On 04/28/2010 07:06 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> And where are the dinosaurs?
They didn't make it onto the Ark, of course! That's why the went
extinct, and that's where all those fossils came from.
I thought everybody knew that.
(Same thing happened to the unicorns.)
We are generally in agreement, I think, actually.
On 04/28/2010 02:34 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> And it doesn't matter. Fundamentalists, generally, corrupt their
> religion, that's my position. (And I will distinguish these from those
> who simply seek to discover and practice the "fundament
On 04/27/2010 08:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 03:04 PM 4/27/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>> On the other hand, if it *is*
>> inerrant, then we can also take as true the fact that the rains lasted
>> 150 days, not more, not less, and that *all* the high moun
On 04/27/2010 12:06 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2949640/Noahs-Ark-found-in-Turkey.html
>
> THE remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000ft up a Turkish
> mountain, it has been claimed.
Isn't this the second or third "Noah's Ark" found on Mount Ar
On 04/24/2010 10:56 AM, Mauro Lacy wrote:
> Rick Monteverde wrote:
>> Maybe they just don't like the sun in their face?
>>
> They surely thought about this. From the abstract:
> "Because wind and light conditions could be excluded as a common
> denominator determining the body axis orientation
On 04/22/2010 08:12 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
[Rossi wrote:]
>
> Dear Sir,
> [...] The effect of
> the starting period upon the energy balance is of no relevance anyway.
Dismissed without ever showing a number justifying the dismissal.
This approach to criticism looks very familiar. I think we
On 04/19/2010 09:53 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> His interest is now in the movement of the fringes rather than in the
> number of fringes:
>
> "The zero point, where a standstill of the pattern movement happens,
> is for both interferometers at the same position. There are two zero
> points i
On 04/19/2010 03:52 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> In case anyone is interested, the guy with the vertical
> interferometer has repeated his experiment with a more rigid
> apparatus:
>
> http://worldnpa.ning.com/profiles/blogs/grusenick-repetition-of
Quote:
> During a 180° rotation with the new Int
On 04/11/2010 09:44 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>
> Second towel took about 22 seconds to fold on camera (chose second towel
> to time for no particular reason). That's 1/67 the average real time
> per towel, so we can probably
On 04/10/2010 11:17 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
> Terry sez:
>
>> I wonder what the true elapsed time was. It looked about 2x.
>
> The article sez at the end:
>
> "Nifty as it sounds, be prepared for a long wait if you want that pile of
> towels folded. The robot took an av
On 04/08/2010 06:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>> > That's true, but we don't have cold fusion, do we?
>>
>> Even if we did, I suspect ramp up time to multi-Gigawatt plants will
>> render the new plants cost effective.
>
> I am not sure what this means. I think you mean: T
>From what I've read it appears that mudslides are almost always the
result of deforestation. Remove the forest, and the hillside eventually
comes loose.
I don't know if that's the case here -- you'd need to look into the
history of the area (which I have not done). The slides may come many
year
On 04/06/2010 09:21 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
> This may already have been pointed out here, but it would appear that Steorn
> has finally published additional information on their PM configuration. The
> original demo... you know... The demo that failed spectacularly several
On 04/02/2010 08:28 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
> Stephan,
>
> This isn’t meant
> to be philosophical but if these fields meet in the cavity and there
> is no mass there for them to fight over, will the fields even sum or
> just pass through each other?
That question can only be answered in th
On 04/02/2010 11:04 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
> 9/9/2009
>
> http://www.examiner.com/x-2912-Seattle-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2009m9d9-Two-whistleblowers-independently-report-teleporting-to-Mars-and-meeting-Martian-extraterrestrials
>
> http://tinyurl.com/l853hy
>
> Two whistleblowers independently
On 04/02/2010 08:28 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote:
> Stephan,
>
> No, Like Harry I am having trouble too but I think you are simply
> making a distinction between different sources of time dilation. I
> know that time dilation is much greater sitting on the surface of a
> dead star vs. a small plane
On 04/01/2010 08:37 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
> Only if potentials exist without fields, can it be said that time
> dilation "doesn't depend in any way on *variations* in the *strength* of
> the gravitational field."
I thought what I said was pretty clear. Are you just trying to pick
nit
On 04/01/2010 08:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Wed, March 31, 2010 9:40:19 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick
>
>
On 04/01/2010 07:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction
>
> At 02:04 PM 4/1/2010, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>
>> But there is a limit suggested by this, that the maximum flattening is
>> by one-half.
This is false. There is no maximum.
On 04/01/2010 05:31 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 4:01:43 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction
&
On 04/01/2010 05:37 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> > This becomes a real problem with the GPS
>> > satellite clocks.
