Re: [Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

[Esa Ruoho]

If you guys like the internets more, the transcript is mirrored here:
http://freeenergy.news/steorn/steorn-o-cube-webinar-full-transcript/


On 29 October 2015 at 02:17, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the 28th
> October 2015.
>
> If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
> the video is at http://orbo.com/
> --
>
> Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to the
> first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial technology
> ... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to demonstrate
> the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we want to
> just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that we've
> taken over the last fifteen years.
> ---
> Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
> got into this crazy company.
> Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because, what
> happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
> technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
> it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
> So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
> technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
> listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
> it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
> that conversation was.. ahm..
> Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
> Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
> proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
> said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
> of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
> was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
> was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
> him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
> what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
> on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
> side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
> was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
> "Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."
> 
> Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years defending
> your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background about
> Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
> Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
> and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
> lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
> you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
> Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
> fraud..
> Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
> Shaun: And then one day..
> Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
> magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
> Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a mistake,
> depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
> We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
> putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
> something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
> money.
> ---
> Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
> realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
> I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
> and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
> realized that yous were doing some interesting stuff, but it's been
> enjoyable seeing the progression over the years, and, you know, we're
> really, really really interested in what's going on, ahm, you know..
> Shaun: And you.. You see all the lads from Steorn, outside and about, in
> and out of there, these lads that just (heard) about every provocation and
> word and insult in the world, they're called conman, scam-artist, and so
> on, you've seen them at their most vulnerable. Honestly what do you think
> of them?
> Alex?:  I've never seen them worry, I've never seen them. I like them,
> genuinely like, I know yous all, right down to Max, I've played poker with
> so many of yous, we've shared so many late nights, and I remember telling
> my friends, you know, we're also in business, and I said, this guy doing
> mad stuff with magnets, like, you know, and yeah.. Yous are operating in,
> you know, this crazy environment, and, when we, you know, when we
> eventually -- when you actually turned around and said that

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Teslaalset]

Price is 1200 Euro
Power generation is 0.4W
Energy is roughly 10Wh
Weight is 300 grams, most of it is due to the aluminum casing.
Even in a Feraday cage the device works.
It’s not sensitive to geographic orientation.
They have a granted patent on this.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Esa Ruoho  wrote:

> Well, I'm watching the replay of the webinar, at
>  https://www.facebook.com/217496297671/videos/10153326632242672/
>
> when I tuned in to the actual broadcast, they said, 2.1amps, two full
> recharges of a smartphone, then 24 hours to recharge in case the battery
> ran out.
>
> Did I get it right, Craig? I stand corrected if I got it wrong.
>
> Oh, and the price? 1200€.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: The fifth force.

[Axil Axil]

Mills is producing nanoclusters of noble gases.

Noble gases are ejected at high pressure from a supersonic nozzle into a
partial vacuum.  The noble gas mixture cools when it is ejected into a
partial vacuum via a small hole (a nozzle), producing a supersonic
molecular beam. The process leads to a reduction in the random motion of
the noble gas molecules and solid clusters of noble gas form.

Mills is producing noble gas nanoparticles. In the Mills fifth force
experiment, the noble gas nanoparticles produce SPPs. The SPPs produce a
magnetic monopole beam that collectively point at the electron beam passing
perpendicular to it. The magnetism produces the change in the line of
flight direction of the electron beam.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> http://news.sciencemag.org/2001/06/magnetism-stiffens-space-time
>
>
> Remember this:
>
>
> Albert Einstein's rubber sheets--his metaphor for thinking of space and
> time as a stretchy membrane--may be due for a dose of starch. By
> reanalyzing the basic equations of general relativity, a researcher has
> discovered that magnetic fields tend to flatten and stiffen the fabric of
> space-time. The finding might force cosmologists and astronomers to
> reexamine how magnetic fields have shaped the evolution of the cosmos.
>
> According to Einstein, a hunk of matter such as a star bends space-time
> just as a bowling ball weighs down a rubber sheet. The result, described in
> relativistic terms, is gravity. That much has been known for the better
> part of a century. But physicist Christos Tsagas of Portsmouth University
> in the United Kingdom looked at the equation in an unusual way, switching
> the roles of space and time--a swap that makes no mathematical difference
> but changes the form of the equation.
>
> Tsagas spotted something no one had seen before: A term in the equation
> showed that magnetic fields transfer their properties to the very fabric of
> space-time itself. Like rubber bands under tension, magnetic field lines
> try to remain as straight as possible. The fields transmit that tension to
> space-time, Tsagas writes in the 11 June issue of *Physical Review
> Letters*, making nearby space like a rubber sheet that has been stretched
> a little bit tighter. According to Tsagas, such a region becomes stiffer
> and flattens out somewhat.
>
> "The normal assumption is to neglect magnetic fields in the early
> universe, mostly for simplicity," says Bernard Carr, a physicist at Queen
> Mary's College in London. But if the finding pans out, cosmologists will
> have to rethink the role of magnetic fields in shaping the cosmos. And
> black hole theorists--who deal with sharply curved space near strong
> magnetic fields--might need to revise some pet notions as well.
> Astrophysicists in general, it's safe to say, could lose a little sleep
> over stiff sheets.
>
>
> Magnetism is antigravity.
>
> SPPs throughout space produce huge amounts of anapole magnetism. The SPP
> soliton in LENR could be the source of the accelerating universe.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> R. Mills has come up with a theory that purports to explain the expansion
>> of the univere based on what he calls the hyperbolic electron. This
>> electron is mated with a photon. This special type of electron sounds like
>> a polariton to me.
>>
>> He has run experiments to show that these electrons(polaritons is the
>> correct name) produce a fifth force or negative gravity witch cause an
>> accelerating universe..
>>
>>
>> http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20paper102307.pdf
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Discovering possible new forces in nature is no mean task. The discovery
>>> of gravity linked to Newton's arguably apocryphal apple experiment has
>>> remained anchored in popular culture. In January 1986, Ephraim Fischbach,
>>> Physics Professor from Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, had
>>> his own chance to leave his mark on collective memory. His work made the
>>> front page of the New York Times after he and his co-authors published a
>>> study uncovering the tantalising possibility of the existence of a fifth
>>> force in the universe. In an article published in *EPJ H*, Fischbach
>>> gives a personal account of how the existence of the gravity-style fifth
>>> force has stimulated an unprecedented amount of research in gravitational
>>> physics - even though its existence, as initially formulated, has not been
>>> confirmed by experiment.
>>>
>>> Back in the late 1980s, Fischbach and colleagues reanalysed data from a
>>> classical physics study, known as the Eötvös Experiment, comparing the
>>> accelerations of samples of different chemical compositions to the Earth.
>>> His interpretation went against previous understanding, suggesting that
>>> acceleration varies depending on the elements' chemical composition. In
>>> theory, this force would coexis

