[Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
Gimme a break: Defkalion state that they are now ready to enter the market, however they say “this process will not be immediate but will take several years , as it will allow time for the big players in the energy distribution change their assets and strategies in a non-traumatic in a synergistic way to new technology” As though introduction of an actual product to the market is identical with reaching the inflection point in the market saturation curve. On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
It seems they will cooperate to incorporate their technology with their customers instead of releasing their reactors directly to retail. 2013/1/18 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/ -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
If their 'market' is 'licensee market' their announcement is probably correct. On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: It seems they will cooperate to incorporate their technology with their customers instead of releasing their reactors directly to retail. 2013/1/18 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/ -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
on point is also that Defkalion is selling the technology, but depend on joint-venture like Defkalion Europe and licensee to develop application, then try to obtain certification, then to get into the market. It is like IBM selling the technology of the yet smaller transistor to a silicon foundry, that will sell to laptop builders, that will finally reach the market... 2 years is optimistic... 2013/1/18 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com Gimme a break: Defkalion state that they are now ready to enter the market, however they say “this process will not be immediate but will take several years , as it will allow time for the big players in the energy distribution change their assets and strategies in a non-traumatic in a synergistic way to new technology” As though introduction of an actual product to the market is identical with reaching the inflection point in the market saturation curve. On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/
[Vo]:Piantelli European Patent - Jan 16, 2013 (Full Text)
METHOD FOR PRODUCING ENERGY AND APPARATUS THEREFOR EP2368252B1 - Jan 16, 2013 www.22passi.it/downloads/EP2368252B1[1].pdf
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
MOSE S.R.L. appears to be a brand new company so this annoucement doesn't do anything to enhance the credibility of Defkalion's claims. see http://www.mose-energy.com/ harry On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/
[Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 By Steven B. Krivit Boeings new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs? http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/01/17/are-nuclear-reactions-causing-boeing-dreamliner-battery-fires/
[Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP
#11 Robert Greenyer 2013-01-18 14:25 @All The EU cell had to be taken off line at short notice to be taken to a big european consortium for preliminary discussion about it. If they are not time wasters, we will ask them to sign an MFMP Full Disclosure Agreement (FDA) as soon as possible. So it has not been on line for a few days. Normal programming will resume shortly. Currently we are trying to track down Nicholas as we have not heard from him (except an unqualified request to urgently order more glass tubes) since he left for the meeting -- Harry
Re: [Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP
Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: If they are not time wasters, we will ask them to sign an MFMP Full Disclosure Agreement (FDA) as soon as possible. That sounds like the opposite of a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). I approve! - Jed
Re: [Vo]:E-Cat world: Defkalion GT and MOSE s.r.l. Forming Joint Venture
More like airplane engine builders! 2013/1/18 Alain Sepeda alain.sep...@gmail.com on point is also that Defkalion is selling the technology, but depend on joint-venture like Defkalion Europe and licensee to develop application, then try to obtain certification, then to get into the market. It is like IBM selling the technology of the yet smaller transistor to a silicon foundry, that will sell to laptop builders, that will finally reach the market... 2 years is optimistic... 2013/1/18 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com Gimme a break: Defkalion state that they are now ready to enter the market, however they say “this process will not be immediate but will take several years , as it will allow time for the big players in the energy distribution change their assets and strategies in a non-traumatic in a synergistic way to new technology” As though introduction of an actual product to the market is identical with reaching the inflection point in the market saturation curve. On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 8:51 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.comwrote: See: http://www.e-catworld.com/2013/01/report-defkalion-gt-and-moses-ltd-forming-joint-venture/ -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
[Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the high temperature heat into. It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool sink if another is not available. In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system that is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be converted into another form of energy. For some reason, this seems to be getting a free lunch and I must be missing something. Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of thermal energy from hot bodies into free space. The body cools down as it loses energy as would be expected, but perhaps there are other ways to cool it down besides radiation as the hot heads discovered. The process I proposed is very much like the conversion of gravitational energy of a gas into heat as the cloud collapses; only in reverse. Is this assumption wrong? Dave
RE: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
I've wondered about such systems for sometime, those that convert one form of energy to another. Suppose someone had a vessel capable of being pressurized in which water was electrolyzed. While electrolysis isn't that efficient, nevertheless, are the pressurized gases therefrom a sort of 'free' kinetic energy, if they drove a turbine or piston motor?
