Re: [Vo]:Magnetic pressure and magnetic temperature
On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In reply to David Jonsson's message of Wed, 9 Apr 2008 08:47:15 +0200: Hi, [snip] Magnetic pressure is a well known concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_pressure It struck me then that other concepts must be applicable to magnetism too like temperature. Temperature is really a measure of the average kinetic energy of particles, so a magnetic temperature may not have a lot of meaning. Then magnetic pressure wouldn't either. Pressure is just energy density. While temperature is also a global variable, computing it wouldn't be so easy. E.g. For a gas one can use p*V/(nR) to get T (for a perfect gas). By analogy, one could substitute magnetic pressure for p, and the volume of the magnet for V, but what does one substitute for n, the number of mole of magnetic atoms in the magnet? (not to mention what value to use for R). This is why a precise definition of magnetic temperature is needed. The ideal gas law is empirical and nothing says that magnetic temperature would have a similar law. I have defined what I mean with magnetic temperature. Where? If kinetic temperature is kB*T=3/2 me*v^2 for a moving electron a similar reasoning could be applied. When the charged particle moves the magnetic energy Um (from the field energy B^2/2µ) becomes µ q^2 v^2 Um = 12 pi r µ is permeability of surrounding medium q is the charge of the particle v is some averaged speed of particle r is the radius of the particle (if assumed to be spherical) Since µ will be dependent of the charged and ionized environment the value will be difficult to calculate. v would be some averaged speed of the particle. However with this definition magnetic temperature becomes Tm = Um/kB (or maybe 3Um/kB?) This would be applicable to monoatomic gases. For more complex molecules, lattices and metal plasmas additional modes of vibration and rotation would apply. This must be well investigated somewhere but probably with another name. David -- David Jonsson Sweden phone callto:+46703000370
[Vo]:V'Ger must evolve
Got the following article originally from www.codeproject.com. It was original titled V'Ger must evolve! Amusing. See: http://space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn13676print=true or http://tinyurl.com/5uwleq Pioneer spacecraft mystery may be laid to rest 14:30 15 April 2008 NewScientist.com news service Valerie Jamieson, St Louis Excerpt: Uneven heat The wealth of data has allowed them to build detailed computer models of Pioneer 11, including a thermal model which shows how heat is distributed over the spacecraft. This has revealed that Pioneer 11 gives off heat in certain directions more than others. The uneven heat emission is enough to nudge the spacecraft off course, accounting for 28% to 36% of the anomaly detected when Pioneer 11 was 3750 million kilometres, or 25 times the Earth-sun distance, away from us. [But what about the remaining 64% to 72%? - svj] Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
Query: when does something once considered cheap, mundane, black and fairly toxic become all-important to society, if not the ultimate answer to our national survival? BTW - this has nothing at all to do with last night's debate ... If there is one defining feature of this particular newsgroup- and the general focus of vortex postings and the varied interests of its readership, it is to identify the best prospects on advanced alternative energy (and hopefully to then take the appropriate action, even if it is only 'advocacy' or 'replication' of results) Within the definition of best there are several levels of assumptions which usually go unmentioned, including the probability that the effect, experiment, report or finding can be developed into a robust technology (at all), and as importantly, the time-frame which would be involved to do so, and the level of funding required, and also the ecological footprint. Any meaningful ranking can therefore be nothing more than any one observer's opinion; and everyone has their own agenda and leanings- and consequently any attempt to arrange the candidate concepts in some kind of order will probably add little meaning to the conservative approaches of such mainstream organizations as MIT - which does have a yearly top 10. That particular list is broader than energy and often is aimed at information technology. http://www.technologyreview.com/specialreports/specialreport.aspx?id=25 On the other extreme (juxtaposed to the mainstream and MIT) is the ranking of Sterling Allan, who has an ongoing top 100 listing; more speculative and sexier perhaps; but of which 100, about 90 are so far removed from immediate reality that it could be easily reduced to 10 ;-) http://peswiki.com/energy/Congress:Top_100_Technologies_--_RD#Top_100 I printed out these lists and a few others, from other observers and bloggers, and spent about an hour this morning trying to imagine what single technology best meets all the criteria of: 1) mainstream do-ability (general agreement that the concept works as claimed, NOW, with no need for a further major breakthrough) 2) near-term horizon for putting real devices into energy production (guideline: 2-5 years, instead of 25 to 50 for hot nuclear fusion) 3) ultimate impact on the elimination of fossil fuel (forget it, if less than 25% of present consumption) I developed a complicated ranking system, and although the following single best of the best is very opinionated and personal (as are most postings here) and also fairly far removed from the concepts which could have the most beneficial impact if they were actually doable - such as LENR or magnetic overunity (MPI) ... the single result is, nevertheless, far and away the best of the best in this ranking scheme, and moreover- it is not within a personal agenda, such as *algoil* would be for me (which did come in second): FWIW here it is: (sorry if 'graphene' sounds a bid mundane, too artsy maybe, and definitely non-sexy, but it is the only possible solar technology which has a real prayer (i.e. true cost effectiveness and no raw material problems) and at the same time, grahene is important for energy conservation and for information processing and other related switching (fast transistors). When applied to solar, or to batteries, or to fast-switching for other uses, this kind of thing could easily have a 25% reduction impact on fossil fuels within 5 years whereas, IMHO such overly touted things as nanosolar thin-film solar (using indium) is an absolute bust, if not a scam. Carbon is already a billion ton industry and the cost of moving it into better uses is minuscule, compared to the potential benefit of the other uses (beside combustion) ... but hey- non-sexy and low-key is generally the way science operates, unless you are a biologist, no?) http://www.technologyreview.com/Nanotech/20558/?nlid=1009 Terry, too bad the guy over at GT (Walter de Heere) who is a pioneer in graphene transistors, did not discover this technique himself... or maybe he has something else which is as effective, who knows. One could imagine graphene this thin, applied to glass, for instance for not much more than the cost of the glass. Every new building would be required to have it and thereby every new building would produce much of its own electricity. Jones
Re: [Vo]:V'Ger must evolve
On 17/4/2008 8:35 AM, OrionWorks wrote: Got the following article originally from www.codeproject.com. It was original titled V'Ger must evolve! Amusing. See: http://space.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn13676print=true or http://tinyurl.com/5uwleq Pioneer spacecraft mystery may be laid to rest 14:30 15 April 2008 NewScientist.com news service Valerie Jamieson, St Louis Excerpt: Uneven heat The wealth of data has allowed them to build detailed computer models of Pioneer 11, including a thermal model which shows how heat is distributed over the spacecraft. This has revealed that Pioneer 11 gives off heat in certain directions more than others. The uneven heat emission is enough to nudge the spacecraft off course, accounting for 28% to 36% of the anomaly detected when Pioneer 11 was 3750 million kilometres, or 25 times the Earth-sun distance, away from us. [But what about the remaining 64% to 72%? - svj] More space probe anomalies Harry http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/space/2008-02-29-nasa-spacecraft-anomal ies_N.htm NASA baffled by unexplained force acting on space probes 2008-02-29 By Charles Q. Choi, Special to SPACE.com Mysteriously, five spacecraft that flew past the Earth have each displayed unexpected anomalies in their motions. These newfound enigmas join the so-called Pioneer anomaly as hints that unexplained forces may appear to act on spacecraft. A decade ago, after rigorous analyses, anomalies were seen with the identical Pioneer 10 and 11 spacecraft as they hurtled out of the solar system. Both seemed to experience a tiny but unexplained constant acceleration toward the sun. A host of explanations have been bandied about for the Pioneer anomaly. At times these are rooted in conventional science perhaps leaks from the spacecraft have affected their trajectories. At times these are rooted in more speculative physics maybe the law of gravity itself needs to be modified. Now Jet Propulsion Laboratory astronomer John Anderson and his colleagues who originally helped uncover the Pioneer anomaly have discovered that five spacecraft each raced either a tiny bit faster or slower than expected when they flew past the Earth en route to other parts of the solar system. 