Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
MAJ Todd Hathaway wrote: This outlines some of the theory behind hydroxy gas production in the Bob Boyce resonance drive systems we are building, similar to the Stanley Meyer's system as described below: AFAIK, the best Boyce Electrolyzers approach the theoretical efficiency of transforming electrical energy into hydrogen. This means no over unity energy production. If you can demonstrate this statement to be incorrect, Sterling Allen wants to talk to you. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
RE: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on
Hi all, This is the first time I post on this message board, so please be gentle =) I just wanted to provide an outside view on the rising oil prices. To me it seems like the value of $ has been dropping and if you look at the increased price of oil and compare it to the falling value of the dollar the two do seem to correlate very nicely... If I buy oil in SEK or Euro the oil prices has almost stood still... So are oil prices really climbing or is the dollar falling? Regards Andreas -Original Message- From: Robin van Spaandonk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: den 21 april 2008 00:23 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on In reply to Taylor J. Smith's message of Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:58:37 +: Hi, [snip] I'm sure if lemmings could talk, they would have very good reasons for marching into the ocean. [snip] Apparently that film was a fake. Lemmings don't actually march into the ocean. It seems only humans are that stupid. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
RE: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on
collapsing dollar: http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=CLK08.NYMt=5d $177/barrel as of this morning...similar trends with other commodities [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, This is the first time I post on this message board, so please be gentle =) I just wanted to provide an outside view on the rising oil prices. To me it seems like the value of $ has been dropping and if you look at the increased price of oil and compare it to the falling value of the dollar the two do seem to correlate very nicely... If I buy oil in SEK or Euro the oil prices has almost stood still... So are oil prices really climbing or is the dollar falling? Regards Andreas -Original Message- From: Robin van Spaandonk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: den 21 april 2008 00:23 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on In reply to Taylor J. Smith's message of Sun, 20 Apr 2008 17:58:37 +: Hi, [snip] I'm sure if lemmings could talk, they would have very good reasons for marching into the ocean. [snip] Apparently that film was a fake. Lemmings don't actually march into the ocean. It seems only humans are that stupid. ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on
Andreas wrote, If I buy oil in SEK or Euro the oil prices has almost stood still... So are oil prices really climbing or is the dollar falling? Howdy Andreas, You peeked ! One must understand that in order to enjoy watching the Wizard of Oz, one must accept the rules of the game... do not look behind the curtain or the wizard will be exposed, That is like a novice being invited to sit in at a game of monopoly.. It must be explained to the novice that the play money is real or the game holds neither virtue nor advantage. Think about the Federal Reserve system. If we didn't have it, we would need to invent it. Problem is as always, people get fat and lazy with riches. The Fed was only designed to survive a single generation, after that who cares. However , the first law of the Dime Box saloon's professor of the P.T.Barnum distinguished chair of financial theories is based on proven evidence that .. the strong take it away from the weak and the smart take it away from the strong. Those poor dumb Chinamen never should have let Marco Polo past the gate of the great wall cuz when Marco came back with the formula for pasta... well..that got the Mafia started and Marco opened his first internet spagetti house fronted by a gangster named Robin, as in Robin Hood.. conspiracy theorists link Marco and Robin.. why not? no self respecting robber would be dumb enough to share with the poor, just ask ole Mugabe down at the hood. Gosh ! Andreas , didn't yo mamma teach you nuthin, Richard
[Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
I went home to Johnstown PA on 4/21/08.? Hillery was speaking?in the?gym of the Johnstown high school on that day.? I went to see her early. I dropped off a note to her secret service agent.? He said he would give it to Hillery.? The hand written note requrested that she support the efforts of Boss and Spizack at SPWAR. At the ralley. Everyone starting chanting? Hillery, Hillery , Hillery.? I did the same.? It was fun. She is going to cut taxes.?provide universal heath care, end the war, and support energy research. If I get a note or email back from her, I will let you know. I'm back in Pittsburgh today debugging the DCS computer controls for Plant Allen near Charlotte. Pehaps I will get to see Obama when he passes throgh North Carolina.? It will be harder to drop off a note because the City and the rally will be much bigger. I noticed quite a few very poor people at the ralley.? The man next to me told me ( Mr Maseris ) that he has not been able to find a job since 1983.? He has a degree in journalism. Things are really bad around Johnstown.? I have been blind to this.? I've been working 10 to 12 hrs a day in Charlotte NC.?.? I've had some tough times with years off, however, never as tough as his. Frank Znidarsic
[Vo]:there is the man who took my note
He is standing behind Hillery in the picture. http://www.tribune-democrat.com/homepage/local_story_111203229.html?keyword=leadpicturestory Frank Z
Re: [Vo]:The (possible) oil peak rolls on
