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 I've heard that if you add Brown's Gas to the intake air you can double the fuel efficiency. Coincident with this you have to trick the computer into reading the input of the oxygen (thermal) sensor as having a suitable heat. This is, of course against the law. Is this the Oil Gang? is it c//onspiracy or coincidence? --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
[Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
Robin, (replying on-list, in case you forgot to change the address line or are unable to get through again) 0.04g D2 is 0.04g D, and D is 2g/mol, so that should be 0.04/2 mol * 6E23 atoms/mol = 1.2 E22 atoms D, which makes the energy per atom half what you said, but since the actual time is really 100 hours (~4 days) i.e. the total energy is really twice what you said, the two errors conveniently cancel each other, and the observed heat is indeed 187 eV / absorbed D atom (assuming Arata et al made no error in their 1W estimation). However it is probable that only a tiny part of the absorbed D is consumed in the putative anomalous reactions (in such experiments one retrieves roughly the same amount of D2 at deloading than was put in at loading doesn't one?), in which case nuclear type energies of the order of MeVs per _reacting_ D are more likely than Mills energies of the order of 100s of eV per reacting D. Michel - Original Message - From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:39 AM Subject: Re: Arata's results are really astounding In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:26:03 +0200: Hi Michel, See below. Note however that the assumption is that only the D actually in the metal reacts. If it's being constantly replaced, then the energy / atom would be commensurately less. [snip] It seems you are getting through again Robin, I saw your answer to Stephen. So where does the 6E21 figure come from? In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:25:29 -0400: Hi, [snip] 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. [snip] 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.) [snip] 10 * 300 mins = 3000 mins @ 1 W = 18 J. 25% of 7 gm = 1.75 gm. 2.2% of this is 0.04 gm D2. 0.04 gm D2 = 6E21 atoms of D. 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. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk - Original Message - From: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: William Beaty [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:26 AM Subject: Re: Arata's results are really astounding Always the same recurrent eskimo.com blacklisting problem I guess, the last I heard of Bill -whom I CC- he was considering moving the list to Google or Yahoo (Bill, if you choose GG I can assist in managing the list, I have some experience with it) It seems you are getting through again Robin, I saw your answer to Stephen. So where does the 6E21 figure come from? Cheers Michel - Original Message - From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 4:55 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 10 Jun 2008 02:24:14 +0200: Hi Michel, [snip] 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 The list still isn't accepting my emails. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant. The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Howdy Thomas, Don't know. Doubt any complex conspiracies are developing in Wash DC other than a regime is passing and the players in the great game are scrambling as new players form behind the curtain for the next act in the drama. Beyond gridlock could be the theme and the music a takeoff of seems I've heard that song before, it's from an old familar score. Richard Thomas wrote, Is this the Oil Gang? is it c//onspiracy or coincidence?
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
OrionWorks wrote: 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. ;-) Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way; there isn't any practice effect among incarnated beings. Memory is organic, mediated by the hippocampus and related brain hardware. Consequently at the end of your life, you'll leave that all behind; in your next life you won't remember anything about Steve Johnson, and, considering how outnumbered humans are among the sentient creatures, chances are you won't even remember anything about what it's like to be human. You'll just have to start over from scratch, and make the best of it as a gerbil or whatever your consciousness happens to be stuck in next time around. How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. Baklava, anyone? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
--- Michel Jullian wrote: However it is probable that only a tiny part of the absorbed D is consumed in the putative anomalous reactions (in such experiments one retrieves roughly the same amount of D2 at deloading than was put in at loading doesn't one?), in which case nuclear type energies of the order of MeVs per _reacting_ D are more likely than Mills energies of the order of 100s of eV per reacting D. Where are the gammas then? Two things worth mentioning, once again. Fortunately they do explain everything elegantly to those with a fully open mind. That does not make them correct and none of us would not be here if we did not already have open-minds. So the final answer may not be available yet. Michel's more likely standard would indeed seem to be bolstered by the fact that helium is produced, and moreover, it is produced roughly commensurate with the excess energy. End of story? Perhaps with the Chubb crutch, but possibly not. The reaction is essentially gamma-less, and you cannot sweep that glaring inconsistency under the table. IOW even if you explain away one miracle convincingly, but only by means of a second even more substantial miracle- you should expect skepticism, and you will get plenty of it. ERGO- at least it should be noted that there is an equally viable alternative explanation, with real evidence, which encompasses both Mills (err... Mills-lite) and LENR as a single modality. IOW it only depends on one-and-a-half linked miracles instead of two ;-) This view suggests that the cross-section for fusion and the resultant QM probability is enhanced greatly (perhaps up to 7 orders of magnitude) by redundant ground-states, and the corresponding shrinkage. This is called Mills-lite instead of Millsean, since the redundant shrunken ground-state can be (and probably is: temporary, and not permanent). This is also in keeping with Mills experiments, where lots of UV is seen there, but where water-bath calorimetry can find only a COP of less than 2 when the ion energy suggests it should be 40-100. This kind of shrinkage provides much or the excess energy over time, but in small doses of UV radiation - which elegantly answers the skeptics question of why there are no gammas --- (yet without having to result to Chubb's magic-phonon invention, for which there is zero evidence in the literature). In contrast there are at least 25 articles and hundreds of experiments in the literature of Balmer line broadening in situations which are similar to LENR, and a few of those experiments are arguably independent. That in contrast to *zero* actual real evidence for Chubb magic-phonons. The rest of the excess energy in LENR would be provided by the actual fusion itself but it is fusion of the (now lower entropy level) reactants. Since most of the expected enthalpy of fusion has already been released over time, and dissipated by sequential shrinkage and reinflation, then there is no gamma - from the final activity which ends the sequence. The actual final fusion, in QM terms (in this hypothesis) is as more the result of energy having been depleted (past a local threshold) as it is a cause of the original excess heat. I understand that this is an extreme minority viewpoint but keep bringing it up as sooner or later, it should possess enough explanatory logic to grab a foothold, even in the face of whatever professional jealousies may have been involved historically with Randell Mills (especially since he only got things half-right) Jones
[Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
