Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Jouni Valkonen]

On 8 September 2012 06:55, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>
> When that system is submerged in the cold bath, the
> spring will become stiffer and this will translate into more pressure
> on the ends of the box, and therefore more potential energy.
>

I think that here you have just 'normal' heat engine. The heat energy/mass
of the hot spring is transformed into the spring energy/mass of the cooler
and stiffer spring. That is, heat energy is transformed into useful
(potential) work.

Jones's video demonstrated more clearly how this change in crystal lattice
structure due to temperature change can be utilized to create useful work
from heat. With nitinol springs this 'phase change' is more extreme than
with regular springs.

—Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 8:35 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
> Lets think about the heated bar from another point of view.  Instead of
> heating the bar first, lets compress it so that the length is reduced.  We
> could place it inside a press and force it to store energy inside just as a
> normal spring would.  Work must be performed upon the metal as it is
> compressed and this work would be stored in the form of potential energy.
>
> Now, it the bar is placed within a cold bath as with the spring, the
> compression can be slowly released until the bar relaxes.  All of the
> potential energy disappears as far as our observations are concerned but we
> know that heating of the bar will bring it back to its original value.  In
> my opinion this is exactly comparable to the original spring compression
> experiment.
>
> So, heat is removed from the bar and the potential energy becomes less.  Why
> is this not the same?
>
> Dave

Dave, see my recent posts to Abd and Jouni.  Abd was right that the
length of the spring is not relevant. However, instead of potential
energy being destroyed, I now think the opposite is possible.
Potential energy can be created by placing the compressed spring in
the cold bath. Instead of compressing the spring with weight imagine
compressing it and then inserting the spring inside a box to maintain
the compression. When that system is submerged in the cold bath, the
spring will become stiffer and this will translate into more pressure
on the ends of the box, and therefore more potential energy.

harry


> -Original Message-
> From: Harry Veeder 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Fri, Sep 7, 2012 1:16 pm
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at
> different temperatures?
>
> snip...
>
>> You could get results of the opposite nature if you place a metal bar
>> between two firmly attached uprights and apply heat.  The heated bar would
>> expand and push apart the uprights, but the extension force would go away
>> once the bar is cooled back to room temperature.
>
> This system converts heat into a store of mechanical energy,
> whereas the spring system is different because it converts a
> mechanical force into
> a store of mechanical energy.
>
>
> From the standpoint of CoE all forms of energy equilavent, but the
> spring example suggests
> they are not equivalent.
>
> harry
>  snip

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Jouni Valkonen  wrote:
> I do not think that this thought experiment works with springs. That is
> because spring energy is stored into compression of electron orbitals into
> higher energy levels. This means that compressed spring is more massive due
> to E=mc². However this is very intriguing thought experiment, because on the
> other hand crystal structure of the spring is chancing when cooled. What
> happens to the potential energy then? Like David said, tracking energy
> conservation is very tricky.

Abd's questions have led me to believe the cold bath and a compressed
spring can be used to create potential energy rather than destroy it!
Abd suggested I imagine placing the spring inside a box after it is
compressed. When this system is submerged in the cold bath the
stiffness of the spring increases, which means the ends of the box are
under greater pressure, which means the system contains more potential
energy. The idea is simple and testable.

This is consistent with my contention that the nature of cold is more
than just the absence of heat (and the absence of motion). Cold is
something unique and distinct from heat. Cold is that which gives
matter stiffness.


> Other perhaps even more intriguing thought experiment would be that if
> compressed spring is assembled using molecular assembler such as star trek
> replicator. This should not take any more energy than with uncompressed
> spring, because van der waals forces are taking care of the assembling
> process in both cases. That is, the extra energy needed to assemble
> compressed spring is provided by van der waals force and van der waals force
> is not classical force, but it is inherent quantum property of atoms. This
> way we could utilize van der waals force to violate classical thermodynamics
> and create useful energy out of nothing. (Geckos are masters of utilizing
> van der waals forces)

The cold bath does this by changing the stiffness of the spring.

> However, even if this thought experiment does not work with springs, for
> sure this thought experiment is working with permanent magnets. If neodymium
> magnet is demagnetized when attached to refrigerator door, we are loosing
> quite significant amount of classical potential energy that was required to
> remove magnet from refrigerator door. That is way more than that 360
> millijoules that is the quantum energy stored into magnetic field.
>
> —Jouni

hmmm, so the magnet motor in the video link you posted might work by
slightly boosting the magnet's own strength with some cooling at just
the right times in the rotation cycle. This is quite different from
magnet motors which try to do it with magnetic shielding.
harry



>
> On 7 September 2012 04:16, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>>
>> If a spring is compressed by a force at room temperature, the spring
>> will return to its original length once the force is removed.
>> In the language of CoE the compressed spring  is said to "store" the
>> energy of the work done by the force.
>>
>> Now compress the spring again and then place it in a bath of liquid
>> nitrogen. The spring will not return to its original length once the
>> force is removed.
>> At this stage I would say some of the "stored energy" has vanished and
>> CoE has been violated.
>>
>>
>> Harry
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Start with a niche market where you can charge a large premium

[Jed Rothwell]

David Roberson  wrote:

Jed, I am not sure the cost to certify a device that a mars mission depends
> upon would be inexpensive.
>

It would cost millions, or hundreds of millions. But of course you would
structure the deal to have Uncle Sam pay that part. Uncle is the only one
capable of doing it in any case. The idea is to get millions or tens of
millions up front for your part of the deal.



> If you are thinking that NASA will fund the testing, then maybe this would
> be a good approach.
>

Exactly. They would not consider any other arrangement.


  I am not confident that they are open to the concept until it has been
> shown to be reliable up front.
>

I am only talking about a reliable device. If it is not reliable, it has no
commercial value. For an unreliable device, you need to look for venture
capital to develop it. That's different from looking for a market in which
to sell it.

It would not be difficult to prove you have a reliable device. I know
people in NASA. If anyone has such a device, I could arrange tests in a
couple of weeks.


 In the good old days it was much easier to put a potentially dangerous
> machine into the world for testing.  The protection of the public once was
> secondary.  Now, developing a drug for example is outrageously expensive
> and puts a damper upon many new ideas.
>

True, but you would not want to live in the bad old days. I am sure we can
develop cold fusion despite the restrictions.


So I am not sure that a small scale proof will be adequate.
>

It would be adequate if you are building small device to put in places far
away, such as Mars or the bottom of the ocean. Start with that, because it
can be done soonest and easiest. Prove the reliability and safety of
kilowatt and megawatt devices after you make milliwatt devices (AA
batteries).



