Re: ionizing radiation
At 09:18 pm 20-01-05 -0500, Mick wrote: MC: In the case cited, grounding of the can is irrelevant. Small AM radios have a ferrite stick as the antenna, which responds to the magnetic portion of the EM fields and grounding is not needed. They also have automatic gain control circuits which try to make local, strong stations and distant weak stations sound equally loud. Thus if you were in a urban area with nearby transmitters, your box migt be a effective shield, giving, say 100 x attentuation of the incoming signal. The radio would just up its internal gain to make the output equally loud. Yes, the signal gets in through the gaps between the lid and the box, illustrating my earlier point that you have to think watertight and airtight when discussing shielding. Mike Carrell That's what I like about Vortex. Every day you learn something new. 8-) Cheers Grimer
Gold and Methane Systhesis
Not about transmutation; but, maybe we don't need no steenkin' Cold Fusion: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/print?id=421532 Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: Dream-inspired fringe-science invention
yeah, i remember that bit. iirc, he was seriously underestimating the force of the blast and velocity of the shrapnel thats ACTUALLY encountered by those forces hit by ied's. and im agreed here. this is bunk. a beam of light that kills things, makes walls transparent... from a dream... cmon, he calls the main unit the centrifuge and it includes lights and lasers. please. looking at one of those pictures, it looks like his sighting barell is a freaking tp tube. wont even say what he calls the principle under which it works. not a chance. anyone who has created a new law of physics loves nothing more than naming the principles, and expounding on what they are and how they work without ever actually saying anything. i call shenanigans. On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 01:42:45 -0500, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A few months ago he appeared on discovery channel's Daily Planet demonstrating an unique amour to protect vehicles against blasts from road side bombs. He said he did this because he was concerned for his brother's safety who is in the military and serving in Afghanistan. I think a representative from the Canadian military was present at the demo. Harry Keith Nagel at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Bill Mike, He has three Canadian applications regarding the bear suit (eh?) CA2263028Protective Guard CA2260549Protective Helmet CA2233107Protective Apparel These are registered to TroySport Incorporated Which presumably is Troy James Hurtubise's company. Here's the inpadoc data. Legal status (INPADOC) of CA F 2263028 A (Patent of invention) PRS Date : 2003/04/03 PRS Code : FZDE Code Expl.: - DEAD EFFECTIVE DATE: 20020225 CA F 2260549 A (Patent of invention) PRS Date : 2003/04/03 PRS Code : FZDE Code Expl.: - DEAD EFFECTIVE DATE: 20020201 CA F 2233107 A (Patent of invention) PRS Date : 2003/04/03 PRS Code : FZDE Code Expl.: - DEAD EFFECTIVE DATE: 20010628 This means all three applications were abandoned by the applicant, so no patent was granted. Troysport has no web presence that I could discern. I couldn't find any applications regarding the flame paste, you might try sleuthing that one. As always, this http://www.ipdiscover.com and this http://www.classclarify.com are recommended for more in-depth research. K. -Original Message- From: Michael Foster [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 11:17 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: Dream-inspired fringe-science invention I dunno, Bill. This guy's grizzly-proof suit and something called fire paste seem to work. The weird suit in the background of the photo reminded me that I'd seen this guy's stuff on the Discovery Channel, so I googled his name and came up with: http://www.improb.com/news/2003/oct/troy-flamerproof.html I have to agree. It seems like total B.S. But you have to ask why somebody would go to all that trouble to dupe some investors out of a few tens of thousands of dollars, escpecially an inventor with a track record. Of course they were fromFrance..., Remulac, maybe. M. Bill wrote: Here's something from a basement inventor: weird EM effect makes solids transparent, ruins electronics, kills goldfish? http://www.baytoday.ca/content/news/details.asp?c=6657 http://www.baytoday.ca/content/news/gallery.asp?c=6657Title=%3Cb%3EHurtubise+ says+invention+sees+through+walls%2DBayToday%2Eca+excl usive%3C%2Fb%3E The few experiences I've had with these things lead me to conclude that it's a hoax. The thing is horribly complicated and employs unknown principles... and yet it WORKS? How the hell would he debug such a beast if (when) it didn't work when first turned on? That's a dead giveaway. Imagine trying to build a laser or computer or TV set in 1905 from information received in a dream. Or imagine one person in 1905 trying to make a copy of these devices, even with the actual device in front of them to work from. Without continuing and extremely detailed step-by-step guidance, there are many thousands of critical mistakes possible in a complicated system, any one of which would screw up the function. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web! -- Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us that dragons can be beaten. -G.K. Chesterton
Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
I Googled it before going to the trouble of trying it. OTOH, a large needle on a foot of thread swung past a stationary vertical "Cow Magnet" goes into rotational oscillation above the tip of the CM. http://www.maxwellsociety.net/PhysicsCorner/CurrentLoopPolarization/ElectroAndPermanentMagnets.html "The results obtained by Guala-Valverde and others suggest a sort of rotational relativity. That is, it seems that the emf across the load depends only upon the motion of magnet and load relative to each other. (Obviously there is a nonzero emf when the magnet is at rest and the load rotates.) The problem with this conclusion is that Maxwells equations (like Newtons laws) apply only in inertial frames of reference. The contention of this article is that the experimental results are consistent with the electric polarization of translating current loops. In brief, spinning permanent magnets have spin-induced electric fields with radial components. Such radial electric fields can produce emfs across resting loads, quite as the magnetic forces produce emfs when the load moves through the B field of a resting magnet. It is worth noting another explanation suggested for the zero emf observed when magnet and load rotate in tandem. It has been theorized that the spinning magnet "drags" its B field along, so that the (also moving) load is not cutting across any B field lines. However, the emf is nonzero when the load spins within an enclosing electromagnet, regardless of whether the electromagnet spins or remains at rest. And the emf is zero when the load is at rest and the electromagnet spins! It seems somewhat ad hoc to suppose that a spinning permanent magnet drags its magnetic field along, whereas a spinning electromagnet does not." Frederick
Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
What if the electromagnet is wound with high turn pitch. It should translate wrt your frame like the stripes on a rotating "barber pole". :-) http://www.maxwellsociety.net/PhysicsCorner/CurrentLoopPolarization/ElectroAndPermanentMagnets.html "It has been quantitatively demonstrated that the net charge density is not everywhere zero when the current loop of Sect. 1 translates along a line in its plane. Indeed a simple proof qualitatively indicates that uncharged current loops are electrically polarized when they translate. At any given moment the translating loop has an excess of positive or negative charge on one "side," and an excess of negative or positive charge on the other. In brief, the translating loop has an electric dipole moment (as well as a magnetic moment), and consequently there is a nonzero electric field." "This effect is only present when the loop translates. It is not present when the loop merely spins." Frederick More: http://www.maxwellsociety.net/PhysicsCorner/Electrodynamics/GualaValverde%20Explanation.html
Re: Vehicles need to be insulated
At 1:18 AM 1/19/5, thomas malloy wrote: At 12:09 PM 1/18/5, thomas malloy wrote: and Horace Heffner responded; You people need to visit J C Whitney's website and look for a gas powered heater. I'm glad to hear that only a few of you are freezing to death in your cars! Actually, so few people freeze here because they enough common sense to carry emergency arctic gear. Throwing more hydrocarbon energy at a hydrocarbon energy problem is not a solution. IMHO, it is way more energy efficient to have a gas powered heater / absorption refrigerator built into the auto for the few times when you will need it than upsize the engine and use the waste heat. I have not suggested that upsizing an engine is the solution. On the contrary, I have pointed out that the coming downsizing of engines will create a problem with heating and cooling and the solution I proposed is *vehicle insulation*. Also, I think heat/defrost/AC is used far more often than a few times, in fact more than half the time in some places. Vehicle insulation is a far more energy efficient solution than auxilliary heating/cooling. I also pointed out that suitably designed vehicle insulation has many other advantages as well. However, this is a solution that requires action by the auto manufacturers themselves. Isulating is such an obvious way to improve a vehicle. I wonder why it is not being done already. I suppose the principle reason is that it is easier to sell the general public a low capital cost than a low operating cost. At some point, however, I think vehicle comfort will play a large enough role that marketing of high milage vehicles will be affected by the feature. Regards, Horace Heffner
Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
Frederick Sparber at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What if the electromagnet is wound with high turn pitch. It should translate wrt your frame like the stripes on a rotating barber pole. :-) Would such a rotating electromagnet self-accelerate along the axis of rotation if its axis of rotation could be maintained? Harry
Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
Harry Veeder wrote: Frederick Sparber at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What if the electromagnet is wound with high turn pitch. It should translate wrt your frame like the stripes on a rotating barber pole. :-) Would such a rotating electromagnet self-accelerate along the axis of rotation if its axis of rotation could be maintained? You might have trouble keeping it on the ground. :-) BTW, there should be another field due to v^2/r acceleration. Gravity? Frederick Harry
RE: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
Keith Nagel wrote: Hey Fred, I'm curious how they explain the functioning of the self exciting homopolar generator, N. Tesla (1891). Where are the translating current loops? Googling Guala-Valverde brings up a lot of related stuff, Keith. Eddys? Frederick K. -Original Message- From: Frederick Sparber [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 21, 2005 6:07 PM To: vortex-l Subject: Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets What if the electromagnet is wound with high turn pitch. It should translate wrt your frame like the stripes on a rotating barber pole. :-) http://www.maxwellsociety.net/PhysicsCorner/CurrentLoopPolarization/ElectroA ndPermanentMagnets.html It has been quantitatively demonstrated that the net charge density is not everywhere zero when the current loop of Sect. 1 translates along a line in its plane. Indeed a simple proof qualitatively indicates that uncharged current loops are electrically polarized when they translate. At any given moment the translating loop has an excess of positive or negative charge on one side, and an excess of negative or positive charge on the other. In brief, the translating loop has an electric dipole moment (as well as a magnetic moment), and consequently there is a nonzero electric field. This effect is only present when the loop translates. It is not present when the loop merely spins. Frederick More: http://www.maxwellsociety.net/PhysicsCorner/Electrodynamics/GualaValverde%20 Explanation.html
Re: Gravitation Force Between Rotating Solenoids
Back to the original thought. Even if there is no E field set up around a rotating Electromagnet/Solenoid the rotation of the Magnetic B Field should result in a small E field due to the acceleration v^2/r of the field. I.e., the tangential velocity vector is constantly changing directions. Hence, two rotating solenoids should attract or repel on another with a force proportional to the coil current and rotational acceleration. http://www.pa.msu.edu/~duxbury/courses/phy294H/lectures/lecture23/lecture23.html "Maxwell's term describes the fact that a time varying electric field induces a magnetic field." " Faraday's law states that a time varying magnetic field induces an electric field." There's that "rotating energy loop-disk" thingy again, Jones. :-) Frederick
Re: E Fields From Spinning Electromagnets Magnets
Frederick Sparber at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Harry Veeder wrote: Frederick Sparber at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What if the electromagnet is wound with high turn pitch. It should translate wrt your frame like the stripes on a rotating barber pole. :-) Would such a rotating electromagnet self-accelerate along the axis of rotation if its axis of rotation could be maintained? You might have trouble keeping it on the ground. :-) BTW, there should be another field due to v^2/r acceleration. Is 'r' the radius of the barber pole? Gravity? Not sure what you mean. Harry