Aren't gammas a hotfusionomorphic view of fusion? The energy may be released in some other way in the particular environment. Mills' hydrinos may not be needed either, after all all that's required is a _temporary_ lowering of the Coulomb barrier, as in Horace's deflation fusion hypothesis (kind of short lived hydrinos if I understand correctly), or as in DIESECF. Michel - Original Message - From: Jones Beene [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 3:19 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding --- Michel Jullian wrote: However it is probable that only a tiny part of the absorbed D is consumed in the putative anomalous reactions (in such experiments one retrieves roughly the same amount of D2 at deloading than was put in at loading doesn't one?), in which case nuclear type energies of the order of MeVs per _reacting_ D are more likely than Mills energies of the order of 100s of eV per reacting D. Where are the gammas then? Two things worth mentioning, once again. Fortunately they do explain everything elegantly to those with a fully open mind. That does not make them correct and none of us would not be here if we did not already have open-minds. So the final answer may not be available yet. Michel's more likely standard would indeed seem to be bolstered by the fact that helium is produced, and moreover, it is produced roughly commensurate with the excess energy. End of story? Perhaps with the Chubb crutch, but possibly not. The reaction is essentially gamma-less, and you cannot sweep that glaring inconsistency under the table. IOW even if you explain away one miracle convincingly, but only by means of a second even more substantial miracle- you should expect skepticism, and you will get plenty of it. ERGO- at least it should be noted that there is an equally viable alternative explanation, with real evidence, which encompasses both Mills (err... Mills-lite) and LENR as a single modality. IOW it only depends on one-and-a-half linked miracles instead of two ;-) This view suggests that the cross-section for fusion and the resultant QM probability is enhanced greatly (perhaps up to 7 orders of magnitude) by redundant ground-states, and the corresponding shrinkage. This is called Mills-lite instead of Millsean, since the redundant shrunken ground-state can be (and probably is: temporary, and not permanent). This is also in keeping with Mills experiments, where lots of UV is seen there, but where water-bath calorimetry can find only a COP of less than 2 when the ion energy suggests it should be 40-100. This kind of shrinkage provides much or the excess energy over time, but in small doses of UV radiation - which elegantly answers the skeptics question of why there are no gammas --- (yet without having to result to Chubb's magic-phonon invention, for which there is zero evidence in the literature). In contrast there are at least 25 articles and hundreds of experiments in the literature of Balmer line broadening in situations which are similar to LENR, and a few of those experiments are arguably independent. That in contrast to *zero* actual real evidence for Chubb magic-phonons. The rest of the excess energy in LENR would be provided by the actual fusion itself but it is fusion of the (now lower entropy level) reactants. Since most of the expected enthalpy of fusion has already been released over time, and dissipated by sequential shrinkage and reinflation, then there is no gamma - from the final activity which ends the sequence. The actual final fusion, in QM terms (in this hypothesis) is as more the result of energy having been depleted (past a local threshold) as it is a cause of the original excess heat. I understand that this is an extreme minority viewpoint but keep bringing it up as sooner or later, it should possess enough explanatory logic to grab a foothold, even in the face of whatever professional jealousies may have been involved historically with Randell Mills (especially since he only got things half-right) Jones
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. I suggest you read the books by Dr. Ian Stevenson (MD). Prof. Stevenson spent his career at the University of Virginia investigating reincarnation using a scientific approach. Naturally, his extensive investigation has been largely ignored because, as you point out, it defies physical and conventional understanding. Nevertheless, evidence exists for past-life memories, especially in children. This life might not be a waste after all. Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: 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. ;-) Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way; there isn't any practice effect among incarnated beings. Memory is organic, mediated by the hippocampus and related brain hardware. Consequently at the end of your life, you'll leave that all behind; in your next life you won't remember anything about Steve Johnson, and, considering how outnumbered humans are among the sentient creatures, chances are you won't even remember anything about what it's like to be human. You'll just have to start over from scratch, and make the best of it as a gerbil or whatever your consciousness happens to be stuck in next time around. How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. 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
Yes, the Eliica. Quite a monster: http://youtube.com/watch?v=L7zHcvDPxYU Here's another, more humble application: http://www.csiro.au/multimedia/ppf32.html Terry On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 8:09 PM, Mike Carrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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
Stephen sez: Perhaps in ten or twelve more lifetimes I'll get the hang of it. ;-) Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way; there isn't any practice effect among incarnated beings. Memory is organic, mediated by the hippocampus and related brain hardware. Consequently at the end of your life, you'll leave that all behind; in your next life you won't remember anything about Steve Johnson, and, considering how outnumbered humans are among the sentient creatures, chances are you won't even remember anything about what it's like to be human. You'll just have to start over from scratch, and make the best of it as a gerbil or whatever your consciousness happens to be stuck in next time around. How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. Hey! Don't disrespect all my past gerbil friendships! ;-) IMO, I'm not sure the essence of what is behind memory is organic. I suspect many NewAgers would counter this POV with the premise that if we all truly left behind all of our memories each time we died none of us would have progressed past the intelligence of the precursor to anaerobic bacterium. There are plenty of documented accounts of individuals who have memories of times past. Even Carl Sagan expressed his suspicions. As for me, and IMHO, the essence of growth is not to remember who or what one's name used to be, or where one might have lived, what one's social status was, or whether one was male or female. All that is trivial fluff that only has superficial significance during our very temporary life spans. Memory as I interpret it is that we learn the essence of what works and what doesn't. As played out in a basic analogy: I kill you. Next time around you kill me... well, ok, we've both done that now, maybe there's a better way to interact with each other... What can we try next? Maybe we can eventually end up actually liking each other precisely because we are so different from each other. Who wants to remember all that drama time after time. No wonder most of us don't. (Emphasis on the word: most.) I'd rather start out fresh with the illusion of a clean slate. I did like our final argument: How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. Beats me too! I suspect one of the reasons I come here is to be constantly confronted with unexplained mysteries. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
