Howdy Vorts,
The herd mentality requires everyone hold the same view regardless. Vorts
are a strange mix that seem to believe there should be at least three biased
views plusa correct balanced view..theirs!! The joy of Vorts is
the ability of it's members to "cut each other some slack"
Jed wrote:
At this point I also need to ask, how much energy does the evolution
of the excess hydrogen actually account for? As a percentage of the
total energy in, do you happen to know if it's typically on the
order of 1%? 10%? 50%?
8000% for brief periods. (80 times input.) For one
Michel Jullian wrote:
No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are
different things.
Yup. I mixed them up.
Walter Faxon wrote:
Just for the record, as well as detecting excess hydrogen is Mizuno also
detecting a corresponding amount of excess oxygen?
As far as I know
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
Michel Jullian wrote:
No Jed, energy efficiency and current (faradaic) efficiency are
different things.
Yup. I mixed them up.
And 3 times overfaradaicity for one overall run means that only
3*0.5%=1.5% of input energy is going into
Jones Beene wrote:
JR As far as I know he does. He has not described the O2 in detail.
It is not stochiometric; there is extra H2 because the O2 from
electrolysis at the anode is separated out by the inverted funnel.
If it is not stochiometric then we can conclude that peroxides are
being
No sorry Jones, my analysis is correct I am afraid, and COP is only 1.3 at
best, not 2 or 3, cf Mizuno's conclusion in
http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTgenerationa.pdf
--
5. Conclusions
We have reached several conclusions:
1. Current efficiency for the plasma electrolysis reaches
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
No, I mean it is not stochiometric because the oxygen from the
anode is diverted out of the cell via another tube. During
ordinary electrolysis, only hydrogen is captured. During
pyrolysis a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen evolves from the
Michel,
This is most inconvenient, as I still do not get the email from
you via vortex, so I am having to go back and forth to the archive
site, in order to see your posts. Thankfully we have
cut-and-paste.
In another paper on the lenr site, perhaps a bit more clearly
stated:
Blank
- Original Message -
From: RC Macaulay
Subject: [VO]: Balance vs. Bias
MC: Richard wrote, snip.
Carefully read the science comments contained in the link
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13559838/
which describes how weather causes the earth to wobble.The article is
written as a absolute
- Original Message -
From: Kyle R. Mcallister [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2006 6:47 PM
Subject: [Vo]: Methane as fuel, recycling CO2?
Not a single reply. This seems common with anything I post.
--Kyle
Gnorts, Vorts!
Let us suppose that my guess is wrong and permanent magnets are not ZPE
pumps. Of course, it is undisputed that the primary source of the PM
field is electron spin with secondary and tertiary contributions from
orbital rotation and nuclear spin. Shall we explore another
A recent Bell-based attack on SR:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9906036
BTW, Brian Greene's book has replaced Alice and Bob with Scully and
Mulder, as in the referenced paper.
More apropos considering spooky action at a distance, n'est-ce pas?
Terry
One side note:
For those Vorts who might not get the subject title:
http://imdb.com/title/tt0051406/
My lusty heart rejects that I was only 4 when Kim Novak made this movie.
Terry
Kyle R. Mcallister wrote:
Hello all,
First off, I must say I hate the term alternative energy. Why?
Alternative has a sort of 'its not the greatest but its something to
fall back on' kind of attachment to it. I think this stuff is more
like advanced energy, but thats just my $0.75
While Terry the Elder is untangling string while
mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green.
Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected from
radio-nuclei and K capture takes an electron
with a circumference or wavelength = hbar/mc
into the nucleus where it's spin stays at
Darn (Vo) nuisance. :-(
- Original Message -
From: Frederick Sparber
To: vortex-l
Sent: 6/29/2006 7:43:12 PM
Subject: [Vo]:
While Terry the Elder is untangling string while
mooning over Kim Novak. I'll say hats off to Brian Green.
Electrons and positrons are routinely ejected
Watch the oxygen bubbles coming off a livestock
tank as the Algae turns greenhouse CO2 into
Anerobic bacteria fermentable feedstock
when air is excluded with a cover.
Kept a water dish for a stray cat
that picked up algae. More O2 bubbles
than from a2 amp electrolysis cell anode.
Floating Algae
Oops,to do the algebra right and put all of the constants
where they belong:
E* r = hbar*c
As energy (E ) increases, radius ( r ) has to decrease
and vice versa.
This will satisfy mcr = hbar for conservation of
momentum (spin) and energy.
Fred
Electrons and positrons are routinely
Dear Vo,
Pre suppose one intends to burn H and O ... and use some of the
atmosphere as well
(A) The exhaust can be passed through calcium hydroxide in an
aqueous solution. then we have trapped the gaseous to use on the
crops... or our own garden.
(B) Nitrogen - oxygen gases can
An article from the Asbury Park Press:
http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060628/OPINION/606280538/1032
TOPIC OF THE DAY Global warming
Posted by the Asbury Park Press on 06/28/06
Nature solves own problems
As a retired scientist I marvel at the progress made in science during
Tangent VO
--
If one examines cold fusion one seems to see electric current
passing through various aqueous solutions with various types of
electrodes.
Can ANY vo let us know the amount of Hydrogen and Oxygen created
by these varied experiments? Can we know the volume of H
Hi all,
This is the second publication from a scientist I have seen today trying
to completely debunk Cold Fusion as relegated to the dust bin of history,
I wonder who is paying for this misinformation to be fed to the
uninitiated and unschooled general public!
John Rudiger
-Original
22 matches
Mail list logo