>   How do we assess the true risk of these things?
>

By making tens thousands of them and having every safety lab on earth test
them exhaustively. No other method would be acceptable in the 21st century.
The notion that one or two safety inspectors will certify devices made by
Rossi or Defkalion strikes me as preposterous. No sane government on Planet
Earth would allow widespread use of a device that apparently works by
producing an unknown nuclear reaction. The reaction must be tested tens of
thousands of times in thousands of different laboratories until:

1. Someone figures out the physics, and everyone agrees the theory is
right; OR

2. Hands-on, practical control developed by Edisonian methods is assured.
That is to say, control so good, with so many tests that everyone is fully
confident the reaction cannot cause harm.

Look what happened in the past when we began to use things like x-rays or
radium without proper testing. Do we want to see hundreds of thousands of
machines out there, only to discover they sometime irradiate people,
causing severe DNA damage?

Half measures, or certification by one or two agencies in Italy, Greece or
Canada simply is not good enough. I am a leading advocate of cold fusion. I
have devoted a large part of my life to that cause. But if any government
official asked me whether we should simply allow this now, without tens of
thousands of tests, I would say that would be criminal irresponsibility.
Any Parliamentary government that would allow that should fall. Any
President who allowed it should be impeached. We can *easily* have the
thing tested by thousands of labs. It would be unthinkable not to do this.
The cost would be trivial compared to the benefits it will produce. It will
soon pay back at a rate exceeding a billion dollars a day!

In my opinion, people such as Rossi and Defkalion are thinking about doing
this on a scale several hundred times too small. People have accused them
of overreaching. In my opinion they have little chance of of success
because -- as someone here once wrote -- they are treating this like an
improved windshield wiper fluid; a business venture you might launch with a
warehouse full of product in cardboard boxes.

Cold fusion cannot work as a cottage industry. It should be used to power
every machine in our civilization, as quickly as possible. If we are going
to avoid global warming that is imperative. To accomplish that will take
contributions and expertise from hundreds of thousands if not millions of
the world's top engineers, product designers, medical researchers,
regulators and others. The cost of the transition, spread out over decades,
will be billions if not trillions of dollars. But the payoff will be
immense, so that should not bother anyone. The cost per capita will be
modest.



>   Some may feel that the risk is worth it because the reward is so great.
>

The risk can be eliminated easily. It would absurd for anyone to run a
risk. It would be like driving without you seatbelt fastened. That is to
say: it would be a risk taken for no reason, with no conceivable benefit,
that can be avoided with a trivial effort.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 9:39 PM, Harry Veeder  wrote:
>  Abd ul-Rahman Lomax asked:
>
>>>
>>> You could create a much simpler "violation." You slip a rectangular box of
>>> the right size over the compressed spring, so it can't return to its
>>> original size. Where did the potential energy go?
>>
>
> I answered,
>> It is still present because the box is performing the same compression
>> task as the weight.
>
> Sorry I misunderstood. My answer refers to the situation before the
> spring is placed in the cold bath.
> However inside the cold bath the spring would exert less pressure
> against the ends of the box which would be equivalent to a loss of
> potential energy.
>
> Harry

On second thought,  the box might do the opposite and create potential
energy (the stored mechanical energy) because the spring is stiffer
when it is cold!

harry

RE: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Oops! I found a big grammatical error in the second paragraph of Dingalint's
Roswell story. It's been fixed.

 

http://personalpen.orionworks.com/dingalint-what-happened-at-roswell.htm

 

I'm decompressing from a long work-vacation down in Chicago attending the
World Science Fiction convention. I still feel very scattered.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

 

From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 7:47 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

 

A nice wax Terry,

 

I'm puzzled by the fact that many "Aliens" are strikingly humanoid in
appearance - possessing two legs, arms, eyes, a nose and mouth, placed in
pretty much the same locations as we possess. I don't think such a
structural layout is a coincidence. My personal speculation is that we may
be genetically related to many so-called ETs. How we might be related is, of
course, the 64 dollar question. Many of these humanoids, in my view, look
like future versions of humans, give or take a million years or so. This
suggests to me the possibility that time-travel, along with millions of
probable/parallel realities may be part of the entire paradigm.

 

I also personally think a likely advancement we get to look forward to is to
eventually develop a hive mind. Individual bodies, like you and me will
become more specialized in order to perform unique tasks for the well-being
of the "collective". Contrary to what many fear might happen, I suspect we
will continue to maintain our "individuality" while simultaneously
maintaining an intimate connection with the "collective". IOW, we will
eventually learn to play the piano with both hands.

 

Speculating on intelligent/alien hive mind activity is, of course, a
favorite science fiction topic. Writers like Arthur C. Clark, David Brin,
Joe Haldeman, and Orson Scott Card to name a few have all written
fascinating speculative fiction on what it would be like to contact hive
minded "creatures". Star Trek's, Borg, is just a nasty permutation based on
something we aren't yet comfortable with, and therefore fear. IOW, we fear
the nature of the hive mind as being something akin to blundering into our
grandparent's bedroom one day and accidently seeing grandma naked... or
perhaps everyone naked for that matter! I suspect a more likely scenario
would be that making contact with hive minded ET intelligences will end up
mostly as a benign experience - at least from our personal individuated
POVs. I suspect our own Hive Mind is still pretty much in an unconscious
state. That's a more charitable way of saying it's still quite dim-witted.
It might take us another 10 - 50 thousand years before our collective
thoughts finally manage to get upgraded to ET standards. Until then, I
suspect most "hive" intelligences out in the wilds of the cosmos would
prefer to keep the dim-witted juveniles safely secured in the game preserve
where they can be better monitored - aka CE3/4K. Of course, we may disobey
the "hive's" suggestions and attempt to break out of our little crib before
we have been potty trained. What then? Are we too old to get spanked?

 

* * * * *

 

BTW, here's a revised reprint of a fictional character of mine, Vince
Dingalint, and his unique perspective on the Infamous Roswell story. Some
Vorts may still remember Vince and his unfortunate predicament - which is
similar to the fate of Billy Pilgrim. The following link is another test of
me revising the look and feel of my still-under-construction web site.
Enjoy:

 

http://personalpen.orionworks.com/dingalint-what-happened-at-roswell.htm

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax asked:

>>
>> You could create a much simpler "violation." You slip a rectangular box of
>> the right size over the compressed spring, so it can't return to its
>> original size. Where did the potential energy go?
>

I answered,
> It is still present because the box is performing the same compression
> task as the weight.

Sorry I misunderstood. My answer refers to the situation before the
spring is placed in the cold bath.
However inside the cold bath the spring would exert less pressure
against the ends of the box which would be equivalent to a loss of
potential energy.

