RE: [Vo]:Texture of magnetic vector rotation in a special knot group

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

DON AND JURG--   --

QUESTIONS:


  1.  Does a magnetic vector imply 3 space  dimensions or only 1
  2.  I s a magnetic field as described by Maxwell also implied?
  3.Are there any intrinsic magmatic physical parameters associated with a 
space dimension(s)?
  4.  What is magnetic flux? (Flux  implies a flow of something,)
  5.  Is magmatic flux related to the angular momentum?
  6.  Is angular momentum a quantized physical parameter or dimension?
  7.  Is space a real physicals dimensiom(s) continuous to 0 ?

Bob Cook






From: Don
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2021 2:43 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Texture of magnetic vector rotation in a special knot group


Hi Jürg!


On 3/31/2021 7:38 AM, Jürg Wyttenbach wrote (about what Don wrote below):

Did you notice that the knots are based on Fibonacci numbers?

The same as in SO(4) physics torus knots!  The magic of flux partition!

J.W.

I'm not sure what you are asking, Jürg.

If you mean, did I notice the numbers are in the Fibonacci sequence, then, yup. 
 I was searching through parametric substitutions using ray-tracing rendering 
and animated search sequences, with all manor of golden and platonic 
combinations over the years.

If you mean, did I notice or discover the Fibonacci number thing, rather than 
develop from another's work, the answer is still yes.  This is golden stuff  of 
my compulsive amateur curiosity, and the golden torus knot seems mapped out to 
my satisfaction, now, so that the nickles in my pocket are beginning to itch 
for want of parts to assemble.  I wanted to (think I) know what I was doing 
before I spent part of our grocery and vice budget.  Now I'm out of excuses.

Or did you mean to ask something other?

---

My curiosity-vectored search has over the years seemed to have a mind of its 
own (Zen-vectored moments of pondering).  I'm really surprised after the system 
design closure of principle last September that the solution was a unique 
arrangement, but an arrangement of concepts I knew well (enough) for years.  
Also, for me, layers of head-jolting-synchronicites kept motivation to keep 
searching at a high level.

Thank you for your curiosity!



-Don

Amateur Engineer and Newbie Woodworker, Director of Bucket List Operations (BLO)

Phi = 5^.5 * .5 + .5 <-- In case all the other keys on your calculator are stuck


On 31.03.2021 15:13, Don wrote:

Hello Vortex People,



This is some serious stuff to me as a hobby.  I call it a hobby so people won't 
think I'm too serious.

But seriously, a certain group of knots on the same donut afford a golden 
opportunity to get organized and orderly on the torus surface <-- with a 
magnetic vector wave continually revolving at velocity by frequency per scale.

A certain group of entangled knots affords what I always thought was going to 
be easy to do.  Well, just winding a helix around a donut multiple times, 
entangling with the earlier windings, and connecting where it started as a 
'smooth' torus knot, gets the surface-velocity-timing of the vector rotation 
all mixed up.   Don't despair!

---

Brought to you by shear boredom during panedemania...

There is a way to wind a group of smooth torus knots on a torus surface, in 
such a way that the torus knots are energized in step-phased electrical 
current, smoothly and continuously over the surface.

The trick is not a 'way to do it', but which knots to smoothly entangle when 
separated by 120 degrees each around the donut <-- and this trick appears and 
disappears by the number of entangled phases.  This focus will be only about 
3-phase.

The answer of which knot to use is --> 13:8 <-- The p:q knot ratio turns around 
the torus axis (p) and helical loops through the torus hole (q).  Or, that's my 
personal choice.

The 3:2 knot, the 13:8, and the 55:34 are the first three knots which also 
share the quality of 1) q = even number, and 2) p and q are adjacent numbers in 
the Fibonacci sequence.

---

Hot or Knot?

What's your vote as a sensible knot for prototype studies toward revolving a 
magnetic vector tangentially and continuously around the surface of a golden 
donut (by torus profile) at a golden slope through the torus plane, and a 
golden slope from the axis through the torus hole?

---

Why q = even numbers?

Because, for even q-s, the electrical connection points for bifilar conduction 
are diametrically opposite each other on the outer circumference of the donut.

So?  Because then, electrical connection is performed away from the torus 
center hole, and all connections for 3-phase group of knots on a donut are done 
on a six-point layout, as a hexagon.  A magnetic self-resonance on the knot 
group (at a few megaHz of ring-amp tail-chase current-reversals for maximized 
delta-B) will have minimal magnetic interference leading away from the magnetic 
surface of the copper array, a copper wound donut. There's nothing in the 
center hole of the donut

Re: [Vo]:A photo of an EVO on the fly

[Axil Axil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKf-6d1Olf4

This is a VEGA video segment from a DAVE experiment analysed by Bob
Greenyer with 30 times slow motion.