--- Michel Jullian wrote: Aren't gammas a hotfusionomorphic view of fusion? Rightly or wrongly, that is the only view of fusion which is accepted by physics, and it can accommodate all of LENR when properly (re)interpreted. If you do not need to invent a new model from the ground up, then why do it? Cold fusion can be verbalized most cogently as a QM version of hot fusion with an increased statistical probability and a decreased intensity (time-based) energy release. That would be as opposed to a brand new kind of fusion. Is that merely a semantics argument? You can be your own judge of that, but the distinction is important for some observers. IOW there is presently NO other internally consistent view of LENR except as based directly on prior hot fusion understanding, but which is modified to the *minimum possible extent* to account for the experimental findings and differences which are now proved in dozens of labs. A brand new kind of fusion is NOT required IMHO. The energy may be released in some other way in the particular environment. Yes, by ultraviolet emission ;-) Once again - why invent a brand new controversial way to release energy via phonons - simply to justify a *real* QM reaction, which itself is NOT necessarily controversial (except in enhanced statistical probability) and except in the way you have invented to describe it ! Mills' hydrinos may not be needed either, Not exactly- but that is why I called the reactant Mills-lite after all all that's required is a _temporary_ lowering of the Coulomb barrier, as in Horace's deflation fusion hypothesis ... which is essentially the same thing, but many in the LENR camp have never given RM any credit for this at all. I don't think it is unfair to mention that Horace is on record in the past as being anti-Mills. All that I am doing is giving some attribution to Mills large and important body of work going back to 1990 - since he is, if not the first proponent of what can be called extended ground-state redundancy at least the most vocal proponent of it, and he has clothed it in a lot of convincing experiment (which he may have misinterpreted). (kind of short lived hydrinos if I understand correctly) Mills considers the hydrino to be stable- but that may be the part he got wrong. Or partly wrong if most are unstable and immediately reinflate. Mills even claims to have captured them ; and has pictures on his site of this: LOL as if a picture were proof. Only problem is he sent out dozens of samples to MRI XPS and NMR specialists and not a single one will independently confirm his claim. When contacted indpendently - even Mills best supporter has hedged. Eric Kreig, no matter what you may think of him, has tried to verify Mills by actually tracking down the people involved. QUOTE: I got through to Alfred Miller of Lehigh university He has done XPS studies on samples Mills gave him. He's seen interesting things that are not easily explained - but is very clear that it is still inconclusive. He doesn't poo poo this stuff out of hand, but I gather that he is not convinced the laws of physics must be rewritten either I can't really conclude anything significant from his data. It doesn't support Mills - but it doesn't prove him a fraud either. IOW Mills best independent proof of a stable hydrino may not support that conclusion. It is inconclusive. Why should we not be free to modify Mills claims? But also- why should we not give Mills the credit he deserves, even if he did not get it 100% correct? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Edmund Storms wrote: Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. True, it's a big one; it's based on the small amount I've read about brain science plus some major guesses. So far, as we continue to learn more about brain function, everything seems to be explainable in terms of the actual physical brain structures. Simulating or mapping an entire human brain is still 'way beyond anything anyone can do at this time, but simpler brains have been mapped and simulated, and effects caused by the ghost in the machine haven't turned up. That /suggests/ that the stuff which a brain has learned, and which its owner can remember, does indeed come from interactions with the outside world, through the apparent physical pathways rather than through any alleged extraphysical path. Supporting this view are impromptu studies of people whose interaction with the external world is limited. The most dramatic was the classic (and accidental) experiment on H.M. (hope I got the initials right) in bilateral hippocampectomy which showed pretty conclusively -- and rather horribly -- that additions to your memory are mediated by the hippocampus and do require that physical structure to take place. Remove the physical switching center and further additions to memory are impossible. Sorry, I couldn't scare up a good link on this one just now. Summary, for those who haven't heard of this, based on my somewhat hazy memories from long ago when I first learned of this case: The patient, H.M., had some problem or other (seizures, depression, something someone thought could be cured using a knife) and had the bad luck to encounter a surgeon who speculated that a bilateral hippocampectomy was just the ticket to cure him. Well, as I got the story, the surgery did indeed cure the condition, but it also made it impossible for H.M. to learn anything new, ever again. From that day forward, every day he awoke was, to him, the day after the operation ... decades later, it was still the day after the operation for him. Lucky for him, he was optimistic about the surgery and awoke in good spirits afterwards, because he repeated the experience many, many times. His short term memory was more or less OK, by the way -- it was migration of memories from short term storage to long term storage that was blocked. (After a number of years had gone by, it was observed that H.M. became agitated upon looking in a mirror -- the aged face looking back at him wasn't at all what he expected to see.) Anyhow what all this suggests to me, as I already said, is that the contents of our memory are based on the physical brain structures, with those structures being formed using a genetic blueprint overlaid with lots of training; I don't see a place for extraphysical memories to work their way in. But perhaps I'm just being too hard-headed (is that like being solid-brained?). On the other hand, as an aside, it seems to me that a strong argument can be made on probabilistic grounds in favor of reincarnation -- but I won't go into that here, at least not just now. Ironically, if memory is truly physical, then we can never know if reincarnation is fact or just fantasy. (And an interesting argument can be made, again purely on the basis of probability theory with some simple assumptions, that the end of the world is nigh -- and perhaps both arguments are correct, and that plus 3 bucks will get you a ride on a bus. Whatever. At least the end-of-the-world argument can [and will] be tested.) I suggest you read the books by Dr. Ian Stevenson (MD). Prof. Stevenson spent his career at the University of Virginia investigating reincarnation using a scientific approach. Naturally, his extensive investigation has been largely ignored because, as you point out, it defies physical and conventional understanding. Nevertheless, evidence exists for past-life memories, especially in children. This life might not be a waste after all. Thanks; I will take a look at it. If nothing else it has the potential to be more optimistic than the bulk of what I read these days, which sometimes leaves me feeling pretty bummed about the world. Ed
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
Jones Beene wrote: Only problem is he sent out dozens of samples to MRI XPS and NMR specialists and not a single one will independently confirm his claim. When contacted indpendently - even Mills best supporter has hedged. Eric Kreig, no matter what you may think of him, has tried to verify Mills by actually tracking down the people involved. QUOTE: I got through to Alfred Miller of Lehigh university He has done XPS studies on samples Mills gave him. He's seen interesting things that are not easily explained - but is very clear that it is still inconclusive. He doesn't poo poo this stuff out of hand, but I gather that he is not convinced the laws of physics must be rewritten either I can't really conclude anything significant from his data. It doesn't support Mills - but it doesn't prove him a fraud either. Jones, do you have any further information on what interesting but inconclusive results might be? My understanding was that the novel substances were supposed to be something never before seen in a laboratory. So, presumably the recipient would attempt to identify it... and either succeed (in which case the substance wasn't novel) or fail (in which case it apparently was novel, at least in the experience of the particular experimenter). One would think that, in the course of studying it, the person receiving the sample would surely have formed some opinion about what the stuff probably was, beyond white powder with funny diffraction pattern. So, do you know of any information on what Miller (or any other sample recipient) thought Mills had actually sent him, after studying it? IOW Mills best independent proof of a stable hydrino may not support that conclusion. It is inconclusive. Why should we not be free to modify Mills claims? But also- why should we not give Mills the credit he deserves, even if he did not get it 100% correct? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
