David Roberson Sat, 08 Feb 2014 13:32:56
-0800
If you look into this scenario in detail, you will see how the total angular
and linear momentum is conserved separately. The high velocity gas impacts the
large volume of gas and sends the total mass
I agree with you Eric, the jury is still out. Ed's way of thinking is more in
line with my recent thoughts about a retarding magnetic field effect. He may
not agree, but it is easier for me to understand how a process that slows down
the snap action associated with the acceleration of the
The link does not work for me.
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Feb 7, 2014 11:53 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Not from Fusion paper by Steven Jones
Looking deeper into the magnetic coupled positive feedback LENR reaction, I
have a few ideas to pass along. I understand that a magnetic field has
essentially unlimited access to the atomic structure. By this I mean that a
large, static external field can penetrate through the electron cloud
the arrangement of the electrodes in the cells--they did not have
the platinum coil that P F used. There was no comparable magnetic field
applied to the Pd electrode in those null experiments.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent
It is interesting that the magnets are shown in that application.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Feb 5, 2014 3:28 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:a note from Dr. Stoyan Sargoytchev
Of interest - in this
Axil, you have offered an idea for a mechanism that might allow coupling
between a locally large magnetic field and nearby fusion events. I remain
skeptical of this type of effect but I want to understand how it operates
according to your concept.
I have a few questions for you to review
I have realized for many years that magnetism is just another way of observing
moving electric charges. Even though the behavior of the underlying moving
charges can be used to define how they effect other charges, it is more
convenient to express the effects by invoking a magnetic field in
While looking at reviews for Caver A. Mead's book, I read a review that said he
made a mistake including voltage in a calculation for superconductors.
Now I think that there must be voltage of a type in superconductors, there are
2 types of voltage.
One is the voltage drop across a
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Feb 4, 2014 3:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a note from Dr. Stoyan Sargoytchev
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 12:16 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Axil, you have offered an idea for a mechanism that might allow coupling
between a locally large
from Dr. Stoyan Sargoytchev
On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 8:01 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The large magnetic field reported by DGT supports the coupling concept, but
there is question as to whether or not the report is accurate.
It is valuable to review again what DGT said
Axil,
It is premature for us to draw the conclusion that all cold fusion reactions
are the same process. Nature decided this issue and not us.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 10:11 am
Subject:
. It turns out that
assumption fits the behavior. Of course this fit might result from luck, but
this approach would seem to be a good start - better than an approach that does
not fit the observations.
Ed Storms
On Feb 3, 2014, at 1:25 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Axil,
It is premature
...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 5:44 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a note from Dr. Stoyan Sargoytchev
On Feb 3, 2014, at 3:23 PM, David Roberson wrote:
I agree with your approach Ed. I just wanted to point out that we must not put
on blinders if we make measurements that suggest that some
(Stalecookie) (My first response to this blog.)
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 2:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:a note from Dr. Stoyan Sargoytchev
I agree with your approach Ed. I just wanted to point
a magnetic field, it can
thermalize gamma radiation to EUV and convert that radiation to more magnetic
strength in a positive feed back loop.
I will continue to repeat this until it gets through,
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:00 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Bob, I was not thinking
I agree Bob. He needs to rotate the coils 90 degrees as you point out.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com
Sent: Mon, Feb 3, 2014 9:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:BLP video is out
, the electrons spiral towards one electrode
and the positive species spiral to the opposite electrode with the electrodes
connected to a load
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:43 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I agree Bob. He needs to rotate the coils 90 degrees as you point out.
Dave
the transverse field, the electrons spiral towards one electrode
and the positive species spiral to the opposite electrode with the electrodes
connected to a load
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:43 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I agree Bob. He needs to rotate the coils 90 degrees
increase magnetic field
strengths going forward. The magnetic fields produced by such solitons can get
huge.
LeClair saw a soliton he produced eat through 6 feet of copper as it rode on
the surface of a copper rod.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 9:23 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote
strong permanent magnet.
Charge movement does not produce a current. There is no AC frequency and no RF
involved.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:13 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
You are describing a strange particle Axil. It is not clear as to whether or
not the magnetic field
I have a question regarding the Casimir effect that someone might be able to
assist me in answering. There is discussion of how this effect is able to
squeeze the hydrogen atom into one of the fractional states and I wonder why
this same force does not push apart the atoms or whatever else may
It is unfortunate that he did not live long enough to understand the damage he
caused to the world by his vendetta against cold fusion. One, or perhaps two
more years and we would have witnessed his mea culpa.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Alan Fletcher a...@well.com
To:
A few days ago I speculated that a COP of at most two would be measured for an
ECAT that undergoes only one power pulse starting from a cold state. Both of
the table top sized box demonstrations performed by Rossi essentially operated
in this manner and there seems to be plenty of controversy
Let me speculate about the magnetic field. My suspicion is that the magnetic
field encourages the LENR activity. The additional LENR activity somehow
interacts with the magnetic field to increase the strength of that same field.