Re: [Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 28 Oct 2015 17:36:53 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>And furthermore, this leave open the strong possibility that the thermal
>gain in LENR - in fact 100% of the claimed thermal gain, can be realized
>from chemical energy alone. This conclusion intentionally disregards
>experiments with laser input, or with disintegration of nucleons, or with
>nuclear fusion evidenced by gamma rays. IOW, all of the gain in LENR where
>no gamma is seen as evidence of the reaction, can be solely attributable to
>a known non-nuclear physical phenomenon - which is the dynamical version of
>the Casimir force.
>
>630 eV and 620 eV. hmmm. Coincidence, or no ??

Interesting side note:- multiply 630 eV by the fine structure constant and you
get 4.6 eV, which is in the ballpark for chemical energies.

>
>Dunno for sure. and it is just an observation, for now. but I do suspect: it
>is too close not to consider the implications of a chemical gain nexus,
>which is due to dense hydrogen chemical bonds being manipulate for net gain
>by the Casimir effect.
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Re: The fifth force.

[Axil Axil]

http://news.sciencemag.org/2001/06/magnetism-stiffens-space-time


Remember this:


Albert Einstein's rubber sheets--his metaphor for thinking of space and
time as a stretchy membrane--may be due for a dose of starch. By
reanalyzing the basic equations of general relativity, a researcher has
discovered that magnetic fields tend to flatten and stiffen the fabric of
space-time. The finding might force cosmologists and astronomers to
reexamine how magnetic fields have shaped the evolution of the cosmos.

According to Einstein, a hunk of matter such as a star bends space-time
just as a bowling ball weighs down a rubber sheet. The result, described in
relativistic terms, is gravity. That much has been known for the better
part of a century. But physicist Christos Tsagas of Portsmouth University
in the United Kingdom looked at the equation in an unusual way, switching
the roles of space and time--a swap that makes no mathematical difference
but changes the form of the equation.

Tsagas spotted something no one had seen before: A term in the equation
showed that magnetic fields transfer their properties to the very fabric of
space-time itself. Like rubber bands under tension, magnetic field lines
try to remain as straight as possible. The fields transmit that tension to
space-time, Tsagas writes in the 11 June issue of *Physical Review Letters*,
making nearby space like a rubber sheet that has been stretched a little
bit tighter. According to Tsagas, such a region becomes stiffer and
flattens out somewhat.

"The normal assumption is to neglect magnetic fields in the early universe,
mostly for simplicity," says Bernard Carr, a physicist at Queen Mary's
College in London. But if the finding pans out, cosmologists will have to
rethink the role of magnetic fields in shaping the cosmos. And black hole
theorists--who deal with sharply curved space near strong magnetic
fields--might need to revise some pet notions as well. Astrophysicists in
general, it's safe to say, could lose a little sleep over stiff sheets.


Magnetism is antigravity.

SPPs throughout space produce huge amounts of anapole magnetism. The SPP
soliton in LENR could be the source of the accelerating universe.



On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> R. Mills has come up with a theory that purports to explain the expansion
> of the univere based on what he calls the hyperbolic electron. This
> electron is mated with a photon. This special type of electron sounds like
> a polariton to me.
>
> He has run experiments to show that these electrons(polaritons is the
> correct name) produce a fifth force or negative gravity witch cause an
> accelerating universe..
>
>
> http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20paper102307.pdf
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Discovering possible new forces in nature is no mean task. The discovery
>> of gravity linked to Newton's arguably apocryphal apple experiment has
>> remained anchored in popular culture. In January 1986, Ephraim Fischbach,
>> Physics Professor from Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, had
>> his own chance to leave his mark on collective memory. His work made the
>> front page of the New York Times after he and his co-authors published a
>> study uncovering the tantalising possibility of the existence of a fifth
>> force in the universe. In an article published in *EPJ H*, Fischbach
>> gives a personal account of how the existence of the gravity-style fifth
>> force has stimulated an unprecedented amount of research in gravitational
>> physics - even though its existence, as initially formulated, has not been
>> confirmed by experiment.
>>
>> Back in the late 1980s, Fischbach and colleagues reanalysed data from a
>> classical physics study, known as the Eötvös Experiment, comparing the
>> accelerations of samples of different chemical compositions to the Earth.
>> His interpretation went against previous understanding, suggesting that
>> acceleration varies depending on the elements' chemical composition. In
>> theory, this force would coexist with gravity, but it would appear in an
>> experiment in the form of a gravity-like long-range force, whose effects
>> would extend over macroscopic distances. It was attributed to the exchange
>> of any of the ultra-light quanta, which are predicted in theories that
>> unify all existing forces under a single, consistent theoretical framework.
>>
>> About thirty years of research later, there is no evidence for the
>> existence of any deviation from the predictions of standard gravity at any
>> distance scale. Nor is there any experimental confirmation for the original
>> model for a fifth force, which would be proportional to the number of
>> baryons in the interacting samples. However, it remains possible that a
>> different kind of fifth force, of a different nature than originally
>> envisaged, could still exist. Meanwhile, this hypothetical force
>> 

[Vo]:Casimir, ZPE and Holmlid

[Jones Beene]

As most vorticians appreciate (since this value simplifies many
calculations) the mass-energy of a photon at a unit wavelength = 1nm =1240
eV. The Casimir force anomaly operates at a geometry between 2 and 12 nm.
There is a severe drop-off in the effect at either end of that range, so we
can be fairly sure of the origins of anomalous energy signatures which fall
within it.