>
>> Well, not really a "problem", because the engineers who designed them
>> knew about GR.
>
&
On 04/01/2010 03:51 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 2:53:15 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction
&
On 04/01/2010 03:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> >> Can someone refresh my memory about the precise time measurements
>> >> conducted with atomic clocks positioned at different elevations on the
>> >> surface of Earth.
&
On 04/01/2010 02:29 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
>>From Jed:
>
>> Gravity or acceleration slow down time. They are one and the same in general
>> relativity theory.
>>
>> If you start with 2 atomic clocks synchronized together, and you move one up
>> 10 m to another floor, that cause
On 04/01/2010 02:20 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Steven V Johnson wrote:
>
>> Can someone refresh my memory about the precise time measurements
>> conducted with atomic clocks positioned at different elevations on the
>> surface of Earth.
>
> Gravity or acceleration slow down time.
*WRONG*
A mom
On 04/01/2010 02:06 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote:
>>From Mr. Lawrence
>
> ...
>
>> For example, if we dig a spherical chamber in the center
>> of a planet, there will be *no* gravitational "field"
>> within that chamber caused by the mass of the planet.
>> However, the gravitational
On 04/01/2010 01:54 PM, Michel Jullian wrote:
> 2010/3/31 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax :
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> But when the helium findings
>> correlate with excess heat, it all changes. The results confirm each other.
>
> Too much proof makes people doubt.
In what way does that statement make sens
ill runs slower at the "bottom" of the chamber
than at the "top".
>
> Regards
>
> Fran
>
> <http://www.mail-archive.com/>
>
>
> *Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction*
>
> Stephen A. Lawrence
> Thu
Any hints as to what, if anything, the license cost?
So far there's been no clear indication that any power company has
actually *bought* a license from BLP, as far as I know. (I'll be happy
to be corrected on this.)
On 04/01/2010 10:54 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> They are starting to play in the
On 03/31/2010 11:52 PM, Francis X Roarty wrote:
> Am I correct in believing a near luminal basketball could pass through
> the eye of a stationary needle?
>
No. The basketball is contracted fore-and-aft, but not side-to-side, as
viewed by an observer sitting next to the needle. So, it's going
On 03/31/2010 05:29 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
> Another speaker from Switzerland. Showed a picture of the top of
> Matterhorn. It broke off and slid down. The culprit, the melting of
> the permafrost due to global warming.
This happened in 2003, according to stories I saw when I googled
On 03/31/2010 02:11 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 31, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
>
>> In fact, I was wondering, who cares about the heat, helium production
>> alone is an indisputable proof of LENRs, isn't it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> A familiarity with
On 03/31/2010 12:24 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Jed Rothwell
>
> Even if you do not intend to create an exaggerated impression,
>> people like me will assume that is your intention. You have made a naive
>> mistake. So don't do it without a good
On 03/30/2010 05:26 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
>> That's certainly true -- it looks suspicious. But again, it's not
> conclusive, and it doesn't point to any specific error.
>
> Thinking back on
On 03/31/2010 10:56 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
> Friends,
>
> I object to the heavy Krivit bashing, it is not called for,
After looking over his slides, I actually think it is called for. I am,
in fact, extremely surprised by your defense of him.
Krivit appears to be accusing much of the CF co
On 03/31/2010 12:46 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 09:30 PM 3/30/2010, Harry Veeder wrote:
>> I don't see anything wrong with the way Krivit presented the data in
>> order to make his point.
>
> As I just mentioned in another post, I haven't studied "his point" in
> this case. Perhaps you'd
e of JLN's OU was.
On 03/30/2010 04:03 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
>> If JLN was reading peak amps and dividing by 20 to get RMS amps, then he
> was off by a factor of about 4.5. Square output with a 5% duty cycle
&g
On 03/30/2010 03:02 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
> Do you by any chance have a URL?
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aH-gen
Thanks; I will check that out. (In fact I think you already posted that
link, but I didn
On 03/30/2010 01:53 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> Stephen,
>
>> "Unfortunately he never showed actual real time volts and amps going in,
> so it's anybody's guess how "true" the RMS numbers from the Fluke 123
> really are (unless you've run your own tests on that particular meter).
> Sticking the la
On 03/30/2010 11:20 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
>
> This came up a few years ago as a possible explanation to the Moller
> MAHG which was claimed to have a gigantic COP >20 until Naudin’s silly
> measurement error was discovered by George Holz. BTW – side note - to
> his discredit, JLN has never ackn
On 03/30/2010 10:09 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> If they [China] were moving ahead rapidly in cold fusion I would be thrilled.