Thus you have a positive feedback mechanism in effect that
I consider a magnetic field the consequence of a time changing electric field.
The electromagnetic effects that we experience depend upon which observation
frame we happen to occupy. This is demonstrated by considering how a charged
particle appears to a stationary or moving observer at some
The superconducting regions might be detectable by the way they interact with
electromagnetic waves. There is discussion about trapped photons from time to
time and that might be due to the zero loss walls of a superconducting cavity.
I can't think of a better method of trapping energy for a
There seems to be a great deal of contraversy related to the actual COP
demonstrated by Rossi during his public tests. I especially recall the two
that used the table top cubic device that he plans to place within his megawatt
shipping model.
Several of us made attempts to calculate the
believe SPPs are 1D.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 7:26 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The superconducting regions might be detectable by the way they interact with
electromagnetic waves. There is discussion about trapped photons from time to
time and that might be due to the zero loss
Jeff Driscoll says:
|smaller fractions than 1/137.0359 are not possible because electron would be
going faster than light|
Special Relativity explains the electron speed of light limit in a somewhat
reasonable manner. In that case the maximum speed is approached as the limit
to a
I guess that is what it boils down to Eric. I would much rather have the
series continue indefinitely as I have been discussing. i.e.
(1/2,1/3,...1/137,1/138...1/infinity) which would blend nicely with the other
integer portion that we all assume is real. If the total series is found to be
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mills's theory
Why would you attach no special consideration to the fine structure constant?
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 4:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I guess that is what it boils down to Eric. I would much rather have the
series continue indefinitely as I
their errorbars right.
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I guess that is what it boils down to Eric. I would much rather have the
series continue indefinitely as I have been discussing. i.e.
(1/2,1/3,...1/137,1/138...1/infinity) which would blend nicely
atom can be.
Harry
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 5:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I guess that is what it boils down to Eric. I would much rather have the
series continue indefinitely as I have been discussing. i.e.
(1/2,1/3,...1/137,1/138...1/infinity) which would blend
= 2, 3, 4 ...) - otherwise Mills would use that
as proof,
Though he shows through math why his size is correct - google correspondence
principle Randell Mills
On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 7:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
That is right Harry. Nobody cares about how big it can
not be the answer. But the end result is amazing in terms of elegance
5 simple equations all equal the rest mass of the electron to 9+
significant digits.
Jeff
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:37 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Thanks for the information Jeff. I was expecting his mass
I didn't make an effort to identify exactly which water molecules are loosing
energy in the process. The end result is the same; the water left behind is
cooler and less energetic than it was before the vaporization occurs.
What process do you consider active leading to the vapor escape with
Jones,
Thanks for the assist. In your theory of RPF, in what form is the energy
released? In the usual solar fusion process a neutrino escapes the active
region to carry away excess energy. Since they are difficult to capture, most
leave the sun along with the mass and energy from their
Mike, do you believe that those older cavitation devices operated at over
unity? My main concern is that it is so difficult to make accurate
measurements of that type when the answer is so very close to 1. Too bad the
effective gain was not significantly higher. That would make our lives a
Robin, there is only one lower frequency where radiation is not possible and
that is zero radians per second. If you believe that some other frequency
exists that is a threshold how would that be determined? What in nature would
separate one frequency from the next so that a well defined
I think I understand what you are referring to now. We are in agreement that
energy is radiated by atoms in discrete levels at 1 photon per chunk. The main
point I was attempting to make is that the actual orbitals must have
characteristics that do not radiate unless and until that photon is
Eric, the broadband emission of photons does seem a little problematic. I have
come to expect the energy levels of atoms to be so well defined that accurate
clocks are built using the transitions. Are you sure that you accurately
understand the source of that radiation? It would seem more
luminescence
during NIR Ti:sapphire femtosecond laser excitation.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Eric, the broadband emission of photons does seem a little problematic. I have
come to expect the energy levels of atoms to be so well defined
cavities. He says
that protons were in these cavities but who can tell really.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:42 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I see what you mean Axil. Unless the nano cavity is a super conductor it
should loose energy to resistive walls like a normal cavity resonator
were in these cavities but who can tell really.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 12:42 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I see what you mean Axil. Unless the nano cavity is a super conductor it
should loose energy to resistive walls like a normal cavity resonator. In
time, the total
is correct. You could have missed something important. Hand waving
just won't due.