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Start with a niche market where you can charge a large premium

[David Roberson]

Jed, I am not sure the cost to certify a device that a mars mission depends 
upon would be inexpensive.  They have too much riding upon the success of the 
mission which will cost billions if it fails.

If you are thinking that NASA will fund the testing, then maybe this would be a 
good approach.  I am not confident that they are open to the concept until it 
has been shown to be reliable up front.

In the good old days it was much easier to put a potentially dangerous machine 
into the world for testing.  The protection of the public once was secondary.  
Now, developing a drug for example is outrageously expensive and puts a damper 
upon many new ideas.

If LENR is to be treated the same as a new reactor, which might make sense, 
then the cost may well be out of reach to anyone but a major player such as GE. 
 Who should decide this issue?  If radiation is not significant, then why force 
these devices into that bottomless pit?  Of course if nuclear explosions are 
possible by some unfortunate circumstance, then there is no alternative but 
extensive proof of safety.

So I am not sure that a small scale proof will be adequate.  How do we assess 
the true risk of these things?  Is the pain and suffering of the poor of the 
world enough negative impact to push forward and begin production to alleviate 
these problems?  Some may feel that the risk is worth it because the reward is 
so great.  Where would we be if the first vaccines were not pursued because the 
risk of catching the disease from the initial offerings kept them out of 
circulation?  How would hand held cell phones been offered for sale had the 
potential dangers that are now suggested kept them in testing forever?  Why 
would anyone eat genetically altered foods since no one can be certain that 
they are safe for both our bodies as well as the environment?

Perhaps the LENR mechanisms are important enough to the world for many reasons 
and therefore must be allowed in some carefully chosen locations.  The military 
seems to be safe under almost all situations since our lives depend upon their 
success.  Rossi is apparently pursuing this path as he is stalled in 
certification for public uses.  In my opinion the world is in dire conditions 
now and some reasonable risk is required if we are to survive as a species.  
Some of us might be willing to take a chance and become the first guinea pigs 
to get this technology off the ground as quickly as possible.

Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Sep 7, 2012 8:23 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Start with a niche market where you can charge a large premium


When I wrote that it might take $1 billion to develop a cold fusion machine, I 
meant things like first generation boilers, generators, automobiles and so on. 
Not small things such as thermoelectric cell phone batteries. Still, I expect 
you need on the order of $100 million to design one, have it certified for 
safety, and to set up a factory.


It seems to me, to commercialize you need a strategy that calls for:


Investing the least amount of capital you can
Producing an income stream as quickly as possible
Lowest risk for you, and for the customer

The smallest, cheapest device you can come up with that has market value

The biggest premium you can find (that is, a large markup, or a large profit)


People such as Rossi often get the last two criteria completely backwards. You 
can make a lot more money per watt selling AA batteries than you can selling 
megawatt reactors.


You want a niche market that has:


Few regulations, or no regulations
No competition
The biggest premium


Where should you look for such a thing? I say look far afield. Very far: Mars. 
I would begin by contacting NASA to develop a replacement for the plutonium 
powered thermoelectric batteries they use. You could sell that at a gigantic 
premium: millions of dollars per kilogram. There are no pesky regulations on 
Mars. Naturally, you could not actually ship a product that could be used on 
Mars for a long time. But the research dollar revenue stream might start very 
soon.


There are probably other similar applications for things in the military, such 
UAVs, and for things like remote telephone repeaters.


Once you start making money from these things, you would be developing 
expertise. You would gain credibility. You would attract capital. In shorty, 
you would have the tools you need to approach a billion dollar market such as 
small generators or AA battery replacements.


Start with the easiest place to make a huge profit, which is not necessarily 
the easiest product. Go from there to other markets. Do not begin by competing 
with conventional natural gas in the 50 MW generator market. That's the worst 
possible place to begin, in my opinion.


Many of the business strategies I have seen proposed in this field seem naive 
to me. They seem impractical. They seem to be devised by people who have little 
knowledge of business, or

RE: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

A nice wax Terry,

 

I'm puzzled by the fact that many "Aliens" are strikingly humanoid in
appearance - possessing two legs, arms, eyes, a nose and mouth, placed in
pretty much the same locations as we possess. I don't think such a
structural layout is a coincidence. My personal speculation is that we may
be genetically related to many so-called ETs. How we might be related is, of
course, the 64 dollar question. Many of these humanoids, in my view, look
like future versions of humans, give or take a million years or so. This
suggests to me the possibility that time-travel, along with millions of
probable/parallel realities may be part of the entire paradigm.

 

I also personally think a likely advancement we get to look forward to is to
eventually develop a hive mind. Individual bodies, like you and me will
become more specialized in order to perform unique tasks for the well-being
of the "collective". Contrary to what many fear might happen, I suspect we
will continue to maintain our "individuality" while simultaneously
maintaining an intimate connection with the "collective". IOW, we will
eventually learn to play the piano with both hands.

 

Speculating on intelligent/alien hive mind activity is, of course, a
favorite science fiction topic. Writers like Arthur C. Clark, David Brin,
Joe Haldeman, and Orson Scott Card to name a few have all written
fascinating speculative fiction on what it would be like to contact hive
minded "creatures". Star Trek's, Borg, is just a nasty permutation based on
something we aren't yet comfortable with, and therefore fear. IOW, we fear
the nature of the hive mind as being something akin to blundering into our
grandparent's bedroom one day and accidently seeing grandma naked... or
perhaps everyone naked for that matter! I suspect a more likely scenario
would be that making contact with hive minded ET intelligences will end up
mostly as a benign experience - at least from our personal individuated
POVs. I suspect our own Hive Mind is still pretty much in an unconscious
state. That's a more charitable way of saying it's still quite dim-witted.
It might take us another 10 - 50 thousand years before our collective
thoughts finally manage to get upgraded to ET standards. Until then, I
suspect most "hive" intelligences out in the wilds of the cosmos would
prefer to keep the dim-witted juveniles safely secured in the game preserve
where they can be better monitored - aka CE3/4K. Of course, we may disobey
the "hive's" suggestions and attempt to break out of our little crib before
we have been potty trained. What then? Are we too old to get spanked?

 

* * * * *

 

BTW, here's a revised reprint of a fictional character of mine, Vince
Dingalint, and his unique perspective on the Infamous Roswell story. Some
Vorts may still remember Vince and his unfortunate predicament - which is
similar to the fate of Billy Pilgrim. The following link is another test of
me revising the look and feel of my still-under-construction web site.
Enjoy:

 

http://personalpen.orionworks.com/dingalint-what-happened-at-roswell.htm

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[David Roberson]

Lets think about the heated bar from another point of view.  Instead of heating 
the bar first, lets compress it so that the length is reduced.  We could place 
it inside a press and force it to store energy inside just as a normal spring 
would.  Work must be performed upon the metal as it is compressed and this work 
would be stored in the form of potential energy.