> Actually, they may be, since they are paying for Arata's work, and
> reportedly replicating it back in China.
Yow! That's wild! Can you provide more info on that --
On 03/23/2010 02:56 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 01:27 PM 3/23/2010, Steven Krivit wrote:
...
>
>> If that's the way you want Vortex to be, not a problem. Journalists
>> are used to people coming unglued when we report hard-hitting facts
>> that ruffle people's feathers.
>
> Or when they
On 03/21/2010 10:59 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>
> On 03/21/2010 07:25 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>> The capacitor is on the input side. A pick up coil was added later to
>> see if it is possible to close the loop and generate OU.
>
> Interesting. Sorry for m
tage source. The fact that the
signal generator which is driving this circuit is apparently making
square waves, not sine waves, is what makes this relevant.
>
> He tried in test 10 but didn't succeed:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7CsBr7ouPE
>
> harry
>
>
&g
the battery until
> the latter is disconnected, which BTW isn't explained on the diagram.
> Is the diagram not complete?
>
>
> 2010/3/21 Stephen A. Lawrence :
>>
>>
>> On 03/21/2010 09:55 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
>>> Which voltage?
>>
>> Vo
On 03/21/2010 09:55 AM, Michel Jullian wrote:
> Which voltage?
Volts on the caps attached to the output -- right, Harry?
But the signal generator is still hooked up, and it's coupled to the
output (at least) through the gate capacitance of the FET and the linked
inductors of the "transformer",
On 03/20/2010 06:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>
> Oh, I don't know -- keep in mind that the "random" sample is actually
> self selected. Have you ever consented to answer a phone survey?
>
>
> It isn't sup
On 03/20/2010 12:01 AM, Harvey Norris wrote:
>
> Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/
>
>
> --- On Fri, 3/19/10, Harvey Norris wrote:
>
>> From: Harvey Norris Subject: [Vo]:Pi factor To:
>> vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Friday, Marc
On 03/19/2010 12:58 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
> test 8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbgwlJx0zNw With only a signal
> generator attached.
This is a variation on Stiffler's circuit, which, as you may recall,
worked with just one wire from a signal generator connected. Capacitive
coupling is
On 03/18/2010 05:19 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> See:
>
> http://pewresearch.org/sciencequiz/
>
> This was administered to 1,005 randomly sampled adults. The results are
> pathetic.
Oh, I don't know -- keep in mind that the "random" sample is actually
self selected. Have you ever consented to an
On 03/18/2010 05:58 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com;
>> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 5:22:20 PM Subject:
>> Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram
>>
>> Stephen A. L
erfect winding geometry isn't really at issue here. It's surely
swamped by the distortion imposed on the field by the external neo magnets.
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To:
>> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 1:
was being shown by the meters ... Am I going to have to to the
overunity forum to get a handle on this? sigh...
>
>
>
> Harry
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010
So what we've got here is a toroidal coil with a neo magnet outside it.
The neo magnet, by saturating /part/ of the ferrite core, essentially
"cuts" the toroid, so it's no longer going to be a closed system; when
we put a current through the coil, we're going to see a chunk of its
field "leaking o
BTW I think you may need to be signed into facebook to see this image.
(At any rate, I couldn't see it until I signed in.)
On 03/18/2010 12:15 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3513566&l=e812a3f42e&id=676517267
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yewd4sf
>
> Harry
>
>
>
>
On 03/18/2010 12:45 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Wed, March 17, 2010 2:58:11 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)
>
>> Even with the ba
On 03/17/2010 03:14 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> So, get rid of the battery -- I mean, *really* get rid of it, disconnect
>> the wires at the battery terminals, and carry it a good distance away
>> from the experiment -- and show the capacit
On 03/17/2010 02:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> George Holz wrote:
>
>> This setup is only interesting if the 12V
>> battery is disconnected from the pulse generator.
>
> I assume you mean they should charge up the capacitor first, and then
> attach it to the pulse generator instead of the battery.
On 03/17/2010 12:26 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> Maybe he thinks it is obvious that the energy stored in the capacitor
> has (or will?) exceed the energy stored in the battery.
>
HAH!
The battery obviously masses more than the caps. (Just look at the
relative sizes, and consider for a moment ty
it away,
turn it off. Otherwise, it's almost surely an example of just one more
way to get power from point A to point B in a way that's sufficiently
confusing that we can't figure it out from the information given in the
video.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - Original M
But but ... he's driving it from a honkin' big 12 volt battery,
looks like a lead acid motorcycle battery or UPS battery.
So, it's *not* a self runner, no matter what it says in the title.
