Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Sorry Ed, but there's a lot of muddled thinking in this little essay. Not like you, I'm sure. I don't want to take up much more time in this forum; it's not the place. But if I were you, I'd get right into the history books. Aside from the fact that since the advent of Islam, it's history has been one of conquer and plunder. Look around. India is a good example, as is Persia. History is history. These two great civilizations have managed to retain some of their original character, but most have totally succumbed and are now essentially basket cases. :...land given to Jews by God.. A little study will show that the Romans expelled the Jews of the time from certain areas... not everywhere. Jews have always lived there during the past 2000 years, and many went back after the Roman empire fell. The crusades, by the way, were a rather brutish way of freeing the holy land from the Arabs who had originally plundered it soon after the advent of Islam. Check all this out. And as for for the original Palestinian inhabitants being forced from their land, they were encouraged to leave by their Arab brothers who wanted some free space so that they could slaughter the Jews more easily; the Jews who had just arrived from the concentration camps to join their brethren. The fact that an equal number (almost one million) Jews were unceremoniously thrown out of the Arab lands before the events of 1948 seems to be constantly forgotten. Where did they go? Where could they go? Why Israel of course. They were welcomed there, as opposed to the Palestinians who were held in limbo for political reasons where they still remain. Ed, I don't care what a person's reasons are for wanting me dead. If that person tries to fulfill this intention, I'll try to take him down without hesitation. It's called a human reaction. If the Arabs - particularly the Palestinians - were to lay down their arms they could get on with life and start to build stuff, but it's not in their nature. Read your bible. Me? I'm a highly imperfect Canadian who utterly detests dishonesty and hypocrisy and ignorance. Governments and the Oil Gang fit this description perfectly, so I really have no time for politics of any description... Like I said - part of the dream... If you want to have further discussions on this (or Sai Baba, or Reality), you may want to ask Steve K for my email address. P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 8, 2008 11:41:28 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds I don't like the situation either, Philip. However, when a nation has the oil we need, it is apparently easy to be nice. If not, we have to pay an even greater price for our principles. This is actually the way the world works these days. In the past, the US called the shots. Increasingly, the oil suppliers and China will call the shots. Get use to the idea, because it is only going to get worse. You should ask why such a situation was allowed to develop. These situations do not occur by accident. As for Israel, it is hard to choose words carefully and still be honest. The situation is not based on scientific logic, but on faith and religious belief. A significant number of people in the US believe that Israel was given to the Jews by God. These people have significant influence and they vote. Therefore, any criticism about how Israel behaves is unpopular, being called anti-Semitism. As a result, Israel can cause the US to do things that would otherwise be impossible if demanded by another country. History shows why is is true. Creation of the country displaced millions of Palestinians. These people were forced from their homes and land. This is a fact. As a result, these people and people in the surrounding countries have been and continue to be angry at the unfairness of this, regardless of the justification based on God's will. Nevertheless, the US has sided heavily in favor of Israel. Because the Palestinians do not have modern weapons, as supplied by the US to Israel, they fight with the only tools they have. The US labels this method terrorism, which it is. As a result, the situation is made more one sided and desperate. No body wins and the US is dragged deeper into the conflict. No matter which side you favor, this is the situation. The policies used in the past have clearly not worked no matter how correct you think them to be. The question is, what do you suggest we do now? Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: I personally don't like the idea of playing nice with people whose greatest wish is to cut my throat. The leader of the greatest and most benevolent country in the world (I didn't say it was perfect) has to make nice to people who by their teachings precipitated the 9/11 disaster, and who incidentally benefit greatly in many ways, many of them most unpleasant, from current oil prices? Just a little
[Vo]:Hummers achieve a new purpose for their existence
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/06/08/vo.tx.robbie.kneivel.jump.ktxa Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Hummers achieve a new purpose for their existence
what about this type of existence? hummers as hydrogen + veg oil runners? http://www.worldsnest.com/ http://www.angels-nest.org kinda cute 2008/6/9 OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED]: http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2008/06/08/vo.tx.robbie.kneivel.jump.ktxa Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks -- :)
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Howdy Vorts, Gosh, golly, gee folks, here we go again with the Jews and arabs. This time the wedge is oil. The USA uses oil like toilet paper and everybuddy knows wez intitled to it.. or we think we do. We have enough oil provided we turn off a few lights and live like I we did back in the '30's by riding bicycles. We ain't gonna cuz we are better and smarter than anyone else and besides, we deserve it.. ask any TV advertizing message. If we are getting into a middle east debate over some long term bar room argument, this feud over land goes back awhile. Ask any Palestinian lounging on the corner in Gaza and he'll correct you by stating .. don't call me a Pallestinian.. call me a Canaanite cuz we wuz here first. The fact that Abraham came to Canaan and bought his land fair and square ain't got nuthin to do with it. His kinfolks later bought up most of Manhatten Island if you notice who's name's on the title to you apartment. but.. that's why they call it political science at Yale.. where all the really smart US presidents learn how to practice their profession.. Now if we can just find out what their profession is.. Richard
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