Now, it the bar is placed within a cold bath as with the spring, the 
compression can be slowly released until the bar relaxes.  All of the potential 
energy disappears as far as our observations are concerned but we know that 
heating of the bar will bring it back to its original value.  In my opinion 
this is exactly comparable to the original spring compression experiment.

So, heat is removed from the bar and the potential energy becomes less.  Why is 
this not the same?

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Harry Veeder 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Fri, Sep 7, 2012 1:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at 
different temperatures?

snip...

> You could get results of the opposite nature if you place a metal bar
 between two firmly attached uprights and apply heat.  The heated bar would
 expand and push apart the uprights, but the extension force would go away
 once the bar is cooled back to room temperature.
This system converts heat into a store of mechanical energy,
hereas the spring system is different because it converts a
echanical force into
 store of mechanical energy.

rom the standpoint of CoE all forms of energy equilavent, but the
pring example suggests
hey are not equivalent.
harry
... snip

[Vo]:Start with a niche market where you can charge a large premium

[Jed Rothwell]

When I wrote that it might take $1 billion to develop a cold fusion
machine, I meant things like first generation boilers, generators,
automobiles and so on. Not small things such as thermoelectric cell phone
batteries. Still, I expect you need on the order of $100 million to design
one, have it certified for safety, and to set up a factory.

It seems to me, to commercialize you need a strategy that calls for:

Investing the least amount of capital you can
Producing an income stream as quickly as possible
Lowest risk for you, and for the customer
The smallest, cheapest device you can come up with that has market value
The biggest premium you can find (that is, a large markup, or a large
profit)

People such as Rossi often get the last two criteria completely backwards.
You can make a lot more money per watt selling AA batteries than you can
selling megawatt reactors.

You want a niche market that has:

Few regulations, or no regulations
No competition
The biggest premium

Where should you look for such a thing? I say look far afield. Very far:
Mars. I would begin by contacting NASA to develop a replacement for the
plutonium powered thermoelectric batteries they use. You could sell that at
a gigantic premium: millions of dollars per kilogram. There are no pesky
regulations on Mars. Naturally, you could not actually ship a product that
could be used on Mars for a long time. But the research dollar revenue
stream might start very soon.

There are probably other similar applications for things in the military,
such UAVs, and for things like remote telephone repeaters.

Once you start making money from these things, you would be developing
expertise. You would gain credibility. You would attract capital. In
shorty, you would have the tools you need to approach a billion dollar
market such as small generators or AA battery replacements.

Start with the easiest place to make a huge profit, which is not
necessarily the easiest product. Go from there to other markets. Do not
begin by competing with conventional natural gas in the 50 MW generator
market. That's the worst possible place to begin, in my opinion.

Many of the business strategies I have seen proposed in this field seem
naive to me. They seem impractical. They seem to be devised by people who
have little knowledge of business, or of the history of technology.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Jed sez:

 

> They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future

> technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do

> this, as I described in my book.

 

Of course they are doing this, just as you say so in your book. Isn't that
often the case when a new paradigm changing technology makes an unscheduled
intrusion? Too many of us lack vision. First we try to ram the round pegs of
a new technology down into the square holes of an old technological paradigm
- sometimes obnoxiously so. Eventually, we wise up. 

 

This reminds me of the old Gopher (Pre-Mosaic) days when one particular
gopher designer tried to create a more "friendly" looking gopher app by
mimicking the look and feel of a three ring binder. For some stupid reason
they thought that if their app were to mimic the look and feel of a three
ring binder it would not alienate the user. Of course, it didn't go
anywhere. Gopher was quickly eclipsed by Mosaic, and then by Netscape, and
then by...

 

Actually as far as turning pages goes, we are still doing mimicking the look
and feel of flipping paper on many tablets. Old habits die hard.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Jed Rothwell]

Bob Higgins  wrote:


> Normally, safety guidelines are more stringent for consumer/home devices
> than industrial devices because the industrial operators are expected to be
> "trained users".


Ah. Okay. So Rossi is not making that up.

Still, the installation and test manuals for industrial boilers that I have
seen look rigorous to me.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:


> Furthermore that market has
> the advantage that licencing is simpler (as Rossi points out).
>

As I said: may-bee. I wonder if Rossi knows what he is talking about here.
He has, shall we say, a creative approach to business strategy. He comes up
with one-of-a-kind strategies.

>From what I have seen, large installations require as much licensing and
safety testing a small ones.

In any case extensive testing will be needed. $20 million will hardly begin
to pay for it. I expect development, testing and licensing costs will be
similar to those of the Toyota Prius; i.e. ~$1 billion before you can sell
the first gadget. Venture capitalists who are not thinking on that scale,
or who are incapable of investing on that scale, are probably wasting their
time. In my ICCF17 presentation I supposed the R&D budget will be something
like the present a budget for semiconductors; $48 billion a year. That
would mean 50 products introduced every year; one per week. When I say
products I mean an SUV one week, a line of home generators the next.

The budget might be $300 billion a year for all I can predict. It will not
be $20 million. That's absurd.

$300 billion may seem like a lot but it is $1000 per capita for everyone in
the U.S. I am sure we will soon be spending a lot more than that for cold
fusion powered products. Think of how much we spend on food, cars, or
electronics, per capita. That's the scale of spending on cold fusion we can
expect.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Bob Higgins]

Normally, safety guidelines are more stringent for consumer/home devices
than industrial devices because the industrial operators are expected to be
"trained users".  For example, the electromagnetic SAR limits for consumer
devices are much lower than for industrial users (think cellphones vs.
portable public safety 2-way radios).

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

>
> I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and
> approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be
> wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can
> see the wisdom of starting with that.
>
> It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for
> gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the
> time something like that could be approved and built the power companies
> will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices.
>
> - Jed
>
>


-- 

Regards,
Bob Higgins

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:47:01 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]

Once again I post before reading the entire thread :( .