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, This is the first time I post on this message board, so please be gentle =) I just wanted to provide an outside view on the rising oil prices. To me it seems like the value of $ has been dropping and if you look at the increased price of oil and compare it to the falling value of the dollar the two do seem to correlate very nicely... If I buy oil in SEK or Euro the oil prices has almost stood still... So are oil prices really climbing or is the dollar falling? The Economist had an article on this just a few days ago. This question is harder to answer than it seems. Like many questions where one would like to find a sound bite answer, there isn't one. It's not trivial to define the value of the dollar. There's more than one way to measure inflation. However, the two most common measures, which use the consumer or producer price indices, incorporate the price of oil in the definition of the value of the dollar -- and that's circular when we're trying to determine the cost of oil! In fact, the total fraction of world income spent on oil is still substantially smaller today than it was back in the early 1980's, which probably explains why markets in the developed world have mostly not shown all that much impact from the high oil prices as yet. On the other hand, in my personal opinion oil is heading for $200/bbl, probably within a year. Once it gets that high it will have passed all previous peaks no matter how they're measured, and I think we're going to see some severe consequences. Anyhow here's the relevant text from the Economist's article, which is brief: * *Crude estimates* Apr 17th 2008 From The Economist print edition *The price of oil has soared to a new high, hasn't it?* A CASUAL observer might be forgiven for thinking that the oil price reached a new record, of $115.07 a barrel, on April 16th. And so it did, in nominal terms. But by other measures, oil is not quite as expensive as it seems. That, in turn, may go some way towards explaining why demand for oil continues to rise in many countries, despite prices that would have been unimaginable just a few years ago. Michael Lewis of Deutsche Bank has come up with several different ways of comparing past and present oil prices. The first step is to account for inflation. But what measure of inflation is most suitable? If historic prices are inflated in line with America's producer-price index, the previous record, struck in the early 1980s, would be the equivalent of $94 in today's money—a level exceeded some months ago. But if the consumer-price index were used instead, oil would need to climb to $118 to hit a record. But an adjustment for inflation, however it is measured, takes no account of the growth in Western consumers' incomes over the years. Back in 1981, the annual average income within the Group of Seven countries would have been enough to buy only 318 barrels of oil. To set back Western consumers by the equivalent today, Deutsche Bank calculates, the price of oil would have to rise to $134 a barrel. By the same token, the American government reckons that energy ate up its biggest share of Americans' disposable income in 1980: 8% compared with about 6.6% now. To drive spending on energy to the same level again, says Deutsche, the price of crude would have to rise to $145. Spending on oil as a share of global output, which is about 3.5%, also peaked in 1980, at 5.9%. Other things being equal, oil will not swallow as big a share of the world's GDP unless the price reaches $150 a barrel.
[Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:The Rent-a-Motor concept
Jones wrote: BTW - why do we continue to have pennies? What a waste of copper and *time* for clerks. I bet the net-cost of using pennies and even nickels is in the billions of wasted dollars. Let's get rid of this gigantic anachronism, ASAP !!! Pennies aren't copper, or at least not much copper. Since '88 or '89 they've been stamped from barrel plated zinc slugs. Up until recently they could actually be made for less than a cent. I've amused myself by grinding the copper off one side and using another penny to make a tiny Daniell cell. Yes, I'm easily amused by such things. But I agree with you. I'd take it a step futher and eliminate all the annoying coinage except quarters. Besides, people are beginning to use credit or debit cards for even small purchases now. When you see card readers at McDonald's you know that cash is on the way out. M. Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
I HAVE insurance, but failed to read the deductible part of it. Went to the emergency room for a cut open hand, like, you could see fat tissue and nerves, that cut. Was told as i was leaving they had my insurance info, no problem. Turns out theres a 1 grand deductible on emergency room visits that are not life threatening, even though THEY told me to go to the emergency room and not urgent care. for 5 hours sitting in a waiting room, 15 minutes seeing a doctor, and 3 stiches, 890 dollars. I net about 500 a week. Thats not bankrupting, but it is bank busting for me. and i HAVE insurance. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: She is going to cut taxes. provide universal heath care, Mutually exclusive. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
On 21/4/2008 11:07 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: She is going to cut taxes. provide universal heath care, Mutually exclusive. Terry depends on who will get the tax cuts. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
On 21/4/2008 12:13 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: On 21/4/2008 11:07 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: She is going to cut taxes. provide universal heath care, Mutually exclusive. Terry depends on who will get the tax cuts. Harry ... and whose taxes will go up. Harry
Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to MAJ Todd Hathaway's message of Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:19:29 -0700 reinterpreting ordinary electrolysis. There must be some additional energy source involved that is not normally accounted for, and determining exactly what that energy source is, is the real riddle. My personal bet is on some form of CF (most likely Hydrino based). Hum, so can you prove the existance of hydrinos? --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
[Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
She explained about the cost.? She assumed that the total heath care cost is a constant. The cost of the uninsured is made up for by billing the insured. The cost of covering the uninsured is getting to be to much for individuals and companies to assume. The cost of the uninsured should be picked up by the government. The problem with this arguemnt is if the cost goes down the usage will go up. I was watching the trains along the main line PRR on Sunday.? There was more traffic on the rail than I have ever seen.? I assume that fuel prices are producing this.? Pherhaps it is time to purcase some rail road stock. Frank Z
Re: [Vo]:The Rent-a-Motor concept
On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here is information on a small but extremely powerful engine, which is in production for military use, and weighing only ~10 kilograms (22 lbs) for what is the equivalent of nearly 30 kilowatts output. With a TBO (time before overhaul) of 10 to 50 hours? That might be okay for the DoD; but, not for a commercial use. Terry
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:42 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The cost of the uninsured should be picked up by the government. And just where does the government derive its income? Terry
[Vo]:The principle of the conservation of energy is a farce.