From Philip (addressed to Edmund Storms): If you want to have further discussions on this (or Sai Baba, or Reality), you may want to ask Steve K for my email address. It's my understanding that when one joins the Vortex group they must assign a personal email address. Anyone on the vortex email list can privately email anyone who joins the group should they chose to carry on private deliberations. (I certainly have on occasion.) It's only when the vortex messages are subsequently posted to the Eskimo web site archive database that individual email addresses are expunged for security reasons. FWIW, in regards to your offer, if you had addressed me in the manner you just addressed Ed I know I would not be inclined to want to continue private discussions. Granted, Ed did ask you point blank to respond to his query, so you were perfectly within your right to express your opinions. Perhaps it's a matter of personal taste, where your comments stuck me more as a form of a lecture than perhaps was your actual intention. I know from personal experience that I learn very little listening to lectures I did not personally sign up for. It seems to me that if we look far enough back in history we would eventually find that no individual, no nation, is free from guilt. It is my hope that if more of us are willing to acknowledge the fact that we are not immune from our sense of outrage, perhaps enough of us can then step back from the automatic impulses to even the score. I'm convinced there are wise individuals on both sides of the fence who understand this. Unfortunately, emotions that evoke a sense of outrage are just too delicious for most of us to let go of for the moment. Outrage becomes an addiction. It demands to be constantly stoked. I have felt the addiction myself. No one is immune. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
I was disapointed in Arata's demonstration.? ? One watt of released energy is small comparted to the chemically released energy.? There is a show on NOVA onel ine about the development of a new hydrogen storage metal.? The amount of heat liberated during loading is great.? A heat exchanger has to be attached to the stroage medium to take the heat away.? The released energy has got to be in the tens of kilowatts range. This released heat is chemical.? I don't know how one can claim that a continued slower release of heat must be nuclear.? Debending on the bulk of the material the continued release of 1 watt would have to extend for months to convince me. I don't believe that this experiment is going to convince the main stream community. I do like Arata 50 nanometer paricles.? I believe that this particle size is one key to the release of low level nuclear energy. Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Here's a good description of the history of Israel and Palestine, by a jewish author: http://takingaimradio.com/hhz/ The Hidden History of Zionism, By Ralph Schoenman On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 09:41:28PM -0600, Edmund Storms wrote: I don't like the situation either, Philip. However, when a nation has the oil we need, it is apparently easy to be nice. If not, we have to pay an even greater price for our principles. This is actually the way the world works these days. In the past, the US called the shots. Increasingly, the oil suppliers and China will call the shots. Get use to the idea, because it is only going to get worse. You should ask why such a situation was allowed to develop. These situations do not occur by accident. As for Israel, it is hard to choose words carefully and still be honest. The situation is not based on scientific logic, but on faith and religious belief. A significant number of people in the US believe that Israel was given to the Jews by God. These people have significant influence and they vote. Therefore, any criticism about how Israel behaves is unpopular, being called anti-Semitism. As a result, Israel can cause the US to do things that would otherwise be impossible if demanded by another country. History shows why is is true. Creation of the country displaced millions of Palestinians. These people were forced from their homes and land. This is a fact. As a result, these people and people in the surrounding countries have been and continue to be angry at the unfairness of this, regardless of the justification based on God's will. Nevertheless, the US has sided heavily in favor of Israel. Because the Palestinians do not have modern weapons, as supplied by the US to Israel, they fight with the only tools they have. The US labels this method terrorism, which it is. As a result, the situation is made more one sided and desperate. No body wins and the US is dragged deeper into the conflict. No matter which side you favor, this is the situation. The policies used in the past have clearly not worked no matter how correct you think them to be. The question is, what do you suggest we do now? Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: I personally don't like the idea of playing nice with people whose greatest wish is to cut my throat. The leader of the greatest and most benevolent country in the world (I didn't say it was perfect) has to make nice to people who by their teachings precipitated the 9/11 disaster, and who incidentally benefit greatly in many ways, many of them most unpleasant, from current oil prices? Just a little strange to me. I'm no politician, but I do respect - as the Soviets did - a nation whose leaders make it perfectly clear what would happen if America were to be jeopardized. Not so with the Saudis. We make nice. As for supporting everything the Israeli government wants. Can you be a little more definitive? You say, ... the Bush gang is so incompetent and so under the domination of Israel... Perhaps you could reword this so that we could all understand (if we're interested, which I'm sure most people here aren't) exactly what this tiny nation in this tiny sliver of land (about the size of New Jersey) is using to dominate the most powerful nation in the world. I guess it could be Viagra... Whatever it is, I'd like some of this domination juice. Please choose you words a little more carefully if you can't offer scientific explanations. They're a dead giveaway... P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, June 8, 2008 7:03:40 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Well, Philip, you did see Bush holding hands with the Saudi king. He was trying to get the Saudi to pump more oil, which they refused to do. However, I see no conflict with playing nice with the Saudi and supporting everything the Israeli government wants. One is done for money and the other is done for politics. Unfortunately, the two have now formed an explosive mixture. Ed
Re: FW: [Vo]:MAPLE and LENR?