I think people make a mistake by defining the problem too narrowly. Only those facts or observation that involve physical processes are considered. Everything else is pushed aside as being religion, mysticism, or imagination. Granted, if each metaphysical observation is viewed in isolation, such an approach looks very reasonable. However, if the whole field of such phenomenon is examined, a consistent picture emerges. The psi effects and other extraphysical mental abilities, the observations of ghosts and other such occurrences, reincarnation, and, last but not least, the abilities of certain men such as Sai Baba, all of these well studied and documented effects lead to a significant and logical conclusion. The conclusion is that a reality exists that is superimposed on the physical one we know and love. This reality is detected occasionally by the brain as well as by scientific instruments. In the past, such studies and occurrences have been the red meat of religion, with all of the confusion and superstition this approach provides. I suggest open minded people now have enough information available to them that is not contaminated by the self-serving needs of religion so that they can start to see a new reality. Since we all are interested in the physical reality, I would hope this new one would create at least as much interest and open minded discussion, without religion being involved. After all, long ago mankind moved from using religion to explain the physical reality. Why can't this improved approach be applied to this new reality? Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. True, it's a big one; it's based on the small amount I've read about brain science plus some major guesses. So far, as we continue to learn more about brain function, everything seems to be explainable in terms of the actual physical brain structures. Simulating or mapping an entire human brain is still 'way beyond anything anyone can do at this time, but simpler brains have been mapped and simulated, and effects caused by the ghost in the machine haven't turned up. That /suggests/ that the stuff which a brain has learned, and which its owner can remember, does indeed come from interactions with the outside world, through the apparent physical pathways rather than through any alleged extraphysical path. Supporting this view are impromptu studies of people whose interaction with the external world is limited. The most dramatic was the classic (and accidental) experiment on H.M. (hope I got the initials right) in bilateral hippocampectomy which showed pretty conclusively -- and rather horribly -- that additions to your memory are mediated by the hippocampus and do require that physical structure to take place. Remove the physical switching center and further additions to memory are impossible. Sorry, I couldn't scare up a good link on this one just now. Summary, for those who haven't heard of this, based on my somewhat hazy memories from long ago when I first learned of this case: The patient, H.M., had some problem or other (seizures, depression, something someone thought could be cured using a knife) and had the bad luck to encounter a surgeon who speculated that a bilateral hippocampectomy was just the ticket to cure him. Well, as I got the story, the surgery did indeed cure the condition, but it also made it impossible for H.M. to learn anything new, ever again. From that day forward, every day he awoke was, to him, the day after the operation ... decades later, it was still the day after the operation for him. Lucky for him, he was optimistic about the surgery and awoke in good spirits afterwards, because he repeated the experience many, many times. His short term memory was more or less OK, by the way -- it was migration of memories from short term storage to long term storage that was blocked. (After a number of years had gone by, it was observed that H.M. became agitated upon looking in a mirror -- the aged face looking back at him wasn't at all what he expected to see.) Anyhow what all this suggests to me, as I already said, is that the contents of our memory are based on the physical brain structures, with those structures being formed using a genetic blueprint overlaid with lots of training; I don't see a place for extraphysical memories to work their way in. But perhaps I'm just being too hard-headed (is that like being solid-brained?). On the other hand, as an aside, it seems to me that a strong argument can be made on probabilistic grounds in favor of reincarnation -- but I won't go into that here, at least not just now. Ironically, if memory is truly physical, then we can never know if reincarnation is fact or just fantasy. (And an interesting argument can be made, again purely on the basis of probability theory with
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
On a more personal note, Shephen. I agree, the brain can do some very strange things. Naturally, these are always explained using established physical laws, rather like the approach we experience with cold fusion. But as I get older and more educated about other possibilities, I find I have a self interest in learning what is in store for me after death. Religion provides no answers I can accept, being more confident in the scientific approach. I realize other people find great pleasure in believing what religion claims and would not welcome the possibility that the claims are all just imagination and self promotion. Nevertheless, I always hope there are a few people in the world who share my approach, but apparently not many. Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. True, it's a big one; it's based on the small amount I've read about brain science plus some major guesses. So far, as we continue to learn more about brain function, everything seems to be explainable in terms of the actual physical brain structures. Simulating or mapping an entire human brain is still 'way beyond anything anyone can do at this time, but simpler brains have been mapped and simulated, and effects caused by the ghost in the machine haven't turned up. That /suggests/ that the stuff which a brain has learned, and which its owner can remember, does indeed come from interactions with the outside world, through the apparent physical pathways rather than through any alleged extraphysical path. Supporting this view are impromptu studies of people whose interaction with the external world is limited. The most dramatic was the classic (and accidental) experiment on H.M. (hope I got the initials right) in bilateral hippocampectomy which showed pretty conclusively -- and rather horribly -- that additions to your memory are mediated by the hippocampus and do require that physical structure to take place. Remove the physical switching center and further additions to memory are impossible. Sorry, I couldn't scare up a good link on this one just now. Summary, for those who haven't heard of this, based on my somewhat hazy memories from long ago when I first learned of this case: The patient, H.M., had some problem or other (seizures, depression, something someone thought could be cured using a knife) and had the bad luck to encounter a surgeon who speculated that a bilateral hippocampectomy was just the ticket to cure him. Well, as I got the story, the surgery did indeed cure the condition, but it also made it impossible for H.M. to learn anything new, ever again. From that day forward, every day he awoke was, to him, the day after the operation ... decades later, it was still the day after the operation for him. Lucky for him, he was optimistic about the surgery and awoke in good spirits afterwards, because he repeated the experience many, many times. His short term memory was more or less OK, by the way -- it was migration of memories from short term storage to long term storage that was blocked. (After a number of years had gone by, it was observed that H.M. became agitated upon looking in a mirror -- the aged face looking back at him wasn't at all what he expected to see.) Anyhow what all this suggests to me, as I already said, is that the contents of our memory are based on the physical brain structures, with those structures being formed using a genetic blueprint overlaid with lots of training; I don't see a place for extraphysical memories to work their way in. But perhaps I'm just being too hard-headed (is that like being solid-brained?). On the other hand, as an aside, it seems to me that a strong argument can be made on probabilistic grounds in favor of reincarnation -- but I won't go into that here, at least not just now. Ironically, if memory is truly physical, then we can never know if reincarnation is fact or just fantasy. (And an interesting argument can be made, again purely on the basis of probability theory with some simple assumptions, that the end of the world is nigh -- and perhaps both arguments are correct, and that plus 3 bucks will get you a ride on a bus. Whatever. At least the end-of-the-world argument can [and will] be tested.) I suggest you read the books by Dr. Ian Stevenson (MD). Prof. Stevenson spent his career at the University of Virginia investigating reincarnation using a scientific approach. Naturally, his extensive investigation has been largely ignored because, as you point out, it defies physical and conventional understanding. Nevertheless, evidence exists for past-life memories, especially in children. This life might not be a waste after all. Thanks; I will take a look at it. If nothing else it has the potential to be more optimistic than the bulk of what I read these days, which sometimes