This indicates that the most intense photon which can be derived from the
Casimir force (which would operate as a boost in energy on a trapped photon)
in a Casimir cavity of the optimum size for DCE (Dynamical Casimir Effect)
is about 620 eV - a soft x-ray.

As fate would have it, Holmlid believes and has published that the densest
form of dense hydrogen which fits within his experiments, appears to be
bound at 630 eV, which is well within the margin of error for the maximum
from DCE (Dynamical Casimir Effect) at 620. This could indicate a surprising
avenue for finding the source of the anomaly - which even Holmlid does not
now recognize.

And furthermore, this leave open the strong possibility that the thermal
gain in LENR - in fact 100% of the claimed thermal gain, can be realized
from chemical energy alone. This conclusion intentionally disregards
experiments with laser input, or with disintegration of nucleons, or with
nuclear fusion evidenced by gamma rays. IOW, all of the gain in LENR where
no gamma is seen as evidence of the reaction, can be solely attributable to
a known non-nuclear physical phenomenon - which is the dynamical version of
the Casimir force.

630 eV and 620 eV. hmmm. Coincidence, or no ??

Dunno for sure. and it is just an observation, for now. but I do suspect: it
is too close not to consider the implications of a chemical gain nexus,
which is due to dense hydrogen chemical bonds being manipulate for net gain
by the Casimir effect.

[Vo]:Steorn: Orbo 28th October 2015 Transcript from Webinar

[Esa Ruoho]

Hi, here's my transcript of the Orbo Steorn Webinar broadcast on the 28th
October 2015.

If you use any of it, please credit accordingly.
the video is at http://orbo.com/
--

Pat: Welcome to the Orbo Webinar. We're here today to introduce you to the
first Orbo product, the O-Cube. Orbo is a highly controversial technology
... (Shaun places the O-Cube on the table) ..and we're going to demonstrate
the functionality of the O-Cube. Before we do that, however, we want to
just give you a brief flavour of who we are and the journey that we've
taken over the last fifteen years.
---
Shaun: So, twelve and a half years ago, yeah? Tell me, how on earth, you
got into this crazy company.
Pat: The beginning's actually going back fourteen years ago, because, what
happened was, in 2001, I was looking to evaluate a particular piece of
technology, nothing to do with Steorn.. And, I didn't know how to evaluate
it, and I made a number of calls, and I was put in contact with yourselves.
So, I met Mike and yourself in 2001 and you looked at the proposition, the
technology we're looking at, and you evaluated it and you said look,
listen, this is not, you know, something to look at.. so, that was the way
it was left. And, I went to meet you then in April 2004 and the purpose of
that conversation was.. ahm..
Shaun: "Where's me fucking money" (laughs)
Pat: Well, it wasn't, it wasn't even at that, because I knew, like, the
proposition for what is.. But the point you were putting to me, was you
said, "Look, we're looking for a venture capital..".. you said to me, first
of all, you said to me, "I'm looking for a VC company", and what I did
was.. I.. The first thing I did probably before I even looked beyond them
was, I got a friend of mine who's a, you know, he's an engineer and I got
him to go in and spend some time with yourself and Mike and to evaluate
what it was. And.. I can remember walking out of Fumberly Court as it was
on a Friday afternoon and.. the two of yous were walking along side by
side.. I said "What you think?" and he just said "Can I invest?". And it
was, it was kind of like that, and I said "Are you serious?" and he said,
"Pat, If this is right" he said, "This is gonna to be very very serious."

Mike: So Shaun, looking a bit tired.. Understandable. Ten years defending
your claims and yourself. Ahm, give us a little bit of background about
Steorn, for a bit, new people tuning in today.
Shaun: Steorn was a company that you and me founded, Mike. Back in 2000,
and we started doing project management.. We were in the world of fruit, a
lot of bananas. And then we started developing technology for others, as
you know, that's when we developed forensic systems for companies like
Microsoft and credit card companies, and we did expert witnessing, in,
fraud..
Mike: (interrupts) So you get on..
Shaun: And then one day..
Mike: (interrupts) And then one day you're sitting there at your desk,
magnets spinning around, and you decide: "I need an ad in the Economist".
Shaun: One day we made a discovery, whatever you gonna call it, a mistake,
depending on where you sit, where we went, yeah, look..
We can get more energy out of these bizarre magnetic fields than we're
putting in, isn't that really cool? And wouldn't it be great to build
something that uses this, put it in the market, and hopefully make a lot of
money.
---
Alex?: When I saw yous guys coming in, and meeting up after work, I
realized that yous were doing a lot of brainstorming, and once I, you know,
I didn't really know much about it, because I kept hearing the name Steorn,
and I didn't really know how to pronounce it or anything like that, but I
realized that yous were doing some interesting stuff, but it's been
enjoyable seeing the progression over the years, and, you know, we're
really, really really interested in what's going on, ahm, you know..
Shaun: And you.. You see all the lads from Steorn, outside and about, in
and out of there, these lads that just (heard) about every provocation and
word and insult in the world, they're called conman, scam-artist, and so
on, you've seen them at their most vulnerable. Honestly what do you think
of them?
Alex?:  I've never seen them worry, I've never seen them. I like them,
genuinely like, I know yous all, right down to Max, I've played poker with
so many of yous, we've shared so many late nights, and I remember telling
my friends, you know, we're also in business, and I said, this guy doing
mad stuff with magnets, like, you know, and yeah.. Yous are operating in,
you know, this crazy environment, and, when we, you know, when we
eventually -- when you actually turned around and said that we could have
one of these boxes in the pub for a while, I mean, I was just cackahoop
when I saw.. When I heard that, and I mean, you know, not.. Partly I was
wondering what the hell it is, but the other part of it is just really
really interested at being involved with something so revolutionary..
--
Shaun: Ok, Pat, so, you have hustled tw