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Entropic Quantum heat pump, like a rainbow Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Friday, January 18, 2013, Chris Zell wrote: I've wondered about such systems for sometime, those that convert one form of energy to another. Suppose someone had a vessel capable of being pressurized in which water was electrolyzed. While electrolysis isn't that efficient, nevertheless, are the pressurized gases therefrom a sort of 'free' kinetic energy, if they drove a turbine or piston motor?
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
In this case you are inputting electrical energy to obtain the gasses. Heat will be added overall to the system as a result and it will become warmer. If you find a way to drive the electrolysis by converting the heat energy of the system into electricity then your concept would be similar to my model. Perhaps it is possible to drive a specially designed photo cell with low energy IR. Dave -Original Message- From: Chris Zell chrisz...@wetmtv.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 3:14 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? I've wondered about such systems for sometime, those that convert one form of energy to another. Suppose someone had a vessel capable of being pressurized in which water was electrolyzed. While electrolysis isn't that efficient, nevertheless, are the pressurized gases therefrom a sort of 'free' kinetic energy, if they drove a turbine or piston motor?
RE: [Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP
Who is this big European consortium? All suggestions are open here . My guess is Siemens. Why? 1. Because they stopped all their investments in Green power technology (Wind, Solar, .). If LENR becomes a commercial reality, all the business with Green Technology will be obsolete in the second after. 2. They abandoned all the nuclear fission activities. 3. Rossi has told to be in contact with them. 4. They have a lot of cash to invest Arnaud
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:25:13 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] In this case you are inputting electrical energy to obtain the gasses. Heat will be added overall to the system as a result and it will become warmer. If you find a way to drive the electrolysis by converting the heat energy of the system into electricity then your concept would be similar to my model. This actually happens when you electrolyze water at a voltage between 1.23 (1.21?)V 1.48V. More precisely, heat energy of the system is converted to chemical energy of the gasses, but the electrolysis is very slow. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Robin, does this result in cooling as the heat is converted? If so, does it not break one of the laws? Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:25:13 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] In this case you are inputting electrical energy to obtain the gasses. Heat will be added overall to the system as a result and it will become warmer. If you find a way to drive the electrolysis by converting the heat energy of the system into electricity then your concept would be similar to my model. This actually happens when you electrolyze water at a voltage between 1.23 (1.21?)V 1.48V. More precisely, heat energy of the system is converted to chemical energy of the gasses, but the electrolysis is very slow. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP
Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: My guess is Siemens. Why? 1. Because they stopped all their investments in Green power technology (Wind, Solar, …). If LENR becomes a commercial reality, all the business with “Green Technology” will be obsolete in the second after. It would premature to stop those investments now because LENR might come to pass. Even I think so, and no one is more confident that cold fusion has to potential to displace all other sources of energy than I am. It has the potential, yes. But first it must be controlled, then developed. There is no telling how long that might take. Even if I saw a working Rossi reactor, I would not advise Siemens or GE to abandon development of all other energy technology. Not just yet. - Jed
[Vo]:Math question
When there is one equation and you substitute another equation into one of its variables, the solution is a set of numbers that includes the conditions of both equations. It is a simultaneous solution. Were there is a squared term in one equation and another equation is substituted in for only one of the terms of the square, what does the result mean? Its not exactly a simultaneous solution. Does it have a name? Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Math question
by definition, wouldnt it be both terms of the square? or am i misunderstanding the question? On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 2:31 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: When there is one equation and you substitute another equation into one of its variables, the solution is a set of numbers that includes the conditions of both equations. It is a simultaneous solution. Were there is a squared term in one equation and another equation is substituted in for only one of the terms of the square, what does the result mean? Its not exactly a simultaneous solution. Does it have a name? Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. That would be us, on a hot day. ;) I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively rectifies sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of zero, it represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute zero. IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes out (depends on your definition of system boundaries). The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery. Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however it receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices). There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the high temperature heat into. Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy remains in the form of molecular kinetic energy throughout the process. Conversion to potential rather than kinetic energy can remove the requirement for a low temperature heat sink. Which BTW is why wind chill is capable of cooling water below ambient temperature. Energy is stored as potential energy when the hydrogen bonds between water molecules are broken. Only a very tiny fraction of the energy required to create the temperature differential is supplied by the wind. This is because the wind only removes the molecules once thermal energy has separated them. Once they are separated they are effectively at infinity relative to one another, so the attractive force between them is only a minute fraction of what it was when they were bound together by Hydrogen bonds in the liquid. It is only this remaining minute attraction that needs to be broken by the wind. It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool sink if another is not available. ??? In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system that is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be converted into another form of energy. For some reason, this seems to be getting a free lunch and I must be missing something. You fear you may be violating the second law of thermodynamics. ;) Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of thermal energy from hot bodies into free space. The body cools down as it loses energy as would be expected, but perhaps there are other ways to cool it down besides radiation as the hot heads discovered. The process I proposed is very much like the conversion of gravitational energy of a gas into heat as the cloud collapses; only in reverse. Is this assumption wrong? Expanding gasses often cool down. That's how refrigerators work. :) Unfortunately, all you have really shown is that solar cells can harvest energy, which we already knew. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:09:49 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] Robin, does this result in cooling as the heat is converted? If so, does it not break one of the laws? Yes it does result in cooling. As the electrolyte gets colder, the electrolysis slows even further (less molecules with sufficient kinetic energy to assist the process). I'm sure a real scientist would tell you that none of the laws are broken. :) Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:25:13 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] In this case you are inputting electrical energy to obtain the gasses. Heat will be added overall to the system as a result and it will become warmer. If you find a way to drive the electrolysis by converting the heat energy of the system into electricity then your concept would be similar to my model. This actually happens when you electrolyze water at a voltage between 1.23 (1.21?)V 1.48V. More precisely, heat energy of the system is converted to chemical energy of the gasses, but the electrolysis is very slow. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP
I often agree with you to a very large number of topics. But here, I'm not. Once the LENR is commercially available, the energy prices will decline slowly but steadily. The wind turbines and solar (heat, or photovoltaic cell) require a huge amount of capital per kW/h produced. Thus, the investments in those green power technologies have very long term, before becoming positive. This therefore requires that the price of energy does not decrease. I'm not saying that LENR will immediately replace all other kind of energy sources. That will take ages, before LENR energy will be the 1st energy source in the world. Fossil fuel still has a long term view. But for the so called Green Power Technologies, LENR will stop all the investments in this field. I think Siemens is aware of this as well. There are too many investments to do with low certainty of money back (in case of commercially available LENR reactors). For sure, I will not, for ever, invest my money in those technologies. _ From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com] Sent: vendredi 18 janvier 2013 22:24 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:A Big European Consortium has an eye on MFMP Arnaud Kodeck arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be wrote: My guess is Siemens. Why? 1. Because they stopped all their investments in Green power technology (Wind, Solar, .). If LENR becomes a commercial reality, all the business with Green Technology will be obsolete in the second after. It would premature to stop those investments now because LENR might come to pass. Even I think so, and no one is more confident that cold fusion has to potential to displace all other sources of energy than I am. It has the potential, yes. But first it must be controlled, then developed. There is no telling how long that might take. Even if I saw a working Rossi reactor, I would not advise Siemens or GE to abandon development of all other energy technology. Not just yet. - Jed
[Vo]:Rossi Third-Party Paper : Good News / Bad News