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 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. I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
From Thomas: 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 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. I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. A controversial yet shrewd observation. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. It tells me countries like Israel had better weaponry. What does it tell you? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
You are certainly right Stephen, might does make right and land is always taken by force and retained the victor. We did it to the British, the Indians, and to the Mexicans while feeling very proud of ourselves. However, the situation with Israel is different. Here a higher moral principal is being claimed, i.e. God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? Ed thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 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. I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Apology to all: This is way, way off topic. I won't respond again on anything biblical, or even Middle Eastern, in this thread. (If you want to yell at me about it do it privately and spare the rest of the list.) thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 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. I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. Interesting view you have of international _law_. Taking territory by conquest and holding it by force is a way of doing it which works; that is true. It worked for Rome when they had a Carthage problem, and it worked for Genghis Khan and his sons. Taking power by coup with support of the military and holding it by dint of that same military is an established way of doing that, too. However, both of those approaches are commonly called rule of men rather than rule of law. Neither approach will stand up in court. (Just check out the last stages of General Pinochet's career if you don't know what I mean by court. It's a different word from battlefield.) Last I heard, international law as currently defined didn't recognize the right of a strong country to just barge in and steal land from a weak country, but perhaps we're talking about two different internationals here, eh? Or two different kinds of law? While this concept of the rule of law, in its current form, is pretty modern (and vastly post-dates biblical law, or Sharia law) the basics have been around for at least a few centuries. Didn't you ever wonder why the United States government was always so determined to get treaties signed with various American Indian tribes? They had the Indians outgunned at least 10 to 1, so they didn't really need the treaties; and certainly it wasn't to record real promises, as the government rarely honored the treaties, and typically just replaced them when they grew tired of the terms. However, whether the treaties were signed by free will or deception or coercion or something else, the rulers of the U.S. were well aware that it was important to establish, at least on paper, a legal basis for the existence of the country. Even then they were aware of the issue of international law. Canada neglected that technicality for parts of Ontario and now, a century or two later, there is a tempest brewing as a result. So far the problem has been largely swept under the rug, but I don't think that approach is going to work forever. No doubt the government will eventually manage to defuse the situation, but I expect it's going to take some substantial effort and possibly a good size chunk of cash to fix it permanently. Down in the States the gummint was cleverer and they don't have this problem. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. Are you stating this as a general principle? Do you honestly mean to say the aggressor always loses? Have you read any American history? Have you ever heard of Rome? Granted, Rome eventually fell -- but the western empire lasted several hundred years, and the eastern portion lasted about 1000 years. Justice delayed is justice denied goes the saying, and that's rather a long delay IMHO. If that's your idea of a demonstration that the aggressor subsequently loses the war, well, heck, just wait 'til the heat death of the universe, then you'll see that /everybody/ eventually loses. Have you ever heard of Genghis Khan? Though his empire eventually split into several parts, portions of it persisted for a very long time. Of course he died, which I suppose you could take to mean God disapproved of him. But then most of his contemporaries seem to have died too, including the Christian ones. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. When you say Philistines do you really mean Philistines or is it just your quaint way of saying Arabs? The modern Arabs lost to the Israelis repeatedly, and there was nothing strange about it. They were using Russian equipment, which kind of stank, and
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Edmund Storms wrote: You are certainly right Stephen, might does make right and land is always taken by force and retained the victor. Excuse me, I didn't say that, or didn't intend to. It's Thomas who elevated it to a principle of international law in this thread, just before I went ballistic and belched out an oversized load response. Just to reiterate, I said: international law doesn't technically recognize the principle of might makes right. As always you can get away with whatever you can get away with; that's a tautology. But that doesn't make it right or legal. We did it to the British, the Indians, and to the Mexicans while feeling very proud of ourselves. However, the situation with Israel is different. Here a higher moral principal is being claimed, i.e. God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? Ed thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 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. Thomas's response starts here: I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Edmund Storms wrote: You are certainly right Stephen, might does make right and land is always taken by force and retained the victor. Excuse me, I didn't say that, or didn't intend to. It's Thomas who elevated it to a principle of international law in this thread, just before I went ballistic and belched out an oversized load response. Just to reiterate, I said: international law doesn't technically recognize the principle of might makes right. As always you can get away with whatever you can get away with; that's a tautology. But that doesn't make it right or legal. Sorry to misinterpret you. Nevertheless, I agree with you. However, international law is a recent concept as our examples point out. So, on that basis, Israel has violated international law as well as the moral behavior Christ taught. So, what remains? I guess if you can prove that you have God on your side, this trump's everything. Ed We did it to the British, the Indians, and to the Mexicans while feeling very proud of ourselves. However, the situation with Israel is different. Here a higher moral principal is being claimed, i.e. God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? Ed thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 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. Thomas's response starts here: I think that the principal of the gain of territory by military conquest is an established principal of international law. In particular, this applies to aggressors, who subsequently loose the war that they start. The problem is that people of a certain political persuasion don't want the rules to apply to the followers of Judeo Christian Civilization. IMHO, the Philistines repeated losses to the Israelis should tell you something, particularly since they out number them 10 to one. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
