On Wed, 02 Mar 2011 18:22 Robin van Spaandonk wrote
[snip]
Ah..in short you reject the Hydrino hypothesis outright, since below ground
state orbitals are the very core of his theory.
Regards,[/snip]
If Naudt's is correct about relativistic hydrogen then both sides are correct.
Sub ground states
From Robin:
...
It's ordinary physics. Charged particles circling around in a magnetic
field
must radiate cyclotron radiation. If you set up a resonant receiver, you
should be able to pick it up. For the lower Van Allen belt, the height and
frequency are approximately such that you could be
on Wednesday, March 02, 2011 11:27 Harry Veeder wrote
[snip]The concept of quantum mechanical tunneling suggests that a particle can,
with a certain probability, bore its way through a columb barrier. Suppose,
instead, the probability is indicative of a fluctuating columb field in which
To my understanding - there is no limit. Just as there is no limit as to how
many magnets you can use in the world.
The basis of the technology is an abstraction of magnetism to electricity.
Just as North-North magnets repel eachother -- North-North
electricity/electrons repel eachother. The
Good point .
From: Roarty, Francis X
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New MOND order?
Robin van Spaandonk wrote
Ah..in short you reject the Hydrino hypothesis outright, since below ground
state orbitals are the very core of his theory.
If Naudts is correct about relativistic hydrogen then both
One more detail, for Dennis or anyone else looking into a Rossi replication
based on an educated guess of what the inventor could have been doing at the
time of the discovery of the energy anomaly.
Rossi's first thermoelectric generator patent, assigned to Leonardo
Technologies #6,620,994 might
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
Obviously a sandworm burrow ...
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
On Mar 3, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
The picture of what looks like a round crater does not match the
description. Discovered by the Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft, this
chamber is more than one mile long
At 10:39 AM 3/2/2011, Jones Beene wrote:
-
However, if you are going to use several layers of plating, which is good,
then there is no reason not to start with copper as the base - for reasons
of cost control.
Perhaps. Silver is pretty cheap, by comparison with gold and palladium!
At 03:16 PM 3/2/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I imagine they do not think it is worth the trouble to comment on,
or to check out. That is how I feel about claims of harvesting
energy from the surroundings such as the one just reported here, by Aviso:
On Mar 3, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
Apparently it is a lava tube.
http://www.siliconindia.com/shownews/
ISRO_finds_cave_in_moon_can_be_used_as_base_station_for_astronauts-
nid-79567.html
That was kind of a silly refutation of Mills. Hydrinos, if real,
result from occupation of previously unknown states below the ground
state. In other words, the ground state is not the ground state,
merely a plateau that is normally not punctured.
The scientific question is whether or not
At 03:45 PM 3/2/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
I have heard about a guy living under high tension power lines who
made a gadget to extract useful amounts of energy. Supposedly the
power company sued him. It's outrageous if they actually did!
Imagine bombarding his family with RF and then suing him
On Mar 3, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
Here is a picture that shows the lava tube:
http://parallelspirals.blogspot.com/2010/03/lava-tubes-found-on-
moon.html
http://tinyurl.com/4awbun6
A rille system
At 05:38 PM 2/21/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote:
His strategy might be reasonable. But a consequence of that strategy
is that I'm not going to believe that Rossi is a demonstration of cold fusion.
That's rather short-sighted of you.
Please do not confuse not going to believe with believe that it
On Mar 3, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:
http://blastr.com/2011/03/giant-chamber-on-the-moon.php
with must-see piccy.
Source article on the lava tube:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2010/pdf/1484.pdf
41st Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2010)
IDENTIFICATION OF LUNAR
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
That was kind of a silly refutation of Mills. Hydrinos, if real,
result from occupation of previously unknown states below the ground
state. In other words, the ground state is not the ground state,
merely a plateau that is normally not
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:15 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
wrote:
There is allegedly some device that enhances battery life in golf carts, I
had some discussion with a fellow who claimed to be working for the company,
which he would not disclose.