The principle of the conservation of energy is not fundamental. The common belief in it is a farce. The positive energy of the universe is balanced by its negative gravitational potential. An interplay of transient interactions would holds the energy of the new system constant until the gravitational field has the opportunity to propagate to the ends of the universe. The energy contained by new mass-energy is balanced by its negative gravitational potential. So what then is preventing the production of something from nothing? Such new mass would have to conserve angular momentum. This could be done by ejecting photons (or phonons ) of opposite spins from a system. Everything that is not excluded by our conservation laws should happen. Why don’t we see this? The answer comes from the study of the path of the quantum transition. Quantum transitions occur at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz-meter. The electron spins a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter. The spin is coupled and canceled in a Cooper pair. No residual megahertz meter vibration remains. The paired elections do not interact with the lattice. They cannot, such an interaction is a quantum transition. Transitions do not occur at a dimensional frequency of zero. Superconductivity results. The spontaneous ejection of two phonons does not take place because there is no megahertz meter stimulation in the paired system. A quantum transtion cannot progress. The secret of producing something from nothing is to add vibration at the dimensional frequency of 1.094 megahertz-meters. The best place to do this is in a condensation of protons. Frank z
Re: [Vo]:The Rent-a-Motor concept
--- Terry Blanton wrote: With a TBO (time before overhaul) of 10 to 50 hours? As I recall that engine was designed for target drones, no? Hopefully the criteria and specs would be upgraded a bit for use as a backup engine. Which begs the question: why would you ever overhaul one anyway? ... or should I say that the only time one of them needs to get overhauled is if your Gunny has trained some really bad marksmen ... Since most of your recruits practiced up to 60 hours per week as preteens on the x-box, prior to enlistment (who else really enlists these days?) one may reasonably doubt that any such drone has ever been missed, nor any of the el-cheapo engines has ever needed to be overhauled ;-)
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:59 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: She is going to cut taxes. provide universal heath care, Mutually exclusive. Given the state of the economy, and the fact that Hillary isn't promising an instant withdrawal from Iraq (as far as I know), just the cut taxes part is mutually exclusive all by itself. ;-) The next president isn't going to be able to cut taxes, period, at least not in the first few years of their term. Universal health care, on the other hand, can be provided for free by using the Romney plan: You pass a law requiring everyone to obtain (private) health insurance. Voila: Overnight, everybody's covered! It's sort of like how the government provides universal liability insurance for all automobile drivers. Since Romney's weasel approach to universal health care became popular (among politicians), the key term in the health insurance debate has become single payer rather than universal. And as far as I know, no current candidate is proposing a single-payer system. For nearly all of us, the plans of Clinton, Obama, and (if he's got one) McCain will make no perceptible difference. BTW the thing universal single-payer health care is most in conflict with is most likely the strong military. If you look at other (poorer) countries where, strangely, they seem to be able to afford single-payer health care even though the (far richer) United States can't, the biggest difference seems to be size of the military. Difference in the tax take as fraction of GNP looks to me to be a secondary issue. Granted, universal health care tends to be something you find in relatively wealthy countries, but certainly not *just* the top tier. Canada, England, France, and Cuba have it, just to name a few, and in France they also have mandatory 5-week vacations, as well as constant strikes which give everybody even more time off from work. There's a lot of grousing about the medical system in Canada, France, and England (not legal to grouse in Cuba, of course) but none the less their systems seem to be working pretty well in spite of everything. Better than the one in the U.S., at any rate, and maybe even cheaper if you can believe the complaints from major U.S. companies who must provide health benefits for all their employees. Incidentally the scariest thing about being in the Canadian health care system is ready for this? vacations in the United States. What if you get in an accident, or get too sick to travel, while in the States? It can be a disaster. A 3 hour tour over the border which ends in an emergency room visit and a hospital stay could cost your life savings. Terry
Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
Here is a video of what is very likely (my opinion) to be overunity hydrogen production from Ron Stiffler. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1pJEz0YGlQ Dr Stiffler has made no claims of the sort, but the numbers speak for themself in the context of the gas being evolved- and are certainly a bit 'unusual' shall we say, fi nothing else: less than one milliamp of current and RF in the MHz range, as the input - such as in the Kanzius experiment but without the need for salt water. Jones
RE: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
One fully-loaded railroad car can carry as much (about 100 tons) as four semi trucks. Between the cost of diesel (now around $4/gal) and the shortage of drivers, rail transport is now significantly cheaper for distance hauling. Lawry _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 12:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note. SNIP I was watching the trains along the main line PRR on Sunday. There was more traffic on the rail than I have ever seen. I assume that fuel prices are producing this. Pherhaps it is time to purcase some rail road stock.
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
Frank sez: ... I was watching the trains along the main line PRR on Sunday. There was more traffic on the rail than I have ever seen. I assume that fuel prices are producing this. Pherhaps it is time to purcase some rail road stock. Frank Z My wife and I were planning on flying out to Denver in August to attend the World Science Fiction convention - DENVENTION. (One must maintain some kind of presence within the science fiction commuity! ;-) ) Round trip airfare from Madison to Denver was quoted over $500 for an individual ticket, the cheap seats of course. We're taking Amtrack. If we went coach the cost would have been about half the current air fare, maybe even less. We're actually traveling by car down to Mount Pleasant, Iowa, and directly hitching the train from there, as compared to going through Chicago. Unfortunately Amtrack doesn't go through Madison, Wisconsin. We decided to go in style, paying a little extra for our own private room. It's still significantly less than the air far. The down side, the train ride will take a leisurely 13 hours. Not a problem. I bet we're not the only couple seriously reconsidering traveling habits. Mongo like choo coo. Why didn't Mongo think of choo choo before. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 01:33:51PM -0400, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: ... Universal health care, on the other hand, can be provided for free by using the Romney plan: You pass a law requiring everyone to obtain (private) health insurance. Voila: Overnight, everybody's covered! It's sort of like how the government provides universal liability insurance for all automobile drivers. If you can't afford auto insurance, you're not allowed to drive. If you can't afford health insurance, you're not allowed to... live?