'Humble and perplexed' The researchers looked at six deep-space probes Galileo I and II to Jupiter, the NEAR mission to the asteroid Eros, the Rosetta probe to a comet, Cassini to Saturn, and the MESSENGER craft to Mercury. Each spacecraft flew past our planet to either gain or lose orbital energy in their quests to reach their eventual targets. In five of the six flybys, the scientists have confirmed anomalies. I am feeling both humble and perplexed by this, said Anderson, who is now working as a retiree. There is something very strange going on with spacecraft motions. We have no convincing explanation for either the Pioneer anomaly or the flyby anomaly. In the one probe the researchers did not confirm a noticeable anomaly with, MESSENGER, the spacecraft approached the Earth at about latitude 31 degrees north and receded from the Earth at about latitude 32 degrees south. This near-perfect symmetry about the equator seemed to result in a very small velocity change, in contrast to the five other flybys, Anderson explained so small no anomaly could be confirmed. The five other flybys involved flights whose incoming and outgoing trajectories were asymmetrical with each other in terms of their orientation with Earth's equator. For instance, the NEAR mission approached Earth at about latitude 20 south and receded from the planet at about latitude 72 south. The spacecraft then seemed to fly 13 millimeters per second faster than expected. While this is just one-millionth of that probe's total velocity, the precision of the velocity measurements was 0.1 millimeters per second, carried out as they were using radio waves bounced off the craft. This suggests the anomaly seen is real and one needing an explanation. The fact this effect seems most evident with flybys most asymmetrical with respect to Earth's equator suggests that the anomaly is related to Earth's rotation, Anderson said. As to whether these new anomalies are linked with the Pioneer anomaly, I would be very surprised if we have discovered two independent spacecraft anomalies, Anderson told SPACE.com. I suspect they are connected, but I really do not know. Unbound idea These anomalies might be effects we see with an object possessing a spacecraft's mass, between 660 and 2,200 lbs. (300 and 1,000 kg), Anderson speculated. Another thing in common between the Pioneer and these flybys is what you would call an unbound orbit around a central body, Anderson said. For instance, the Pioneers are flying out of the solar system they're not bound to their central body, the sun. For the other flybys, the Earth is the central body. These kinds of orbits just don't occur very often in nature it could be when you
Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:14 PM, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Terry, too bad the guy over at GT (Walter de Heere) who is a pioneer in graphene transistors, did not discover this technique himself... or maybe he has something else which is as effective, who knows. One can not expect a lot from a researcher who got his PhD at Berkeley. ;-) I recently met Dr. Jefferey Sitterle who runs the research institute at GT. He came by to see our own spintronics project. (We have had more success since we began winding our own electromagnets, BTW.) He was fairly deadpan throughout the demonstration. And he asked few questions. He also didn't even look at the calibration stickers that I insisted be brought up to date. I was really frustrated by his lack of skepticism! Later, our liason commented that he had not seen the doktor so excited. Huh? I remarked. Terry
[Vo]:STEORN Musings
Speaking of alternative energy companies... It's been a long dry spell since we've heard anything from STEORN, particularly since their spectacularly failed July 2007 demo debacle. My gut reaction would be to assume, sadly, that things are probably not being going well for them. Common sense would suggest to me that STEORN's engineers would have been able to by now correct the kinks so embarrassingly revealed in the failed demo. Surely they would have by now presented a sequel: The new-and-improved ORBO. Still waiting. In absence of hard data, speculation runs rampant. One of my favorite STEORN conspiracies can be found out on Wikipedia where: * * * * * * Eric Berger, writing on the Houston Chronicle website, commented that: Recall that Steorn is a former e-business company that saw its market vanish during the dot.com bust. It stands to reason that Steorn has re-tooled as a Web marketing company, and is using the free energy promotion as a platform to show future clients how it can leverage print advertising and a slick Web site to promote their products and ideas. If so, it's a pretty brilliant strategy.