>I wrote:
>
>
>> If you can power things directly from a home generator, why fool around
>> with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW unit, such as
>> one might use in a shopping mall.
>>
>
>I realize there will be a market for 50 MW replacement power generators for
>a long time, as well as 1 MW reactors for shopping malls, hospitals, and
>other large installations. But I think you should start by going after the
>meat of the market. First go after the market segment with the biggest
>potential profit. Then gradually work your way into smaller markets, and
>obsolete, dying market segments such as 50 MW power reactors.
>
>I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and
>approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be
>wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can
>see the wisdom of starting with that.
>
>It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for
>gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the
>time something like that could be approved and built the power companies
>will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices.
>
>- Jed
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 17:39:28 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
> wrote:
>
>Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary
>> >agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel
>> source
>> >small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen
>> >equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s
>> >hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or
>> >steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility
>> >
>> >This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then
>> >riding on the horses to get where you want to go.
>>
>
>I meant that using it in a 50 MW power plant connected to the grid is too
>circuitous. Just use the energy directly for some application. I do not see
>much future in 50 MW electric power generators once cold fusion becomes
>common. You might as well start with the configuration that is likely to
>become common.
>
>They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future
>technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do
>this, as I described in my book.
>
>Perhaps a better analogy would be inventing internal combustion engines,
>which allow a vehicle such as a Model T Ford to go anywhere, and then using
>these engines only to power replacements for horsedrawn and electric
>trolley cars, which must run on a fixed track. If you can get rid of the
>track, why keep it? If you can power things directly from a home generator,
>why fool around with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW
>unit, such as one might use in a shopping mall.

I think the latter is actually close to what they intend. Note that the article
mentioned a cogen unit. Such units are usually dedicated industrial units, that
are very economical because little energy is wasted. Furthermore that market has
the advantage that licencing is simpler (as Rossi points out).
Once the technology has proven itself safe and viable in a commercial setting
and established itself in the eyes of the public, then they can work toward
smaller distributed units.

>
>- Jed
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> If you can power things directly from a home generator, why fool around
> with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW unit, such as
> one might use in a shopping mall.
>

I realize there will be a market for 50 MW replacement power generators for
a long time, as well as 1 MW reactors for shopping malls, hospitals, and
other large installations. But I think you should start by going after the
meat of the market. First go after the market segment with the biggest
potential profit. Then gradually work your way into smaller markets, and
obsolete, dying market segments such as 50 MW power reactors.

I am assuming that it will take as much effort to get licensing and
approval for a 50 MW reactor as for a 20 kW home generator. I could be
wrong about that. If it is much easier to license the big generator I can
see the wisdom of starting with that.

It would make zero sense to develop a cold fusion replacement for
gigawatt-scale generators such as the ones at nuclear power plants. By the
time something like that could be approved and built the power companies
will be on the last legs and they will not pay their invoices.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Jed Rothwell]

 wrote:

Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary
> >agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel
> source
> >small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen
> >equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s
> >hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or
> >steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility
> >
> >This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then
> >riding on the horses to get where you want to go.
>

I meant that using it in a 50 MW power plant connected to the grid is too
circuitous. Just use the energy directly for some application. I do not see
much future in 50 MW electric power generators once cold fusion becomes
common. You might as well start with the configuration that is likely to
become common.

They are imposing the restrictions of present-day technology on a future
technology which works fine without those restrictions. People often do
this, as I described in my book.

Perhaps a better analogy would be inventing internal combustion engines,
which allow a vehicle such as a Model T Ford to go anywhere, and then using
these engines only to power replacements for horsedrawn and electric
trolley cars, which must run on a fixed track. If you can get rid of the
track, why keep it? If you can power things directly from a home generator,
why fool around with a 50 MW generator? I wouldn't even bother with a 1 MW
unit, such as one might use in a shopping mall.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[mixent]

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 7 Sep 2012 09:49:58 -0400:
Hi Jed,
[snip]
>At last we are seeing some real money! $20 million is great. However, the
>planned use of the money is preposterous:
>
> Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary
>agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel source
>small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen
>equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s
>hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or
>steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility
>
>This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then
>riding on the horses to get where you want to go.
>
>- Jed

..if you end up replacing a fossil fuel burner with LENR heat, then I wouldn't
call that "riding on the horses to get where you want to go".

It's a first (and obvious) step.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:Romney comments on cold fusion

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:19 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> I believe this has been reported before. Perhaps he commented again. See:
>
> http://boingboing.net/2012/09/06/179832.html

Yeah, it's the same quote.  Either that or no one ever educated him on
the difference between superconductors and CF.

T

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[ChemE Stewart]

So are we saying CF is really SLINKY POWER antigravity phenomenon?  :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WktQfP0lgo



On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Harry Veeder  wrote:

> wow, so who (or what) killed the nitinol heat engine?
> and what does SMA mean?
>
> This nitinol machine converts heat into mechanical energy. What I am
> exploring is a sort of anti-heat engine - the destruction of
> mechanical energy by cold.
>
> harry
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> > Harry may be setting you up for SMA...
> >
> > You only need to watch the first 3 minutes of this - to see the
> surprising
> > motor that raised a lot of eyebrows at the time - but never got
> traction, so
> > to speak...
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

wow, so who (or what) killed the nitinol heat engine?
and what does SMA mean?

This nitinol machine converts heat into mechanical energy. What I am
exploring is a sort of anti-heat engine - the destruction of
mechanical energy by cold.

harry



On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Harry may be setting you up for SMA...
>
> You only need to watch the first 3 minutes of this - to see the surprising
> motor that raised a lot of eyebrows at the time - but never got traction, so
> to speak...
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Jones Beene]

Harry may be setting you up for SMA...

You only need to watch the first 3 minutes of this - to see the surprising
motor that raised a lot of eyebrows at the time - but never got traction, so
to speak... 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKmYqUSDch8

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Jouni Valkonen]

I do not think that this thought experiment works with springs. That is
because spring energy is stored into compression of electron orbitals into
higher energy levels. This means that compressed spring is more massive due
to E=mc². However this is very intriguing thought experiment, because on
the other hand crystal structure of the spring is chancing when cooled.
What happens to the potential energy then? Like David said, tracking energy
conservation is very tricky.

Other perhaps even more intriguing thought experiment would be that if
compressed spring is assembled using molecular assembler such as star trek
replicator. This should not take any more energy than with uncompressed
spring, because van der waals forces are taking care of
the assembling process in both cases. That is, the extra energy needed to
assemble compressed spring is provided by van der waals force and van der
waals force is not classical force, but it is inherent quantum property of
atoms. This way we could utilize van der waals force to violate classical
thermodynamics and create useful energy out of nothing. (Geckos are masters
of utilizing van der waals forces)

However, even if this thought experiment does not work with springs, for
sure this thought experiment is working with permanent magnets. If
neodymium magnet is demagnetized when attached to refrigerator door, we are
loosing quite significant amount of classical potential energy that was
required to remove magnet from refrigerator door. That is way more than
that 360 millijoules that is the quantum energy stored into magnetic field.

