At 1:39 PM 10/18/4, Keith Nagel wrote:
[snip bunch of good stuff]
... I
also seem to remember that what initially puzzled researchers
is that the particles all deflected an equal distance, rather
than distribute based on their (random) orientation as they
entered the magnet. Right there the 3D
At 12:48 am 19-10-04 EDT, you wrote:
In a message dated 10/19/2004 12:37:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Did he really believe that?
I believe so.
With all respect, I think you may be mistaken.
==
Dear Vortex,
Won't subscribe for long because of traffic. Thought the
propulsion paper might interest you.
http://luna.brighton.ac.uk/~roc1/index.htm
All the best,
Remi.
At 1:39 PM 10/18/4, Keith Nagel wrote:
[snip bunch of good stuff]
... I
also seem to remember that what initially puzzled researchers
is that the particles all deflected an equal distance, rather
than distribute based on their (random) orientation as they
entered the magnet. Right there the 3D
Hi Remi,
If you have managed to stay on vortex long enough to
consider a certain question releating to your prior (non
propulsion) ideas, here it is:
Since you have been playing around with the Neel temperature
and the related frequency near 100 Ghzin the phase
Transitions paper of 2 years ago),
Hi Horace.
You write:
The only way the final outcome of any such
process can affect the 16 possible outcomes is to change their frequency.
This is true no matter how many dimesions from which those final outcomes
are chosen. This is true even if an infinite number of angels ride with
each
At 3:06 PM 10/19/4, Keith Nagel wrote:
I may be being boneheaded here, help me out. I thought that I showed
by adding extra dimensions it was possible to do exactly what you
describe above, changing the outcome probabilities for the three visible
axis of measurement. If I didn't, show me where I
At 3:06 PM 10/19/4, Keith Nagel wrote:
As regards angels flying along with the particles,
you'll have to put that question to Thomas or RC,
they seem to have a direct line to God.
As you must have sensed, the choice of the angels metaphor indeed was not
directed to you, but I think it does
Hi Jones,
Is it possible that you are confusing antiferromagnetic, which
is a ferromagnetic material where the electron spins in alternating
layers of atoms are in opposite directions with magnetic shielding
such as is provided by superconductors. Antiferromagnetic to
paramagnetic transitions
--- Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
SNIP
In short, causality isn't really violated, it only
appears that way to an observer relying on EM signal
transmission for his/her information.
[snip]
This could be argued from a certain point of view in
the one way FTL sense. But if we
In a message dated 10/8/04 8:59:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I seem to recall that someone calculated that the entire island would
have to be planted in corn to fuel British automobiles with ethanol.
This article:
http://www.fuelcellsworks.com/Supppage1256.html
Hi George,
Is it possible that you are confusing antiferromagnetic,
which
is a ferromagnetic material where the electron spins in
alternating
layers of atoms are in opposite directions with magnetic
shielding
such as is provided by superconductors.
Yes. My terminology is confusing and
Reviewers My Editor have made many suggestions, and the text of this book
has been extensively revised. Anyone who would like an updated review copy
should please contact me. This includes people who have not seen it yet. It
is not secret, but I am still eliminating embarrassing mistakes and
Hi Kyle.
I think the causality paradoxes you mention will
in practice prove to be no impediment to realizing
an FTL signaling system. For the purposes of your
discussion, consider the sender and receiver to
be in the same ref frame. A superluminal signal
will appear somewhere between instantly
Jones,
Interesting.
However, the collossal conductivity claimed by Djurek turned out to be a
collossal disappointment when we and another superconductor lab each
measured two sets of his samples. Perhaps one day he will achieve what he
has claimed, but we saw no evidence of it to this point.
I posted in a hurry earlier as I was leaving the house. Some corrections
follow.
Flow is about 154 ft^3/sec, thus channel is running about 5.5 feet deep.
If you want to eliminate horizontal vortices, run a vertical vortex and
thus run the pump at lower amperage, simply add some horizontal vanes
16 matches
Mail list logo