vortex-l-request is how you subscribe/unsubscribe. The email address is vortex-l@eskimo.com Terry On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 6:32 PM, Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Harry, I sent a response to your message (it is appended). I get an ACCESS DENIED message when sending to vortex-l, [EMAIL PROTECTED], or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Could you post this for me? Thanks. On Jun 8, 2008, at 10:39 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: [snip] For safety reasons, the reactors were designed to have a negative power coefficient reactivity value. It was expected to be 0.12 mk/MW. In June 2003, it was measured at +0.28 mk/MW. [snip] Yet, no amount of analysis, fiddling or technological repair has resolved the deviation from original design. Tests in 2007 achieved the exact same +0.28 mk/MW measurement. The reactor uses a D2O-reflected core. It seems unlikely, but I have to wonder if they ignored the frequency of neutron spallation: n + D - n + n + p Horace Heffner
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One watt of released energy is small comparted to the chemically released energy. So what? The power level of the heat from impure radium is far lower than most chemical reactions with same mass of fuel. That proves nothing. There is a show on NOVA onel ine about the development of a new hydrogen storage metal. The amount of heat liberated during loading is great. Yes, that is clearly visible on the other graphs, and you can see the tail end of that heat in the hydrogen loaded sample. As you see, it is stone cold after 300 minutes, whereas the deuterium sample remains hot 10 times longer. That proves the point. A heat exchanger has to be attached to the stroage medium to take the heat away. The released energy has got to be in the tens of kilowatts range. This released heat is chemical. I don't know how one can claim that a continued slower release of heat must be nuclear. Oh come now, Frank. NOBODY has claimed that a slower release of heat must be nuclear. The total energy release proves that. The power level has nothing to do with it. Debending on the bulk of the material the continued release of 1 watt would have to extend for months to convince me. The material weighs 7 g, it is about 20% to 30% Pd, and it absorbs about 2.2 mass% for the Pd (ignoring Zr) at 1 MPa (Yamaura et al.) Why months? And for that matter, why not decades or centuries? This is arbitrary. You need only wait until the heat release is far beyond the limits of chemistry, which this is. Setting an arbitrary limit of months is moving the goal posts for no reason, which is the sort of thing skeptics do. - Jed
[Vo]:Typical theorist response
Here is a snide theorist from Central Casting: http://missatomicbomb.blogspot.com/2008/06/gullible-part-2.html - Jed
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
I have found the exchange of opinions expressed so far educational. Let me pose a question I don't think has been explored adequately Does anyone here imagine it conceivable that Arata's experiment points to a practical way of scaling up the generation of heat to commercial and industrial levels? Granted this might be a difficult question to answer under the current circumstances since I gather Arata has yet to clarify a number of critical components. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics
On 4/6/2008 10:53 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Harry Veeder wrote: I am calling your bluff. ;-) Not a bluff, though it involves some fuzzy reasoning. The difference between a proof and an explanation has bugged me since junior high, when I found out that most mathematical facts are proven without ever being explained. As I said before, a model may predict what's going to happen but will never tell you why. Using a model is a tacit admission that we don't know what the reasons behind things are, or even if there are any such reasons. I would think the _construction_ of a model depends on some a-priori explanations (or stories?) of the world. What is the difference between an explanation and a model? You have said something substantive about models, but nothing substantive about explanations, except to say that explanation is not a model. Or is it just an issue of semantics? Maybe it's just semantics, but I actually think it's more a matter of gut feel, and satisfaction level. If you look at the link Terry gave, the author's objection is that physics doesn't say why magnets attract. Well, what would it mean to say why they attract? This is the heart of the issue -- just exactly what is an explanation? In physics it's hard to say, for me, at least, because I don't know of any explanations. As far as I know modern physics has none. It does and it is called mechanics, and to ensure mechanical explanations remain dominant and universally applicable they have been revamped by the quantum hypothesis. In math it's easier to see the difference. For example, we can find pi by integrating the arctan function, or by integrating sqrt(1-x^2), both of which are stunningly opaque approaches. We can prove that the area of a circle is pi*r^2 using calculus, which is, again, an amazingly opaque approach. Alternatively, we can find the circumference and area of a circle using Pythagoras's theorem and some simple drawings, and we can extract a value for pi that way. I would call the latter approach an explanation, because, to me, it explains why the circumference and area of the circle are what they are. But something this is pointing up is that the word explanation is rather slippery. I could struggle with it a bit more, and perhaps say that an explanation works from simple things which we know to be true to show that other more complex things follow inevitably from those simple things -- but the phrase know to be true is already flirting with vagueness. So I'll just let it go at saying that an explanation leaves one feeling satisfied; a model may not... I guess the question becomes how do we learn a particular sense of satisfaction, and are there other senses of satisfaction that should be allowed in physics other than those rooted in mechanics and probability theory. By the way, the derivation of pi from Pythagoras's theorem to which I referred, and the derivation of the area of a circle and volume of a sphere using geometric arguments, are here: http://physicsinsights.org/pi_from_pythagoras-1.html http://physicsinsights.org/sphere-volume-1.html You may not feel these pages actually explain anything, of course! :-) That was, however, part of the reason for putting them together, and perhaps these pages will give you an idea of what I think an explanation is. Or maybe not... Aristotle's explanation of why some things fall (gravity) and why other things rise is that each element seeks its natural place of rest. Bodies made of the element earth tend to fall, while bodies made of the element air tend to rise. This may not be satisfying from a modern sensibility, but it was satisfying to many people in the past. Likewise, the sensibilities of future generations might regard today's physics as unsatisfying. In fact many people do right now. ;-) Harry
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
R C Macaulay wrote: Howdy Vorts, Gosh, golly, gee folks, here we go again with the Jews and arabs. This time the wedge is oil. The USA uses oil like toilet paper and everybuddy knows wez intitled to it.. or we think we do. We have enough oil provided we turn off a few lights and live like I we did back in the '30's by riding bicycles. We ain't gonna cuz we are better and smarter than anyone else and besides, we deserve it.. ask any TV advertizing message. If we are getting into a middle east debate over some long term bar room argument, this feud over land goes back awhile. Ask any Palestinian lounging on the corner in Gaza and he'll correct you by stating .. don't call me a Pallestinian.. call me a Canaanite cuz we wuz here first. The fact that Abraham came to Canaan and bought his land fair and square ain't got nuthin to do with it. OK now this is 3500 year old history, so I hope we can discuss it in a little more depth while leaving our guns safely out of sight under the table, eh? To be blunt, if you want to do a title search on the land of Israel you need to start with Joshua, not Genesis, and the stories aren't very similar. Sure Abram (later Abraham) and his gang paid for the land they settled on when they *first* came to Canaan. But then the weather turned poor and they didn't want to just tough it out, so they pulled up stakes and moved to Egypt, apparently preferring to live under the thumb of the predecessors of Nasser to trying to scratch out a living in land which showed every sign of turning into a desert. Their neighbors, in contrast, apparently stayed put and just made do. Since the not-yet-Israelites just left without so much as handing the keys to the local Century -14 broker to put the homestead on the market, after a couple centuries went by their former property was legally considered abandoned and was taken over by the local government, in the form of the Philistines. (Under