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Eric Walker]

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:35 PM, Stephen Cooke 
wrote:

If Kaons are produced in these devices it's astonishing to imagine a local
> low energy source generating the same conditions to spawn Phi Mesons from
> nucleons, as the high energy cyclotrons used by DAPhiNE and TRIUMF.
>

One begins to suspect it's implausible.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

The meson that contains strange and anti strange quark only is the Phi meson. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phi_meson

It's interesting that in order to generate Kaons in nuclear physics apparatus 
such as TRIUMF and DAPhiNE the use high energy sources of 500MeV protons in 
collisions with nucleons at particular nucleon resonances. DAPhiNE seems to be 
a particularly efficient Kaon factory from its name I suppose it is generating 
Phi Mesons, which decay to the Kaons.

If Kaons are produced in these devices it's astonishing to imagine a local low 
energy source generating the same conditions to spawn Phi Mesons from nucleons, 
as the high energy cyclotrons used by DAPhiNE and TRIUMF.


> On 26 okt. 2015, at 17:57, Stephen Cooke  wrote:
> 
> Yup I agree with you Axil although I am no expert on these matters I also 
> don't know of anyway they could be generated from the protons. I will be 
> interested if someone has an explanation for that. 
> 
> Just to expand on the strange quark pair generation idea: 
> 
> This is why I was wondering that if sufficient energy is applied if a strange 
> anti strange quark pair can be manifested. If so quarks do not exist in 
> isolation so they would normally need to be contained in a meson. Unlike Pion 
> 0 which contain + and  - up quarks or + and - down quarks I do not see such a 
> meson for just + and - Strange quarks. (Does any one know if one exists)?
> 
> There are a few other Mesons however might be applicable. These are the eta 
> meson, the eta prime meson, the short K 0 and the long K 0. All these Mesons 
> are neutral and are their own anti particle. All these Mesons contain strange 
> mixed up combination of + and - pairs of quarks the eta contain Up, Down and 
> Strange quarks, the short and long K0 contain Down and Strange quarks. I'm 
> not exactly what they mean in physical terms. The eta and eta prime Mesons 
> are heavier than the Kaons and have very short half lives. The short kaon 
> also has a short half life. The long Kaon however has a longer half life of 
> 51 ns.
> 
> (The strange combinations of quarks in eta and K0 mesons can be found in the 
> Meson list in this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mesons)
> 
> Since K0 short and Long are their own anti particle I wonder if they can be 
> generated individually at lower energy than required for + - Meson pairs i.e 
> 497 MeV for K0 long rather than 996 MeV for +/- Kaon pairs. 
> 
> I should say that if this process is to work either it would need to be 
> contained with in the nuclei. For particles the mass of Kaons this implies 
> quite heavy Nuclei otherwise the energy would exceed the nucleus binding 
> energy, for +/- K pairs it would imply nuclei heavier than Antimony are 
> required (perhaps Pt if available would full fill this) for a single K 0 to 
> form this would imply a nucleus of heavier than Nickel. I suppose one could 
> imagine a resonant or entangled process where the energy was raised and 
> distributed across several nuclei, thereby liberating Kaons from all the 
> nuclei at the same time.
> 
> If heavy nucleons are available in Holmlids experiment this could lead to a 
> test of the idea by removing elements heavier than Nickel if we stopped 
> seeing Kaons (and maybe only see pions onwards), it could demonstrate that 
> maybe this process was in action.
> 
> HOWEVER:
> 
> *** If I understand correctly there are no sufficiently heavy elements 
> available in Holmlids experiment for Kaons to form this way? If I remember 
> right there are no elements heavier than Nickel listed? The catalyst I think 
> only contains Potassium, Iron and Oxygen. Is the is correct? If so it implies 
> another process must take place. ***
> 
> I think in the current consensus this leaves effectively two possibilities: 
> 
> 1. Concurrent Nucleon disintegration or annihilation with the production of 
> particles also including strange quarks, if so an explanation is needed as to 
> how down quarks can change to strange quarks for example. 
> 
> 2. Axil's SPP Analogue black hole Hadron evaporation. It will be amazing if 
> it can work that way, i wonder if there is a particular absolute proof way to 
> observe that , such as actually observing an form SPP and seeing Kaons come 
> directly as a result of it? I suppose we will have to wait for new high tech 
> equipment to see that.
> 
> But maybe there is another mechanism too. (Hopefully not involving any 
> Gorillas ;) )
> 
> It is interesting that this test it may give us a window on CP violation too
> 
> 
> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 11:42:22 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
> From: janap...@gmail.com
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> 
> I don't understand how strange and antistrange quarks can come from protons. 
> There would need to be a quark reformatting process involved that can turn 
> matter into different matter and antimatter types instantly. It is easier to 
> accept that light energy from the laser is turned 

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Esa Ruoho]

Well, I'm watching the replay of the webinar, at
 https://www.facebook.com/217496297671/videos/10153326632242672/

when I tuned in to the actual broadcast, they said, 2.1amps, two full
recharges of a smartphone, then 24 hours to recharge in case the battery
ran out.

Did I get it right, Craig? I stand corrected if I got it wrong.

Oh, and the price? 1200€.


