Re: [Vo]:Document For You
This looks like a phishing virus attack. On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: SPAM? *From:* Jeff Sutton [mailto:jsutton.sudb...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:03 AM *To:* undisclosed-recipients: *Subject:* [Vo]:Document For You Hello. Kindly View the documents i have attached for you using Drop Box. Please let me know your opinion.
Re: [Vo]:Document For You
I received one that I did not open either. Dave -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jul 16, 2015 1:36 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Document For You This looks like a phishing virus attack. On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:00 PM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: SPAM? From: Jeff Sutton [mailto:jsutton.sudb...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:03 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: [Vo]:Document For You Hello. Kindly View the documents i have attached for you using Drop Box. Please let me know your opinion.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: A basis for this was the assumption was that only single spin quanta can be transferred in a coherent system in any given reaction. After thinking about your comments about spin, I realized I've been neglecting spin up to now. For a little while I thought the problem was unrecoverable. It seemed to me that the dividing of the reaction energy across a number of electrons would require dividing up angular momentum of n=1 (for the original gamma) across those electrons. Now I wonder whether it would be possible to conserve spin with the appropriate selection of electrons: -1/2 + 1/2 + -1/2 + 1/2 + ... + 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 Each electron will in turn emit a photon, which is again angular momentum n=1, so I'm not sure how that factors in as a consideration. It seems improbable to me that there would be two [dd]* resonances with antiparallel spin underway at the same time. Eric
[Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
Eric-- I do not consider that the LENR reactions produce many, if any gammas (EM RADIATION .5 mev.) It takes lots of mass to stop gammas—actually the electrons associated with the mass. very few are of the exact energy to react with a resonant transition of a nucleon. Gammas are well correlated in fission reactors with fissions and energy production, and the shielding is required to accomplish a reduced gamma flux and heating of uncooled parts of a reactor. Without the electrons of the shields (mostly steel and lead)From my the gammas escape. IMHO the lack of gammas in LENR means they are not created in the reaction. If resonant absorption of gammas were part of nature, it would have been identified in fission reactor operations. IMHO it is not a significant effect. Bob Cook From: Eric Walker Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 5:06 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:24 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I realize what you meant, but during normal decay reactions, the energy is not shared with an ensemble of electrons, so why would this case be special? I'm not really sure. There's just enough of doubt on my part about the applicability of known behavior to this specific situation that I don't write off the possibility. Here are some potential explanations: a.. In the case of a short-lived nuclear transition yielding a gamma that occurs from the rearranging of nucleons, the nucleons reside in a field of strong positive charge, despite the presence of an electron cloud (I suspect). Perhaps the charge density has to be negative or strongly negative for a gamma-yielding transition to short-circuit to nearby electrons. b.. Maybe when it comes to gamma-yielding transitions, there is more natural activity than we think there is, and a lot of the transitions are short-circuited in the proposed manner, leading to heat rather than gammas. As observers outside of the system, we see only those gammas that escape for some reason. c.. Maybe there is a qualitative a difference between metastable transitions, which take a while to occur, and that of an extremely short-lived resonance like a [dd]* pair. The faster the transition, the more likely it is to short-circuit. Because we generally study dd fusions in a plasma system, this skews the data we have to work with, because there are few electrons nearby. (In cases where a dd fusion occurs during thin-foil ion bombardment, there is an anomalous screening effect.) d.. Perhaps the circumstances of the production of the alphas are a little different than simple fusion in the vicinity of lattice sites; for example, if there is electric arcing which is drawing the precursors near one another (which may or may not be d+d), the arc in conjunction with the electron cloud may provide a different environment than is witnessed in other contexts. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR
I don't think my first pic went through. I think they come in all shapes and sizes! On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 7:59 AM, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, July 16, 2015, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: I would not be surprised if these vortices were present sealing the inner walls of Casimir cavities helping to evacuate the larger virtual particles that are suppressed out of the cavity in a sort of push pull arrangement. Even my relativistic perspective where the larger VP are still present but undergo Lorentzian contraction would still fit this push pull concept where the black hole like property of these vortices would accumulate to balance the white hole like properties of the cavity and result in relativistic level differentials that provide contraction [a super Ventori like effect of virtual particles at the nano scale]. *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:35 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR Where does the vacuum energy come from in LENR? Nano-particles slows down light and cause light to flow in a tight circle called a vortex. When this happens a black hole on a nano-scale is formed. This black hle of light sucks in virtual paericles from the vacuum. On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR
On Thursday, July 16, 2015, Roarty, Francis X francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote: I would not be surprised if these vortices were present sealing the inner walls of Casimir cavities helping to evacuate the larger virtual particles that are suppressed out of the cavity in a sort of push pull arrangement. Even my relativistic perspective where the larger VP are still present but undergo Lorentzian contraction would still fit this push pull concept where the black hole like property of these vortices would accumulate to balance the white hole like properties of the cavity and result in relativistic level differentials that provide contraction [a super Ventori like effect of virtual particles at the nano scale]. *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','janap...@gmail.com');] *Sent:* Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:35 PM *To:* vortex-l *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR Where does the vacuum energy come from in LENR? Nano-particles slows down light and cause light to flow in a tight circle called a vortex. When this happens a black hole on a nano-scale is formed. This black hle of light sucks in virtual paericles from the vacuum. On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','janap...@gmail.com'); wrote:
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: Your point is if the experimental result does not fit the theory, then ignore or discount the experimental result. This sounds just like the process that the naysayes use to ignore LENR. My point is that the experiment was not done well; for example, there was no proper calibration. This complaint is about method and not theory. If one does not have good data to work with, it's a guessing game as to whether there was excess heat. Whether or not there was excess heat, the isotopic analysis was interesting, however. Where in the Lugano report does it say that the nickel particle you've been drawing attention to is homogenous 64Ni? I believe it would be something of a stretch to get at this conclusion indirectly on the basis of the isotopic analyses that were provided. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR
I would not be surprised if these vortices were present sealing the inner walls of Casimir cavities helping to evacuate the larger virtual particles that are suppressed out of the cavity in a sort of push pull arrangement. Even my relativistic perspective where the larger VP are still present but undergo Lorentzian contraction would still fit this push pull concept where the black hole like property of these vortices would accumulate to balance the white hole like properties of the cavity and result in relativistic level differentials that provide contraction [a super Ventori like effect of virtual particles at the nano scale]. From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2015 8:35 PM To: vortex-l Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Zero point energy in LENR Where does the vacuum energy come from in LENR? Nano-particles slows down light and cause light to flow in a tight circle called a vortex. When this happens a black hole on a nano-scale is formed. This black hle of light sucks in virtual paericles from the vacuum. On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 8:04 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.commailto:janap...@gmail.com wrote:
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
Hi Bob, On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: I do not consider that the LENR reactions produce many, if any gammas (EM RADIATION .5 mev.) It takes lots of mass to stop gammas—actually the electrons associated with the mass. I think we agree about the gammas for the most part -- there are generally few gammas seen in LENR experiments (but not no gammas). The few gammas there are not commensurate with excess heat; it's possible they're not even correlated. I'm saying there might be another branch under the right conditions for reactions that in a plasma system would produce gammas. E.g., instead of: d+d → 4He+ɣ we might have: d+d + electrons → 4He + excited electrons + lower energy photons The quote about alphas that was attributed to Rossi has not yet been sourced, so it's not clear exactly what was said or in what context. Our knowledge of the facts is not very good at this point. Eric
[Vo]:Document For You
Hello. Kindly View the documents i have attached for you using Drop Box. Please let me know your opinion. Click here to view http//dropbox.com/login/documents http://dropfile.uno/file/fox/dropbox/index.php log on with your email for immediate access to view. Regards.
