the uranium atom is simply not credible. The binding energy is too small. It's like trying to hold down a roof in a tornado with an ordinary rubber band. [snip] This is not necessarily true of Hydrinos. The very severely shrunken ones have binding energies running into the tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of eV. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Friedman Unit of measure in Iraq war
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:35:41 -0400: Hi, [snip] Sorry to make fun of such a grim subject, but sometimes ya' gotta laugh to keep from crying. See: http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Friedman_Unit One Friedman Unit, also known as 'one Friedman' or 'one F.U.', equals six months in the future. [snip] ..six months being about the maximum amount of time one can reasonably ask someone to be patient. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Laddermill Demo Success
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Thu, 30 Aug 2007 08:57:08 -0400: Hi, [snip] Is there a picture of the actual mill anywhere? I've seen concept drawings of laddermills but never a photo, as far as I can recall. The Dutch version of the story (which I read, in highly scrambled form, grace of Babelfish) seems to say they've also demo'd this in a concert with Jan Ackerman in which his equipment was powered by electricity from a kite (albeit the wind failed and they apparently had to run on batteries during the concert, but the batteries had been charged by another kite so it was still a legit demo -- at least I /think/ that's what it said). So, Ockels is generating electricity alright -- but certainly not from the piece of equipment in the picture, which is just a kite, no dynamo, no pulleys, no nothing which would do the work. So I was just wondering if there's a shot of the part that makes the juice anywhere. [snip] After listening to the explanation, it goes roughly like this:- As the kite goes up, the string drives a wheel which is connected to a dynamo. When at height, a command is sent to the kite to fly down again (rather than having to be dragged down). Once at the bottom, the cycle begins anew. The inventor says that kite mills up to 50 kW can be built, but then suggests that 3 of these would be enough to power the city of Groningen. (I suspect he is off by about a factor of 1000). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:the Gray Matter
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Wed, 29 Aug 2007 01:56:13 -0800: Hi, [snip] Is there any evidence such things exist? There are three problems with the small ones. The first is Heisenberg requires the half-lives be very short. I seem to remember you showed this in a previous email (paper on your web site?). Could you provide a URL for it? I think I can argue against it, but need to review it again first. The second is the difficulty obtaining a series of catalytic events to take energy in the right amounts in the right sequence in order to create them. This is only a problem if timing is an issue, such as it may be if your first point here above is correct. However if point one is wrong, then Hydrinos are not short lived, and the difficulties far less. The third is making all this happen in a uranium lattice. That's just a matter of combining the U with the Hydrinos once the latter have been prepared. (Why are we using U again?) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Laddermill Demo Success
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:33:16 -0400: Hi, [snip] I wrote: This is interesting, but the discussion of a 10 megawatt Laddermill seems unrealistic. Unrealistic is the wrong word. No doubt there will be progress in carbon filament cables. I guess I meant that this thing will require the development of new technology, whereas the inventor seems to be claiming that it could be implemented in the near future, even on the megawatt scale. Even a single kevlar cable traveling at 480 m /min (from your other post) with a cross section of 1 sq. in. and a tensile strength of 3 GPa, would generate almost 15.5 MW. However I suspect the design speed will be slower, and there are likely to be two cables, each of which could be thicker. At 1 sq. in. each and a density of 1.44 gm/mL, two 20 km cables would weigh 36000 kg. (20 km because the cable has to go up and also down in a ladder-mill. Actually they would need to be even longer, because they don't extend vertically, but at an angle. Anyone know how much lift one might expect? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Progress in photon thrustors
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 18 Sep 2007 17:19:08 -0400: Hi, [snip] See: http://dialog.newsedge.com/newsedge.asp?site=2006121916143901110346block=folderstorybriefs=offaction=XMLStoryResultsmd=truestoryid=p0906509.2rwrtcrdata=off 35 micro-Newton of thrust is pretty small. I wonder how much they expect for a reasonable vehicle? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Progress in photon thrustors