On 28 October 2015 at 16:18, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Slight correction
>
>
>
> Ø  I think that this tech is the outgrowth of the Nobel Prize won in 2010
> by a couple of Russians Geim and Novoselov. Russia is slowly becoming
> entrepreneurial but they know they need to deal with local resellers in the
> marketplace.
>
>
>
> I should have added that Andre Geim is Dutch citizen born Russia. Ph.D.
> 1987 from Institute of Solid State Physics, Chernogolovka, Russia.
>
>
>
> Konstantin Novoselov is British and Russian citizen, born 1974 in Russia.
> Ph.D. 2004 from The Netherlands.
>
>
>
> Both Russians were professors at University of Manchester, UK when the won
> the Nobel prize for the discovery of graphene.
>



-- 

---
http://twitter.com/esaruoho
http://lackluster.bandcamp.com

Re: [Vo]:R. Mills and the SPP soliton

[Frank Znidarsic]

from my book


THE FINE STRUCTURE CONSTANT
 
Coulomb’s equations (1&2) describe theelectromagnetic force.  The factors, 
ofthese equations, were used by Maxwell and the speed of light c was produced.  
This speed is that of a freely propagatingelectromagnetic wave. 


  
Znidarsic’s equations (3&4) also describe theelectromagnetic force.  The 
factors, ofthese equations, produced the nuclear speed Sn.  The domain,of this 
speed, was extended to non-baryonic systems in (30).  Energy moves between the 
harmonics, of a boundmatter wave, at Sn.  The speed of the ground state 
electron in thehydrogen atom is 2Sn.  The factor of two appeared as the 
nuclearspeed coupled with the atomic orbits.  Theratio the speed 2Sn tothat of 
light c was expressedbelow.  




alpha = 2Sn/c


 
The origin and meaning of the fine structureconstant has been a long standing 
mystery. Richard Feynman stated, “Physicistsput this number up on their wall 
and worry about it.”  The fine structure constant a emerged as the ratio was 
reduced.   The fine structure constant emerged, fromspeed, within a framework 
of Newtonian mechanics.  

Re: [Vo]:R. Mills and the SPP soliton

[ChemE Stewart]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fine-structure_constant
...As a dimensionless constant which does not seem to be directly related
to any mathematical constant
, the fine-structure
constant has long fascinated physicists.

Arthur Eddington  argued
that the value could be "obtained by pure deduction" and he related it to
the Eddington number , his
estimate of the number of protons in the Universe.[40]
 This
led him in 1929 to conjecture that its reciprocal was precisely the integer
 137
. Other physicists neither
adopted this conjecture nor accepted his arguments but by the 1940s
experimental values for 1/α deviated sufficiently from 137 to refute
Eddington's argument.[41]


The fine-structure constant so intrigued physicist Wolfgang Pauli
 that he collaborated with
psychiatrist Carl Jung  in a quest
to understand its significance.[42]

 Similarly, Max Born  believed if
the value of alpha were any different, the universe would be degenerate,
and thus that 1/137 was a law of nature.[43]


Richard Feynman , one of the
originators and early developers of the theory of quantum electrodynamics
 (QED), referred to
the fine-structure constant in these terms:

There is a most profound and beautiful question associated with the
observed coupling constant, *e* – the amplitude for a real electron to emit
or absorb a real photon. It is a simple number that has been experimentally
determined to be close to 0.08542455. (My physicist friends won't recognize
this number, because they like to remember it as the inverse of its square:
about 137.03597 with about an uncertainty of about 2 in the last decimal
place. It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty
years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their
wall and worry about it.) Immediately you would like to know where this
number for a coupling comes from: is it related to pi or perhaps to the
base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn
mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding
by man. You might say the "hand of God" wrote that number, and "we don't
know how He pushed his pencil." We know what kind of a dance to do
experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don't know
what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number come out,
without putting it in secretly!
— Richard Feynman , Richard
P. Feynman (1985). *QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter
*
. Princeton University Press
. p. 129. ISBN

0-691-08388-6
.

Conversely, statistician I. J. Good
 argued that a numerological
explanation would only be acceptable if it came from a more fundamental
theory that also provided a Platonic explanation of the value.[44]


Attempts to find a mathematical basis for this dimensionless constant have
continued up to the present time. However, no numerological explanation has
ever been accepted by the community.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:45 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> R. Mills may have experimentally observes that the SPP soliton behaves
> like a hydrino.
>
> As energy is feed into the SPP soliton it gets smaller. From Mills
> observations, the soliton must shrink in size  in 1/137 increments. The
> orbits of the polaritons inside the soliton will adjust their structure to
> refit inside the smaller whispering gallery wave through Fano resonance.
> Mills makes the mistake that in order for an electron that follows a
> circular path must revolve around a nucleus. This is not true. An
> electron(together with a entangled photon) can follow a circular orbit
> inside an optical cavity.
>
> There is something special about 1/137 that is important in string theory.
> I will keep an eye pealed for that connection.
>

[Vo]:R. Mills and the SPP soliton

[Axil Axil]

R. Mills may have experimentally observes that the SPP soliton behaves like
a hydrino.

As energy is feed into the SPP soliton it gets smaller. From Mills
observations, the soliton must shrink in size  in 1/137 increments. The
orbits of the polaritons inside the soliton will adjust their structure to
refit inside the smaller whispering gallery wave through Fano resonance.
Mills makes the mistake that in order for an electron that follows a
circular path must revolve around a nucleus. This is not true. An
electron(together with a entangled photon) can follow a circular orbit
inside an optical cavity.

There is something special about 1/137 that is important in string theory.
I will keep an eye pealed for that connection.

[Vo]:Re: The fifth force.

[Axil Axil]

R. Mills has come up with a theory that purports to explain the expansion
of the univere based on what he calls the hyperbolic electron. This
electron is mated with a photon. This special type of electron sounds like
a polariton to me.