Re: [Vo]:Went to see Hillery - dropped her a note.
Mark S Bilk wrote: If you can't afford auto insurance, you're not allowed to drive. If you can't afford health insurance, you're not allowed to... live? That is the crux of the matter. Economics theory treats all good alike. Whether we are buying a new car, a candy bar, groceries or gas our behavior fits in certain patterns. That is a reasonable first approximation, but beyond this approximation, every class of products is different. You can survive without most consumer goods, and without driving a car. You can cut back on driving, or carpool. But if you are starving you will pay any amount of money for food. Most people who are sick will pay any amount to be cured. You tend to be vulnerable when sick, and not able to think straight. My friend was so doped up he felt no pain and he would have agreed to anything at any price. He told me: they could have said, 'hey, let's amputate that leg,' and I would said, 'sure, go ahead.' His adult daughter rushed to the hospital and started negotiating the price and turning down services, such as more diagnostic tests. A generalized economic analysis of cost-benefits also works well for a wide range of goods and services, but it breaks down completely for some things, notably scientific research. What price can you assign to the work of Newton, Faraday, or Fleischmann? What cost per hour would be fair? A billion dollars perhaps? Since the benefits of a discovery will last as long as civilization survives, do we owe Newton a trillion dollars per second for the time it took him to write Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica? Such things are beyond economic analysis. You might as well ask what is the monetary value of language, or fire. Some captains of industry and corporate CEOs receive hundreds of millions of dollars in salaries these days. I doubt they are worth it, but the issue is debatable. That is to say, you could make the case that they increase the value of the company and the stock with their management skill. You can assign a monetary value to their work. But the lifetime contributions of such people is microscopic compared to the contributions of a scientist or inventor. - Jed
[Vo]:PETA prize for cultured meat
Somewhat more on topic than my friend's stroke: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/21/us/21meat.html Here are some rather wacko comments from the article, reflecting the views of people who are apparently unaware of the biological origin of themselves: A founder of PETA, Ingrid Newkirk, said she had been hoping to get the organization involved in advancing in vitro meat technology for at least a decade. But, Ms. Newkirk said, the decision to sponsor a prize caused 'a near civil war in our office,' since so many PETA members are repulsed by the thought of eating animal tissue, even if no animals are killed. Lisa Lange, a vice president of the organization, said she was part of the heated exchange. 'My main concern is, as the largest animal rights organization in the world, it's our job to introduce the philosophy and hammer it home that animals are not ours to eat.' Ms. Lange added, 'I remember saying I would be much more comfortable promoting eating roadkill.' What do they think we are? Forget carnivores: we are descended from a long line of insectivores. - Jed
[Vo]:Cold Fusion, LENR, CMNS Book Index
Cold Fusion, LENR, CMNS Book Index http://newenergytimes.com/Books/books.htm
Re: [Vo]:Cold Fusion, LENR, CMNS Book Index
Steve Krivit wrote: Cold Fusion, LENR, CMNS Book Index http://newenergytimes.com/Books/books.htm Huh. There are more books than I thought. I have a few other books that mention cold fusion in passing, or that have a chapter about it, such as Collins and Pinch, The Golum, which is pretty good, and some others which are pretty awful. Plus I have some books in Japanese. - Jed
[Vo]:Haiko Leitz is disconcerted by the decline of cold fusion
Haiko Leitz sent me this message, which he also posted to the CMNS group: I have retrieved the number of CMNS papers that have been published in scientific journals using two sources: a) INSPEC database b) Dieter Britz's bibliography (http://www.chem.au.dk/~db/fusion/biblio.html) Here's the result: inspec britz inspec/britz 1989 154251 0,6 1990 237321 0,7 1991 163190 0,9 1992 66 990,7 1993 53 950,6 1994 102671,5 1995 37 540,7 1996 44 680,6 1997 52 441,2 1998 47 520,9 1999 39 321,2 2000 54 351,5 2001 29 211,4 2002 33 201,7 2003 34 122,8 2004 35 8 4,4 2005 36 9 4,0 2006 21 9 2,3 20075 Apart from the slight difference which may be due to the fact that Dieter has carefully selected papers, the result is quite devastating... My response to him: These numbers are probably accurate. Britz undercounts the number of peer-reviewed papers some years because he rejects papers from some journals, and from the Italian Physical Society ICCF4 collection. Were you not aware of this trend? It has been clear for many years that cold fusion is dying, because the researchers themselves are retiring and dying. This is what I described in the introduction to my book. I am not optimistic that the field will survive. - Jed
[Vo]:the decline of cold fusion
Were you not aware of this trend? It has been clear for many years that cold fusion is dying, because the researchers themselves are retiring and dying. This is what I described in the introduction to my book. I am not optimistic that the field will survive. - Jed How can that be? SPWAR has detected high energy reactions from a cold fusion system. This is no small thing. Then the field dies. I don't understand. Frank Z
[Vo]:The principle of the conservation of energy is farce, corrected