January 17th, 2013 at 10:36 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=776cpage=2#comment-565344 Dear tomconover: I did not read the report, yet, because it has not been published yet. By the way, the Third Party members returned this week to make more tests to clear some points that they had to repeat, while I am in Miami. I know that there are skeptics too. I fear we will have to wait for the publication to know about the report. Maybe I will have its final version the day before the publication, maybe not. About the plantas, they are in construction. Warm Regards, A.R. Bad news : yet another jam-tomorrow deferment Good news: Could be to clarify a point raised during peer-review (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I was hoping for a good challenge. So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is possible. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. That would be us, on a hot day. ;) I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively rectifies sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of zero, it represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute zero. IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes out (depends on your definition of system boundaries). The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery. Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however it receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices). There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the high temperature heat into. Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy remains in the form of molecular kinetic energy throughout the process. Conversion to potential rather than kinetic energy can remove the requirement for a low temperature heat sink. Which BTW is why wind chill is capable of cooling water below ambient temperature. Energy is stored as potential energy when the hydrogen bonds between water molecules are broken. Only a very tiny fraction of the energy required to create the temperature differential is supplied by the wind. This is because the wind only removes the molecules once thermal energy has separated them. Once they are separated they are effectively at infinity relative to one another, so the attractive force between them is only a minute fraction of what it was when they were bound together by Hydrogen bonds in the liquid. It is only this remaining minute attraction that needs to be broken by the wind. It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool sink if another is not available. ??? In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system that is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be converted into another form of energy. For some reason, this seems to be getting a free lunch and I must be missing something. You fear you may be violating the second law of thermodynamics. ;) Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of thermal energy from hot bodies into free space. The body cools down as it loses energy as would be expected, but perhaps there are other ways to cool it down besides radiation as the hot heads discovered. The process I proposed is very much like the conversion of gravitational energy of a gas into heat as the cloud collapses; only in reverse. Is this assumption wrong? Expanding gasses often cool down. That's how refrigerators work. :) Unfortunately, all you have really shown is that solar cells can
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Why have a law if it can not be broken? We have laws against stealing because people actually steal. Maybe we don't need any stinking laws of thermodynamics since no one can break them. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:47 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:09:49 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] Robin, does this result in cooling as the heat is converted? If so, does it not break one of the laws? Yes it does result in cooling. As the electrolyte gets colder, the electrolysis slows even further (less molecules with sufficient kinetic energy to assist the process). I'm sure a real scientist would tell you that none of the laws are broken. :) Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:04 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 15:25:13 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] In this case you are inputting electrical energy to obtain the gasses. Heat will be added overall to the system as a result and it will become warmer. If you find a way to drive the electrolysis by converting the heat energy of the system into electricity then your concept would be similar to my model. This actually happens when you electrolyze water at a voltage between 1.23 (1.21?)V 1.48V. More precisely, heat energy of the system is converted to chemical energy of the gasses, but the electrolysis is very slow. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Third-Party Paper : Good News / Bad News
If they actually returned to perform more tests then it most likely is a good sign. Had the ECAT been a total failure, it is unlikely that they would bother to recheck it. I have my fingers crossed. Dave -Original Message- From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 5:01 pm Subject: [Vo]:Rossi Third-Party Paper : Good News / Bad News January 17th, 2013 at 10:36 PM http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=776cpage=2#comment-565344 Dear tomconover: I did not read the report, yet, because it has not been published yet. By the way, the Third Party members returned this week to make more tests to clear some points that they had to repeat, while I am in Miami. I know that there are skeptics too. I fear we will have to wait for the publication to know about the report. Maybe I will have its final version the day before the publication, maybe not. About the plantas, they are in construction. Warm Regards, A.R. Bad news : yet another jam-tomorrow deferment Good news: Could be to clarify a point raised during peer-review (lenr.qumbu.com -- analyzing the Rossi/Focardi eCat -- and the defkalion hyperion -- Hi, google!)