In reply to OrionWorks's message of Wed, 19 Sep 2007 09:50:05 -0500: Hi, [snip] For more info see: http://www.baeinstitute.com/index.html http://www.baeinstitute.com/tech_advPropulsion.html I wondered how they were going to get net thrust from bouncing light between two mirrors until I came across this http://www.photonics.com/content/news/2007/February/22/86585.aspx . Quote: On Dec. 21, 2006, Bae used a photonic laser and a sophisticated photon beam amplification system to demonstrate that photonic energy could generate amplified thrust between two spacecraft by bouncing photons many thousands of times between them. Repeated experiments since then have confirmed the results. Now if two spacecraft are both accelerated in opposite directions, it makes sense, however I should think that it would become increasingly difficult to maintain beam confinement as they got farther apart. Upon closer reading of http://www.baeinstitute.com/tech_advPropulsion.html I get the impression they want the base laser on the ground. However in that case I doubt they will achieve a 3000 fold increase in thrust due to absorption in the atmosphere. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:OU Miracle Tube
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:20:15 -0400: Hi, [snip] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=481996in_page_id=1965 http://snipurl.com/1qs74 The system - developed by scientists at a firm called Ecowatts in a nondescript laboratory on an industrial estate at Lancing, West Sussex - involves passing an electrical current through a mixture of water, potassium carbonate (otherwise known as potash) and a secret liquid catalyst, based on chrome. more The sum of the first three ionization energies of Chrome is 54.22 eV. 4 x 13.598 = 54.39. Close enough for gumint work. IOW the Cr could easily be a Mills catalyst. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]: Local Cosmic Matter
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:49:58 -0700: Hi, [snip] http://www.physorg.com/news109872915.html Heat from the detonation and firestorms would have melted much of the ice sheet, releasing water vapor into the atmosphere. ...and when it condensed as rain, it would have caused The Flood making a huge impression on the remnants of humanity, and giving rise to stories that live on to this day. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]: Local Cosmic Matter
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 26 Sep 2007 09:49:58 -0700: Hi, [snip] It is theorized from actual DNA evidence that two different (in time), but similar (in severity) population-bottlenecks occurred just prior to both of these DNA progenitors being alive; but alive at differing times (45,000 years apart) and that all humans alive today derive from this confluence of tragedy and opportunity (which is the population-bottlenecks); and furthermore, that both of the near-extinctions could be related to similar CMC events! (which is today's addition to the you heard it first on Vortex shtick ;-) [snip] 45000 years is about twice the period of the precession of the poles. This may imply a natural rotation frequency of something of the same order of magnitude. Suppose that the Sun orbits about a black hole once every 27000 years approximately. If the black hole itself is also rotating such that the direction of the polar beams in space changes continually (like a huge water sprinkler), and at such a frequency that the solar system gets clipped by one beam or the other every second orbit, then the regularity is explained. The only difference is that rather than being hit by a meteor(ite), we pass through the particle beam, which would heat the atmosphere considerably, but cause no shock effects on the ground. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]: Local Cosmic Matter
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 26 Sep 2007 15:33:10 -0700: Hi, [snip] Robin, Suppose that the Sun orbits about a black hole once every 27000 years approximately. Although that cannot be ruled out, there seems to be no good evidence AFAIK that a black hole has been documented nearby (and perhaps cannot be situated anywhere other than a galactic core) ... or is there? http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2000/03 [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]: Local Cosmic Matter
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Thu, 27 Sep 2007 21:45:08 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] Jones Beene wrote: Robin, Suppose that the Sun orbits about a black hole once every 27000 years approximately. Although that cannot be ruled out, there seems to be no good evidence AFAIK that a black hole has been documented nearby (and perhaps cannot be situated anywhere other than a galactic core) ... or is there? Good point Jones, AFAIK, a black hole, or a dark star would swallow any given amount of matter. In the process, it would, IMHO, emitt lots of EMF. Reasons.org did a video model of the solar system. On the edge of it was the Ort Cloud. I had previously visulaized it as a belt, in the plane of the planetary eclyptic. The Reasons model showed it as a blanket around the entire solar system. It would seem to me that if something like this was incoming, it would light up the EMF spectrum like a flood light, and given the efforts of the radio astronomers, there is no way we'd overlook it. I said orbits not incoming. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