[Vo]:LENR IDEA PLUS INFO FOR JUL 16, 2015
Deae Friends, The idea is important I hope, love it or kill it. See: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/07/a-basic-idea-plus-some-info-for-jul-16.html All the best, Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
Eric-- I agree with the idea that d-d + e’s go to 4He and excited electrons. One of my first comments on Vortex-l was very similar. I suggested the d’s fuse in adjacent lattice positions—all in one coherent system by giving up spin mass energy to the lattice electrons as spin energy and, hence phonic energy with conservation of angular momentum in the orbital electrons and the low energy radiant photons. A basis for this was the assumption was that only single spin quanta can be transferred in a coherent system in any given reaction. Thus there was a reaction time during which the d’s entered an excited spin states in the adjacent lattice positions and as a function of the local magnetic field giving up spin quanta one at a time, conserving spin and angular momentum as the excited virtual 4He’s decayed to stable 4He. The transition time would be on the order of nuclear transitions in excited nucleons. I assmed 2 virtual 4He were involved with anti-parallel spin energy states—similar to a Cooper pair of particles—although separated in the same coherent system. This allowed the system to start the reaction with a balanced of 0 angular to give up. The energy states would vary with the local magnetic field and create the necessary conditions to conserve energy spin and angular momentum. I further reasoned that entropy would increase, if the coherent system reached a condition that would allow it to do so. Hence the generation of heat via spin coupling—nucleons to electrons. Bob Cook From: Eric Walker Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 6:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction Hi Bob, On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 1:23 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: I do not consider that the LENR reactions produce many, if any gammas (EM RADIATION .5 mev.) It takes lots of mass to stop gammas—actually the electrons associated with the mass. I think we agree about the gammas for the most part -- there are generally few gammas seen in LENR experiments (but not no gammas). The few gammas there are not commensurate with excess heat; it's possible they're not even correlated. I'm saying there might be another branch under the right conditions for reactions that in a plasma system would produce gammas. E.g., instead of: d+d → 4He+ɣ we might have: d+d + electrons → 4He + excited electrons + lower energy photons The quote about alphas that was attributed to Rossi has not yet been sourced, so it's not clear exactly what was said or in what context. Our knowledge of the facts is not very good at this point. Eric
RE: [Vo]:Document For You
SPAM? From: Jeff Sutton [mailto:jsutton.sudb...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2015 10:03 AM To: undisclosed-recipients: Subject: [Vo]:Document For You Hello. Kindly View the documents i have attached for you using Drop Box. Please let me know your opinion. Click here to view http//dropbox.com/login/documents http://dropfile.uno/file/fox/dropbox/index.php log on with your email for immediate access to view. Regards.
Re: [Vo]:My posting privileges at SCP have been revoked.
Your faith in them is amazing.
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy website is confusing
Found this using the google image search. Really cool app. On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:58 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: These guys are frauds. That boiler is stolen from Utica: http://ingramswaterandair.com/utica-fired-direct-vent-sealed-combustion-boiler-10-pi-15043.html?image=Utica_USC4_Gas_Fired_Direct_Vent_Sealed_Combustion_Boiler On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: See: http://brillouinenergy.com/ You have to scroll down and down here to reach things such as: . . . A low temperature system operating at up to 150ºC based on an electrolytic (wet) process. Brillouin Energy’s WET™ Boiler systems can supply low temperature thermal energy for space and water heating, and other common low temperature industrial purposes such as for food processing or healthcare applications. In case you are wondering where it says that. You can click on the + sign down there to see yet other things. This is what game programmers might call an Easter Egg. Seek and thou shalt find. There are also dead links in this site and other problems. I do not care for these scrolling, page-undifferentiated web site designs. They should at least include an index, like the one I put here for the different subtitle scripts: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Brillouin Energy website is confusing
These guys are frauds. That boiler is stolen from Utica: http://ingramswaterandair.com/utica-fired-direct-vent-sealed-combustion-boiler-10-pi-15043.html?image=Utica_USC4_Gas_Fired_Direct_Vent_Sealed_Combustion_Boiler On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: See: http://brillouinenergy.com/ You have to scroll down and down here to reach things such as: . . . A low temperature system operating at up to 150ºC based on an electrolytic (wet) process. Brillouin Energy’s WET™ Boiler systems can supply low temperature thermal energy for space and water heating, and other common low temperature industrial purposes such as for food processing or healthcare applications. In case you are wondering where it says that. You can click on the + sign down there to see yet other things. This is what game programmers might call an Easter Egg. Seek and thou shalt find. There are also dead links in this site and other problems. I do not care for these scrolling, page-undifferentiated web site designs. They should at least include an index, like the one I put here for the different subtitle scripts: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
How does your wonder particle stop at neutron formation just at Ni62? On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:59 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 16 Jul 2015 01:20:56 -0400: Hi, [snip] What keeps this particle from interacting with the atoms on the outer region of the nickel particle more than the inner section of the nickel particle? More Ni64 should have been found on the outside of the particle and more Ni58 should have been fount at the center of the particle. Not if it had all been converted. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 5:13 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: This is an interesting idea, but again the question arises, why doesn't this happen with normal decay reactions? I will tell you when I find out. ;) Eric
Re: [Vo]:Possible cause for coral reefs dying...
