Re: [Vo]:Progress in atomic batteries
Jed Rothwell wrote: This is conventional technology as far as I can tell, but interesting: I agree. I briefly discussed EI's technology, they have IP protection, and perhaps their method is superior to the Brown Nuclear battery. I mentioned the Brown Patent to our Governor, Minnesota is long on nuclear waste. Unfortunately the use of radionuclides is a major barrier to venture capitalists. I'm glad to see that the defense establishment is bankrolling their efforts. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:OT: UV and US (was: Call for new Ozone process)
Jones Beene wrote: Speaking of having one's head in the ozone... not that anyone has ever accused this writer of that problem ;-) It sounds like ozone is inherently poisonous. My friend has been putting ozonated water on his ears, four minutes morning an night, he says that his diabetes is now under control. I mentioned another friend who left an ozone generator run in her apartment, she almost died. A little bit is good, too much is bad. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Space Energy / Don Kelly query
Esa Ruoho wrote: Good day. Might someone on this list have back issues of the Space Energy Journals? One of them, apparently from before 2003, has Don Kelly writing about one Timothy Thrapp of the World Improvement Technologies fame (or, Interesting URL Esa. I dropped my subscription to Don Kelly's magazine many years ago. Too many false claims. AFAIK, Tilley is a fraud. I found the summary paragraph interesting, the translation software didn't translate the word after business practices, unseriousn, can anybody translate that? However, the wheat and chaff line was spot on. AFAIK, the only people who are making money in the FE business are presenting conferences. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Environmental space
NP Surprisingly, our personal spaceship works out to be a globe only about 1.18 kilometres in diameter HH This is wrong by orders of magnitude by inspection. Such a sphere would easily fit within a 10.6 km envelope around the earth. No, one's personal space on Earth is a piece of land and ocean (30% land, 70% ocean) which is 278 metres square - with which we both agree - with a ceiling height of around 8.6km of air above it (not 10.6km - thanks for the correction Horace!). I originally took the stated statistic ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_pressure ) that half the mass of the atmosphere is below 5.3km and doubled it to get total mass. The volume of our personal atmospheric space, a right rectangular prism (or tall thin brick shape), is 278x278x8600 = 664,642,400 cu m. Convert this volume to a sphere and you get a radius of about 541 metres, which is a diameter of 1.08km Q.E.D. I found no mistake in your arithmetic below but you used the total volume of Earth's atmosphere to get 1000km for the radius but I was trying to work out how much atmosphere, land and ocean each person has to use and abuse... HH The volume V of a sphere to hold all that gas is V = 4/3 Pi r^3, so r = ((3V)/(4 Pi))^(1/3) = (3(4.3x10^18 m^3)/(4 Pi))^(1/3) = 1x10^6 m, or about 1000 km. The radius of one's personal spaceship's atmospheric globe is, as above, 541 metres. I was trying to find out what people thought of these figures - were they surprisingly small/big/about what you expected etc? * air pressure at sea level is about 14.7lbf/sq in = 10. tonnesf/sq metre density at sea level is about 1.2kg/cu m
Re: [Vo]:Environmental space
In reply to Nick Palmer's message of Sun, 23 Mar 2008 20:17:33 -: Hi, [snip] I was trying to find out what people thought of these figures - were they surprisingly small/big/about what you expected etc? [snip] IMO they are completely meaningless, because they imply that we actually have compete freedom within that space. However that's not how the real world works. We all share the *same* space, and consequently what we do affects everyone else. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Windturm-Generator - Windtower-Generator
Howdy Thomas, I have followed Everts website for some time. His emphasis is in the differential pressure that is assumed formed by manipulating shapes. His ideas are well conceived but he also admits they are theoritical. As he continues to refine his thoughts on many versions of this differential theme, I become more interested.. to the point of setting up design and actually maching a test shape. He has a thought that under operation that certain devices may actually begin to operate on the differential pressure induced to the point they may become self sustaining... I avoid the use of the word free energy. He has actually examples of some of his machines built by a German firm. a take off of the Griggs theme. Richard
Re: [Vo]:A memory of March 1989 and Arthur C. Clarke
Terry Blanton wrote: Particularly is the Thai Buddhist concept of Nirvana. The individual lives but a brief life before striking the earth whereby the mote returns to the dust and the drop makes it way to the sea. Classic New Age Schick. Terry On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 10:34 AM, OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I sense another tremor in diatribe forces... I have often noted the fact that a number of atheists I've known are actually deeply spiritual individuals, Dennis Prager debated a man at the American Atheists Conference this morning. Dr. Zeiler advanced the case for Rational Scienticism, which he contended could be the basis of a moral system. AFAIK, this position is the position of most atheists. Dennis pointed out that both Stalin and Mao were followers of RS. He continued by mentioning their murderous accomplishments. In his final statement, Dennis pointed out the accomplishments of secularism; in his humble opinion, their accomplishments in governance, culture, education, religion, philosophy, arts, music, are crap. I was cheering. At this point, I saw a woman storming out, her body language said, I can't listen to anymore of this. IMHO, it's moments like this which reassure me that there is a just G-d. and I mean that on a primal level. Ironically, most hard-core religious fundamentalists I've met (particularly those that come from traditional religious institutions) don't seem to comprehend the kind of spirituality that atheists can naturally exude from deep within the inner cores. We understand it perfectly well Steven. What you need to understand is that this system has failed every time it's been tried. This is because it doesn't recognize man's fallen and sinful nature. This is what I want to tell Richard Dawkins. That and; Darwinism, and the ideas which grow out of it like, Spontaneous Biogenesis, Panspermia, the Gia Hypothesis are so fanciful that they deserve to be included in an anthology of the greatest science fiction stories of all time. Witness the crazed suicidal bomber who tries to take out as many innocent souls as he possibly can. You have to realize that there are two gods in this system, one is the G-d of Israel, and the other is Lucifer. They have produced two quite different religious systems these two gods. One is the Holy Torah, the other New Age. Are they really doing it for the preservation of their way-of-life, for the glory of Allah, or for the 72 virgins that had been promised them. Oh, Deceiving men is so damn easy. Yah, Yah, give em what they want. Behaving in a selfless manner becomes irrelevant simply because there is no self that needs preserving More New Age Schick. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