From Ed Storms: Sorry to misinterpret you [S. Lawrence]. Nevertheless, I agree with you. However, international law is a recent concept as our examples point out. So, on that basis, Israel has violated international law as well as the moral behavior Christ taught. So, what remains? I guess if you can prove that you have God on your side, this trump's everything. Ed And to state the obvious, we all know that both camps claim that their All-Powerful and Merciful God claims the same territory for His chosen children. I sometimes like to fantasize a sarcastic outcome: That a good dose of atheism would go a long way towards breaking this pissing contest - but I suspect if I were to suggest it one of these Almighty Gods would smite me as I stand. Life's a b_tch when the Gods are offended. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Good idea, Steven, but I suggest a different approach from atheism. A good dose of real humility would work as well. If they would simply question whether a god as old and complex as the one that must exist in a universe as vast and old as ours would give a shit who occupies this speck of land. Ed OrionWorks wrote: From Ed Storms: Sorry to misinterpret you [S. Lawrence]. Nevertheless, I agree with you. However, international law is a recent concept as our examples point out. So, on that basis, Israel has violated international law as well as the moral behavior Christ taught. So, what remains? I guess if you can prove that you have God on your side, this trump's everything. Ed And to state the obvious, we all know that both camps claim that their All-Powerful and Merciful God claims the same territory for His chosen children. I sometimes like to fantasize a sarcastic outcome: That a good dose of atheism would go a long way towards breaking this pissing contest - but I suspect if I were to suggest it one of these Almighty Gods would smite me as I stand. Life's a b_tch when the Gods are offended. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:test
test
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:03:44 +0200: Hi, [snip] Robin, (replying on-list, in case you forgot to change the address line or are unable to get through again) 0.04g D2 is 0.04g D, and D is 2g/mol, so that should be 0.04/2 mol * 6E23 atoms/mol = 1.2 E22 atoms D, which makes the energy per atom half what you said, but since the actual time is really 100 hours (~4 days) i.e. the total energy is really twice what you said, the two errors conveniently cancel each other, and the observed heat is indeed 187 eV / absorbed D atom (assuming Arata et al made no error in their 1W estimation). However it is probable that only a tiny part of the absorbed D is consumed in the putative anomalous reactions (in such experiments one retrieves roughly the same amount of D2 at deloading than was put in at loading doesn't one?), in which case nuclear type energies of the order of MeVs per _reacting_ D are more likely than Mills energies of the order of 100s of eV per reacting D. Michel [snip] Agreed, however my main point was that it was way more than normal chemical energy. I offered the Mills comment more as a coincidental fact. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Quite right Ed. For an interesting story on this, read any of the biographies of Edgar Cayce - The Sleeping Prophet P.. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:10:08 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. I suggest you read the books by Dr. Ian Stevenson (MD). Prof. Stevenson spent his career at the University of Virginia investigating reincarnation using a scientific approach. Naturally, his extensive investigation has been largely ignored because, as you point out, it defies physical and conventional understanding. Nevertheless, evidence exists for past-life memories, especially in children. This life might not be a waste after all. Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: 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. ;-) Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way; there isn't any practice effect among incarnated beings. Memory is organic, mediated by the hippocampus and related brain hardware. Consequently at the end of your life, you'll leave that all behind; in your next life you won't remember anything about Steve Johnson, and, considering how outnumbered humans are among the sentient creatures, chances are you won't even remember anything about what it's like to be human. You'll just have to start over from scratch, and make the best of it as a gerbil or whatever your consciousness happens to be stuck in next time around. How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. Baklava, anyone? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:19:12 -0700 (PDT): Hi, [snip] Where are the gammas then? I see two possibilities (and I suspect Arata of adhering to the first). 1) The cluster of four deuterium atoms creates 2 alphas concurrently (or 1 Be8* that subsequently fissions). This means two fast alphas, with equal energy, and opposite momentum, and presumably no gammas. 2) The energy is carried away by fast electrons that were Mills shrunken electrons in a previous life. :) These electrons (two of them?) then lose most of their energy ionizing surrounding atoms. Though it seems probable that at least some of the energy would show up as bremsstrahlung x-rays in this case. (Has anyone looked for it?) [snip] This is called Mills-lite instead of Millsean, since the redundant shrunken ground-state can be (and probably is: temporary, and not permanent). This is also in keeping with Mills experiments, where lots of UV is seen there, but where water-bath calorimetry can find only a COP of less than 2 when the ion energy suggests it should be 40-100. There could be a simpler explanation for Mills' results. Most of the energy they had to add to the system didn't result in shrinkage and excess energy production. In short, the efficiency of the whole was low. However when the amount of excess energy *per consumed atom* is calculated, the result is way beyond chemistry. e.g. It takes 1 kW to create enough catalyst ions and H atoms to liberate an extra 300 W. Most of the ions simply recombine again without catalyzing a shrinkage reaction. Most of the H recombines to H2 without undergoing shrinkage. In short at any one time, only a small percentage of the overall atomic population undergoes shrinkage. That means you need a high power input to maintain the overall population, of which only a tiny fraction is undergoing the desired reaction. As near as I can tell, this has been Mills' main problem since day one. It's also why I suggested to him that he try heating KH. When heated, it breaks up into one K atom, and one H atom, i.e. one catalyst atom and one Hydrino candidate - a perfect match. I seems however that he has progressed beyond that to NaH. (BTW very good insulation of the experiment should also solve the problem, since that would ensure that less energy leaked away, and thus was reused. There is probably also an optimal temperature at which the reaction operates, which would vary depending on which catalyst was used). [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Good suggestion, Philip. I have read the biographies of Edgar Cayce. He is another example of powers that have no physical explanation and no religious significance. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Quite right Ed. For an interesting story on this, read any of the biographies of Edgar Cayce - The Sleeping Prophet P.. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:10:08 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds Stephen, you are making a huge assumption when you say that past lives are not remembered. I suggest you read the books by Dr. Ian Stevenson (MD). Prof. Stevenson spent his career at the University of Virginia investigating reincarnation using a scientific approach. Naturally, his extensive investigation has been largely ignored because, as you point out, it defies physical and conventional understanding. Nevertheless, evidence exists for past-life memories, especially in children. This life might not be a waste after all. Ed Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: OrionWorks wrote: 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. ;-) Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way; there isn't any practice effect among incarnated beings. Memory is organic, mediated by the hippocampus and related brain hardware. Consequently at the end of your life, you'll leave that all behind; in your next life you won't remember anything about Steve Johnson, and, considering how outnumbered humans are among the sentient creatures, chances are you won't even remember anything about what it's like to be human. You'll just have to start over from scratch, and make the best of it as a gerbil or whatever your consciousness happens to be stuck in next time around. How we're supposed to get anywhere with a system like this beats me. Baklava, anyone? Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. Edmund Storms wrote: God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