In case anyone wants to support a good cause: http://www.reefguardians.org On Wednesday, July 8, 2015, ChemE Stewart cheme...@gmail.com wrote: Mark, I understand and I agree with you. Nature thrives around a balance, any chronic source of upset/pollution, be it chemical or electromagnetic, can throw that out of balance. A little poison is good for you... When I first started mapping wildlife disease two years ago, I mapped chronic wasting disease (CWD) in deer near radar stations (all of the maps are on my blog) with a link on my menu. A university PhD candidate emailed me and told me that chronic wasting disease is a possibly a type of Protein/Prion disease http://www.cwd-info.org/index.php/fuseaction/about.main Infectious agents of CWD are neither bacteria nor viruses, but are hypothesized to be prions. Prions are infectious proteins without associated nucleic acids. http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/condition/prion-disease. I love my radiation devices but do they love us? Hopefully everyone learned something about radars yesterday... Stewart On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 1:58 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','zeropo...@charter.net'); wrote: Since I was the one who initiated this thread, I feel responsible to clear things up… calm down and take a deep breath! Dave and Stewart, you two have completely missed the point, and Dave, it is clear that you have not read my original post, nor any of the references. Let me also say that I may be a bit of an odd-man-out in the Vort Collective since I have degrees in both Biology and ComputerSci, and it is understandable how someone without the biology background might miss the main point I was trying to make. Please read the following points carefully: 1. the PRF (pulse-repetition-frequency) is NOT the issue or possible ‘cause’ I was referring to in my original post. 2. the references in my post show that protein reactivity CAN BE AFFECTED by THz EM waves IN SOLUTION, causing significant changes to ‘normal’ biochemical processes. Since PROPER protein interactions are ESSENTIAL to living organisms, and exposure to even very low levels can cause this disruption of biochemical processes, it could lead to deleterious effects to the organism. Here is the title to one of the refs which states it very succinctly: “Terahertz underdamped vibrational motion governs protein-ligand binding in solution” Let me provide some explanation as to the significance of the wording in this title: - why ‘underdamped’, and ‘in solution’? Interaction of NON-ionizing EM waves with biological tissue/processes has always been thought to be HIGHLY DAMPED due to the high (salt) water content of biological tissues, thus, not likely to cause much interaction with physical elements (i.e., living cells and various molecules). And this is probably the case for the vast majority of EM frequencies. However, it now appears that protein conformation (physical folding 3D shape) has evolved to be in a state of near criticality which is key to the proteins ability to interact with very specific other proteins or molecules. The underdamped vibrations which the Thz waves cause in the protein, or subunits of the protein, although only lasting picoseconds, are enough to trigger the conformational change BEFORE the protein has a chance to interact with its target protein/molecule. If this is allowed to happen on a continuous basis, it could have very deleterious effects on the health of the organism. 3. If even a minute amount of EM power at very high frequencies makes it to the depth of the coral-building organisms, there is a possibility that it would disrupt some aspect of their biochemical processes, leading to their decline/death. If the radars were only on for a few mins/hours a day, the organisms could probably recover, but when hit with it 24/7/365, their systems eventually degrade causing death. This is a **reasonable** scenario given this new knowledge about how EM can affect protein interactions. Is it the cause of coral and other sea-life deaths??? I don’t know, but wanted to pass it along… 4. Although one of the references was referring to Thz freq’s, it would be reasonable to assume that Ghz or lower freqs might also cause similar disruption to biochemical processes. In looking at this thread, the fact that it got sidetracked is probably because most of my original text was deleted early on and Dave did not go back to read it… -Mark Iverson
[Vo]:Brillouin Energy website is confusing
See: http://brillouinenergy.com/ You have to scroll down and down here to reach things such as: . . . A low temperature system operating at up to 150ºC based on an electrolytic (wet) process. Brillouin Energy’s WET™ Boiler systems can supply low temperature thermal energy for space and water heating, and other common low temperature industrial purposes such as for food processing or healthcare applications. In case you are wondering where it says that. You can click on the + sign down there to see yet other things. This is what game programmers might call an Easter Egg. Seek and thou shalt find. There are also dead links in this site and other problems. I do not care for these scrolling, page-undifferentiated web site designs. They should at least include an index, like the one I put here for the different subtitle scripts: http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=1618 - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Thu, 16 Jul 2015 01:20:56 -0400: Hi, [snip] What keeps this particle from interacting with the atoms on the outer region of the nickel particle more than the inner section of the nickel particle? More Ni64 should have been found on the outside of the particle and more Ni58 should have been fount at the center of the particle. Not if it had all been converted. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Re: Rossi's theory of the LENR reaction
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Thu, 16 Jul 2015 12:58:49 -0500: Hi, [snip] Now I wonder whether it would be possible to conserve spin with the appropriate selection of electrons: -1/2 + 1/2 + -1/2 + 1/2 + ... + 1/2 + 1/2 = 1 Each electron will in turn emit a photon, which is again angular momentum n=1, so I'm not sure how that factors in as a consideration. It seems improbable to me that there would be two [dd]* resonances with antiparallel spin underway at the same time. This is an interesting idea, but again the question arises, why doesn't this happen with normal decay reactions? Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:My posting privileges at SCP have been revoked.