current U.S. law this typically happens a lot faster; property is considered abandoned after about 3 to 5 years depending on the state.) Subsequently, after deciding they didn't like living with Egyptians so much any more, Abraham's descendants moved back to Canaan. And this time they most certainly didn't buy back their abandoned land fair and square: Instead, under the warlord Joshua's ungentle patronage, they barged in, all guns (and trumpets) blazing, and nuked everybody and everything in their path. The rather astonishing destruction of the fortified city of Jericho is merely among the first of their exploits. This didn't endear the nascent nation of Israel to the locals, and doesn't seem to put the possession of the land of Israel on the firmest of legal footings. Oh, granted, God said it was theirs, so under God's law it's clear cut, but under international law it's rather hazier, I think; unlike God's law, international law doesn't technically recognize the principle of might makes right. But this is hopelessly off topic so I think I'd best shut up at this point. His kinfolks later bought up most of Manhatten Island if you notice who's name's on the title to you apartment. but.. that's why they call it political science at Yale.. where all the really smart US presidents learn how to practice their profession.. Now if we can just find out what their profession is.. Richard
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
Good question, Steven. If this method is as good as claimed, it is the best and only method I believe that can result in a commercial device. Earlier use of palladium black by Arata showed similar behavior. Using this material, McKubre (SRI) replicated the claimed heat production and produced some tritium in the process. As a result, the method looks very promising. But, the difference between a scientific experiment and a practical device is always vast and littered with pitfalls. Ed OrionWorks wrote: I have found the exchange of opinions expressed so far educational. Let me pose a question I don't think has been explored adequately Does anyone here imagine it conceivable that Arata's experiment points to a practical way of scaling up the generation of heat to commercial and industrial levels? Granted this might be a difficult question to answer under the current circumstances since I gather Arata has yet to clarify a number of critical components. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
I read somewhere in his next experiment he plans on boiling water to make a cup of tea. Harry On 9/6/2008 2:37 PM, OrionWorks wrote: I have found the exchange of opinions expressed so far educational. Let me pose a question I don't think has been explored adequately Does anyone here imagine it conceivable that Arata's experiment points to a practical way of scaling up the generation of heat to commercial and industrial levels? Granted this might be a difficult question to answer under the current circumstances since I gather Arata has yet to clarify a number of critical components. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics
Harry Veeder wrote: On 4/6/2008 10:53 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Harry Veeder wrote: I am calling your bluff. ;-) Not a bluff, though it involves some fuzzy reasoning. The difference between a proof and an explanation has bugged me since junior high, when I found out that most mathematical facts are proven without ever being explained. As I said before, a model may predict what's going to happen but will never tell you why. Using a model is a tacit admission that we don't know what the reasons behind things are, or even if there are any such reasons. I would think the _construction_ of a model depends on some a-priori explanations (or stories?) of the world. Not necessarily, though some certainly seem to be. Aether theory is predicated on the notion that there is some kind of aether which carries some kind of vibrations; as such that's a sort of fuzzy explanation (though the details are pretty wild if you stop and think about what sort of material aether must be, keeping in mind the obvious fact that planets and stars plow through the aether with no impediment to their motion, along with the fact that vibrations traveling in any known medium go faster as the medium becomes stiffer and slower as the medium becomes floppier -- and vibrations in the aether travel really wicked fast, so it must be really wicked stiff, which makes those planets cruising through the middle of it all the harder to understand). But to take a contrary example, special relativity postulates no mechanism at all for anything; it's just a proposal that the geometry of space is just like what you get if you assume the distance between any two events is fixed for all observers *if* you measure distance as x^2 - t^2. The justification for it is that it works, with no reference to whether or not it makes sense or explains anything. Another contrary example is Ptolemaic cosmology, which as far as I can see explains nothing, and is really just a mathematical construct. What is the difference between an explanation and a model? You have said something substantive about models, but nothing substantive about explanations, except to say that explanation is not a model. Or is it just an issue of semantics? Maybe it's just semantics, but I actually think it's more a matter of gut feel, and satisfaction level. If you look at the link Terry gave, the author's objection is that physics doesn't say why magnets attract. Well, what would it mean to say why they attract? This is the heart of the issue -- just exactly what is an explanation? In physics it's hard to say, for me, at least, because I don't know of any explanations. As far as I know modern physics has none. It does and it is called mechanics, I can't really agree. We tend to think mechanics explains something because it so neatly matches our experience with stuff, but really it is nothing more than a *description* of what Newton thought things did. A centerpiece of Newtonian mechanics is the law of gravity, which is simply a bald statement that two bodies attract with a force equal to G m_1 m_2 / r^2 with no hint of an explanation -- and what's more, that's a description of action at a distance, with information as to where each body is located being transmitted to the other body in *zero* time, with, again, no proposed mechanism for this information transfer. Newton, as I recall, had misgivings about that (and he was right, of course). More basically, Newton's second law (I think it's the second law -- it's hot has heck here today and my head's full of fuzz as a result) says that sum (dx_i/dt * m_i) must be constant. No reason is given; no mechanism is provided; it is merely a mathematical statement, chosen to match Newton's observation. Of course it turns out that there can be no simple (and correct) mechanism given for either Newtonian gravitation nor the conservation of Newtonian momentum, because both laws turn out to be untrue at the edges -- over very large distances, at very high velocities, they don't work perfectly. So their mechanism, if it were stated, would necessarily be something which doesn't quite apply in all situations. That would tend to make it less than satisfactory as an explanation, I would think. and to ensure mechanical explanations remain dominant and universally applicable they have been revamped by the quantum hypothesis. But again, they're not explanations, at least not as I understand the term. Tell me *why* momentum is conserved -- that would be an explanation. But Newton didn't tell us *why*, he merely told us that it *is* conserved. It's like the following little convsersation: Go to bed NOW! Why? Because I told you to! In math it's easier to see the difference. For example, we can find pi by integrating the arctan function, or by integrating sqrt(1-x^2), both of which are stunningly opaque approaches. We can prove that the area of a circle
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
Edmund Storms wrote: Good question, Steven. If this method is as good as claimed, it is the best and only method I believe that can result in a commercial device. Earlier use of palladium black by Arata showed similar behavior. Using this material, McKubre (SRI) replicated the claimed heat production and produced some tritium in the process. As a result, the method looks very promising. I agree completely. That's why I began the thread with title really astounding. I did not mean that the calorimetry is astounding or that the paper is sublimely well written. It is, in fact, one of the worst papers Arata has published, when you evaluate it strictly by style, organization, choice of words and so on, without reference to the content. Great discoveries are often hidden under muddled prose. This experiment is similar to the previous experiments in many critical ways. The fact that they were confirmed and independently replicated is good reason to think that this experiment is also valid. But, the difference between a scientific experiment and a practical device is always vast and littered with pitfalls. Also true and very important. The pitfalls include technical problems, but more often personality problems. In Arata's case the latter may prove fatal. I am glad there 5 Chinese people involved, including 4 young people who I suppose must be ambitious and who would not be happy to see years of their work thrown away because Arata refuses to work with anyone who does not promise to call this the Arata effect, or for some other bizarre reason. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