It's no secret:
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:23 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote:
Source article on the lava tube:
http://www.lpi.usra.edu/meetings/lpsc2010/pdf/1484.pdf
41st Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2010)
IDENTIFICATION OF LUNAR VOLCANIC TUBES, A POTENTIAL SITE FOR HUMAN
Yesterday I wrote that it can be surprisingly difficult to evaluate the
performance of a large machine. That probably sounds odd. Let me explain
a bit, while I try to anticipate some of the honest skeptical objections
that might be raised about a 1 MW demonstration. Rossi is sometimes open
to
Here is a message Ed sent to Abd and me, reprinted with permission --
This debate of whether to believe Rossi ignores two very important
facts. We now know that chemically assisted nuclear reactions are
possible, thanks to the CF work. This not like the claims for over unity
based on odd
and I would like to see what he will use as his control.
Dennis
--
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 3:50 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Anticipating skeptical objections to a 1 MW demonstration
Dennis wrote:
and I would like to see what he will use as his control.
I am more concerned about control in the other sense -- can he can
keep it under control.
Seriously, a thing like this does not need a control (null comparison).
A null is vital for small scale experiments -- under ~10
BTW - If you haven't seen it, here is the preliminary WIPO rejection notice
of most of the claims of the Rossi patent
http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2011/36/Rossi-Patent-Application-WO-20
09-125444-PrelimReport.pdf
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?14114-Vimana-(UFO)-Found-In-Cave-In-Afghanistan!!!s=a4cac42f6f636c2cb9015ae1a68805c3
What's a Vimana?
http://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1GGGE_enUS360US360aq=fsourceid=chromeie=UTF-8q=vimana
(Submitted mostly for entertainment purposes.)
T
Dennis,
Indeed . And that would be controls.
It might be a minority view; several controls are needed.
He needs a metachronous 1 MW pulse for enough time
and energy for the system to reach the same temp and heat
deposited that the LANR system would expect to achieve
in the steady state,
Unless he can unplug it...
Most any system will tend to be messy at that level for any system
that runs for extended times (days??) to rule out chemistry.
I think he would do better by just making something in the 1 to 10 KW
(thermal) range
that ran for a week unplugged. If his claims are
Mitchell Swartz m...@theworld.com wrote:
He needs a metachronous 1 MW pulse for enough time
and energy for the system to reach the same temp and heat
deposited that the LANR system would expect to achieve
in the steady state,
Ah. That is a skeptical objection I did not anticipate.
I
Having said all of that . . . Looking back at my notes from Hydrodynamics
and the County Facility engineer who measured excess heat from the gadget
installed in the Fire Department, I should report their methods could not be
simpler. In the case of the Fire Department, they did the following:
He cannot safely unplug it, we are told.
However, one thing everyone seems to be overlooking in why Rossi is choosing
to construct a machine which has a large number of modular units - is that
it lends itself to the energy cascade, with extremely high iterative gain.
A cascade will allow his
Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
He cannot safely unplug it, we are told.
I think Cravens meant Rossi should use the heat to generate electricity and
make the device self-sustaining. He added: If his claims are real, he
should have enough gain for that even at only 5% conversion rates.
If you talking about closing the loop, then the Stirling engine is a good
choice. Here is one he could use.
http://www.whispergen.com/main/PRODUCTS/
If I am correct about the cascade, then a Stirling can provide about 15%
conversion of heat to electricity (due to the low Carnot spread) but
At 09:21 PM 3/3/2011, Jones Beene wrote:
He cannot safely unplug it, we are told.
Others apparently feel as I do, that a device that cannot be safely
unplugged makes me nervous.
Yes. Nuclear reactors (fission type) make me nervous. I wouldn't want
to live near one.
Yes. Your fear would be shared by the majority in the USA, and that is
likely to be the major reason that Rossi is not doing it here. He knows he
would not see this device sold here during his lifetime, due to the NRC.
At some level, one's tolerance level for risk is proportionate to the
Yes, I meant that it would be more convincing if a smaller device was used
(10's to 100KW) and that
it turned a steam engine, stirling,. that could convert the heat and it
then could be run without any
access to external power sources.
Notice I do not wish to imply that the water flow
36 matches
Mail list logo