It is my understanding that Dr. Mills ordered me removed from the Yahoo SCP discussion group. While I can still view, I'm not allowed to post anymore. Giving a quick synopsis of what I believe probably lead up to my ultimate fate: Dr. Mills recently revealed the surprising claim over at SCP that BLP's SunCell technology, which the company is attempting to build a commercially viable prototype with, has now apparently evolved from a complicated moving parts system to a non-moving parts system. IOW, some kind of a solid-state technology is now being developed. Alas, as far as the peanut gallery is concerned, no details have been given that might help explain what this new technology entails. This has resulted in fertile speculation within the SCP group combined with a generous serving of congratulations offered up to Dr. Mills from what I would call the SCP cheerleading squad. I think what got me ultimately canned was the fact that I became insistent in requesting that Dr. Mills might want to consider having BLP assemble some kind of a NON-PROPRIETARY black-box demonstration to confirm the fact that some form of a solid state prototype really is what they are working on. I reasoned that if BLP was willing to place out in the public domain several interesting demonstrations last summer involving now abandoned moving-parts SunCell technology why not consider releasing another more up-to-date public demonstration showing why BLP's RD staff have now moved on to a new solid-state technology. Obviously pursuing a solid state system ought to be a vast improvement. I realize the fact that Randy Co was never under any obligation to explain anything to the peanut gallery guild, of which I am a non-paying member of. According to how many startup companies operate (typically under extreme secrecy) the fact that Dr. Mills has been willing to reveal as much as he has over the years has been an unusual step to take. It was a step many within in SCP group have been extremely thankful for. Obviously, the real purpose of the original demonstrations of last summer was not to demonstrate anything for the public's sake. It was to secure additional funding. BLP succeeded in that endeavor. Millions of dollars flowed into BLP's bank account. I was happy for BLP good fortune. Nevertheless, the fact that BLP performed several demonstrations last summer I felt it was worth a try to see if BLP might be willing to show the general public something. I argued it might help minimize pathological skeptical speculation. Many of them, I argued, would be more than happy to infer that BLP is now just making stuff up out of thin air. Randy didn't buy that explanation. What does it matter, he replied. It's a legitimate response. NTL, I must confess I did press him on the matter. The result was that I was barraged by numerous SCP cheerleaders who chastised me for bugging Dr. Mills. One called my posting style passive aggressive. That was news to me. Directly challenging Dr. Mills, which admittedly might not have been a wise thing for me to have done, does not strike me as something a passive aggressive individual would engage in. From my perspective, we are apparently left to take Randy's word. That didn't sit well with me. Under the circumstances I felt it was worth a try to see if we might be able to get more clarification. Apparently, Dr. Mills disagreed, and I disagreed with Dr. Mills disagreeing with me. And so I was canned. I can live with that. He is the boss of BLP. It's not easy being the boss. Alas, from my perspective, a year has gone by and no self-running POC has yet to be demonstrated. This obviously should not surprise a single Vortex veteran. The general public is apparently left to assume that BLP continues to work on the new solid state technology. I see no reason to doubt such claims. But the burning unanswered question still remains: How far have they gotten? FWIW, Randy did mentioned the possibility of unveiling some kind of a prototype before the end of 2015. Based on past predictions I guess we shall see what develops. I continue to wish BLP well. * * * Yesterday, before I learned of my fate, I sent a message specifically to the moderator, John Farrell, asking for clarification of my status. I wanted to make it clear that I would abide by his decision. Upon learning of my fate I wrote the following reply to John: Thank you for your candor, John. I am not surprised. Nevertheless, I continue to wish Dr. Mills and BLP good fortune. I'm sure they will survive quite fine without any further deliberations from me. There are some very smart individuals in the SCP group. Many are asking good physics questions of Randy. I hope his theory manages to get more serious scrutiny in the near future by a larger science community. Obviously, a good experimental prototype (or a commercial product) ought to accomplish that. As for the cheerleading squad... Well I probably was a card-carrying