On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 3:45 AM Axil Axil  wrote:

> Strange radiation is a self amplifying chain reaction that is self
> contained. SR just needs a source of electrons to grow. The electrons are
> without charge and form a lattice which implies that there is no internal
> movement as in a plasmid. Consistent with the Higgs abyss hypothesis, the
> EVO only requires the most insubstantial superconductive seed to initiate
> growth, but once growth begins, it continues self sustained in the presence
> of a free electrons feed stock until instability sets in and the EVO
> explodes.
>
> However, if the source of free electrons dry up, the EVO becomes dormant
> and can survive indefinitely until additional free electron feedstock again
> becomes available.
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:34 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Presented now is a video that shows the energy release from an EVO at
>> termination  via the Bosenova.
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBQYArxDrdg
>>
>> Bosenova production in slow motion
>> VEGA - 240fps + 8x slow motion
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VuO7iYzyT8&t=155s
>>
>>
>> The production of EVO in slow motion.
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU7v4Yy_QGw
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:05 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Naked singularities are not related to gravitational black holes. These
>>> micro black holes are a consequence of tachyon condensation. Ashoke Sen
>>> took the fear out of tachyons for physicists when he characterized tachyon
>>> condensation. In the late 1990s, Ashoke Sen conjectured that the tachyons
>>> carried by open strings attached to D-branes in string theory reflect the
>>> instability of the D-branes with respect to their complete annihilation.
>>> The total energy carried by these tachyons has been calculated in string
>>> field theory; it agrees with the total energy of the D-branes, and all
>>> other tests have confirmed Sen's conjecture as well. Tachyons therefore
>>> became an active area of interest in the early 2000s. OK, so
>>> open-string tachyons and closed-string tachyons in twisted sectors are more
>>> or less understood by now. Physicists no longer panic or abandon the theory
>>> when they see a tachyon. Instead, they calmly interpret these tachyons as
>>> sources of instabilities – instability that annihilate objects or whole
>>> chunks of spacetime and that may (but don't necessarily have to) lead to a
>>> new stable world with some interesting objects that may be left over. For
>>> this reason, it was Ashoke Sen and his apprentices such as Edward Witten
>>> who unified nothingness and somethingness in physics – i.e. in string
>>> theory (because no other theory can achieve similar unifications) – and who
>>> discovered new perspectives on the somethingness in between and that's my
>>> explanation why both Sen and Witten deserves their $3 million Breakthrough
>>> prizes. I am interested in relating the abstractions of string theory
>>> to real world engineering applications. I want to know the ways and means
>>> of how these naked singularities annihilate objects or whole chunks of
>>> spacetime and that may lead to new stable conditions with some interesting
>>> transformed objects that may be left over.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:18 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>>>
 Holmlid new paper legwork by can

 *Title:* “Production of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0): A novel nuclear
 fuel”

 Date:

 26 March 2021

 *Authors:* Leif Holmlid, Andrzej Kotarba, Pawel Stelmachowski.

 *Link:*
 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319921008144?via%3Dihub#!


 Some LENR-relevant excerpts from the paper:

 [...] It is possible to have an energy output by forming H(0) from
 hydrogen gas. This condensation energy will easily be believed to be
 non-chemical thus nuclear due to its size (of the order of hundred times
 larger than normal chemical energy output). It may be a large part of the
 energy which is considered to be caused by so-called cold fusion, as
 suggested previously by Winterberg [6,7]. Other nuclear reactions in H(0)
 may be the main processes considered to be cold fusion, with very little of
 normal fusion products like 4He and neutrons out.
 So-called cold fusion according to Fleischmann and Pons [8] is probably
 due to the condensation reactions of H(0) as mentioned above and also due
 to the spontaneous nuclear processes which take place in H(0) [9]. Such
 spontaneous nuclear processes are similar to those induced by pulsed lasers
 [[10], [11], [12]] which do not give 4He and neutrons as products but
 instead give mesons, especially charged and neutral kaons [[13], [14],
 [15]]. Thus, these processes are not fusion processes. The mesons formed
 have lifetimes o

Re: [Vo]:A photo of an EVO on the fly

[Axil Axil]

Strange radiation is a self amplifying chain reaction that is self
contained. SR just needs a source of electrons to grow. The electrons are
without charge and form a lattice which implies that there is no internal
movement as in a plasmid. Consistent with the Higgs abyss hypothesis, the
EVO only requires the most insubstantial superconductive seed to initiate
growth, but once growth begins, it continues self sustained in the presence
of a free electrons feed stock until instability sets in and the EVO
explodes.