The principle of the conservation of energy is not fundamental. The common belief in it is a farce. The positive energy of the universe is balanced by its negative gravitational potential. An interplay of transient interactions would holds the energy of a new system constant until the gravitational field has the opportunity to propagate to the ends of the universe. The energy contained by new mass-energy is balanced by its negative gravitational potential. So what then is preventing the production of something from nothing? Such new mass would have to conserve angular momentum. This could be done by ejecting photons (or phonons ) of opposite spins from a system. Everything that is not excluded by our conservation laws should happen. Why don’t we see this? The answer comes from the study of the path of the quantum transition. Quantum transitions occur at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz-meter. The electron spins a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter. The spin is coupled and canceled in a Cooper pair. No residual of megahertz meter vibration remains. The paired elections do not interact with the lattice. They cannot, such an interaction is a quantum transition. Transitions do not occur when the amplidude of vibration at the dimensional frequency of 1.094 megahertz meters is zero. Superconductivity results. The spontaneous ejection of two phonons does not take place because there is no megahertz meter stimulation in the paired system. A quantum transtion cannot progress. The secret of producing something from nothing is to add vibration at the dimensional frequency of 1.094 megahertz-meters. The best place to do this is in a condensation of protons. Angular momentum is measured from another reference frame. In the single bodied early universe the concept of the conservation of angular momentum did not apply. That's how the original genesis progressed. The principle of the conservation of energy had nothing to do with it. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:the decline of cold fusion
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can that be? SPWAR has detected high energy reactions from a cold fusion system. This is no small thing. Then the field dies. I do not think the SPWAR results have been replicated to everyone's satisfaction yet. Certainly the Russians have doubts, and they are experts in CR-39. The issue is somewhat over my head. Anyway, the field is dying because the researchers themselves are dying, and not being replaced by younger researchers. If you ask a skeptic why, he will say this is one of Langmuir's criteria for pathological science: The ratio of supporters to critics rises to somewhere near 50% and then falls gradually into oblivion. If you ask me, I say: The field has been crushed by rabid academic politics, and the suppression of academic freedom. I don't understand. Come now. It isn't hard to understand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the decline of cold fusion
Jed, Perhaps detractors help to maintain interest in the subject, but they are dying off too. harry On 21/4/2008 3:47 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How can that be? SPWAR has detected high energy reactions from a cold fusion system. This is no small thing. Then the field dies. I do not think the SPWAR results have been replicated to everyone's satisfaction yet. Certainly the Russians have doubts, and they are experts in CR-39. The issue is somewhat over my head. Anyway, the field is dying because the researchers themselves are dying, and not being replaced by younger researchers. If you ask a skeptic why, he will say this is one of Langmuir's criteria for pathological science: The ratio of supporters to critics rises to somewhere near 50% and then falls gradually into oblivion. If you ask me, I say: The field has been crushed by rabid academic politics, and the suppression of academic freedom. I don't understand. Come now. It isn't hard to understand. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the decline of cold fusion
Harry Veeder wrote: Perhaps detractors help to maintain interest in the subject, but they are dying off too. Perhaps they do help maintain interest, but they do not increase to the number of peer-reviewed papers published per year, which is the metric Leitz measured. By that standard there is no question cold fusion is dying. The late anti-cold fusion skeptic Douglas Morrison made a big deal about decline in the number of papers. He thought that meant the subject is pathological. He also made a big deal about what he called the Regionalization of results and what I called Arian Science Numerology. Not to put too fine a point on it, he believed that only white Northern European people do real science, and he said that positive cold fusion results were all those garlic eating Souther European Italians and Greeks, and by Orientals and other unwashed hoards. He didn't put it quite like that, but that was the message. He was banging that drum long before cold fusion came along. Gene Mallove sent me some snippets of Morrison's pre-cold fusion lectures on the intellectual superiority of the White Northern European races. To be fair, such attitudes were common decades ago. Morrison was no worse that many people of his generation. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:the decline of cold fusion
All science research is cumulative and stimulates the imagination. There are ongoing studies and adjacent research. I choose to believe that Dr.Ron Stiffler has the energy and drive to open a few doors with his experiments. May even find something he wasn't looking for.. this often happens to the dedicated scientist. Richard
Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:30:39 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to MAJ Todd Hathaway's message of Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:19:29 -0700 reinterpreting ordinary electrolysis. There must be some additional energy source involved that is not normally accounted for, and determining exactly what that energy source is, is the real riddle. My personal bet is on some form of CF (most likely Hydrino based). Hum, so can you prove the existance of hydrinos? At the moment I personally cannot. However I said most likely, which implies still some uncertainty. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
[Vo]:Re: HUP-spread-out electron feels (and thus Coulomb-screens?) like a point charge...