Re: [Vo]:Math question
On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:31 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Does it have a name? The original equation is called a quadratic equation and has certain solutions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_equation Maybe this helps?
RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
As far back as 2005, we were suggesting here on vortex that the high failure rate of Lithium batteries could have a LENR connection http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg09241.html -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 - By Steven B. Krivit Boeing's new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs? http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/01/17/are-nuclear-reactions-causing-boei ng-dreamliner-battery-fires/
RE: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Dave, you're nothing but a heretic. . WELCOME to the Collective! J -Mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. ;-) http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/resources/core/images/wink.png I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I was hoping for a good challenge. So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is possible. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. That would be us, on a hot day. ;) I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively rectifies sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of zero, it represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute zero. IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes out (depends on your definition of system boundaries). The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery. Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however it receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices). There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the high temperature heat into. Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy remains in the form of molecular kinetic energy throughout the process. Conversion to potential rather than kinetic energy can remove the requirement for a low temperature heat sink. Which BTW is why wind chill is capable of cooling water below ambient temperature. Energy is stored as potential energy when the hydrogen bonds between water molecules are broken. Only a very tiny fraction of the energy required to create the temperature differential is supplied by the wind. This is because the wind only removes the molecules once thermal energy has separated them. Once they are separated they are effectively at infinity relative to one another, so the attractive force between them is only a minute fraction of what it was when they were bound together by Hydrogen bonds in the liquid. It is only this remaining minute attraction that needs to be broken by the wind. It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool sink if another is not available. ??? In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system that is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be converted into another form of energy. For some reason, this seems to be getting a free lunch and I must be missing something. You fear you may be violating the second law of thermodynamics. ;) Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of thermal energy from hot bodies into free space. The body cools down as it loses energy as would be expected, but perhaps there are other
RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Maybe the higher radiation environment at high altitude facilitates LENR. Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona US -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 4:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries As far back as 2005, we were suggesting here on vortex that the high failure rate of Lithium batteries could have a LENR connection http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg09241.html -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 - By Steven B. Krivit Boeing's new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs? http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/01/17/are-nuclear-reactions-causing-boei ng-dreamliner-battery-fires/
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
You are reminding me of an idea I had long ago. Take 2 hot radiating objects. Place then in a perfect thermal insulating container (for fun). Now I have heard that a magnet can rotate the plane of polarization of photons. The second fact this is based on is that if you have 2 polarized lenses at 90 degrees no light gets through until a 3rd is added between that is at 45 degrees, the middle one rotates the light enough to make it through the final one. Then between them have a setup of polarized lenses (at varied angles) and a magnetic field. The magnetic field rotates the light such that light making the trip from object A to B can get through the polarized lenses (some of it anyway), but in the other direction the twist direction of the magnetic field opposes the twist direction of the polarized lenses. In theory this allows light/heat to escape one to go to the other side, but not the other way. I am not really sure however that I am correct about the relative directions the magnetic field would rotate the plane of polarization. John On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Dave, you’re nothing but a heretic… ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** … WELCOME to the Collective! J ** ** -Mark ** ** *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? ** ** Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. [image: ;-)] * *** ** ** I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I was hoping for a good challenge. ** ** So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. ** ** Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is possible. ** ** Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. ** ** ** ** Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. ** ** That would be us, on a hot day. ;) ** ** ** ** I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. ** ** ** ** These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. ** ** I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively rectifies sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of zero, it represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute zero. IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes out (depends on your definition of system boundaries). ** ** ** ** The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. ** ** This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery. ** ** ** ** Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. ** ** Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however it receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices). ** ** There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the high temperature heat into. ** ** Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy remains in the form
RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Possibly. Maybe too, virbration and/or thermal cycling play roles - even if the problem is eventually found to be purely chemical. -- Lou Pagnucco Hoyt Stearns wrote: Maybe the higher radiation environment at high altitude facilitates LENR. Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona US -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 4:02 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries As far back as 2005, we were suggesting here on vortex that the high failure rate of Lithium batteries could have a LENR connection http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg09241.html -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 - By Steven B. Krivit Boeing's new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs? http://news.newenergytimes.net/2013/01/17/are-nuclear-reactions-causing-boei ng-dreamliner-battery-fires/
RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Excellent point, Hoyt. There is solid evidence that a small amount of radiation stimulates LERN by a factor of thousands of times more than its own energy content. This relates to quantum correlation fields. -Original Message- From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. Maybe the higher radiation environment at high altitude facilitates LENR. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene As far back as 2005, we were suggesting here on vortex that the high failure rate of Lithium batteries could have a LENR connection http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg09241.html -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 - By Steven B. Krivit Boeing's new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs?
RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Thanks. ...so if Boeing does all their battery testing on the ground, they'd miss it. Hoyt -Original Message- From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 5:08 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries Excellent point, Hoyt. There is solid evidence that a small amount of radiation stimulates LERN by a factor of thousands of times more than its own energy content. This relates to quantum correlation fields. -Original Message- From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. Maybe the higher radiation environment at high altitude facilitates LENR. -Original Message- From: Jones Beene As far back as 2005, we were suggesting here on vortex that the high failure rate of Lithium batteries could have a LENR connection http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg09241.html -Original Message- From: pagnu...@htdconnect.com Are Nuclear Reactions Causing Boeing Dreamliner Battery Fires? Jan. 17, 2013 - By Steven B. Krivit Boeing's new 787 Dreamliners use high-capacity lithium-ion batteries. These batteries have materials similar to those used in the most common type of low-energy nuclear reaction experiment. Boeing is considering LENRs for future aerospace applications. On June 22 and 23, 2011, Boeing representatives met with NASA and the Federal Aviation Authority to discuss such applications. Will they meet again to consider the possible relationship between the battery fires and LENRs?
Re: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. hoyt-stea...@cox.net wrote: Maybe the higher radiation environment at high altitude facilitates LENR. If that were the case, I think they would have discovered it during flight tests. There are now 50 Dreamliners in service. I believe there were two used in testing before the airliners put them in service, so there were many hours of flight accumulated, albeit at a rate ~25 times lower than now. I think they would have discovered an anomaly that turns on at high altitudes. On the other hand, something is happening that did not occur during flight testing. My guess is that it is a manufacturing defect in some batteries but not others. The ones used in flight tests were okay, and most of the ones deployed now are okay, but some are defective. Manufacturing defects with batteries of this type have caused fires in laptop computers. Stray scraps of metal left in the batteries, according to press reports. The Dreamliner is also having problems with a valve in the wings leaking fuel. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
Interesting idea, but I also am not aware that a magnetic field will cause significant optical rotation. Maybe someone in the vortex is familiar with this issue to offer guidance. Your suggestion reminds me of a circulator used in microwave products, less the lenses of course. It can guide RF signals in one direction. It could allow RF to be sent from one device to the other but have no return path. It is a neat way to stabilize negative resistance devices. Perhaps this is a way to achieve your plan. Dave -Original Message- From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 6:51 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? You are reminding me of an idea I had long ago. Take 2 hot radiating objects. Place then in a perfect thermal insulating container (for fun). Now I have heard that a magnet can rotate the plane of polarization of photons. The second fact this is based on is that if you have 2 polarized lenses at 90 degrees no light gets through until a 3rd is added between that is at 45 degrees, the middle one rotates the light enough to make it through the final one. Then between them have a setup of polarized lenses (at varied angles) and a magnetic field. The magnetic field rotates the light such that light making the trip from object A to B can get through the polarized lenses (some of it anyway), but in the other direction the twist direction of the magnetic field opposes the twist direction of the polarized lenses. In theory this allows light/heat to escape one to go to the other side, but not the other way. I am not really sure however that I am correct about the relative directions the magnetic field would rotate the plane of polarization. John On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Dave, you’re nothing but a heretic… … WELCOME to the Collective! J -Mark From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I was hoping for a good challenge. So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is possible. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. That would be us, on a hot day. ;) I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard spectrum. These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever present light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively rectifies sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of zero, it represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute zero. IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes out (depends on your definition of system boundaries). The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world into a higher location thereby producing gravitational energy. This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery. Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler. Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however it receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices). There
Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?
