JLN's W Filament2.5E-4 meterdia x0.100 meterlong
Area = (pi)R^2 x L = 4.9E-9 meter^2
Resistance at 27 K = 0.122 ohms
Resistance at 500 K = 0.203 ohms
Resistance at 1,000 K = 0.508 ohms
Resistance at 2,000 K = 1.13 ohms
Temp K w/m^2 Ohm-Meters Amp/Meter^2 % H Atoms
27.00 -- - -0.60E-7 -
Oops. Couldn't figure why the radiated power was 3 milliwatts at 2500 K .
It should be about 53 watts.
Frederick
- Original Message -
From: Frederick Sparber
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: 7/9/05 8:56:12 AM
Subject: Re: MAHG update
JLN's W Filament2.5E-4 meterdia x0.100
- Original Message -
From: Brad [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It's trickier than you would think because that analog ammeter
and
shunt still has to pass 166 A with minimal voltage drop
Well it is not necessary to cover the whole range of baterry
capability when the testing amp range for the
Jones,
Jon,
After reading my last post I can see that my point is not
entirely clear.
IMO, Naudin's voltage measurents are taken directly at the
filament
connections on the MAHG tube assembly thus neglecting any
voltage drops thru
the connecting leads to the supply source.
tex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2005 5:55
AM
Subject: Re: MAHG update
JLN's W Filament2.5E-4 meterdia x0.100
meterlong
Area = (pi)R^2 x L = 4.9E-9 meter^2
Resistance at 27 K = 0.122 ohms
Resistance at 500 K = 0.203 ohms
Resistance at 1,000 K = 0.508 ohms
This test does not prove that LENR is not occurring. LENR does not
produce detectable radiation outside of the cell. The only radiation of
any significance has only been detected within the cell. In addition,
such a counter would not detect radiation from tritium nor neutron
emission.
Ed,
Your are correct and I was too hasty in saying that LENR had been
eliminated as a factor. I'm having a low batting average today it
seems.
This test does not prove that LENR is not occurring. LENR does
not produce detectable radiation outside of the cell. The only
radiation of any
FWIW, another reality check for the input power consumed by the MAHG is to
first calculate the energy in Joules per pulse and multiply by the rep rate.
IE, the input energy is 166 * 12 * (1/50) * .05 = 1.992J per pulse.
Therefore, the input power = 1.992 * 50 = 99.6 watts. With the equipment JLN
Jon,
FWIW, another reality check for the input
power consumed by the MAHG is to first calculate the energy in Joules
per pulse and multiply by the rep rate. IE, the input energy is 166 * 12
* (1/50) * .05 = 1.992J per pulse. Therefore, the input power = 1.992 *
50 = 99.6 watts. With the
Nope, except for the fact that they experience force
in opposite directions because of opposite charge.
Merlyn
--- Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Merlyn
Well, technically any electron passing through a
magnetic field is accelerated, whether the field
is
static or not.
Then why can one not cohere ZPE with a sufficient electric field?
From: Merlyn
Nope, except for the fact that they experience force
in opposite directions because of opposite charge.
Merlyn
--- Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Merlyn
Well, technically any
From: Merlyn
Well, technically any electron passing through a
magnetic field is accelerated, whether the field is
static or not.
Do electrons and positrons behave differently in static magnetic *or* electric
fields?
Well, technically any electron passing through a
magnetic field is accelerated, whether the field is
static or not.
A dynamic magnetic field is required to accelerate a
static electron, but if the electron is already
moving, then a static field will induce a force on the
electron and thus an
Jones,
I am not against you, but people would rather listen to Hal -thenthey should really take a close look at him, his background and "what" he has said Vs what he now says. If Hal hasunkind words about mydevice, why don't you ask him if it is from personal experience and get him to publicly
Is anyone here seriously interested in a Breakthrough Energy sourceand does anyone else here realize how important Chernetski's work was?
http://www.nuenergy.org/alt/chernetsky.htm
Video link... http://www.nuenergy.org/video/chernetski.rm
--- Christopher Arnold wrote:
Is anyone here seriously interested in a
Breakthrough Energy source and does anyone else here
realize how important Chernetski's work was?
We all realize how important it could have been IF it
were true. Mark and I recieved the follwoing note from
Hal a couple
PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Chernitski (was Re: MAHG update hypothesis) Chernetski
--- Christopher Arnold wrote:
Is anyone here seriously interested in a Breakthrough Energy source
and does anyone else here realize how important Chernetski's work was?
We all realize how
Jones,
Wonderful,now please ask Hal to watch the video of himself disputing what he just told you and Mark. Maybe Hal forgot about his private viewing, maybe he was told to forget about it, or maybe he just wantsEVERYONE ELSEto forget about his video disclosure of such an Earth-shattering
Jones,
You sound paranoid talking about the Kings software and all that spy stuff, but we "are" talking about PuthoffwithCIA, NSA etc. etc. connections- maybe he works for the same king.
My business with Puthoff is not open to discussion, but what Hal has provided are two completely different
From: Christopher Arnold
You sound paranoid talking about the Kings software and all that spy stuff,
but we are talking about Puthoff with CIA, NSA etc. etc. connections -
maybe he works for the same king.
Jonesee, you *are* aware of HP's involvement with Grillflame, n'est-ce pas?
Jones Beene wrote
What would be the next step in the evolution towards
the goal of self-power?
1)Instead fo H2, try a gas mixture consisting of 3
Helium atoms to every two Hydrogen atoms.
Jones
Rather than invoking ZPE, Dirac or hydrinos, I Suspect that the
Correction, From Hals own lips on video - said he "did" witness Chernetski's Plasma Discharge device and was extremely excited by what he appeared to see it doing. He then invited Chernetski to Austin, however the death of Chernetski prevented his participation. Considering that Plasma is the
in Moscow about the time of Chernitski's demise.I've copied this to Hal who would know for sure.MarkFrom: Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.comTo: vortex-l@eskimo.comSubject: Re: MAHG update hypothesisDate: Sun, 5 Jun 2005 08:51:19 -0700 (PDT)--- Jean "Rather th
experiment. Perhaps due to
his arrival in Moscow about the time of Chernitski's demise.I've
copied this to Hal who would know for sure.MarkFrom: Jones
Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Reply-To: vortex-l@eskimo.comTo:
vortex-l@eskimo.comSubject: Re: MAHG update
hypothesisDate: Sun, 5 Ju
Christopher Arnold wrote:
This information kindly provided by Bruce A. Perreault
I understand Mr. Perreault is on the verge of an announcement about an
atomic battery. Do you know him?
factor in his output?
From: Christopher Arnold [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2005 3:00 PMTo: vortex-l@eskimo.comSubject: Re: Chernitski (was Re: MAHG update hypothesis) Chernetski
Mark,
Rather than wait for Hal to respond, Please watch the video of Hal talking about
Jones Beene wrote:
When a proton becomes temporarily bare, almost
immediately it will attract an electron, and if none
is available from 3-space, then one will be
forthcoming form the epo field, which will express a
local-charge-deficit such that any real electron
cross over and will fill
27 matches
Mail list logo