thomas malloy wrote: The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. If this is the case Thomas, Israel better have God on its side because otherwise the country is doomed. This conclusion is obvious to any rational person, not just liberals. Here is a small country that is not self sufficient without outside aid and is surrounding itself with walls to protect itself from its neighbors. Meanwhile, it is surrounded by a hostile population that is growing richer and increasing in numbers. At the same time, the rest of the world is being significantly inconvenienced by the consequences of the conflicts in the area, i.e. higher oil prices. To make the situation worse for Israel, its actions violate modern standards of behavior, as shown by the various UN resolutions, both passed and proposed, that condemn its behavior. Surely these facts must concern all Jews and Christians. At some point, theological and historical arguments simply won't work any more. How long must people wait until this reality becomes obvious? Ed Edmund Storms wrote: God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Hmmm... Ya don't think that higher oil prices are due to (1) greed, and (2) the holy purpose of holding the world by the balls until the Caliphate is established (ie - the West succumbs financially and goes down the tubes)? It seems that the scientific idea of cause and effect is somewhat inapplicable to the situation as you see it. Got a migraine? It's Israel! It's the Jews!!! (Take your pick.) Actions violating modern standards of behaviour? Exactly what standards? I've been practising the martial arts for close to 30 years, and I can tell you how best to handle murderous thugs... including those populating that great tax waster, the UN. Like I said before, if a person wants to harm my family or myself, I will spare no effort to put an end to him. Perhaps you should think of what your gut reaction would be in that kind of situation. I venture that if a thug - any thug - came at you or your wife to commit mayhem and you had a gun handy, you couldn't get to it fast enough. If not, you're not a normal human being. This is the human condition. Survival. Not theological or historical arguments. No more walking passively into cattle-cars toward death, surrounded by thugs. Open your eyes Ed. That is, if you want to... which doesn't seem apparent. Too much education and worship of the intellect, perhaps; try using your intuition. Works also for solving Cold Fusion and other energy-related problems. To the others at Vortex; I didn't want to prolong this nonsense, but I simply won't stand by passively when I see lies and hypocrisy in front of me. It's called defamation, and it's been going on for a long time. And it's going to have to stop, or there will be horrendous problems. So I apologize to all. P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 8:31:10 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds thomas malloy wrote: The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. If this is the case Thomas, Israel better have God on its side because otherwise the country is doomed. This conclusion is obvious to any rational person, not just liberals. Here is a small country that is not self sufficient without outside aid and is surrounding itself with walls to protect itself from its neighbors. Meanwhile, it is surrounded by a hostile population that is growing richer and increasing in numbers. At the same time, the rest of the world is being significantly inconvenienced by the consequences of the conflicts in the area, i.e. higher oil prices. To make the situation worse for Israel, its actions violate modern standards of behavior, as shown by the various UN resolutions, both passed and proposed, that condemn its behavior. Surely these facts must concern all Jews and Christians. At some point, theological and historical arguments simply won't work any more. How long must people wait until this reality becomes obvious? Ed Edmund Storms wrote: God's will. We are to believe that the Jews are more favored than the Philistines by God and that the moral teachings of Christ allow such a conquest. This is not a normal conflict! In addition, even if we ignore the moral issue, the practical issue of Israel being able to survive while being surrounded by angry people who have access to rockets needs to be considered. Granted, Israel has won the pitched battles. But, will they win the war without compromise? thomas malloy wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: 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 --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
RE: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
I don't like to play amateur moderator, and you can correctly say that I have no business either. It's just selfish: I enjoy the posts from the participants here, want them to stay, and I can tell the conversation is just this close to where people begin to leave in a huff or get put in the cooler by the real moderator. - Rick
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
I'm amazed Philip that you would call my analysis lies and hypocrisy. We can differ about what the facts mean, but I don't understand why you can't acknowledge easily verifiable facts. Unfortunately, your reaction is not uncommon and it is the reason why rational decisions are not being made. So that you are not further confused by my approach, by rational decisions I mean ones that would allow Israel to survive without counting on the supernatural. Even the Bible advises that God helps those who help themselves. I see no sign that Israel is taking this advice in a rational way. Instead, they seem to have your approach. No one blames Israel for everything. However, Israel is the cause of the conflicts in that region of the world. You don't need to accept my statement because many sources of this opinion are available. Right now the price of oil is going up partly because of the conflict in Iraq and the possibility that the US or Israel will attack Iran. You can easily check this fact as well. The US has nothing to fear from a proposed nuclear weapon from Iran. First, it can not reach us, they want us to buy their oil in the future, and last but not least, we can turn them into toast. Only Israel has something to fear, as Iran has made clear. Consequently, we are helping Israel even though we have no direct threat to ourselves, while paying dearly. As for fighting thugs, you seem to forget that the people in Palestine were first attacked when Israel was formed. Naturally, they fought back. Now you use this response as a reason to fight them. This is the cycle that always leads to destruction when the sides are evenly matched. That is why Christ advised turning the other cheek. I don't advise this approach now, but the brute force approach is not working either. Unless rational decisions are made in the future, the result I fear will not please either one of us. As for further discussion of this topic, I apologize to anyone who finds this boring or unimportant. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Hmmm... Ya don't think that higher oil prices are due to (1) greed, and (2) the holy purpose of holding the world by the balls until the Caliphate is established (ie - the West succumbs financially and goes down the tubes)? It seems that the scientific idea of cause and effect is somewhat inapplicable to the situation as you see it. Got a migraine? It's Israel! It's the Jews!!! (Take your pick.) Actions violating modern standards of behaviour? Exactly what standards? I've been practising the martial arts for close to 30 years, and I can tell you how best to handle murderous thugs... including those populating that great tax waster, the UN. Like I said before, if a person wants to harm my family or myself, I will spare no effort to put an end to him. Perhaps you should think of what your gut reaction would be in that kind of situation. I venture that if a thug - any thug - came at you or your wife to commit mayhem and you had a gun handy, you couldn't get to it fast enough. If not, you're not a normal human being. This is the human condition. Survival. Not theological or historical arguments. No more walking passively into cattle-cars toward death, surrounded by thugs. Open your eyes Ed. That is, if you want to... which doesn't seem apparent. Too much education and worship of the intellect, perhaps; try using your intuition. Works also for solving Cold Fusion and other energy-related problems. To the others at Vortex; I didn't want to prolong this nonsense, but I simply won't stand by passively when I see lies and hypocrisy in front of me. It's called defamation, and it's been going on for a long time. And it's going to have to stop, or there will be horrendous problems. So I apologize to all. P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 8:31:10 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds thomas malloy wrote: The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. If this is the case Thomas, Israel better have God on its side because otherwise the country is doomed. This conclusion is obvious to any rational person, not just liberals. Here is a small country that is not self sufficient without outside aid and is surrounding itself with walls to protect itself from its neighbors. Meanwhile, it is surrounded by a hostile population that is growing richer and increasing in numbers. At the same time, the rest of the world is being significantly inconvenienced by the consequences of the conflicts in the area, i.e. higher oil prices. To make the situation worse for Israel,
Re: [Vo]:Re: Arata's results are really astounding
--- Robin: This means two fast alphas, with equal energy, and opposite momentum, and presumably no gammas. On first read, that is simply impossible, Robin, unless I am missing something. The nature of fast alphas is to create copious gammas on interaction with condensed matter. Unless by fast you mean under roughly 100 keV. Otherwise there should be gammas. There would be essentially no difference between fast alphas derived from fusion, and alphas of the same mass-energy from an accelerator. Can you imagine alphas from an accelerator hitting a target without gammas? Or if I am mistaken, what would be the difference between the two examples ? Jones
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
As for fighting thugs, you seem to forget that the people in Palestine were first attacked when Israel was formed. This is simply not true - a lie in fact - among many others I've seen from Ed. Ed can be as amazed as he wishes; his ignorance of history is spellbinding... And this is coming from a person who as a youngster, shunned history at school in favour of science. The people in Palestine were told to leave by their leaders, so that the Jews could be easily slaughtered by the better armed and very large Arab armies. It didn't happen. Prior to this time, the Jews in Arab lands were subjected to pogroms and had their houses and belongings confiscated. They were then forcibly expelled... those that weren't killed. PLEASE! I've told you this before, Ed, and I told you to read a damn history book or two; not a book by some Jewish holocaust denying wacko. Where does that put your mentality. Now - again, I'm sorry Vorticians I won't continue this fruitless conversation. I simply can't make the blind see. Out. P. - Original Message From: Edmund Storms [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 10:21:20 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds I'm amazed Philip that you would call my analysis lies and hypocrisy. We can differ about what the facts mean, but I don't understand why you can't acknowledge easily verifiable facts. Unfortunately, your reaction is not uncommon and it is the reason why rational decisions are not being made. So that you are not further confused by my approach, by rational decisions I mean ones that would allow Israel to survive without counting on the supernatural. Even the Bible advises that God helps those who help themselves. I see no sign that Israel is taking this advice in a rational way. Instead, they seem to have your approach. No one blames Israel for everything. However, Israel is the cause of the conflicts in that region of the world. You don't need to accept my statement because many sources of this opinion are available. Right now the price of oil is going up partly because of the conflict in Iraq and the possibility that the US or Israel will attack Iran. You can easily check this fact as well. The US has nothing to fear from a proposed nuclear weapon from Iran. First, it can not reach us, they want us to buy their oil in the future, and last but not least, we can turn them into toast. Only Israel has something to fear, as Iran has made clear. Consequently, we are helping Israel even though we have no direct threat to ourselves, while paying dearly. As for fighting thugs, you seem to forget that the people in Palestine were first attacked when Israel was formed. Naturally, they fought back. Now you use this response as a reason to fight them. This is the cycle that always leads to destruction when the sides are evenly matched. That is why Christ advised turning the other cheek. I don't advise this approach now, but the brute force approach is not working either. Unless rational decisions are made in the future, the result I fear will not please either one of us. As for further discussion of this topic, I apologize to anyone who finds this boring or unimportant. Ed PHILIP WINESTONE wrote: Hmmm... Ya don't think that higher oil prices are due to (1) greed, and (2) the holy purpose of holding the world by the balls until the Caliphate is established (ie - the West succumbs financially and goes down the tubes)? It seems that the scientific idea of cause and effect is somewhat inapplicable to the situation as you see it. Got a migraine? It's Israel! It's the Jews!!! (Take your pick.) Actions violating modern standards of behaviour? Exactly what standards? I've been practising the martial arts for close to 30 years, and I can tell you how best to handle murderous thugs... including those populating that great tax waster, the UN. Like I said before, if a person wants to harm my family or myself, I will spare no effort to put an end to him. Perhaps you should think of what your gut reaction would be in that kind of situation. I venture that if a thug - any thug - came at you or your wife to commit mayhem and you had a gun handy, you couldn't get to it fast enough. If not, you're not a normal human being. This is the human condition. Survival. Not theological or historical arguments. No more walking passively into cattle-cars toward death, surrounded by thugs. Open your eyes Ed. That is, if you want to... which doesn't seem apparent. Too much education and worship of the intellect, perhaps; try using your intuition. Works also for solving Cold Fusion and other energy-related problems. To the others at Vortex; I didn't want to prolong this nonsense, but I simply won't stand by passively when I see lies and hypocrisy in front of me. It's called defamation, and it's been going on for a long time.
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Howdy Vorts, Seems this thread has taken on a life of it's own. Time to take the mirror down from behind the bar before sumbuddy starts preaching a sermon and tosses a whiskey bottle. The boys at the Dime Box saloon practice peaceful co-existence and .. the rule is to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves. Which means.. be wise enough to stomp a snake flat and pull his fangs without a discussion and it makes a snake plum peaceful as a dove. Problem is that when Israel does this it's called cruelty to animals. Richard
Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Edmund Storms wrote: thomas malloy wrote: The return of the Jews, the conquest of the land, it's subsequent prosperity, the hatred of the Arabs, their refusal to get over the indignity of the loss of that part of their conquered land, the Liberals support of Islam. IMHO, It's all supernatural. BTW, comprise will get no where with the Islamists, it's counterproductive. If this is the case Thomas, Israel better have God on its side because otherwise the country is doomed. This conclusion is obvious to any rational person, not just liberals. Here is a small country that is not self sufficient without outside aid and is Your comments just tickle me Ed, this is exactly the scenario that the prophecies said would occur. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