From Wikipdia: In the presence of magnetic fieldshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_field, all molecules have optical activity. A magnetic field aligned in the direction of light propagating through a material will cause the rotation of the plane of linear polarization. This Faraday effecthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_effect is one of the first discoveries of the relationship between light and electromagnetic effects. This allows for instance a magnetic fed to change the polarization of light. If this can or can't work I am not sure, probably, but then again there wil be other ways as you point out. The gist of it is though that there are obviously ways to make use of light to beat entropy, your way being semi practical. It should have never been called a law, it is just a generalization. John On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Interesting idea, but I also am not aware that a magnetic field will cause significant optical rotation. Maybe someone in the vortex is familiar with this issue to offer guidance. Your suggestion reminds me of a circulator used in microwave products, less the lenses of course. It can guide RF signals in one direction. It could allow RF to be sent from one device to the other but have no return path. It is a neat way to stabilize negative resistance devices. Perhaps this is a way to achieve your plan. Dave -Original Message- From: John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 6:51 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? You are reminding me of an idea I had long ago. Take 2 hot radiating objects. Place then in a perfect thermal insulating container (for fun). Now I have heard that a magnet can rotate the plane of polarization of photons. The second fact this is based on is that if you have 2 polarized lenses at 90 degrees no light gets through until a 3rd is added between that is at 45 degrees, the middle one rotates the light enough to make it through the final one. Then between them have a setup of polarized lenses (at varied angles) and a magnetic field. The magnetic field rotates the light such that light making the trip from object A to B can get through the polarized lenses (some of it anyway), but in the other direction the twist direction of the magnetic field opposes the twist direction of the polarized lenses. In theory this allows light/heat to escape one to go to the other side, but not the other way. I am not really sure however that I am correct about the relative directions the magnetic field would rotate the plane of polarization. John On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 12:06 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote: Dave, you’re nothing but a heretic… ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** … WELCOME to the Collective! J ** ** -Mark ** ** *From:* David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] *Sent:* Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? ** ** Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole. [image: ;-)] ** ** I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand why the heat engine limitations exist. Now, I am a bit confused. It is just too easy to break that rule and get away with it. I was hoping for a good challenge. ** ** So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual motion machine that we would all desire? All we have to do is to come up with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way. ** ** Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion. Maybe not after a little consideration, sooner or most likely much later all of the heat will be harvested and the patent office wins. No perpetual motion is possible. ** ** Dave -Original Message- From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics? In reply to David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500 (EST): Hi, [snip] I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert it into mechanical energy in a useful manner. The net effect is that the system cools down in response. ** ** ** ** Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very high temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead of the long wavelengths associated with our environment. ** ** That would be us, on a hot day. ;) ** ** ** ** I guess it would
Re: [Vo]:Math question
Thanks I was a great help. -Original Message- From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Math question On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:31 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Does it have a name? The original equation is called a quadratic equation and has certain solutions: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quadratic_equation Maybe this helps?
Re: [Vo]:Interesting speculative theory from Krivit on Boeing batteries
Was that really a serious amount of testing before deployment? - especially for an effect that is so transient (and disbelieved)? After all, Krivit asserts that all the elements for LENR events are there. Is he wrong? If so, how? Jed Rothwell wrote: If that were the case, I think they would have discovered it during flight tests.