[33] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steorn * * * * * * Taking my own advice to heart, where it is advisable to choose the conspiracy one wishes to believe in wisely, I have to admit that I actually gave Mr. Berger's theory serious consideration. In the end, however, I discarded it on the premise that Berger's theory violated my personal understanding of the principals of Occam's Razor. The theory personally strikes me as possessing too many complicated assumptions that would have to be set in place for the final payoff to eventually be realized. ...and just when is that payoff supposed to occur? Of course, this leave me once again clueless as to what might really be going on. I've therefore decided appeal to the collective intelligence of Vort's membership, particularly to all those entrepreneurs and former CEOs who have suffered their own personal stories - the slings and arrows of outrageous misfortune while running their own companies and start-ups. What say you all to the STEORN saga? What do your own gut reactions suggest? Bugged in Madison, Wisconsin. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Cavitation Weapon
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 7:15 AM, thomas malloy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Terry Blanton wrote: More on the pistol shrimp: On Sun, Apr 13, 2008 at 4:34 AM, Terry Blanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hunting with a cavitation pistol: I was amazed that the cavitation effect would travel a distance and have an effect. OTOH, various researchers have sited this effect as a method of inducing LENR's. I would assume that the Office of Naval Research has looked into this. Be strict. There is no cavitation at a distance, only locally at the claw. The wave or flow produced is similar to the von Zeipel fluid motion or the vortex toys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_ring_toys David -- David Jonsson Sweden phone callto:+46703000370
Re: [Vo]:Cavitation Weapon
Howdy David, We have water test tank observations of vortexes shedding off the main vortex and traveling distances. These compact spirals are similar to the vid pics of the claw produced shot that travels in a spiral projectile toward the shrimp. Notice the shape of the claw is parabolic and collapses into a parabola. This vid has given us a clue to a how to run ahigh speed parabolic shape inside another parabolic shroud to attempt to reproduce the effect. Richard David wrote, I was amazed that the cavitation effect would travel a distance and have an effect. OTOH, various researchers have sited this effect as a method of inducing LENR's. I would assume that the Office of Naval Research has looked into this. Be strict. There is no cavitation at a distance, only locally at the claw. The wave or flow produced is similar to the von Zeipel fluid motion or the vortex toys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_ring_toys David
Re: [Vo]:Cavitation Weapon
Here is a more scientific movie on the subject http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONQlTMUYCW4feature=related David On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:14 PM, R C Macaulay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Howdy David, We have water test tank observations of vortexes shedding off the main vortex and traveling distances. These compact spirals are similar to the vid pics of the claw produced shot that travels in a spiral projectile toward the shrimp. Notice the shape of the claw is parabolic and collapses into a parabola. This vid has given us a clue to a how to run ahigh speed parabolic shape inside another parabolic shroud to attempt to reproduce the effect. Richard David wrote, I was amazed that the cavitation effect would travel a distance and have an effect. OTOH, various researchers have sited this effect as a method of inducing LENR's. I would assume that the Office of Naval Research has looked into this. Be strict. There is no cavitation at a distance, only locally at the claw. The wave or flow produced is similar to the von Zeipel fluid motion or the vortex toys http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vortex_ring_toys David -- David Jonsson Sweden phone callto:+46703000370
Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
Jones wrote about graphene as an alternative to the transparent indium tin oxide solar cell. It looks promising but on page two of the article there was this dampener... They also need to improve the conductivity of their film: indium tin oxide is still hundreds of times more conductive. Organic solar cells with indium tin oxide electrodes are between 3 percent and 5 percent efficient. With graphene thin-film electrodes, we get 0.1 percent, Chhowalla says, but these are proof-of-concept devices and of course will improve with time.