Not really a point charge of course. I meant a highly localized charge such as that of a nucleus, by opposition to the widely spread-out charge of an electron (due to the quantum uncertainty of its position). For most purposes, slow and massive nuclei can be treated as classical point charges, whereas fast moving lightweight electrons require quantum treatment and are best considered as charge density. What I find interesting in the case of an approaching nucleus's image charge is that the fast fuzzy induced surface electron synthesizes the slow highly localized _look and feel_ of a symmetrical virtual negative nucleus inside the cathode, coming to meet the nucleus at the time and place of impact. If an actual deuteron desorbs there at the same time... guess what can happen? ;-) Michel - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:HUP-spread-out electron feels (and thus Coulomb-screens?) like a point charge... Even within classical physics the existence of a point charge is problematic. (as well as point masses.) Do you mean charge density at a point? Harry On 20/4/2008 6:49 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: (HUP = Heinsenberg's Uncertainty Principle). Back to my DIESECF (Desorbing vs Incident Excess Surface Electron Catalyzed Fusion) speculation for a moment, forwarding a post I made to the CMNS group today, in response to a sensible objection by X (names hidden). Michel - Original Message - From: Michel Jullian mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: X Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 11:56 AM Subject: CMNS: Re: Question to X (was Re: Apples and Oranges) Thanks for your reply X. Y made the same very sensible objection some time ago. My lame response at the time was: if screening occurs, it has to be at the negatively charged cathode surface, there is no better place... something must escape us in the physics. And then the other day I discovered the image charge concept. It does provide a mechanism whereby the (induced) lightweight fast moving -e (single electron charge) spread out all over the place, as illustrated by the minus signs on the cathode surface in Feynman's figure below (Lectures on Physics vol.2 p. 6-9)... ...conspires to be perceived by the (inducing) +e charged incident hydrogen ion (+ ball on the right), and by the rest of the world on the same side of the cathode, as a mirror image (and, as such, equally punctual and slow moving) -e charge (- ball on the left) This tentatively suggests that there is no QM law preventing a properly uncertainty-spread electron to _look like_ a classical point charge... does this make any sense? Michel - Original Message - From: X To: CMNS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 4:13 PM Subject: CMNS: Re: Question to X (was Re: Apples and Oranges) ... Do you think that Coulomb screening by the negative surface charge induced by an impinging deuteron (electrostatically equivalent to a mirror image -e charge as discussed recently) can significantly improve its chances to fuse with a simultaneously desorbing deuteron, wrt to chances when both are inside or outside the cathode? [snip] the screening electrons being very light will be spread out a lot through quantum uncertainty so it will not work very well
Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to thomas malloy's message of Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:30:39 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to MAJ Todd Hathaway's message of Sat, 19 Apr 2008 17:19:29 -0700 reinterpreting ordinary electrolysis. There must be some additional energy source involved that is not normally accounted for, and determining exactly what that energy source is, is the real riddle. My personal bet is on some form of CF (most likely Hydrino based). Hum, so can you prove the existance of hydrinos? At the moment I personally cannot. However I said most likely, which implies still some uncertainty. Well,let me put it another way. if someone were attempting to get an LENR reactor to work. Let's suppose that it worked, measurable anomolus heat out put. Then they built a hydrio generator and bubbled the out put gas into the LENR cell, and it worked measurably better. How would that be for proof? --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
From Edmond Storms: This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed I work for the state of Wisconsin. As a humble public servant we have, relatively speaking, some of the best HMO heath insurance the common man woman can get in our country. Like most health insurance costs the state's aggregate expenses have steadily increased along with everyone else's, often well over 10% each year, year after year. Predictably, these relentless increases eventually hit the state coffers in unpleasant ways. About three to four years ago our state unions were informed of the fact that we would actually have to start PAYING a small monthly premium OUT OF OUR OWN POCKETS. Boy! Did the ka-ka hit the fan! I don't expect much sympathy from the Vort membership, especially from those few brave souls who are actually trying to make a living pursuing the American dream of private entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, it would seem that some of my colleagues prefer to gloss over the fact that the common taxpayer, the private business man woman who pays our state salaries are struggling each day to make ends meet, let alone pay their own draconian health insurance premiums. As best as I can figure most Wisconsin state employees are now required to fork out somewhere around $30 (single) to $80 (family plan) a month from out of their own pocketbooks to pay their share of the premium. Meanwhile the state kicks in somewhere around five hundred (single) to a thousand (family) a month tax free to pay the remainder of the premium. This is, of course, not taxable. I consider myself extremely lucky. The smarter of my colleagues consider themselves extremely lucky as well. Few of us well get rich on our government salaries. OTOH, it's not likely that any of us will need to declare bankruptcy as a result of an unexpected trip to the emergency room followed by a few days stay at the local hospital. I agree with Jed, and especially with Mr. Storm's assessment of the situation. Some form of a modified (Americanized) socialism is probably the only way we will be able to survive the health cost crisis. Unfortunately, I fear too many of us still consider the s word to be as unspeakable and un-American as uttering the n word in mixed company. We are getting what we paid for. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:The Dark Side of the UGA
