Re: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[Vibrator !]

Any particle with integer spin is by definition a boson, so in the case of
an EPO it's a massive one.  Beyond that, i have nothing..!

As regards the potential source in LENR, either there's a corresponding
change in entropy in the fuel, hence a local source, or there isn't, so a
non-local one (ie. over-unity). Like most folks, i'm expecting a change in
mass of the spent fuel.  How and why it happens i have little idea, but
look forward to finding out..

..and as for the Planck scale, is there even sufficient spacetime to
manifest motion?  Doubtless, alternative dimensions become relevant down
there, and i am partial to the notion of an active vacuum..  but all angels
and pinheads to me i'm afraid..

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 6:20 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> It seems Vortex-l has a new voice in Vibrator!.  It fits nicely with the
> current subject line regarding spin and angular momentum, although, with a
> negative energy twist.  It reminds me of Weaver coming onto the LENR Forum
> to  take on the E-Cat World  view a couple years back.
>
>
>
> Be that what it is, my question is what do you call an EPO with spin 1 and
> 0 charge?
>
>
>
> Is it a Bose particle or something else?  However, if it exists, it may be
> a nice conductor of angular momentum.  At small distances (f- meters and
> smaller) maybe angular momentum acts like charge with a plus and minus sign
> and can be divided among particles of a coherent system.  Once the
> necessary resonant condition happens to the coherent system. the EPO
> divides into 2 Fermi particles—a positron and a electron which react with
> each other or the entire system to create a new coherent system with lower
> potential energy.  Some potential energy may transform to increased orbital
> momentum energy states or may leave the system as EM energy and angular
> momentum of .511 Mev photons.
>
>
>
> The resonant conditions I suggest are created within the coherent system
> by the change in potential energy of the system caused by the intrusion of
> force fields—electric, magnetic or gravitational—in the coherent system.
> From the LENR testing it would appear that any one of  these force fields
> may catalyze the LENR phenomena.
>
>
>
> This model may fit well with  P. Hatt’s theory regarding creation of mass
> from electrons and positrons.   He is able to predict magnetic moments and
> mass of muons, protons and neutrons quite accurately with respect to
> current experimental data.
>
>
>
> (As an aside I doubt the B magnetic fields have a curl of 0 at the Plank
> scale.  Thus,  Maxwell’s equations are only an approximation of what
> happens in macroscopic systems.  The continuous math provided by the
> calculus  really does not apply at small distances IMHO.  I suspect that
> relativity theory has the same problem.)
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail  for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *JonesBeene 
> *Sent: *Thursday, October 19, 2017 6:35 AM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
>
>
>
>
>
> V! sez:
>
>- I'm familiar with the producers of the above videos.  In every
>instance of these angular accelerations, they are being produced by the
>linear accelerations of Mr Hand, either waving a stator ring or poking a
>magnet at a field etc..
>
>
>
> Perhaps not. There is both a logical explanation for spontaneous rotation
> (in *Nature*, no less) - and several vids with no Mr. Hand…
>
>
>
> https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v547/n7664/full/nature23290.html
>
>
>
> “The origin of this anisotropy is purely electronic—the so-called
> electronic nematicity. Unusually, the nematic director is not aligned with
> the crystal axes, unless a substantial orthorhombic distortion is imposed.
> The fact that this anisotropy occurs in a material that exhibits
> high-temperature superconductivity may not be a coincidence.”
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[Vibrator !]

The torque is undoubtedly a thermal / radiative asymmetry between upper
(warmer) and lower (cooler) sides of the levitated sphere.

However even if it's due to the random, turbulent airflow caused by the
temperature gradient and evaporation, it's rectifying to consistent
momentum the same way a ping-pong ball trapped under a running tap does, or
a collapsing accretion disk, or water draining down a hole etc. etc.