—Jouni


On 7 September 2012 04:16, Harry Veeder  wrote:

> If a spring is compressed by a force at room temperature, the spring
> will return to its original length once the force is removed.
> In the language of CoE the compressed spring  is said to "store" the
> energy of the work done by the force.
>
> Now compress the spring again and then place it in a bath of liquid
> nitrogen. The spring will not return to its original length once the
> force is removed.
> At this stage I would say some of the "stored energy" has vanished and
> CoE has been violated.
>
>
> Harry
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax  
wrote:
> At 08:16 PM 9/6/2012, Harry Veeder wrote:
>>
>> If a spring is compressed by a force at room temperature, the spring
>> will return to its original length once the force is removed.
>> In the language of CoE the compressed spring  is said to "store" the
>> energy of the work done by the force.
>>
>> Now compress the spring again and then place it in a bath of liquid
>> nitrogen. The spring will not return to its original length once the
>> force is removed.
>> At this stage I would say some of the "stored energy" has vanished and
>> CoE has been violated.
>
>
> Seriously? Why would you say that?
>
> You could create a much simpler "violation." You slip a rectangular box of
> the right size over the compressed spring, so it can't return to its
> original size. Where did the potential energy go?

It is still present because the box is performing the same compression
task as the weight.

> First of all, I'm not so sure about the liquid nitrogen doing what is
> claimed about the spring. But if it does, it might do so in several
> different ways. For starters, energy is conserved in a closed system. In the
> situation described, the liquid nitrogen is heated by the spring, i.e.,
> energy is removed from the spring and is transferred to the liquid nitrogen.
>

Placing an uncompressed spring in the liquid nitrogen will also result
in a transfer heat. If the uncompressed and compressed spring both
start at room temperature, then it seems to me the loss of stored
energy is not commensurate with the transfer of heat.


> I could imagine that the spring, with serious pressure on it, might just
> break in the liquid nitrogen.
>
> If a compressed spring is dissolved in acid, again, the energy of
> compression is -- theoretically by CoE -- transferred to the acid, it would
> be heated a little. As the spring dissolved, it would become weaker, it
> would be likely to break before complete dissolution. All the energy,
> ultimately, would end up as heat in the acid, but the dissolution is also
> exothermic. Not easy to measure the contribution from the spring energy.
>
> The "length" of the spring is a red herring. The energy stored in the spring
> is the force exerted integrated over the distance travelled. At the same
> temperature, we expect with a perfect spring that it will return to the same
> length if released, and that does work equivalent to the return distance.
> However, an imperfect material may lose its "spring," and will not return to
> the same length. Where has the energy gone?
>
> It's the same problem, really.
>
> From my observation of bending metal, the energy goes into heating the
> spring, i.e, as the material is inelastically deformed, it heats.
> Bend metal back and forth, it heats, to the extent that the bending is not
> converted into spring tension. I've felt metal bent repeatedly back and
> forth get quite hot.

Upon first compression the spring warms, but it will cool so this
warming is not commensurate with the store of energy represented by
the load on the spring.

Harry

[Vo]:Romney comments on cold fusion

[Jed Rothwell]

I believe this has been reported before. Perhaps he commented again. See:

http://boingboing.net/2012/09/06/179832.html

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at different temperatures?

[Harry Veeder]

On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:29 PM, David Roberson  wrote:
> I think that the spring will return to its original position as in the first
> case if the temperature is returned to the same as before.  This situation
> would demonstrate that the missing energy is taken away as heat into the
> liquid nitrogen so it does not disappear.

Consider two identical springs. One is uncompressed and other is
compressed. Both are at room temperature before being placed in
identical cold baths. This tells me the heat content of the spring is
unrelated to the energy stored in the compressed spring and the loss
of stored energy cannot be explained by a transfer  of heat from the
spring to the cold bath.

> You could get results of the opposite nature if you place a metal bar
> between two firmly attached uprights and apply heat.  The heated bar would
> expand and push apart the uprights, but the extension force would go away
> once the bar is cooled back to room temperature.

This system converts heat into a store of mechanical energy,
whereas the spring system is different because it converts a
mechanical force into
a store of mechanical energy.


> COE is conserved in both of these experiments.  You must search carefully
> for energy sources and sinks since sometimes they are difficult to locate.
>
> In the heated bar case you can see that heat energy is added to the device
> which results in expansion.  The force due to the expansion does work by
> moving the uprights apart and is returned when the heat energy is extracted
> by cooling.

>From the standpoint of CoE all forms of energy equilavent, but the
spring example suggests
they are not equivalent.

harry

> -Original Message-
> From: Harry Veeder 
> To: vortex-l 
> Sent: Thu, Sep 6, 2012 10:25 pm
> Subject: [Vo]:Compressed spring - what happens to the stored energy at
> different temperatures?
>
> If a spring is compressed by a force at room temperature, the spring
> will return to its original length once the force is removed.
> In the language of CoE the compressed spring  is said to "store" the
> energy of the work done by the force.
>
> Now compress the spring again and then place it in a bath of liquid
> nitrogen. The spring will not return to its original length once the
> force is removed.
> At this stage I would say some of the "stored energy" has vanished and
> CoE has been violated.
>
>
> Harry
>

Re: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

[LORENHEYER]

If I've "learned" one thing over the years from all my observations of 
looking up in the sky with the "unaided" eye, not to mention what I am 
absolutely convinced and/or confident are authentic first-hand eyewitness 
up-close 
encounters that depict actual landed craft that leave tell-tale signs, 
effects, and/or physical evidence behind, plus the occupants or crew that have 
been 
described as small humanoid (highly evolved and/or developed in my opinion) 
beings w/ small thin bodies (in diver type suits) w/ enlarged heads w/ 
large obsidian or almond shaped eyes (something obvious related to tremendous 
light gathering abilities, in my opinion) and barely discernable nose, ears, 
mouth,  Not to mention w/o a doubt, no genitalia, organs, blood, flesh, 
nerves natural senses (have you lost yours yet?... well, you won't need to, 
because it's all not only archaic and completely unnecessary & outdone, but 
obsolete), etc, etc..   
  
 Now, while I am well aware of many but 
certainly not all of the various incidents over the years of sightings & 
encounters 
of us well-grounded in-the-flesh naturally limited and/or biologically 
dependent restricted humans with "them", I also realize that every copycat 
story 
& hoax will "naturally" follow, and/or a more reasonable practical down to 
earth (un) scientific explanation. (Money or Job Security typically forces 
most of us to say or do anything... it''s completely understandable because 
it is the current means by which enables us to prosper & progress and/or 
govern ourselves.   
 