The following personal essay was inspired by the recent discussions on health insurance (more precisely the lack of) brought to our attention by Jed, Ed, Stephen, and the Leaking pen. * * * * * An interesting analogy that made the smarmy economics of our country a little easier for me to comprehend was the personal realization that when GNP remains stagnant it should theoretically mean that everyone's material quality of life should remain stagnant as well. Curiously, that rarely happens. Lets assume for the sake of argument that we live in a country called the United Gumdrops of America, or UGA. Each UGA citizen produces a single gumdrop to be consumed each day, and that there are exactly 300 million citizens in the fair land of UGA. That means 300 gumdrops are being produced and subsequently consumed each day within the UGAn economy. Now, here's the catch: Once a UGA citizen manufactures their own gumdrop they must then sell their personally manufactured gumdrop to another UGA citizen because they can't consume their own gumdrop. They can only eat a gumdrop manufactured by another UGA citizen. Despite countless UGA government and privately financed projects to crack the barrier that prevents UGA citizens from consuming their own personally manufactured gumdrop no citizen can consume their own gumdrop. This forces every UGA citizen to consume a gumdrop manufactured by another UGA Citizen. Under this scenario our UGA economy produces 300 million gumdrops each day, and every single gumdrop must be redistributed fairly and equitably throughout the land of UGA - and everyone consumes their acquired gumdrop. Everyone's daily gumdrop requirements are being satisfied and all of UGA's citizens are happy, at least when it comes to consuming gumdrops. Of course, maintaining fair and equitable system of gumdrop distribution throughout the country UGA rarely happens. There are always individuals who know how to manipulate the system of gumdrop distribution better than others. They posses greater power or gumdrop influence over others and subsequently end up consuming more gumdrops per day; let's say two or three gumdrops per day. And as we all know, the laws of conservation dictate that if someone consumes two or three extra gumdrops over their daily single gumdrop allotment, that means an equal number of UGA citizens must go without consuming any gumdrops at all for that day. Let's assume it's really, REALLY IMPORTANT that everyone GETS their daily gumdrop allotment. Go without consuming a gumdrop a day for a few days straight and suddenly all those gumdrop-deprived UGAn citizens decide maybe it's time to take matters into their own hands and start TAKING gumdrops away from others who seem to have their own gumdrop. Maybe they'll focus their frustration on a few UGAn citizens who seem to have acquired the skill of securing lots of gumdrops, and maybe they will get their gumdrop and subsequently not feel so gumdrop deprived. More likely, however, too many of the gumdrop deprived will simply take a gumdrop anyway they can, meaning what's easiest for them to reach for, and that typically means from someone who is not all that adept at holding onto their single gumdrop. Maybe those who aren't adept at keeping their own gumdrop are sick, or too old, or simply too ignorant to know they've just been hoodwinked into relinquishing their daily gumdrop allowance. What is the UGA leadership to do? Its citizens are beginning to riot over gumdrops! They ponder their options: (*) Eliminate the gumdrop deprived – specifically those who no longer seem capable of acquiring their daily allotment of a gumdrop. Unfortunately, there is an unpleasant cascading effect that accompanies this solution as each UGA gumdrop deprived citizen who is eliminated results in one less gumdrop they personally manufacture that subsequently enters the UGA distribution system and isn't sold, and that means another UGA citizen will no longer be getting their daily gumdrop either, and subsequently they too will need to be eliminated. How far should the UGA leadership carry this scenario? Most UGA citizens will most likely decide, sooner or later, that this plan isn't a very good one and subsequently decide to remove every UGA leader that had made the suggestion in the first place, and while they at it, they'll take their gumdrop away from them too. (*) Eliminate and/or prevent those who consume more than their daily allotment of gumdrops from consuming more than their daily requirement of a gumdrop. Unfortunately, this suggestion is considered just as Un-UGAn, and every UGA leader that had ever suggested it is also voted out of office, and their gumdrop is taken away from them as well. (*) Figure out a way to increase gumdrop production as manufactured per UGA individual. Hey! Maybe this might work! However, the suggestion has consequences as well. If implemented it's probably a good idea to start planning for: (1) Additional UGA cavities. (2)
Re: [Vo]:The Rent-a-Motor concept
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 12:27 PM, Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I recall that engine was designed for target drones, no? Hopefully the criteria and specs would be upgraded a bit for use as a backup engine. I think it has to do with the Wankel seals. They won't hold up as well on a two cycle. T
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Yes, I agree. However, even if I were paying the bill, how would I, while sick, bargain with the doctor to lower my payment? The insurance company and the government are supposed to do this for me, in their own self-interest. If the government were the single payer, they would have a bigger stick to keep the costs under control. I suggest, the problem is that the medical and insurance companies are in bed together. Together, they have paid for a government that won't intervene. As long as the employer/employee pay, and the government won't stop the rape, why change a profitable system? The medical/insurance companies have no reason to lower costs because both gain profit from the situation, the insurance companies with higher premiums and the medical companies with more income. Every time the government tries to bring the situation under control, both scream socialized medicine and predict loss of quality. The voters buy the nonsense and continue to pay. Unfortunately for the medical/insurance companies, the rest of the system is stating to hurt and is starting to put pressure on the government. Perhaps if a few more of the purchased congressmen are voted out of office, things will change. Ed leaking pen wrote: Unfortunately Ed, health insurance is in part the problem. When insurance and not a person was paying the bill, doctors and hospitals found they could charge more. Insurance companies raise prices to compensate, but are thus willing to pay more, and the cycle continues. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Jeff -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:10 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Indeed, Senator Kyle a couple of years ago had a talk in the Scottsdale galleria, a large office building where I worked, in a town hall format. He talked about medicare D, and the beauty of how it made the us government the largest single buyer, and how it gave med d such bargaining rights. my voice from the crowd. But Senator Kyle, YOU wrote the rider on medicare part D that removed its right to bargain, and forced Medicare patients to pay whatever the drug companies charged! His handlers attempted but failed to escort me out, when I showed the badge stating i worked there. Then he mentioned drugs from canada. But senator Kyle, those drugs are often the same drugs from the same batches sent here to the us, sent to canada where they have price controls, and sent back, in factory original sealed condition. How could they be unsafe? On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I agree. However, even if I were paying the bill, how would I, while sick, bargain with the doctor to lower my payment? The insurance company and the government are supposed to do this for me, in their own self-interest. If the government were the single payer, they would have a bigger stick to keep the costs under control. I suggest, the problem