I like all that Steven... I do tend to lecture a little (perhaps a lot); just ask my wife... But it doesn't really matter if nobody is paying attention to the content - which is a human condition; we're too busy paying attention to what's going on inside our minds by way of reaction. C'est la vie. I particularly like what you say about looking back in history. This is absolutely correct. And what seems like a big mistake at any given time, can turn out to have wonderful consequences. Of course we don't know that at the time (just figure out what William the Conquerer was thinking as he was conquering)... We're not really in control of outcomes, although we think we are. See what I mean about my tending to lecture? P. - Original Message From: OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 10:17:31 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds From Philip (addressed to Edmund Storms): If you want to have further discussions on this (or Sai Baba, or Reality), you may want to ask Steve K for my email address. It's my understanding that when one joins the Vortex group they must assign a personal email address. Anyone on the vortex email list can privately email anyone who joins the group should they chose to carry on private deliberations. (I certainly have on occasion.) It's only when the vortex messages are subsequently posted to the Eskimo web site archive database that individual email addresses are expunged for security reasons. FWIW, in regards to your offer, if you had addressed me in the manner you just addressed Ed I know I would not be inclined to want to continue private discussions. Granted, Ed did ask you point blank to respond to his query, so you were perfectly within your right to express your opinions. Perhaps it's a matter of personal taste, where your comments stuck me more as a form of a lecture than perhaps was your actual intention. I know from personal experience that I learn very little listening to lectures I did not personally sign up for. It seems to me that if we look far enough back in history we would eventually find that no individual, no nation, is free from guilt. It is my hope that if more of us are willing to acknowledge the fact that we are not immune from our sense of outrage, perhaps enough of us can then step back from the automatic impulses to even the score. I'm convinced there are wise individuals on both sides of the fence who understand this. Unfortunately, emotions that evoke a sense of outrage are just too delicious for most of us to let go of for the moment. Outrage becomes an addiction. It demands to be constantly stoked. I have felt the addiction myself. No one is immune. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.Zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Mark, I'm tired of these people... There's a Jewish guy called Norm Finkelstein who is both a holocaust denier and an Arab terrorist apologist (to say the least). Then there's my favourite, Noam Chomsky. Like they say, if there are ten Jews in a room, you'll get at least eleven opinions. Perhaps this writer should investigate and write about Arab plunder and conquest... but then again that's really dangerous; he could get seriously hurt - even killed. Far safer to write insane stuff about his fellow Jews. No fatwas in Judaism. About 2000 years ago, the best Jewish (I don't think they were called Jews then) fighters assembled in Jerusalem before taking on the Romans in one mother of all battles. Between arriving in Jerusalem and girding up their loins the Jewish fighters were so busy slaughtering each other, that they forgot their true purpose. Go figure. Of course, as we know the Romans won big time and renamed that bit of land Palestine just to rub it in (after the Philistines, the arch-enemy of Israel). The same situation is taking place as we speak. Ideology and ego have replaced common sense, and perhaps outmoded things like honesty and decency... So we get guys writing such stunningly intellectual books... and those who lap up their content. End of lecture P. - Original Message From: Mark S Bilk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 10:32:25 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Here's a good description of the history of Israel and Palestine, by a jewish author: http://takingaimradio.com/hhz/ The Hidden History of Zionism, By Ralph Schoenman On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 09:41:28PM -0600, Edmund Storms wrote: I don't like the situation either, Philip. However, when a nation has the oil we need, it is apparently easy to be nice. If not, we have to pay an even greater price for our principles. This is actually the way the world works these days. In the past, the US called the shots. Increasingly, the oil suppliers and China will call the shots. Get use to the idea, because it is only going to get worse. You should ask why such a situation was allowed to develop. These situations do not occur by accident. As for Israel, it is hard to choose words carefully and still be honest. The situation is not based on scientific logic, but on faith and religious belief. A significant number of people in the US believe that Israel was given to the Jews by God. These people have significant influence and they vote. Therefore, any criticism about how Israel behaves is unpopular, being called anti-Semitism. As a result, Israel can cause the US to do things that would otherwise be impossible if demanded by another country. History shows why is is true. Creation of the country displaced millions of Palestinians. These people were forced from their homes and land. This is a fact. As a result, these people and people in the surrounding countries have been and continue to be angry at the unfairness of this, regardless of the justification based on God's will. Nevertheless, the US has sided heavily in favor of Israel. Because the Palestinians do not have modern weapons, as supplied by the US to Israel, they fight with the only tools they have. The US labels this method terrorism, which it is. As a result, the situation is made more one sided and desperate. No body wins and the US is dragged deeper into the conflict. No matter which side you favor, this is the situation. The policies used in the past have clearly not worked no matter how correct you think them to be. The question is, what do you suggest we do now? Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: I personally don't like the idea of playing nice with people whose greatest wish is to cut my throat. The leader of the greatest and most benevolent country in the world (I didn't say it was perfect) has to make nice to people who by their teachings precipitated the 9/11 disaster, and who incidentally benefit greatly in many ways, many of them most unpleasant, from current oil prices? Just a little strange to me. I'm no politician, but I do respect - as the Soviets did - a nation whose leaders make it perfectly clear what would happen if America were to be jeopardized. Not so with the Saudis. We make nice. As for supporting everything the Israeli government wants. Can you be a little more definitive? You say, ... the Bush gang is so incompetent and so under the domination of Israel... Perhaps you could reword this so that we could all understand (if we're interested, which I'm sure most people here aren't) exactly what this tiny nation in this tiny sliver of land (about the size of New Jersey) is using to dominate the most powerful nation in the world. I guess it could be Viagra... Whatever it is, I'd like some of this domination juice. Please choose you words a little more carefully if you can't offer scientific
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: 18 J / 6E21 atoms of D = 187 eV / D atom. This is way beyond ordinary chemistry, but does fall right in the range of Mills energies. Please note however, that they deliberately quench the reaction after 100 hours. If they did not do that, there is no telling how much longer it would continue. In other words, this is not the upper limit. Based on other experiments and the assumption that this is fusion (which I think is 99.99% sure) it might go on for years. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
I am an Arab. Hath not an Arab eyes? Hath not an Arab hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Jew? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? Harry On 9/6/2008 5:21 PM, PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: The same situation is taking place as we speak. Ideology and ego have replaced common sense, and perhaps outmoded things like honesty and decency... So we get guys writing such stunningly intellectual books... and those who lap up their content. End of lecture P.
Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding
I wrote: This experiment is similar to the previous experiments in many critical ways. The fact that they were confirmed and independently replicated is good reason to think that this experiment is also valid. Please note I said good reason not a slam dunk. Nothing, Nothing, NOTHING is sure until it is widely replicated. Then it becomes as sure as sure can be. The material that we presume Arata uses is described in detail by Yamaura et al. Arata Zhang are co-authors so I guess it is the same stuff. I hope to get permission to upload this paper, but if you want to know all about it right now, e-mail me for a copy. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Will S. wrote: . . . healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Jew? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? You left out the best line! The last line, forever pertinent in the Middle East: And if you wrong us, shall we not revenge? - Jed
[Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
I seem not to have received that posting by Robin you quote, was it sent to the list? I gather 180,000 J is 1W times 3600 s per hour times 50 hours (and not 100 hours), but where does that figure of 6E21 atoms of D come from? If confirmed, the figure of 187 eV (18J/6E+21/1.6E-19 = 187) per D atom is indeed far beyond chemical reaction heat release. For comparison, D2(g) + 0.5 O2(g) - D2O(l) only releases about 1.5 eV per D atom (294 kJ/mol D2O - 294000J/6.02E23/1.6E-19/2 = 1.5 eV per D atom), i.e. two orders of magnitude less. Also I don't recall reading anything about Arata et al deliberately quenching the reaction after 100 hours, didn't they suggest the reaction was poisoned by 4He to explain why heat release didn't last longer? Michel - Original Message - From: Jed Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 1:10 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:RE: Arata's results are really astounding Robin van Spaandonk wrote: 18 J / 6E21 atoms of D = 187 eV / D atom. This is way beyond ordinary chemistry, but does fall right in the range of Mills energies. Please note however, that they deliberately quench the reaction after 100 hours. If they did not do that, there is no telling how much longer it would continue. In other words, this is not the upper limit. Based on other experiments and the assumption that this is fusion (which I think is 99.99% sure) it might go on for years. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Not sure if you read some of the stuff I wrote; better still, read a history book or two. Find out the history of killing and pillage of the Arab. Ask any (Hindu) Indian about the Islamic invasion of India, wherein about 70 million people died. There is a difference between the perennial aggressor and the perennial defender, unless of course, you happen to be a moral equivalence type of person, where victim and aggressor are exactly the same... And - unless you're blind, deaf and dumb - they're still thirsting for your balls - on a plate. And they don't hold back when telling us this. They want a caliphate, wherein you'll be a second-class (at least) citizen. Now of course I'm generalizing, which is never good, but this is what's coming out openly from their leaders. Now if you like what they do and you like people telling you how to worship and whom to worship, and of course, when to worship, then you're their man. Go for it. P. - Original Message From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 8:11:37 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds I am an Arab. Hath not an Arab eyes? Hath not an Arab hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Jew? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? Harry On 9/6/2008 5:21 PM, PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: The same situation is taking place as we speak. Ideology and ego have replaced common sense, and perhaps outmoded things like honesty and decency... So we get guys writing such stunningly intellectual books... and those who lap up their content. End of lecture P.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
You have a point, and personally I don't go for the God gave it to us stuff, because I can't prove it. But I have to ask you if you live in America, and how you feel about the white man coming in and taking over, and, if you feel bad about it - very bad about it - if you've ever considered moving back to the land of your ancestors... assuming your ancestors, for example, didn't come over to the UK with William the Conquerer. That poses new problems. People are where they are because it's where they are, as part of the dream. My approach is, live with it. go out, have a coffee and a bagel (or some nice organic bread) and get on with life. There's room enough for everyone, and everyone can make good, as long as they work for everything, and don't try to plunder what the next man has. You should read the Mahabharata; about the Pandavas and the Kauravas... Fun stuff (apologies to Richard). P. - Original Message From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 3:57:38 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds R C Macaulay wrote: Howdy Vorts, Gosh, golly, gee folks, here we go again with the Jews and arabs. This time the wedge is oil. The USA uses oil like toilet paper and everybuddy knows wez intitled to it.. or we think we do. We have enough oil provided we turn off a few lights and live like I we did back in the '30's by riding bicycles. We ain't gonna cuz we are better and smarter than anyone else and besides, we deserve it.. ask any TV advertizing message. If we are getting into a middle east debate over some long term bar room argument, this feud over land goes back awhile. Ask any Palestinian lounging on the corner in Gaza and he'll correct you by stating .. don't call me a Pallestinian.. call me a Canaanite cuz we wuz here first. The fact that Abraham came to Canaan and bought his land fair and square ain't got nuthin to do with it. OK now this is 3500 year old history, so I hope we can discuss it in a little more depth while leaving our guns safely out of sight under the table, eh? To be blunt, if you want to do a title search on the land of Israel you need to start with Joshua, not Genesis, and the stories aren't very similar. Sure Abram (later Abraham) and his gang paid for the land they settled on when they *first* came to Canaan. But then the weather turned poor and they didn't want to just tough it out, so they pulled up stakes and moved to Egypt, apparently preferring to live under the thumb of the predecessors of Nasser to trying to scratch out a living in land which showed every sign of turning into a desert. Their neighbors, in contrast, apparently stayed put and just made do. Since the not-yet-Israelites just left without so much as handing the keys