On Fri, Jan 24, 2014 at 1:01 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Axil, you might be expecting too much too quickly. It could well take many
years to fill in the cracks assuming that Mills is correct
The total energy contained by the steam must be no greater than the input light
energy. This is not magic, just a way to concentrate the incoming light. I am
assuming that LENR of some sort is not contributing.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To:
cells.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 2:09 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The total energy contained by the steam must be no greater than the input light
energy. This is not magic, just a way to concentrate the incoming light. I am
assuming that LENR of some sort is not contributing
superfulidically and share the incoming energy, enhance energy concentration
might result.
Using water as the reaction substrate precludes the development of BEC
formation due to its cooling effect. Using hydrogen does not stop BEC formation.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 3:44 PM, David Roberson dlrober
the
production of little heat. I think this lack of heat condition is all connected
under the nano-particle causation principle.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 4:16 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Axil, I realize that there may be some interesting behavior associated with
this material
still runs. This was
demonstrated to the patent office and Papp got the best patent of the year
award back in the 70s..
When Mills can do that, Mills will only be 50 years behind Papp.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It could be a Papp like process
to the patent office and Papp got the best patent of the year
award back in the 70s..
When Mills can do that, Mills will only be 50 years behind Papp.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 6:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
It could be a Papp like process as you suspect Axil. I do not know what
I look at this issue from another angle. If Papp had a real engine, then why
would he want to keep it from humanity? It seems more likely that he wanted to
prevent others from seeing that his device was a fake and the liquids would
make that obvious. Many people would like to prevent being
PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The other problem I find difficult to accept is that the Papp engine did not
find its way into production if it actually performed as described. Even an
idiot would instantly realize that the Papp engine would be a great investment
and money maker
it short of exceptional evidence.
I have heard this illogical thought process many times, sadly the utility of
something does not overcome the resistance of belief and powerful entrenched
interests.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 2:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I have to admit
steam without bring water to a boil.
You should further your education into human nature by dealing with a criminal
psychopath. Bernie Madoff is not available anymore but I am sure there are many
more doing business on wall street.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 8:43 PM, David Roberson dlrober
, then to protect that
beloved thing, the welfare of the world can go to hell.
Just a thought...
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 9:31 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Sorry John. You are correct about what you say to a certain extent. How much
resistance do you think the general public would
, 2014 10:53 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nanoparticles make steam without bring water to a boil.
On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 5:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Why on earth would they let such an opportunity get away? It just doesn't add
up.
Just to play devil's advocate, perhaps Papp had
to a boil.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:31 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Sorry John. You are correct about what you say to a certain extent. How much
resistance do you think the general public would exhibit to owning a vehicle
that runs virtually for free?
Virtually zero
for the conservation of mass when the CoE was proposed, but
probably only because it would have seemed obvious.
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 5:10 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 3:31 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Sorry John. You are correct
The video raises my expectations quite a bit, but there are many questions that
need to be answered before I will be convinced that it works well. My main
question at this point is why do they need 10,000 amps of drive current to get
the power output? If the dynamic impedance is .1 ohms,
Jeff, do you know whether or not Mills takes special relativity into
consideration in his equations that lead to the excellent match with the fine
structure constant? If he does, how does SR impact the calculation? There
are interesting implications if he does not need to.
Dave
zero mass,
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 2:52 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Jeff, do you know whether or not Mills takes special relativity into
consideration in his equations that lead to the excellent match with the fine
structure constant? If he does, how does SR impact
in determining
biological
and chemical processes. Strength of the luminescence indicates distance between
the molecular tags.
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:17 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Harry, I have been following the hydrino discussion and I believe that the
theory
be accommodated.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jan 20, 2014 8:04 pm
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
All they need
My bad.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Mon, Jan 20, 2014 11:13 pm
Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:BLP's announcement
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 8:05 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Eric
I, like you would greatly appreciate a theory that is more classical and
deterministic. But, there is a great deal of human intellect and energy
involved in quantum theory and we must be careful before it can be abandoned.
It is our task to remain skeptical of a new theory and subject it to
as ‘unknown sources’. But, the same lines
have been seen in BLP experiments producing hydrinos.
Mike Carrell
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, January 17, 2014 2:48 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: BLP's announcement
My understanding of fields
.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Mike,
I honestly hope that Mills has come up with a new theory that eliminates the
probabilities of quantum mechanics. Do I read that correctly, or does his
theory still allow for quantum like unknowns?