Re: [Vo]:V'Ger must evolve
In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:46:08 -0500: Hi, [snip] Possible effects: 1) Tidal. 2) Friction with space dust. 3) Interaction with the Solar wind. 4) Uneven solar heating. 5) Gravitational interaction with the Oort cloud /or Kuiper belt (only mentioned because no one knows their mass or distribution, hence they can't possibly have been properly taken into consideration.) 6) Electric charge on the craft, either residual or built up through interaction with the solar wind /or friction. 7) Magnetic field of the space craft interacting with the magnetic field of the Earth /or Sun. (Magnetic field generated through rotation of the craft, causing the residual electrostatic charge to rotate.) 8) All of the above. I write this list just to show that any such calculations are probably based upon simplified models which most likely ignore most is not all of the above. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
Nick, Yes, this low efficiency is undoubtedly true for now. But here is the (possible) paradigm shift, and I should have tried to explain my enthusiasm as involving a paradigm shift rather than as a step-wise improvement. Even if the efficiency remains far less than for a dedicated solar panel, with this kind of shift in economics, that lower efficiency is not the real issue. When any nearly-transparent film can be applied so thinly and cheaply to glass, not needing to be crystalline like silicon - then even if the result is modest efficiency- that is not so big an issue since you are *going to install a window anyway.* IOW - most of the cost is already covered by the main use - and we could be facing the situation in the next few years when the glass industry says- we can convert all of the window glass we make into low efficiency electrical converters for only a little extra cost, in mass production. The graphene required for this is 'de minimis' due to the thinness, and carbon is cheap. Ditto for the roofing and ditto for siding industry, not to mention exterior surface of every automobile, etc. Even painting contractors might get into the act somehow. At that point it might be wise to legislate this for 100% of new construction. Look at how much glass is in a forty story high rise- even one percent conversion, if it can get that high - becomes enticing, considering the enormous surface area, and the fact that most of the cost is going to be covered by the normal expense of glazing. The same would be true for roofing, or even wall panels, if the wiring and connection situation could be worked out to be done easily. Applying graphene would be most comparable, or analogous, in this paradigm to applying paint... and almost every exposed surface of a building which has any coating at all could have a graphene coating for little more than the normal paint, no? That would be assuming you could figure out how to get two distinct layers wired up to collect the energy. It is a weird suggestion, but provocative. Solar panels for an automobile roofs are expensive, but the factory applied paint (containing graphene?) is required and not optional, so there could be little or no major cost increase to get some solar energy converted into electricity that way. Multiply that by millions of bettery powered cars basking in parking lots and you have some major reductions in fossil fuel. Where are Lerner and Loewe when we need them? This could be a new twist on paint your wagon ... which for the trivia-challenged out there did have such catch tunes as Whoop-Ti-Yay and There's aCoach Comin' In when Cherry and her Fandango girls arrive ... ...not to mention, fellow prospectors, we can opt for They Call the Wind Maria if this one doesn't pan-out. Jones - Original Message From: Nick Palmer Jones wrote about graphene as an alternative to the transparent indium tin oxide solar cell. It looks promising but on page two of the article there was this dampener... They also need to improve the conductivity of their film: indium tin oxide is still hundreds of times more conductive. Organic solar cells with indium tin oxide electrodes are between 3 percent and 5 percent efficient. With graphene thin-film electrodes, we get 0.1 percent, Chhowalla says, but these are proof-of-concept devices and of course will improve with time.
Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
Jones Beene wrote:- Even if the efficiency remains far less than for a dedicated solar panel, with this kind of shift in economics, that lower efficiency is not the real issue I wasn't being negative. In fact, for a long time I have thought that, apart from the research value, it is pointless trying to pursue ultra high efficiency multi junction solar cells up to and beyond 30% when a much less efficient cell, that can be deployed over much greater areas, would achieve the same thing at a fraction of the cost. People have been rather hypnotised by the prospect of a few square meters of blue/black panel creating their juice and overlook the bigger, lower tech route towards getting the same power...
Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:43 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Nick, Yes, this low efficiency is undoubtedly true for now. But here is the (possible) paradigm shift, and I should have tried to explain my enthusiasm as involving a paradigm shift rather than as a step-wise improvement. Even if the efficiency remains far less than for a dedicated solar panel, with this kind of shift in economics, that lower efficiency is not the real issue. When any nearly-transparent film can be applied so thinly and cheaply to glass, not needing to be crystalline like silicon - then even if the result is modest efficiency- that is not so big an issue since you are *going to install a window anyway.* IOW - most of the cost is already covered by the main use - and we could be facing the situation in the next few years when the glass industry says- we can convert all of the window glass we make into low efficiency electrical converters for only a little extra cost, in mass production. The graphene required for this is 'de minimis' due to the thinness, and carbon is cheap. Ditto for the roofing and ditto for siding industry, not to mention exterior surface of every automobile, etc. Even painting contractors might get into the act somehow. At an energy production of only 1 W/m^2 it won't make much difference. IMO the technology most likely to make the biggest impact in the shortest time is the PHEV. Of course this assumes that concurrently coal fired power stations are replaced by cleaner power sources. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Re: V'Ger must evolve
Don't shoot this down - I'm only dreaming! They also noted anomalies in five other satellites apart from one which passed by planets symmetrically (i.e orbital axis not inclined). They speculated that the rotation of the planet might have something to do with it and I thought I may as well bring up aether drift/swirl as a possible explanation for the anomalies...
[Vo]:Re: Best of the best near-term horizon
I suspect Jones proposed a dummy as best of the best, so that the technology he deemed second best (algoil, what else ;-) would come out as the winner. Seriously though Jones, have a look at Nanosolar's latest declarations (last few days) and tell me if they still don't make sense to you: http://blog.nanosolar.com/ Excerpt: PS: The SF Chronicle article describes a dynamic of arguments as it may unfold in a lot of communities these days. There's the Berkeley professor quoted as the it's-too-expensive skeptic. I went through the economics paper behind this skepticism and am not surprised: First, he predicts the cost of installing multi-MW municipal power based on the cost of a small residential silicon PV rooftop system. Secondly, he extrapolates the near-term cost of solar by averaging legacy technology providers with emerging cost leaders and fails to look at the world's most streamlined solar installations as a reference (of which there are admittedly none yet in California). I guess these kinds of errors happen as the energy industry transitions to be more like the technology industry. EDF Enters Strategic Partnership with Nanosolar, Invests $50 Million April 10, 2008 Posted by Martin Roscheisen, CEO EDF press release says it all. And yes: California is a big target of this partnership of ours. Multi-MW sized farms in particular. -- Michel - Original Message - From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 1:10 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Best of the best near-term horizon In reply to Jones Beene's message of Thu, 17 Apr 2008 15:23:43 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Nick, Yes, this low efficiency is undoubtedly true for now. But here is the (possible) paradigm shift, and I should have tried to explain my enthusiasm as involving a paradigm shift rather than as a step-wise improvement. Even if the efficiency remains far less than for a dedicated solar panel, with this kind of shift in economics, that lower efficiency is not the real issue. When any nearly-transparent film can be applied so thinly and cheaply to glass, not needing to be crystalline like silicon - then even if the result is modest efficiency- that is not so big an issue since you are *going to install a window anyway.* IOW - most of the cost is already covered by the main use - and we could be facing the situation in the next few years when the glass industry says- we can convert all of the window glass we make into low efficiency electrical converters for only a little extra cost, in mass production. The graphene required for this is 'de minimis' due to the thinness, and carbon is cheap. Ditto for the roofing and ditto for siding industry, not to mention exterior surface of every automobile, etc. Even painting contractors might get into the act somehow. At an energy production of only 1 W/m^2 it won't make much difference. IMO the technology most likely to make the biggest impact in the shortest time is the PHEV. Of course this assumes that concurrently coal fired power stations are replaced by cleaner power sources. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:On loss or gain of energy in presure volume work in solids with varying temperature
Hi I have an idea about what this is all about http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508107 The authors talk about inconsistency but my understanding is that it explains two well known phenomena in everyday life. I want to hear what you say before I say more. Can anyone conclude what the two phenomena are? David -- David Jonsson Sweden phone callto:+46703000370
Re: [Vo]:On loss or gain of energy in presure volume work in solids with varying temperature
... one of them would probably be a negative expansion coefficient - i.e. freezing water, or the mischmetals which contract with applied heat Can anyone conclude what the two phenomena are? David
Re: [Vo]:On loss or gain of energy in presure volume work in solids with varying temperature
Sure David, Using the example of a piece of copper rod at ambient temperature, Rapidly bend the rod and it gets hot at the bend. The more rapid the bend, the hotter it gets. No inconsistency unless you wish to rewrite thermo.. which some brainiac should do soon before we tumble. Richard David wrote, I have an idea about what this is all about http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508107 The authors talk about inconsistency but my understanding is that it explains two well known phenomena in everyday life. I want to hear what you say before I say more. Can anyone conclude what the two phenomena are?