However, if the source of free electrons dry up, the EVO becomes dormant
and can survive indefinitely until additional free electron feedstock again
becomes available.

On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:34 PM Axil Axil  wrote:

> Presented now is a video that shows the energy release from an EVO at
> termination  via the Bosenova.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBQYArxDrdg
>
> Bosenova production in slow motion
> VEGA - 240fps + 8x slow motion
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VuO7iYzyT8&t=155s
>
>
> The production of EVO in slow motion.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rU7v4Yy_QGw
>
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:05 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>
>> Naked singularities are not related to gravitational black holes. These
>> micro black holes are a consequence of tachyon condensation. Ashoke Sen
>> took the fear out of tachyons for physicists when he characterized tachyon
>> condensation. In the late 1990s, Ashoke Sen conjectured that the tachyons
>> carried by open strings attached to D-branes in string theory reflect the
>> instability of the D-branes with respect to their complete annihilation.
>> The total energy carried by these tachyons has been calculated in string
>> field theory; it agrees with the total energy of the D-branes, and all
>> other tests have confirmed Sen's conjecture as well. Tachyons therefore
>> became an active area of interest in the early 2000s. OK, so open-string
>> tachyons and closed-string tachyons in twisted sectors are more or less
>> understood by now. Physicists no longer panic or abandon the theory when
>> they see a tachyon. Instead, they calmly interpret these tachyons as
>> sources of instabilities – instability that annihilate objects or whole
>> chunks of spacetime and that may (but don't necessarily have to) lead to a
>> new stable world with some interesting objects that may be left over. For
>> this reason, it was Ashoke Sen and his apprentices such as Edward Witten
>> who unified nothingness and somethingness in physics – i.e. in string
>> theory (because no other theory can achieve similar unifications) – and who
>> discovered new perspectives on the somethingness in between and that's my
>> explanation why both Sen and Witten deserves their $3 million Breakthrough
>> prizes. I am interested in relating the abstractions of string theory to
>> real world engineering applications. I want to know the ways and means of
>> how these naked singularities annihilate objects or whole chunks of
>> spacetime and that may lead to new stable conditions with some interesting
>> transformed objects that may be left over.
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 4:18 PM Axil Axil  wrote:
>>
>>> Holmlid new paper legwork by can
>>>
>>> *Title:* “Production of ultra-dense hydrogen H(0): A novel nuclear fuel”
>>>
>>> Date:
>>>
>>> 26 March 2021
>>>
>>> *Authors:* Leif Holmlid, Andrzej Kotarba, Pawel Stelmachowski.
>>>
>>> *Link:*
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319921008144?via%3Dihub#!
>>>
>>>
>>> Some LENR-relevant excerpts from the paper:
>>>
>>> [...] It is possible to have an energy output by forming H(0) from
>>> hydrogen gas. This condensation energy will easily be believed to be
>>> non-chemical thus nuclear due to its size (of the order of hundred times
>>> larger than normal chemical energy output). It may be a large part of the
>>> energy which is considered to be caused by so-called cold fusion, as
>>> suggested previously by Winterberg [6,7]. Other nuclear reactions in H(0)
>>> may be the main processes considered to be cold fusion, with very little of
>>> normal fusion products like 4He and neutrons out.
>>> So-called cold fusion according to Fleischmann and Pons [8] is probably
>>> due to the condensation reactions of H(0) as mentioned above and also due
>>> to the spontaneous nuclear processes which take place in H(0) [9]. Such
>>> spontaneous nuclear processes are similar to those induced by pulsed lasers
>>> [[10], [11], [12]] which do not give 4He and neutrons as products but
>>> instead give mesons, especially charged and neutral kaons [[13], [14],
>>> [15]]. Thus, these processes are not fusion processes. The mesons formed
>>> have lifetimes of less than 100 ns. Most often, it is the decay of the
>>> mesons which can be studied easily, giving high-accuracy lifetimes in
>>> agreement with those measured at large accelerators [16]. Since almost all
>>> mesons formed (kaons and pions) decay to muons which have a much longer
>>> lifetime of 2.20 μs,