is that the medical and insurance companies are in bed together. Together, they have paid for a government that won't intervene. As long as the employer/employee pay, and the government won't stop the rape, why change a profitable system? The medical/insurance companies have no reason to lower costs because both gain profit from the situation, the insurance companies with higher premiums and the medical companies with more income. Every time the government tries to bring the situation under control, both scream socialized medicine and predict loss of quality. The voters buy the nonsense and continue to pay. Unfortunately for the medical/insurance companies, the rest of the system is stating to hurt and is starting to put pressure on the government. Perhaps if a few more of the purchased congressmen are voted out of office, things will change. Ed leaking pen wrote: Unfortunately Ed, health insurance is in part the problem. When insurance and not a person was paying the bill, doctors and hospitals found they could charge more. Insurance companies raise prices to compensate, but are thus willing to pay more, and the cycle continues. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Yes Jeff, that is an argument that is always raised when some form of socialized medicine is suggested. The fact is that under no successful system is the service completely free. For example, I'm one of the lucky people who has good insurance. Nevertheless, I have to pay part of the service and I have to actually be sick to want to endure the process of seeing a doctor. However, I don't have to worry about emergencies nor not being able to afford to get well. Of course, if everyone had such insurance, more doctors would be needed to handle the increased load. Simply making more low-interest loan money available to attend medical school would eventually solve this problem. Again, this money would have to be provided by a government program because we now see what happens when the process is turned over to private companies. After all, an advancing society needs to make getting a higher education in any field much easier, so why not encourage an education in medicine along with the other options? Meanwhile, the government would be free of the influence being applied by the combination of powerful insurance and medical providers. Influence in the government would be more evenly balanced through the efforts of employers and voters. Gradually, a single payer, government run system will be created simply because all other options have obviously failed. Eventually, we will have a process similar to Social Security, but in health instead of income. Why not start sooner rather than later? How much more suffering must occur before the conclusion becomes obvious? Ed Jeff Fink wrote: If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Jeff -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:10 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
If you are opposed to a free health care system thean you must have been opposed to the free interstate highway system. Harry Jeff Fink wrote: If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Jeff
Re: [Vo]:Re: HUP-spread-out electron feels (and thus Coulomb-screens?) like a point charge...
hmmm...at the scale of the nucleus the surface of the cathode is not a monolithic structure like the plate in the diagram... so in reality would the image charge be as localised as the one depicted in the diagram? harry On 21/4/2008 6:32 PM, Michel Jullian wrote: Not really a point charge of course. I meant a highly localized charge such as that of a nucleus, by opposition to the widely spread-out charge of an electron (due to the quantum uncertainty of its position). For most purposes, slow and massive nuclei can be treated as classical point charges, whereas fast moving lightweight electrons require quantum treatment and are best considered as charge density. What I find interesting in the case of an approaching nucleus's image charge is that the fast fuzzy induced surface electron synthesizes the slow highly localized _look and feel_ of a symmetrical virtual negative nucleus inside the cathode, coming to meet the nucleus at the time and place of impact. If an actual deuteron desorbs there at the same time... guess what can happen? ;-) Michel - Original Message - From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 10:13 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:HUP-spread-out electron feels (and thus Coulomb-screens?) like a point charge... Even within classical physics the existence of a point charge is problematic. (as well as point masses.) Do you mean charge density at a point? Harry On 20/4/2008 6:49 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: (HUP = Heinsenberg's Uncertainty Principle). Back to my DIESECF (Desorbing vs Incident Excess Surface Electron Catalyzed Fusion) speculation for a moment, forwarding a post I made to the CMNS group today, in response to a sensible objection by X (names hidden). Michel - Original Message - From: Michel Jullian mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: X Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2008 11:56 AM Subject: CMNS: Re: Question to X (was Re: Apples and Oranges) Thanks for your reply X. Y made the same very sensible objection some time ago. My lame response at the time was: if screening occurs, it has to be at the negatively charged cathode surface, there is no better place... something must escape us in the physics. And then the other day I discovered the image charge concept. It does provide a mechanism whereby the (induced) lightweight fast moving -e (single electron charge) spread out all over the place, as illustrated by the minus signs on the cathode surface in Feynman's figure below (Lectures on Physics vol.2 p. 6-9)... ...conspires to be perceived by the (inducing) +e charged incident hydrogen ion (+ ball on the right), and by the rest of the world on the same side of the cathode, as a mirror image (and, as such, equally punctual and slow moving) -e charge (- ball on the left) This tentatively suggests that there is no QM law preventing a properly uncertainty-spread electron to _look like_ a classical point charge... does this make any sense? Michel - Original Message - From: X To: CMNS [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 4:13 PM Subject: CMNS: Re: Question to X (was Re: Apples and Oranges) ... Do you think that Coulomb screening by the negative surface charge induced by an impinging deuteron (electrostatically equivalent to a mirror image -e charge as discussed recently) can significantly improve its chances to fuse with a simultaneously desorbing deuteron, wrt to chances when both are inside or outside the cathode? [snip] the screening electrons being very light will be spread out a lot through quantum uncertainty so it will not work very well
Re: [Vo]:theory behind hydroxy gas production using Stanley Meyers unit
In reply to thomas malloy's message of Mon, 21 Apr 2008 18:43:40 -0500 (CDT): Hi, [snip] Well,let me put it another way. if someone were attempting to get an LENR reactor to work. Let's suppose that it worked, measurable anomolus heat out put. Then they built a hydrio generator and bubbled the out put gas into the LENR cell, and it worked measurably better. How would that be for proof? I would say that it would be very interesting, but would want to know a few more details. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