He's got it charging a couple of caps, up to 17 volts or so, above the
battery voltage. He makes a big
On 03/15/2010 06:14 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> This is off topic but it is related to technology, and to the latest
> bruouhaha in the news. People have called into question the report
> made by James Sikes that his Prius went out of control for several
> miles. In the interest of disseminating te
On 03/13/2010 11:07 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:
> >From Terry,
>
>
>> http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/thermopower-waves-0308
>>
>>
>>
>> "A previously unknown phenomenon
>>
>> In the new experiments, each of these electrically and thermally
>> conductive nanotubes was co
On 03/07/2010 10:37 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> On Mar 6, 2010, at 9:43 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>> Possibly a new method of detecting Alzheimer's:
>>
>> Eye test that spots Alzheimer's 20 years before symptoms: Middle-aged
>> could be screened at routine optician's visit
>>
>> http://www.dai
;t show me the rest at all. So, I managed to watch
the first part of the video but didn't get to the shot at 6:40. Can you
summarize what it showed?
Anyhow, I've addressed what I can, below:
On 02/21/2010 03:17 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> - Original Message
&g
On 03/03/2010 10:27 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> I don't really understand how tidal and retarded effects can cancel.
>
> Tidal effects are only detectable on extended bodies, and the "tidal
> force" generally (always?) has nonzero divergence.
Actually I think th
I don't really understand how tidal and retarded effects can cancel.
Tidal effects are only detectable on extended bodies, and the "tidal
force" generally (always?) has nonzero divergence.
On the other hand, the retarded gravity effect typically manifests
itself as a rotation of the acceleration
On 02/23/2010 03:32 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> It is notable that even if ion redistribution fully negates a field
> within the electrolyte, that negation occurs via an ion redistribution,
> and thus an artificial concentration gradient is obtained. A change in
> surface electron density and
instead of a HV supply.
>
> Michel
>
> 2010/2/23 Stephen A. Lawrence :
>>
>>
>> On 02/22/2010 10:32 PM, Rich Murray wrote:
>>>
>>> Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid
>>> in an insulated box with two e
On 02/22/2010 10:32 PM, Rich Murray wrote:
>
> Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid
> in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by
> SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot spots from H and O
> microbubbles: Rich Murray 2010.02
On 02/22/2010 08:38 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
>
> *From:* Jed Rothwell
>
> Ø That's a splendid little video, and an elegant demonstration of spin
> conservation. I urge people to see it.
>
> … if it is authentic, it is splendid indeed.
>
It looks authentic enough -- but it's *NOT* smoke rings.
It'
On 02/22/2010 04:56 PM, Steven Krivit wrote:
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/
The article begins:
> According to an Oct. 5, 2009, press release on the Lyndon LaRouche
> Political Action Committee Web site,
Say ... what??
On 02/18/2010 11:51 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
> On 02/18/2010 08:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>> Naudin has posted two more videos where he holds the magnet away from
>> the torodial coils so that the pickup coil is between the magnet and
>> th
On 02/20/2010 07:56 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
>
>
> I have never committed a crime in my life. It says I have to answer
> all of these questions by law. If I do not answer this will be my
> first crime of violation of the law. If take my amendment rights of
> Unreasonable search and Seizure
On 02/18/2010 08:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To:
>> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 2:10:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?
>>
>>
On 02/18/2010 01:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
>> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
>> Sent: Tue, February 16, 2010 8:25:05 PM
>> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?
>>
>> At 12:37 AM 2/16/2010, Wm. Scott Smit
On 02/18/2010 12:26 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>
>
> - Original Message
>> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To:
>> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, February 17, 2010 3:43:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo
>>
>>
>
On 02/18/2010 12:07 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 02:09 PM 2/17/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>> At the same time, there is one other piece of information which is
>> missing, which makes it hard to judge the significance of the lack of
>> measured change in the cur
On 02/17/2010 12:14 AM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> I did some googling on magnetic saturation... (some parts of the post
> have been removed)
No prob, I snip all over the place, myself.
...
[sal]
>> The distinction you're drawing between a "cloak" and a "shield" is
>> interesting but I think
Very, very cute! Thanks, Harry! I'll definitely be passing this one along!
On 02/15/2010 11:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
> Naudin's Solid State Generator.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjDbIrKIVXs
>
> How do you explain this?
It's the same principle as the Steorn motor, which also depends
Gotta love Naudin's work on this -- it's so clear...
Couple things, from a very quick skim of the new version of the page.