 Now, one thing I'll say with 100 % certainty is 
that while this whole complete "other" issue has been thoroughly absolutely 
completely diluted, one clear *FACT* remains, and that is that what we (human 
beings) tend only to believe in, in regard to a more enduring place in 
heaven in some afterlife, with God or the Lord, or Supreme Being, or 
whathaveyou,,, the *Reality* of the situation or "nature of the beast"  will 
demand that 
as we evolve & grow over 10's of thousands & millions of years, develope 
vastly improved ways of obtaining efficiency in energy production & materials 
w/ second to none properties, along with the one & only process that will 
enable this civilization to travel the stars w/o trouble or fail.  

   Unfortunately, over 
the course of such a vast amount of time (and space) needed to develope this 
whole complete other mode of technological being, and the enormity or 
immensity or capacity and/or level of sophistication that information is 
processed  about the world we live in, our current human mode of existence will 
long 
since have become so outdated that yuo certainly wouldn't even hope to 
recognize it Out with the Old... In with the New.   
 

Our earthly individual 
human identities that we now live experience differently will very slowly come 
to pass, because, bio-reproduction and/or the natural environment will at 
some point in the future be competely abandoned or outdone. IOW's, immortality 
and/or a one being based ability will be developed/created in the 
Laboratory, whereas the world outside will then be the world within.
   

 Now, no doubt while it's a long story, 
that has already comepletely played out out there in countless other star 
systems over the billions of years, it's important to keep in mind that we 
humankind possess the cognitive ability to comprehend this "other" world which 
we 
generally know little to nothing about.  

So anyway, right now up in the Space above us is a highly coordinated 
attuned effort the likes of which would not only would but is completely 
baffling 
ourkind down here on good old earth, BUT, it should be at least comforting, 
if not rewarding, and/or even beyond exciting to *Know* that a whole 
complete *other* immaculate exquisite mode of existence/being has been 
thoroughly 
accomplished In The Absolute, Among The Stars, In Space, w/o trouble or 
fail, and very possibly Forever There After Anything else, would be 
uncivilized... not worth a hill of beings, or how'bout,  the paper it's printed 
on.  

  
Just having a little fun, before I perish from the earth OR

Re: [Vo]:Is sonofusion a viable power source?

[pagnucco]

Axil,

I am hoping all of these approaches are on the right track - whether they
use H or D.  BTW, it wasn't mentioned on Vortex-l, but "The SmartScarecrow
Show" had a video presentation covering a variety of cavitation approaches
I had never seen.  If interested, it is at:

http://smartscarecrow.com/2012/08/30/cavitating-electroyzers-the-key-to-over-unity-by-moray-b-king/

-- LP

Axil wrote:
> There is no deuterium in the LeClair’s cavatation. He uses only water and
> aluminum from Home Depot.
>
> Molten fluoride salts are transparent like water and the cavatation
> methods
> that LeClair uses will work with molten salts, IMHO; but molten salts are
> far hotter of course.
>
> Sonofusion might also perform with molten salts.
>
> Dear pagnucco you suffer from the same Deuterium fixation that many other
> cold fusion veterans suffer from. This is based on the fantasy that
> Deuterium is required to support a version of hot fusion.
>
> This is what Peter Gluck has been railing about when he tries to draw a
> distinction between LENR and LENR+.
>
> Cavatation is a LENR + reaction and is fundamentally the same as the Rossi
> reaction where no deuterium is used. All LeClair needs at a minimum is
> water to support his reaction.
>
> Cheers: Axil
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 11:27 PM,  wrote:
>
>> Axil,
>>
>> Interesting points.
>> Perhaps related to one of their points on their webpage at URL:
>> http://www.quantum-fusion.com/technology.shtml
>>
>>  ""Due to the laws of quantum mechanics CIF power output exponentially
>>depends on temperature: e.g. a tenfold increase in temperature
>> results
>>in 50,000-fold increase in the output power! Therefore minute process
>>improvements will result in huge power boost (the law of diminishing
>>returns does not apply to CIF design)""
>>
>> I don't know much about how well deuterium (or D2O) dissolves in these
>> salts (or other hi-temp liquids), but it sounds worth pursuing.
>> Hopefully, some of the sonofusion proponents will participate in
>> Vortex-l
>> discussions.
>>
>> -- LP
>>
>>
>> Axil^2 wrote:
>> > The theory that sonafusion is based on Deuterium fusion may be flawed.
>> > Under this theory, two deuterium atoms are supposed to fuse and
>> convert
>> > into helium. This fusion does not happen. I do not believe this fusion
>> is
>> > possible.
>> >
>> > As the LeClair experiment with cavatation has indicated, a molecule
>> > clustering mechanism which accumulates and concentrates positive
>> electric
>> > charge may be the cause of any nuclear reactions that may be happening
>> in
>> > sonofusion.
>> >
>> > IMHO, to make sonofusion as well as the LeClair reactions more
>> effective
>> > at
>> > producing nuclear heat, molten fluoride salts should be tried to
>> replace
>> > water as the cavatation medium. With this engineering change, this
>> ionic
>> > cavatation medium may produce coulomb barrier lowering molecular
>> > clustering
>> > since molten salts have been shown to produce intense damage to
>> cavatation
>> > impellers 10 times more intense than water.
>> >
>> > Unlike water, molten salts can support very high electro-turbines
>> > operating
>> > temperatures up to 1000C. Higher thermodynamic efficiencies will then
>> be
>> > possible at ambient pressure.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Cheers:Axil
>> > On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 2:51 PM,  wrote:
>> >
>> >> Perhaps of interest -
>> >>
>> >> I am not sure whether this has been posted on Vortex-l before, but
>> >> Quantum Fusion, Inc., has a professional looking website -
>> >>
>> >> http://www.quantum-fusion.com/
>> >>
>> >> - which is promoting deuterium based sonofusion with the aim of
>> reducing
>> >> energy generation cost to 1 cent/kWh.
>> >>
>> >> The pdf-documents at the bottom of their science page -
>> >>   http://www.quantum-fusion.com/science.shtml
>> >> - appear well researched.
>> >>
>> >> Any opinions on whether sonofusion has suffered the same fate as
>> LENR,
>> >> and
>> >> whether it deserves a second look?
>> >>
>> >> -- Lou Pagnucco
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>

[Vo]:Why we still need political conventions and physics conferences

[Jed Rothwell]

I've been thinking about one of Arthur C Clarke's favorite subjects: the
competition between transportation and communication. He suggested that one
or the other would be perfected in the distant future, but that perfecting
one would render the other unnecessary. In other words, if you could reach
any point on the earth in half an hour there would be little point to
making something like a life-size three-dimensional holographic video
communication system.