to the local Century -14 broker to put the homestead on the market, after a couple centuries went by their former property was legally considered abandoned and was taken over by the local government, in the form of the Philistines. (Under current U.S. law this typically happens a lot faster; property is considered abandoned after about 3 to 5 years depending on the state.) Subsequently, after deciding they didn't like living with Egyptians so much any more, Abraham's descendants moved back to Canaan. And this time they most certainly didn't buy back their abandoned land fair and square: Instead, under the warlord Joshua's ungentle patronage, they barged in, all guns (and trumpets) blazing, and nuked everybody and everything in their path. The rather astonishing destruction of the fortified city of Jericho is merely among the first of their exploits. This didn't endear the nascent nation of Israel to the locals, and doesn't seem to put the possession of the land of Israel on the firmest of legal footings. Oh, granted, God said it was theirs, so under God's law it's clear cut, but under international law it's rather hazier, I think; unlike God's law, international law doesn't technically recognize the principle of might makes right. But this is hopelessly off topic so I think I'd best shut up at this point. His kinfolks later bought up most of Manhatten Island if you notice who's name's on the title to you apartment. but.. that's why they call it political science at Yale.. where all the really smart US presidents learn how to practice their profession.. Now if we can just find out what their profession is.. Richard
[Vo]:Re: The Lightning: Electric car with wheel motors, nano-titanate batteries
It seems a very impressive combination indeed. Those astounding AltairNano nano titanate betteries keep coming up here, hopefully we will see them soon in an actual product. Michel - Original Message - From: Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 5:13 PM Subject: [Vo]:The Lightning: Electric car with wheel motors, nano-titanate batteries I hadn't heard of this one until I stumbled across it while looking for something else in Google. It's a high end niche car but none the less I thought it was interesting. Wheel motors, used on all electric locomotives, have, as far as I know, never been used on a car (in recent memory, at least). Apparently the reason is weight at the wheels. The Lightning, which isn't /quite/ on the market yet, is supposed to use a new design of wheel motor with far better power/weight ratio than previous engines. Of course it has electric 4wd as a result, and along with nano titanate batteries from Altair Nano, it achieves amazing performance and astonishing range and breathtakingly short recharge times and all that good stuff electric sportscar manufacturers like to talk about, for a price of less than 200,000 pounds Sterling. Here's a story on it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2007/09/01/nosplit/mflight01.xml http://tinyurl.com/2vun4k
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Philip sez: ... People are where they are because it's where they are, as part of the dream. My approach is, live with it. go out, have a coffee and a bagel (or some nice organic bread) and get on with life. There's room enough for everyone, and everyone can make good, as long as they work for everything, and don't try to plunder what the next man has. This strikes me as incredibly naive. And yet, it is precisely how I try to live my life each day. I often feel like I'm not very good at it - living up to this interpretation of the Golden Rule. It is nevertheless a worthy goal to strive towards each day, one day at a time. Perhaps in ten or twelve more lifetimes I'll get the hang of it. ;-) Baklava, anyone? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: The Lightning: Electric car with wheel motors, nano-titanate batteries
I have seen a video about a Japanese motor-in-wheel electric car. Eight wheels to get the necessary total power. Powered by a fortune in lithium ion batteries. Outperformed top of the line gasoline race cars. This was several years ago. I don't know if the motor technology is better now [very custom motor design] but the battery technology is getting incrementally better. Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Pay attention to the emerging news from Blacklight Power. An existing cell delivers 50 kW peak power and 753 kJ from a 5 gm charge of fuel. That energy will vaporize 8 oz. of water. An energy balance estimate from Mills says that a 1 gigawatt power plant would consume 1 liter H20 per second. Much, much work remains to be done to achieve that, but the time of the Oil Gang will pass. This will not solve the problems of human nature but the path of human future can be much better. Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics
Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Mon, 09 Jun 2008 16:51:17 -0400: Hi, [snip] Aether theory is predicated on the notion that there is some kind of aether which carries some kind of vibrations; as such that's a sort of fuzzy explanation (though the details are pretty wild if you stop and think about what sort of material aether must be, keeping in mind the obvious fact that planets and stars plow through the aether with no impediment to their motion, along with the fact that vibrations traveling in any known medium go faster as the medium becomes stiffer and slower as the medium becomes floppier -- and vibrations in the aether travel really wicked fast, so it must be really wicked stiff, which makes those planets cruising through the middle of it all the harder to understand). Perhaps it becomes easier to accept, if it is not a matter of ploughing *through* the medium. Consider how a wave passes through water. The energy of the wave is passed from molecule to molecule, but the molecules themselves don't actually go very far. Maybe the aether works the same way. Particles (e.g. electrons) are then *patterns* in the aether. The pattern can move, simply through the transfer of energy, without the aether itself moving. But then it seems like this would lead to an issue with aether dragging, doesn't it? Classical aether theories can't be reconciled with the results of the Fizeau, Michelson-Morley, and Sagnac experiments unless there is partial or complete dragging of the aether along with the Earth. If the Earth itself is just a pattern traveling through the aether that doesn't seem like a very obvious thing to have happen. Alternatively one could assume the Earth is a traveling pattern in a Lorentz aether, which avoids the need for dragging, but the Lorentz ether theory loses a lot of the pleasingly sensible feel of classical aether. It leads to the same mathematical model as special relativity, which implies, in particular, that, while there is a distinguished aether rest frame in Lorentz ether theory, it cannot be detected in any way. There is no way at all to tell how fast you're moving relative to the aether, because all experiments produce the same results regardless of your absolute velocity; consequently you can't tell if you're stationary with respect to the aether or not. In fact, in so-called LET, the aether cannot be detected in any way; the theory is, in a word, indistinguishable from special relativity. This leaves one in a somewhat uncomfortable position, which is that of taking the existence of the central object in the theory entirely on faith. *If* the aether itself is incompressible, then compression waves travel at infinite velocity, however transverse waves are probably limited to the velocity of light. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