He has run experiments to show that these electrons(polaritons is the
correct name) produce a fifth force or negative gravity witch cause an
accelerating universe..

http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/theory/theorypapers/F%5E2%20paper102307.pdf

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 3:56 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Discovering possible new forces in nature is no mean task. The discovery
> of gravity linked to Newton's arguably apocryphal apple experiment has
> remained anchored in popular culture. In January 1986, Ephraim Fischbach,
> Physics Professor from Purdue University in West Lafayette, Indiana, had
> his own chance to leave his mark on collective memory. His work made the
> front page of the New York Times after he and his co-authors published a
> study uncovering the tantalising possibility of the existence of a fifth
> force in the universe. In an article published in *EPJ H*, Fischbach
> gives a personal account of how the existence of the gravity-style fifth
> force has stimulated an unprecedented amount of research in gravitational
> physics - even though its existence, as initially formulated, has not been
> confirmed by experiment.
>
> Back in the late 1980s, Fischbach and colleagues reanalysed data from a
> classical physics study, known as the Eötvös Experiment, comparing the
> accelerations of samples of different chemical compositions to the Earth.
> His interpretation went against previous understanding, suggesting that
> acceleration varies depending on the elements' chemical composition. In
> theory, this force would coexist with gravity, but it would appear in an
> experiment in the form of a gravity-like long-range force, whose effects
> would extend over macroscopic distances. It was attributed to the exchange
> of any of the ultra-light quanta, which are predicted in theories that
> unify all existing forces under a single, consistent theoretical framework.
>
> About thirty years of research later, there is no evidence for the
> existence of any deviation from the predictions of standard gravity at any
> distance scale. Nor is there any experimental confirmation for the original
> model for a fifth force, which would be proportional to the number of
> baryons in the interacting samples. However, it remains possible that a
> different kind of fifth force, of a different nature than originally
> envisaged, could still exist. Meanwhile, this hypothetical force
>  has led to the development of many new
> theories and novel experiments. For instance, it has stimulated the quest
> for new macroscopic fields of gravitational strength, and provides another
> means of studying high-energy physics.
>
>
> Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-10-may-the-fifth-force-be.html#jCp
>
> There has been a concept recently introduced by the AIRBUS people in LENR
> thinking called "Dark Gravity". This force is a rethinking of the general
> theory of relativity to include the concept of negative energy in the
> formulation of einstein's equations. The concept of negative energy came
> about in Dirac's formulation of the electron  theory at relativistic speeds.
>
> The concepts of the tachyon explains how the removal of all quantum
> uncertainty from the inside of a black hole produces negative energy.
> Negative energy is absolute "nothing". this negative energy is also
> negative matter. Time runs backward inside a black hole as a result of an
> accumulation of negative energy.
>
> Negative energy flips things around. Feynman said that a positron is an
> electron that is traveling backward in time. From this ground rule of
> quantum mechanics,  negative energy flips the charge of the electron around
> when the electron goes backward in time. Negative mass also flips the
> direction of gravity around from attractive to repulsive.
>
> When the LENR reaction is underway in matter where tachyons are produced
> in micro black holes, those tachyons produce a repulsive force that
> counters the force of gravity. This  repulsive force is called "Dark
> Gravity". This might be the fifth force that is being produced in matter
> when LENR is active in various chemical compounds when certain catalytic
> processes are underway.
>
>

[Vo]:New Xcos Model of Thermal Positive Feedback Systems

[David Roberson]

I have been modelling Rossi Like systems for several years now.  On many 
occasions I have discussed my theories on vortex and have offered a simple 
static model to others interested in playing with the system parameters.

A document is being written that explains how a positive thermal feedback 
system can have significant stable gain even though many find it difficult to 
believe since the output power is many times greater than the required 
controling input power.  There is a common misconception that the output will 
over power the input leading to self destruction of the device.  On more than 
one occasion I have argued with skeptics on vortex but could not explain how 
this feedback process works in words that they understood or believed. 

Over the years, I have generated models that use spice programs, Excel, and 
just about every type of mathematical program that I could locate and develop 
with.  All of these efforts show that my conclusions are reasonable when using 
the assumptions that I make concerning the thermal power generation behavior of 
LENR materials.  The lack of solid data associated with the release of thermal 
power by the core materials keeps me from proving that my theories are 
accurate.  However, if the required data ever becomes available I suppose that 
my models can be adjusted to take any unusual characteristics into account.  My 
major concerns are that the core has some type of lag with respect to when it 
begins to release power upon application of a constant temperature to its 
material, and that its generated power drifts over significant time frames when 
a constant temperature is applied.  Both of these issues will require 
modifications.

The above problems are going to have to be resolved if they are proven to exist 
when data is released by Rossi or whomever else is forthcoming.  It would be 
ridiculous for me to hold up my work until all of that information becomes 
widely distributed, so I am going to release a simple time domain model that 
others can toy with as they desire.  This particular toy model is not based 
upon actual ECAT parameters but instead uses coefficients that are small and 
well defined so that the underlying behavior can be well understood.  I have an 
Excel like program that backs up the selection of the coefficients to make 
their values easy to calculate.  I can set the location of the important device 
negative slope at will with this program as well as carefully adjust the type 
of system that is generated.  It is trivial to obtain coefficients for either 
type 1, type 2, or type 3 designs.   One can then obtain a more thorough 
understand of how the COP is influenced by these choices.

Within the last few days I began working with a freely available modeling 
program named Xcos, which comes attached to the master program named Scilab.  I 
have used that pair on several occasions before and find it to be quite simple 
to modify models, etc. using a GUI that is easy to understand.  The flexibility 
of Xcos is amazing and one can rapidly modify his test system to use different 
types of signal sources and model parameters.  I recommend that others on 
vortex obtain a copy of these programs for general modeling.

The type 2 model I am offering appears to exhibit a COP of 7 when allowing the 
built in PWM control to operate.  It has a core thermal power generation 
function that is second order in nature and an output thermal power release 
function that contains a linear term for conduction as well as a forth order 
term related to radiation.  Again, my model is simplified and not directly 
pertaining to the ECAT, but someone can adjust the variable coefficients to 
make it fall into line.   I will be available to work with anyone that wishes 
to accept that task.  Send me a private email and I will email back my Xcos 
model.  I can also send a copy of the Excel file that offers design support if 
requested.  This is a very simple Excel file, but it can be used to rapidly 
obtain coefficients to use within the Xcos model.  Trial and error is not a 
good way to adjust the Xcos model as I found out the hard way.