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 3:34 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> *From: *Chris Zell 
>
>
>- OK, here’s my current puzzlement: is it possible that physics has
>ignored a free energy effect within rotational inertia?
>
> It is possible that a gainful effect has been overlooked, and that is why
> it is fun to figure out which of these vids are faked. Rotational anomalies
> are probably the closest to showing a valid anomaly but most of the videos
> are fakes. Hopefully the one in thousand will show up soon. There are
> spatial avenues for augmenting inertia – such as the DCE (dynamical Casimir
> effect).
>
>
>
> However, since no one has been able to demonstrate a device that shows
> true gain … unequivocally, and which has been fully replicated, the Laws of
> Thermodynamics are still on the books (but they are not true Laws and will
> fizzle away IF adequate scientific proof arrives, even if the gain is
> slight).
>
>
>
> The reason for the original comment on the reality of a magnetic spin
> vortex (or unreality) was the approaching possibility of RTSC. For
> instance, if the following video was done in a vacuum with a disk of RTSC
> then we would have something more relevant to talk about.
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRby1Wilv-Q
>
>
>
> For now, the bubbles take the place of Mr Hand, which is the usual
> culprit.
>
>
>
> Since the vid above was never done without bubbles AFIK we have little to
> go on for a claim of true gain, other than a reasonable probability that a
> disk of RTSC could be fabricated with engineered line-pinning which
> permitted and even encouraged anisotropy, as in the Nature piece.  Think
> helicity and chirality.
>
>
>
> Electronic nematicity would need to have the nematic director both aligned
> with the crystal axis and deliberately off axis in places giving engrained
> helicity.
>
>
>
> I will ask Ron Kita to provide a recipe for favored Chiral helicity when
> the time is right. First we have to make that disk of RTSC.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[Vibrator !]

The motion is powered by the applied current, explained in the synopsis.
Ie. input energy is converting to work.  The anisotropy is a material,
structural or reactive property, not a fundamental field property.

Obviously there is chiralty and 'handedness' in nature, but what i was
attempting to address was an overly-simplistic interpretation of Tesla's
"wheelworks" quip - as if a straightforward mechanical, gearwise coupling
between quantum and classical angular momenta might be possible.

In every case where something spins up, something else is providing field
density or direction fluctuations that are resolving to torque, but while
it costs no energy, in principle, to vary a field property, if that
variation in turn performs mechanical work, then that workload is commuted
back to the energy source - in other words, Mr Hand is burning more burrito
when waving a stator ring over a spinning rotor, than he would without the
rotor present, and the same is true in any EM or electrical example, the
counter-forces,and thus output workload, commuted to the input source via
Lenz's law.

A rise in momentum and / or energy without a corresponding loading on the
input energy supply would of course be a genuinely interesting system..





On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 2:35 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

>
>
> V! sez:
>
>- I'm familiar with the producers of the above videos.  In every
>instance of these angular accelerations, they are being produced by the
>linear accelerations of Mr Hand, either waving a stator ring or poking a
>magnet at a field etc..
>
>
>
> Perhaps not. There is both a logical explanation for spontaneous rotation
> (in *Nature*, no less) - and several vids with no Mr. Hand…
>
>
>
> https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v547/n7664/full/nature23290.html
>
>
>
> “The origin of this anisotropy is purely electronic—the so-called
> electronic nematicity. Unusually, the nematic director is not aligned with
> the crystal axes, unless a substantial orthorhombic distortion is imposed.
> The fact that this anisotropy occurs in a material that exhibits
> high-temperature superconductivity may not be a coincidence.”
>

[Vo]:ICCF20 proceedings uploaded

[Jed Rothwell]

See:

Biberian, J.P., ed. J. *Condensed Matter Nucl. Sci.* Vol. 24. 2017.

Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Condensed Matter
Nuclear Science, Sendai,  Japan, October 02–07, 2016

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/BiberianJPjcondensedw.pdf

There are 31 papers in this collection.

Please contact me if you find errors in formatting or spelling.



I am running out of letters for the automatically generated filename:
BiberianJPjcondensedw.pdf. Three more to go: x, y and z. After that,
Jean-Paul will have to change his name.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

It seems Vortex-l has a new voice in Vibrator!.  It fits nicely with the 
current subject line regarding spin and angular momentum, although, with a 
negative energy twist.  It reminds me of Weaver coming onto the LENR Forum to  
take on the E-Cat World  view a couple years back.

Be that what it is, my question is what do you call an EPO with spin 1 and 0 
charge?