** Introductory text in a box at top of page:
> The current required to get the temporary depolarization of the magnetic
> domains of the ferrite is fully independent of the
On 02/13/2010 11:19 PM, Francis X Roarty wrote:
> Scott,
>
> The EM drive link is
> http://www.universetoday.com/2008/10/09/is-the-impossible-emdrive-possible/
>
>
>
>
>
> *[snip] Actually, the untreated powdered alloy is pyrophoric, but once it has
> been *
>
> *treated
Caveat: My reply, interspersed with the message, is too long. Oh, well.
On 02/13/2010 04:35 PM, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>>
>> Lovely page! Thanks, Harry!
>
>
> You are welcome.
>
>> JLN has done a really clear job of des
On 02/11/2010 09:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Mark Iverson wrote:
>
>> "So, it looks to me like Naudin's playing games with his measurements.
>> His setup's interesting but I would hesitate to trust a single
>> measurement on that page."
>>
>> You guys are pathetic... You're looking for any lit
Funny, Mark, you really didn't address the objection. You just attacked me.
Sounds like you didn't understand the reason the change is significant,
either.
On 02/11/2010 01:48 AM, Mark Iverson wrote:
>
> "So, it looks to me like Naudin's playing games with his measurements.
> His setup's inte
On 02/10/2010 01:41 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 10:24 PM 2/9/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>
>> > Yeah, I think you are right, on that end. Energy is stored in the
>> > inductor field, but with relatively long rise time. When the switch
>> > op
On 02/09/2010 10:06 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 09:55 PM 2/9/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>> Large peak voltages when the circuit's opened, sure, I can buy that.
>> But one thing inductors do really well is squash the current peaks.
>
> When you turn on t
On 02/09/2010 08:25 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> At 04:40 PM 2/9/2010, you wrote:
>> Lovely page! Thanks, Harry!
>>
>> JLN has done a really clear job of describing the effect, well enough
>> that it can be reproduced and fully analyzed, with, as far as I can see,
>> no hidden tricks.
>
[ .
Lovely page! Thanks, Harry!
JLN has done a really clear job of describing the effect, well enough
that it can be reproduced and fully analyzed, with, as far as I can see,
no hidden tricks.
Now, what can we say about his page?
First, he measures the inductance of the coil, and observes that it's
On 02/08/2010 05:10 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
>> My comments all addressed the issue of a BB spectrum shift, and were not
> related to superradiance.
>
> Aha. I see, this is a miscommunication more than
On 02/08/2010 05:01 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> Stephen
>
> It's clear that you are trying to re-characterize a mistaken understanding
> on your part, in order to try to win an argument that can only be won if you
> get to rephrase it your own terms.
Totally false.
>
> For instance: "CoE has *
I think you may be confusing two effects here.
On 02/08/2010 01:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>
>
>> I have lost the citation from a few weeks ago that claimed that
>> below a threshol
On 02/08/2010 03:38 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
>> I'm not going to pretend I can follow the reasoning here. Sorry...
>
>
> Well, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
>
> I
On 02/08/2010 01:07 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
> -Original Message- From: Stephen A. Lawrence
>
> Jones Beene wrote:
>
>
>
>> I have lost the citation from a few weeks ago that claimed that
>> below a threshold of about 10 nm, the expected blackbody
On 02/08/2010 11:41 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
>
> I have lost the citation from a few weeks ago that claimed that below a
> threshold of about 10 nm, the expected blackbody frequency is upshifted for
> nanostructures, in general.
If I understand you, and if this is true, then it's a violation of t
On 02/07/2010 11:48 AM, Frank wrote:
> What is relativistic velocity of earth to micro and nanoscopic material
> in space? I don’t recall the earths orbital velocity
Roughly 20 miles per second, or about 0.01% C (i.e, C/1)
Escape velocity from the Sun is something like 40 miles per second
On 02/05/2010 04:09 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>
>> Does the evolved heat increase significantly? If so, that could be a
>> win. Alternatively, shield an active cell heavily, to stop the cosmic
>> ray muons, like do the experiment in a mine. I believe this has been
>> d
On 02/05/2010 03:44 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
> Reading what I could find on Bosenovas, I find myself pretty worried.
> I'd say that finding out what happens in this phenomenon is pretty
> important, but one of the seriously worrisome possibilities is that a
> black hole was formed and escap
On 02/03/2010 03:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> Defective fly-by-wire is very scary. Can you even turn the engine off
>> if the computer isn't listening?
>
> It is very scary, but as far as I know, they haven't made a compute
On 02/03/2010 03:26 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
>> Defective fly-by-wire is very scary. Can you even turn the engine off
>> if the computer isn't listening?
>
> It is very scary, but as far as I know, they haven't made a compute
601 - 700 of 2038 matches
Mail list logo