If you review Rossi's patent you will see that an air gap separates the heated 
fuel chamber from the cooling surface.  This is a very important aspect of his 
design.  It allows radiation power to become the most efficient way for 
internally generated power to escape the core at elevated device temperatures.  
 The forth order function is put there to outweigh the thermal power generation 
process once operation is established at high temperatures.  By this means he 
may be able to convert a potentially unstable type 3 device into a type 2 
device that does not latch up or meltdown.  Other replicaters might want to 
follow his lead.

Dave

[Vo]:OCT 28, 2015- LENRINFO AND LOCAL OXYMORONS

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/10/oct-28-2015-lenr-info-and-local.html

That's your dosis of INFO AND GLUCKISMS FOR TODAY.

Peter

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

RE: [Vo]:The self-charging supercapacitor/battery

[Jones Beene]

From: Ken Deboer 

 

> I wonder if the recent finding by a Rice Univ. group "Riemann surfaces of 
> carbon as graphene nanosolenoids") would be of interest.  They found a 1T 
> field induced by very low voltage in spiral graphene nanoparticles

 

That is an interesting suggestion, since one T. is arguably possible to achieve 
as a surface effect with NIB. We have talked about similar things here before 
under the heading of “ring current”. If ting current showed up in a spiral 
structure or graphene, then a net potential difference could show up.

 

In short, there is adequate evidence that many forms of carbon which are based 
on a 6 carbon ring structure (which is most of them) will exhibit  some degree 
of “local HTSC” (only local) and this is due to lossless current flow around 
the rings… which is known as ring-current. This provides a strong 
antiferromagnetic effect to the substrate.

 

I wonder if Robert Murray-Smith has used magnets in this regard? It could be a 
way to accentuate or augment the chemical (double layer) self-charging effect.

 

Jones

 

Re: [Vo]:The self-charging supercapacitor/battery

[Ken Deboer]

Hi Jones,
You and others have often speculated on a possible role of magnetism.  In
that regard I wonder if the recent finding by a Rice Univ. group (Yakobson
et al; Nano Lett. Oct 15, 2015 "Riemann surfaces of carbon as graphene
nanosolenoids") would be of interest.  They found a 1T field induced by
very low voltage in spiral graphene nanoparticles.

[BTW., Even tho I had gotten completely out of the stock market casino
years ago, even before the 2008 crash, I did buy a thousand shares of
Sunvault Energy stock a few months ago as a bet on Dr. Smith's thing!].
 regards, ken

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:53 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Robert Murray-Smith explains how carbon-carbon (graphene-graphite)
> becomes self-charging
>
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLGtWEmTGl4&html5=1*
> 
>
> This device blurs the distinction between battery and capacitor. It is
> really a bit of both.
>
> There is no overunity – but the lifetime of the effect is surprising.
>
> This indicates a factoid which many of us have suspected for a long time
> – there can be a lot more energy in normal “chemical energy” than
> expected. Normal chemistry refers to valence electrons only.
> “Suprachemistry” can refers to exploiting sub-valence electrons or
> redundant orbits using chemistry – not fusion.
>
> It is not ruled out that the energy seen in many if not most forms of
> LENR, including dense hydrogen, comes from “chemistry”. Holmlid now says
> that the dense hydrogen state has binding energy of 630 eV (not 50 eV as
> in an older paper). This is chemical energy, yet it can provide hundreds
> of times more apparent gain than burning hydrogen in air. Yet it is not
> “overunity” since it requires energy input to create the dense cluster.
>
> Jones
>

RE: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

With regard the above post about possible Meson interactions with Nuclei, 
assuming Mesons are present without fixing on a particular mechanism and in 
case it is interesting here are small number of the relevant links (there are 
many many more to be found):
http://nuclphys.sinp.msu.ru/books/b/Feshbach/10%20Pion%20and%20Kaon%20interections%20with%20nuclei.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370269301015039
http://www.researchgate.net/publication/236346244_Low_energy_kaon-nuclei_interaction_studies_through_the__00_channel_with_the_KLOE_detector
http://ptp.oxfordjournals.org/content/108/5/917.full.pdf

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/reinhold.bertlmann/pdfs/dipl_diss/CarlaSchuler_BA_v2.pdf
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/349/1/012003/pdf
http://www.actaphys.uj.edu.pl/_old/vol27/pdf/v27p2993.pdf
https://indico.fnal.gov/getFile.py/access?contribId=160&sessionId=15&resId=0&materialId=slides&confId=8903
   (interesting Neutrino interactions)





From: stephen_coo...@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 16:21:52 +0100
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

There is another possibility:
Photogeneration of mesons from nuclei, I have a suspicion this might be what 
Holmlid believes is occurring I the UDD. Interestingly this effect is caused by 
exciting a nucleon resonance for example the Delta resonance which effectively 
"opens the door" for meson (pion in this case) generation. Interestingly it 
also works with light nuclei such as He, D and T so is not limited by the 
binding energy, probably this is due to the energy coming directly from high 
MeV photon stimulation of the nucleon rather than excitation and de-excitation 
of the nucleus.
I can't help wondering if in the absence of this photon source there can be a 
kind of coupling between a nucleon resonant state and the nucleus excitation 
state of similar Energy, spin and polarity.
It is astonishing the amount of information, theory and experimentation 
projects and data there is on the internet regarding Kaon and Pion generation 
and their interaction with nuclei. It's been investigated massively in the 
past. If Kaons and Pions are in fact seen in Holmlid's experiment and Possibly 
other LENR devices it could well be worth reviewing them.
Well I guess I have a lot to read now and try to understand.