Turning from the distant future to the present, people wonder why we still
have political conventions and physics conferences. It is an interesting
question. Many newspaper commentators say that U.S. political party
conventions are "obsolete." Because of changes in the primary system, the
nomination occurs before the convention. The convention is a mere
formality. I disagree. First, it is possible that no one will win a primary
in the future and a convention will be necessary. Second, conventions still
serve vital purposes. Mainly, they bring delegates, candidates,
representatives, enthusiastic supporters and even families together to have
a good time face to face. People schmooze, plan for the future, politic,
divvy up the campaign funds, and hold training sessions about how to raise
money how to conduct campaigns. For a political junkie it is wonderful fun.
It fires up supporters and helps the campaign that follows. What you see
broadcast on the television in the main hall is only a small part of what
goes on.

Conventions are particularly important for the Democratic Party because it
is informal at best and usually in chaos. As Will Rogers said, "I am not a
member of any organized party -- I am a Democrat."

I think it will be a long time -- if ever -- before telepresence and
communications can replace the kind of face-to-face interactions people
benefit from at a convention.

My wife remarks that Americans love conventions, meetings, trade shows,
labor unions bashes, national meetings of Baptists, the NIWeek with 3,000
employees, comic book conventions, Dragon*con parades, Chowder and Marching
societies, and other gatherings of people with common interests. This sort
of thing is more common in the US than Japan. I expect it is more common
than in Europe. Visitors to the US from Europe in the 19th century remarked
on this.

I think physics conferences are also held in person partly because
scientists, like everyone else, like to schmooze, and meet face-to-face to
chat informally. It is also a good place to find a job, or poach someone
else's star employee.

ICCF17 was broadcast via Skype for the first time in the history of cold
fusion conferences. Several people told me they saw some sessions. As a way
to get technical information from the lectures or from something like
Celani's demonstration, a Skype video or a YouTube video is pretty good.
Some people even participated in the conference via Skype, making short
presentations or asking questions during the Q&A session.

The ICCF17 Preparata medal was presented to John Bockris in absentia.
Bockris is old and cannot travel. He made a short presentation
by prerecorded video. A video of the presentation is being sent to him.

For everyday business meetings or planning sessions with people you already
know well, I think Skype and other virtual conference is already a better
choice than most business meetings. It is particularly good for people
widely separated time zones.

You can see from photos of the White House Situation Room and other
expensive facilities that political leaders and captains of industry
already use high tech video presence, probably about as readily and as
often as Woodrow Wilson used telephones in 1914. The telephone was still a
high-tech gadget in 1914. Some top leaders felt it was beneath their
dignity to use it full-time. Even if the President did not use the
telephone on an everyday basis back then, his staff certainly did. Someone
like the Assistant Sec. of the Navy Franklin Roosevelt did. The first --
and perhaps last -- U.S. president to be addicted to telephones was LBJ.
Much of what he did is lost to history because he conducted so much
business by phone. Nowadays, presidents use e-mail, like everyone else.

There was no overseas telephone service until the 1930s, when radio-based
service was introduced. That is how FDR and Churchill chatted during WWII,
on scrambled telephones. They did not discuss secrets in detail because
AT&T worried that the Germans might be able to unscramble the transmission.
FDR and Churchill conducted most communication by cable.

Getting back to the future . . . I expect that compared to political
conventions, or trade shows, future physics conferences are likely to have
more virtual participation than they do now, but I expect there will be
actual, physical participation.

In the distant future, I expect that people will live Mars and various
other planets. Once this happens, physical participation in conferences
will once again become necessary

RE: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

Terry sez:

 

[Regarding the latest UFO jellyfish images.]

 

...

 

> However, I have to offer this vid:

> 

>  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDlRm87fQaY

> 

 

Striking images of ISS. I didn't realize one could get such clear images
from something as simple as a 5 inch refracting telescope. That's
astounding.

 

> and one of not so good quality:

> 

>  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=r0OIxzFJiKY&NR=1

> 

> and, while I really want to believe, . . .

> 

> Maybe Loren Heyer will comment?

 

 

Quoting from the first You Tube link:

 

"In short: Get a telescope that costs more than 50 dollars."

 

Yep! 

 

It wasn't clear to me whether the fuzzy images were videos of stationary
objects or whether the objects were in near orbit around our planet. I
suspect knowing just that little bit of info alone would probably tell us
the high likelihood of whether these particular "ufos" were local or
foreign.

 

... your tax dollars at work! ;-)

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy- 20 Million funding

[Jed Rothwell]

At last we are seeing some real money! $20 million is great. However, the
planned use of the money is preposterous:

 Sunrise offer is also conditional on Brillouin striking preliminary
agreement to acquire at least one “stranded asset” conventional fuel source
small scale (5-10MW) Power Plant, with existing conventional co-gen
equipment, and replacing (retrofitting) old fuel source with Brillouin’s
hot tube NHB™, together with renewal of an operating power purchase or
steam heat contract with an industrial or a utility

This is inventing a railroad train, using it to transport horses, and then
riding on the horses to get where you want to go.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:a rather tragic joke

[Peter Gluck]

Thank you both for the additions to the Principle!
Peter

On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 03:10 PM 9/6/2012, Terry Blanton wrote:
>
>> Gee, Peter, it brought a tear to my eye since it reminded me of how I
>> treat my people.  That guy was a great man!
>>
>
> He was. Peter, you were lucky to know him, and it looks like he gave you a
> gift beyond price.
>
>  My professional career and my life followed and I have applied always,
>> stubbornly, in all the cases, the Chief Engineer’s Principle. Sometimes I
>> have succeeded sometimes not…and this was it.
>>
>
> In the work I'm involved with, this is called being "cause in the matter."
> It is not a "fact." It is a stand, here the stand of the Engineer who
> accepts full responsibility for performance.
>
> "Possible" and "impossible" are just stories, intepretations, they are
> neither true nor false. But when we declare that something will happen,
> something happens, if we continue the stand and don't just give up at the
> first excuse. What may seem impossible turns out to be possible, the
> limitations were a limitation in imagination. From getting into action,
> more possibilities appear, and some of them may be workable.
>
> The Engineer excises "Can't" from his or her vocabulary. "I don't know
> how" is somewhat reasonable, but even that may be inauthentic. I might know
> and don't know that I know, because I don't yet recognize the connection.
>
>
>


-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com