Re: [Vo]:Re: V'Ger must evolve
On 17/4/2008 6:01 PM, Michel Jullian wrote: I agree 100%, what would seem anomalous to me would be no anomalies in the trajectories. Michel sorry? - Original Message - From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 12:01 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:V'Ger must evolve In reply to Harry Veeder's message of Thu, 17 Apr 2008 12:46:08 -0500: Hi, [snip] Possible effects: 1) Tidal. 2) Friction with space dust. 3) Interaction with the Solar wind. 4) Uneven solar heating. 5) Gravitational interaction with the Oort cloud /or Kuiper belt (only mentioned because no one knows their mass or distribution, hence they can't possibly have been properly taken into consideration.) 6) Electric charge on the craft, either residual or built up through interaction with the solar wind /or friction. 7) Magnetic field of the space craft interacting with the magnetic field of the Earth /or Sun. (Magnetic field generated through rotation of the craft, causing the residual electrostatic charge to rotate.) 8) All of the above. I write this list just to show that any such calculations are probably based upon simplified models which most likely ignore most is not all of the above. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk Perturbation modelling is not what I would call bold science. ;-) Harry
Re: [Vo]:On loss or gain of energy in presure volume work in solids with varying temperature
Title:Inconsistencies in the current thermodynamic description of elastic solids Authors:Jozsef Garai, Alexandre Laugier (Submitted on 17 Aug 2005) Abstract: Using the contemporary thermodynamic equations of elastic solids leads to contradictions with the fundamental statements of thermodynamics. Two examples are presented to expose the inconsistencies. In example one the internal energy between the initial and final states shows path dependency while in example two changing the temperature of a system at constant volume produces mechanical work. These results are contradictory with the fundamentals of thermodynamics and indicate that the contemporary description of elastic solids needs to be revisited and revised regarding example two, it doesn't produce work, rather work must be done ON the system to keep it at constant volume while the temperature is changed. yes? no? Harry On 17/4/2008 7:15 PM, David Jonsson wrote: Hi I have an idea about what this is all about http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0508107 The authors talk about inconsistency but my understanding is that it explains two well known phenomena in everyday life. I want to hear what you say before I say more. Can anyone conclude what the two phenomena are? David
Re: [Vo]:Re: Best of the best near-term horizon
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:36:24 +0200: Hi, [snip] Seriously though Jones, have a look at Nanosolar's latest declarations (last few days) and tell me if they still don't make sense to you: http://blog.nanosolar.com/ [snip] Quote: There is a reason why one of the worlds largest power producers invested in Nanosolar. ...and that reason is that they want to continue selling power to people forever, rather than have the people harvest it themselves for nothing. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Babbage's Difference Engine Lives!
Dear Justin and Eddie; Just the toy for the nerd who has everything. If you follow the Wikipedia article you will notice the mention of steampunk a genera of writing. The TV series Wild Wild West was an example, fiction with scientific anachronisms. Building a 5-ton mechanical calculator... from 19th-century plans. http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/news/2008/041108-difference-engine.htmlpagename=/news/2008/041108-difference-engine.htmlpageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/041108-difference-engine.htm http://tinyurl.com/5ql8me --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