On 28 Oct 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker  wrote:

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke  
wrote:
The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:

There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
measure charged particle radiation.
Eric

  

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

There is another possibility:

Photogeneration of mesons from nuclei, I have a suspicion this might be what 
Holmlid believes is occurring I the UDD. Interestingly this effect is caused by 
exciting a nucleon resonance for example the Delta resonance which effectively 
"opens the door" for meson (pion in this case) generation. Interestingly it 
also works with light nuclei such as He, D and T so is not limited by the 
binding energy, probably this is due to the energy coming directly from high 
MeV photon stimulation of the nucleon rather than excitation and de-excitation 
of the nucleus.

I can't help wondering if in the absence of this photon source there can be a 
kind of coupling between a nucleon resonant state and the nucleus excitation 
state of similar Energy, spin and polarity.

It is astonishing the amount of information, theory and experimentation 
projects and data there is on the internet regarding Kaon and Pion generation 
and their interaction with nuclei. It's been investigated massively in the 
past. If Kaons and Pions are in fact seen in Holmlid's experiment and Possibly 
other LENR devices it could well be worth reviewing them.

Well I guess I have a lot to read now and try to understand.



> On 28 Oct 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker  wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:
> 
> There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
> imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
> measure charged particle radiation.
> 
> Eric
> 

[Vo]:The self-charging supercapacitor/battery

[Jones Beene]

Robert Murray-Smith explains how carbon-carbon (graphene-graphite) becomes
self-charging

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLGtWEmTGl4&html5=1

This device blurs the distinction between battery and capacitor. It is
really a bit of both.

There is no overunity - but the lifetime of the effect is surprising. 

This indicates a factoid which many of us have suspected for a long time -
there can be a lot more energy in normal "chemical energy" than expected.
Normal chemistry refers to valence electrons only. "Suprachemistry" can
refers to exploiting sub-valence electrons or redundant orbits using
chemistry - not fusion.

It is not ruled out that the energy seen in many if not most forms of LENR,
including dense hydrogen, comes from "chemistry". Holmlid now says that the
dense hydrogen state has binding energy of 630 eV (not 50 eV as in an older
paper). This is chemical energy, yet it can provide hundreds of times more
apparent gain than burning hydrogen in air. Yet it is not "overunity" since
it requires energy input to create the dense cluster.

Jones

RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Jones Beene]

Slight correction

 

Ø  I think that this tech is the outgrowth of the Nobel Prize won in 2010 by a 
couple of Russians Geim and Novoselov. Russia is slowly becoming 
entrepreneurial but they know they need to deal with local resellers in the 
marketplace. 

 

I should have added that Andre Geim is Dutch citizen born Russia. Ph.D. 1987 
from Institute of Solid State Physics, Chernogolovka, Russia. 

 

Konstantin Novoselov is British and Russian citizen, born 1974 in Russia. Ph.D. 
2004 from The Netherlands. 

 

Both Russians were professors at University of Manchester, UK when the won the 
Nobel prize for the discovery of graphene.

RE: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:NEW LIVE Steorn Webinars Announced - Product Demonstrations

[Jones Beene]

Esa, If my suspicion is correct, the price will be in the 100 euro range.

 

There seems to be a close connection between Steorn, and ADGEX (an Australian 
company) and a US reseller (or two) – all of which are tied-at-the-hip to the 
same Russian supplier of a an advanced graphene ultracapacitor. As of now, 
Steorn looks like a “rebrander” of someone else’s basic technology, not a 
developer, but time will tell. 

 

I think that this tech is the outgrowth of the Nobel Prize won in 2010 by a 
couple of Russians Geim and Novoselov. Russia is slowly becoming 
entrepreneurial but they know they need to deal with local resellers in the 
marketplace. 

 

This capacitor is not OU, but it appears to be since it will recharge to some 
extent anyway, which is a feature for graphene, in general (see YouTube) and 
with simple RF induction circuitry, already in production for cell phones, the 
devices will recharge in the background.

 

From: esa ruoho 

 

Wow Craig, just read that the price of the O-Cube will be revealed today!

I sincerely hope it's in the 100s to the 200 euros, rather than 500-1000-2000+ 
euros. 

as I seriously could maybe afford that if it's <200€.

maybe.

 

http://freeenergy.news/steorn-orbo/o-cube-price-to-be-revealed-as-steorn-webinars-begin/

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:Neutral K mesons violates CPT

[Stephen Cooke]

Good point. That's very true too. Those people at the frontier of 
experimentation like Holmlid and putting together new knowledge in new and 
novel ways like yourself Axil are rare individual and way ahead of most of us. 
I agree we should not hold them back with the burden of external verification 
and should trust to some extent their expertise. Its up to others in time to 
learn test and validate and that additional external verification will come. 
Positive or negative when it comes we will always learn and gain something in 
the process.

I like the image of experts being generated out of a vacuum 😀.  Perhaps this is 
indeed the secret source of LERN get positive and negative experts generated in 
equal proportion and allow them  annihilate to in a big ball of energy? I can 
only imagine what quantities of experts are eventually produced by tachyons but 
if the positive ones are ejected into the world and the negative ones are 
trapped in a black hole and sent back in time so much the better 😉

> On 28 Oct 2015, at 02:19, Axil Axil  wrote:
> 
> I don't think that there are experts in particles created in condensed matter 
> physics. Holmlid is the first. We can't wait for experts to develop out of 
> the vacuum.
> 
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:23 PM, Stephen Cooke  
>> wrote:
>> Yup with due respect to Holmlid who obviously has good well developed 
>> expertise in the field and years of experience and analysis behind him, we 
>> nevertheless cannot know for sure until other experts are brought in to 
>> witness and process the raw data and ideally the test is repeated 
>> independently. I'm fully with you there Eric. I hope we get that 
>> verification someday.
>> 
>>> On 28 okt. 2015, at 01:05, Eric Walker  wrote:
>>> 
 On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:56 PM, Stephen Cooke 
  wrote:
 
 The alternatives are also hard to explain, however:
>>> 
>>> There is another alternative you didn't mention -- Holmlid has a fertile 
>>> imagination and is confused and needs to pull in someone who knows how to 
>>> measure charged particle radiation.
>>> 
>>> Eric
>