Is it a Bose particle or something else?  However, if it exists, it may be a 
nice conductor of angular momentum.  At small distances (f- meters and smaller) 
maybe angular momentum acts like charge with a plus and minus sign and can be 
divided among particles of a coherent system.  Once the necessary resonant 
condition happens to the coherent system. the EPO divides into 2 Fermi 
particles—a positron and a electron which react with each other or the entire 
system to create a new coherent system with lower potential energy.  Some 
potential energy may transform to increased orbital momentum energy states or 
may leave the system as EM energy and angular momentum of .511 Mev photons.

The resonant conditions I suggest are created within the coherent system by the 
change in potential energy of the system caused by the intrusion of force 
fields—electric, magnetic or gravitational—in the coherent system.  From the 
LENR testing it would appear that any one of  these force fields may catalyze 
the LENR phenomena.

This model may fit well with  P. Hatt’s theory regarding creation of mass from 
electrons and positrons.   He is able to predict magnetic moments and mass of 
muons, protons and neutrons quite accurately with respect to  current 
experimental data.

(As an aside I doubt the B magnetic fields have a curl of 0 at the Plank scale. 
 Thus,  Maxwell’s equations are only an approximation of what happens in 
macroscopic systems.  The continuous math provided by the calculus  really does 
not apply at small distances IMHO.  I suspect that relativity theory has the 
same problem.)

Bob Cook




Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: JonesBeene
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 6:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex


V! sez:

  *   I'm familiar with the producers of the above videos.  In every instance 
of these angular accelerations, they are being produced by the linear 
accelerations of Mr Hand, either waving a stator ring or poking a magnet at a 
field etc..

Perhaps not. There is both a logical explanation for spontaneous rotation (in 
Nature, no less) - and several vids with no Mr. Hand…

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v547/n7664/full/nature23290.html

“The origin of this anisotropy is purely electronic—the so-called electronic 
nematicity. Unusually, the nematic director is not aligned with the crystal 
axes, unless a substantial orthorhombic distortion is imposed. The fact that 
this anisotropy occurs in a material that exhibits high-temperature 
superconductivity may not be a coincidence.”

RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[JonesBeene]

From: Chris Zell

➢ OK, here’s my current puzzlement: is it possible that physics has ignored a 
free energy effect within rotational inertia?
It is possible that a gainful effect has been overlooked, and that is why it is 
fun to figure out which of these vids are faked. Rotational anomalies are 
probably the closest to showing a valid anomaly but most of the videos are 
fakes. Hopefully the one in thousand will show up soon. There are spatial 
avenues for augmenting inertia – such as the DCE (dynamical Casimir effect).

However, since no one has been able to demonstrate a device that shows true 
gain … unequivocally, and which has been fully replicated, the Laws of 
Thermodynamics are still on the books (but they are not true Laws and will 
fizzle away IF adequate scientific proof arrives, even if the gain is slight). 

The reason for the original comment on the reality of a magnetic spin vortex 
(or unreality) was the approaching possibility of RTSC. For instance, if the 
following video was done in a vacuum with a disk of RTSC then we would have 
something more relevant to talk about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRby1Wilv-Q

For now, the bubbles take the place of Mr Hand, which is the usual culprit. 

Since the vid above was never done without bubbles AFIK we have little to go on 
for a claim of true gain, other than a reasonable probability that a disk of 
RTSC could be fabricated with engineered line-pinning which permitted and even 
encouraged anisotropy, as in the Nature piece.  Think helicity and chirality. 

Electronic nematicity would need to have the nematic director both aligned with 
the crystal axis and deliberately off axis in places giving engrained helicity. 

I will ask Ron Kita to provide a recipe for favored Chiral helicity when the 
time is right. First we have to make that disk of RTSC.

RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex

[JonesBeene]

V! sez:
➢ I'm familiar with the producers of the above videos.  In every instance of 
these angular accelerations, they are being produced by the linear 
accelerations of Mr Hand, either waving a stator ring or poking a magnet at a 
field etc.

Perhaps not. There is both a logical explanation for spontaneous rotation (in 
Nature, no less) - and several vids with no Mr. Hand…

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v547/n7664/full/nature23290.html

“The origin of this anisotropy is purely electronic—the so-called electronic 
nematicity. Unusually, the nematic director is not aligned with the crystal 
axes, unless a substantial orthorhombic distortion is imposed. The fact that 
this anisotropy occurs in a material that exhibits high-temperature 
superconductivity may not be a coincidence.”