From Mike Carrell: Pay attention to the emerging news from Blacklight Power. An existing cell delivers 50 kW peak power and 753 kJ from a 5 gm charge of fuel. That energy will vaporize 8 oz. of water. An energy balance estimate from Mills says that a 1 gigawatt power plant would consume 1 liter H20 per second. Much, much work remains to be done to achieve that, but the time of the Oil Gang will pass. This will not solve the problems of human nature but the path of human future can be much better. Mike Carrell Sounds encouraging. I've got to ask the following questions cuz you known damned well know someone (or some concerned citizen's group) eventually will. The questions being: Goodness gracious me! How much of our planet's finite water resources are we permanently destroying in order to feed our global civilization's thirst for gigawatts of power? Won't our precious planet eventually shrivel up like a dried prune - turn into a vast Dune-like desert planet, or like Mars? And here's another gem I'm sure someone will eventually fret over: All that extra Oxygen that's being liberated into the atmosphere. Won't objects like cars and steel buildings begin to rust more quickly? Won't we experience deadlier forest fires due to the increased oxygen content that is likely to be belched into our atmosphere? You just KNOW someone is NOT going to be happy! Card carrying luddites are going to have a field day with this. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Exactly. P. - Original Message From: OrionWorks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 9:05:49 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Philip sez: ... People are where they are because it's where they are, as part of the dream. My approach is, live with it. go out, have a coffee and a bagel (or some nice organic bread) and get on with life. There's room enough for everyone, and everyone can make good, as long as they work for everything, and don't try to plunder what the next man has. This strikes me as incredibly naive. And yet, it is precisely how I try to live my life each day. I often feel like I'm not very good at it - living up to this interpretation of the Golden Rule. It is nevertheless a worthy goal to strive towards each day, one day at a time. Perhaps in ten or twelve more lifetimes I'll get the hang of it. ;-) Baklava, anyone? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
On 9/6/2008 7:29 PM, PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Not sure if you read some of the stuff I wrote; better still, read a history book or two. Find out the history of killing and pillage of the Arab. Ask any (Hindu) Indian about the Islamic invasion of India, wherein about 70 million people died. There is a difference between the perennial aggressor and the perennial defender, unless of course, you happen to be a moral equivalence type of person, where victim and aggressor are exactly the same... Indeed they aren't the same...but the state of Israel also became an aggressor when it began occupying and building settlements in violation of UN resolutions. And - unless you're blind, deaf and dumb - they're still thirsting for your balls - on a plate. And they don't hold back when telling us this. They want a caliphate, wherein you'll be a second-class (at least) citizen. Yes such rhetoric is alarming, but this is not 1938 and they are not a military superpower like Germany was in 1938. I even heard a guy on TV Ontario's news show _The Agenda_ assert that the real target of is the Vatican so it should be the Italians who should take out Iranian nuclear facilities. He says you don't have to take his word for it, as it is all written into their religion. Now of course I'm generalizing, which is never good, but this is what's coming out openly from their leaders. Now if you like what they do and you like people telling you how to worship and whom to worship, and of course, when to worship, then you're their man. Go for it. Of course I don't go for it. Harry - Original Message From: Harry Veeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Monday, June 9, 2008 8:11:37 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds I am an Arab. Hath not an Arab eyes? Hath not an Arab hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions; fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same winter and summer as a Jew? If you prick us do we not bleed? If you tickle us do we not laugh? If you poison us do we not die? Harry On 9/6/2008 5:21 PM, PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: The same situation is taking place as we speak. Ideology and ego have replaced common sense, and perhaps outmoded things like honesty and decency... So we get guys writing such stunningly intellectual books... and those who lap up their content. End of lecture P.
Re: [Vo]:Three Words That Could Overthrow Physics
In reply to Stephen A. Lawrence's message of Mon, 09 Jun 2008 21:36:23 -0400: Hi Stephen, [snip] Perhaps it becomes easier to accept, if it is not a matter of ploughing *through* the medium. Consider how a wave passes through water. The energy of the wave is passed from molecule to molecule, but the molecules themselves don't actually go very far. Maybe the aether works the same way. Particles (e.g. electrons) are then *patterns* in the aether. The pattern can move, simply through the transfer of energy, without the aether itself moving. But then it seems like this would lead to an issue with aether dragging, doesn't it? Classical aether theories can't be reconciled with the results of the Fizeau, Michelson-Morley, and Sagnac experiments unless there is partial or complete dragging of the aether along with the Earth. If the Earth itself is just a pattern traveling through the aether that doesn't seem like a very obvious thing to have happen. [snip] I don't see why there can't be some aether dragging, after all, waves do move molecules to some extent, just not much. Perhaps this depends on the extent to which the aether is frictionless? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
