!
Noble Gas Engine stock also offered at about $3. Sounds like a Variation
on a Theme of Rossi.
Easy, easy ...
Chung
--- On *Thu, 8/16/12, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com* wrote:
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date
a Physics degree; undergraduate or otherwise?
Jojo
- Original Message -
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 10:23 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
At 10:37 AM 8/16/2012, MarkI-ZeroPoint
of Rossi.
Easy, easy ...
Chung
--- On Thu, 8/16/12, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thursday, August 16, 2012, 6:48 PM
Like most predictions of string
theory; super-symmetric
on
a Theme of Rossi.
Easy, easy ...
Chung
--- On *Thu, 8/16/12, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thursday, August 16, 2012, 6:48 PM
Like most predictions of string theory; super
Q.E.D.
At 01:54 AM 8/17/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
So, you admit to having NOT read CE web site and a more thorough
explanation of his theory.
Yes. Generally, I admit the truth, regardless of how it might look.
Basically, I trust the truth more than I trust myself.
So, you do not really
: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
Q.E.D.
At 01:54 AM 8/17/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
So, you admit to having NOT read CE web site and a more thorough
explanation of his theory.
Yes. Generally, I admit the truth, regardless of how it might look.
Basically, I trust the truth more than I trust myself
. LOL ...
Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:42:38 -0700
At 05:02 AM 8/15/2012, Chemical Engineer wrote:
I was hoping they would embrace my theory and observations but I guess it is a
little too early for that.
Really, CE? Were you actually that naive
Park, arXiv:1203.4683v1 [hep-ph]
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 4:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
At 05:02 AM 8/15/2012, Chemical Engineer wrote:
I
. Cardoso et. al., [arXiv:1201.5118[hep-th]].
[191] Seong Chan Park, arXiv:1203.4683v1 [hep-ph]
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 4:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory
be tested.
ChemE, have you thought of submitting it to arXiv, or some other open
peer-review site?
-Mark
From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 8:51 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
A nice theory actually
[mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, August 16, 2012 8:51 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
** **
A nice theory actually, however how will we apply Galileo's Principles
(the Scientific Method) to it?
Suppose it is 100% true, what does this mean
Mark,
Yes I would like to post it on arxiv, I need a sponsor in the physics area.
Do you know of any? I am cleaning up the document some and want to make
sure i get all of the references, etc.
I do not fault Abd. He has years of frustration built up
stand corrected, he's definitely an
expert.
- Original Message -
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 11:37 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
well-referenced explanation BEFORE commenting on it, else
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
No, I am not making it up and it was not a dream
Physics is ultimately a work of the imagination. Over time some of
those imaginings are retained and studied while others are
dismissed or forgotten for lack of evidence
OK, you are right, it did wake me up at night.
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com
wrote:
No, I am not making it up and it was not a dream
Physics is ultimately a work of the
@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
OK, you are right, it did wake me up at night.
At 02:06 AM 8/16/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
I had unsubscribed and never intending to repost here again but I
just can't stand the pretentious verbal diarrhea of this
self-appointed so called LENR Expert.
Sorry, honey, I'm late for dinner, but Someone is Wrong on the Internet.
I tend to write in
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, you are right, it did wake me up at night.
Did you start having these dreams before or after you first read about
quantum singularities?
harry
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:00 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com
Always slept well at night
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com
wrote:
OK, you are right, it did wake me up at night.
Did you start having these dreams before or after you first read
a...@lomaxdesign.com
An: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Gesendet: 21:36 Donnerstag, 16.August 2012
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Theory Panel Dissensus
At 02:06 AM 8/16/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
I had unsubscribed and never intending to repost here again but I just can't
stand the pretentious verbal
At 12:42 PM 8/16/2012, Chemical Engineer wrote:
Mark,
Yes I would like to post it on arxiv, I need a sponsor in the
physics area. Do you know of any? I am cleaning up the document
some and want to make sure i get all of the references, etc.
I do not fault Abd. He has years of frustration
At 10:37 AM 8/16/2012, MarkI-ZeroPoint wrote:
RE: ChemEng's hypothesis,
Abd,
at least he backs up his hypothesis with a list of references... all *191*
of them! So he is probably MORE current on the scientific underpinnings of
his hypothesis than you, so I'd suggest you visit his website and
Like most predictions of string theory; super-symmetric particles, micro
black holes, no one (AKA CERN) has detected them yet at any energy. CERN is
way beyond any energy the cold fusion can reach or hot fusion for that
matter. The prospects are grim. The string people are disappointed.
I wish I were as sure of my theory as you guys sound.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.3208v2.pdf
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
Like most predictions of string theory; super-symmetric particles, micro
black holes, no one (AKA CERN) has detected them yet at any
After watching -with some interruptions due to local conditions-
the Theory Panel at ICCF-17, my first reaction was to go to the Merriam
Webster dictionary and to search for the best antinomy of Consensus.
It is Dissensus. Perhaps reading the text will be more encouraging.
Peter
--
Dr. Peter
I was hoping they would embrace my theory and observations but I guess it
is a little too early for that. If everyone could get on the same page
this fledgling industry can generate some serious revenue and transform the
World!
My theory explains the following observations:
Ed Storms, well
I forgot one:
Embrittlement. On-going Hawking radiation within a structure will
gradually decay its integrity due to local heat effects as well as further
collapse and transmutations of local atomic structures. This has been
witnessed in Mr. Celani's wire.
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:02 AM,
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.com wrote:
Conductivity inversion effects in a metal wire/lattice. It is well
understood that a singularity carries charge, angular momentum and radius
like any other particle. It is also understood that when they evaporate
No, I am not making it up and it was not a dream
A *charged black hole* is a black
holehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole that
possesses electric charge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge.
Since the electromagnetic repulsion in compressing an electrically charged
mass is
No, I am not making it up:
A *charged black hole* is a black
holehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole that
possesses electric charge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge.
Since the electromagnetic repulsion in compressing an electrically charged
mass is dramatically greater than the
The mass sets the radius
On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 1:39 PM, Chemical Engineer cheme...@gmail.comwrote:
No, I am not making it up:
A *charged black hole* is a black
holehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole that
possesses electric charge http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_charge.
Since
At 02:46 AM 8/15/2012, you wrote:
After watching -with some interruptions due to local conditions-
the Theory Panel at ICCF-17, my first reaction was to go to the Merriam
Webster dictionary and to search for the best antinomy of Consensus.
It is Dissensus. Perhaps reading the text will be more
At 05:02 AM 8/15/2012, Chemical Engineer wrote:
I was hoping they would embrace my theory and observations but I
guess it is a little too early for that.
Really, CE? Were you actually that naive?
Here is the situation. PdD cold fusion was discovered -- or
rediscovered -- over twenty years
33 matches
Mail list logo