It would seem
announcement
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 6:42 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Can a loss of mass attributed to the formation of hydrinos and their subsequent
escape from the system be shown? This would be strong evidence as well.
I think the transition from hydrogen to hydrino would show
Mechanics) where Mills's theory is based on CQM.
Mills's theory fits existing data better than standard quantum mechanics and
the equations are *much* simpler and easier to understand,
though it takes some elbow grease to understand it,
Jeff
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:54 PM, David Roberson
to see.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Mike,
I honestly hope that Mills has come up with a new theory that eliminates the
probabilities of quantum mechanics. Do I read that correctly, or does his
theory still allow for quantum like unknowns
Jeff,
Do you expect x-rays and gamma rays to pass through a cloud of hydrinos without
interacting? This might be a way to see them if they are in fact considered
dark matter. I recently read about a super powerful x-ray laser that could
strip all the electrons from atoms and I bet it would
hydrinos? These things are Atoms( bosons)
aren't they? Let 's see an experiment that produces a hydrino BEC and look for
absolute certainty and determinism. That would be something to see.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:48 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Mike,
I honestly hope that Mills
The more I think about hydrinos, the more I suspect that they would not be dark
enough to hide from astronomers. Perhaps the clouds of hydrogen that we see
and from which stars form are just a large number of hydrinos being decomposed
back into hydrogen due to gamma radiation. One problem
Kevin, the skeptics have failed to prove that Rossi does not have a real
device. They always fall back on character assassination when they have
nothing left. I guess you might think that if someone once committed a felony,
then it is likely that they might repeat. This belief may be true in
Axil,
How does quantum mechanics explain this phenomenon? Is this new physics of
some type or just super heating of the region where the IR contacts the
particles?
The IR must induce an extremely large electron current flow on the surface of
the metal which of course leads to a strong
Mike,
You say that hydrinos are dark matter. What do you base this statement upon?
I have long believed that dark matter and energy do not actually exist, but am
open to ideas. It seems that the scientific community comes up with concepts
to explain everything except LENR by imagining
focusing and resonances), restrictions on EMF
concentration can be overcome to fantastic levels.
The deep infrared(terahertz) is ideal for this type of wavelength manipulation
because the wavelength is so long.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 2:30 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Axil
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Jan 18, 2014 3:07 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:The photo reactor
On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 11:30 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
One of my favorite concepts is that the electric field
Mike,
I honestly hope that Mills has come up with a new theory that eliminates the
probabilities of quantum mechanics. Do I read that correctly, or does his
theory still allow for quantum like unknowns?
It would seem that much of the recent quantum computing, etc. fairly well
establishes
NANOPARTICLE
David Roberson wrote:
Axil,
How does quantum mechanics explain this phenomenon? Is this new physics
of some type or just super heating of the region where the IR
I also find what appears to be a problem with the theory. Mills makes an
assumption in the very beginning of his analysis that the electron orbit sphere
must be of zero thickness with no radial component if it is to exist without
radiation of electromagnetic waves. This is not true and can
, 2014 at 12:21 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I also find what appears to be a problem with the theory. Mills makes an
assumption in the very beginning of his analysis that the electron orbit sphere
must be of zero thickness with no radial component if it is to exist without
It appears to me that they have most of the possible current levels covered.
Why list ranges that include each other?
Magnetic fields that are changing in magnitude or direction generate electric
fields that can impart energy upon charged particles. A steady magnetic field
is not able to
Actually, the mass of the hydrino should be reduced since it has less energy
than zero level hydrogen. That energy and hence mass has been lost to the
catalyst.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Jan 16,
I spent a bit of time adjusting some of the parameters of my thermal control
ECAT model and have a few observations.
I suppose that it seems obvious that the greater the non linearity of the
function binding core power generation to core temperature, the more critical
will be the required
Blaze, you sound like a bookie. Are you the one calling the shots in that
game? Is anyone actually making bets according to your inputs?
How liquid are the bets and can someone get into a position and then out again
without delay? How is the money handled?
If someone had bought a position
John, it does seem rather arbitrary how his game works and hopefully he can
help me understand it better. Does anyone actually risk capital on this issue?
I have seen plenty of proof that Rossi has the real deal and I can not imagine
how additional proof will make a difference to many others.
I guess I should have mentioned that I do include thermal storage within the
materials. This behaves much like a capacitor and charge. That is what
determines the time domain characteristics of my model.
I was referring to a different type of delay, such as one that might show up if
the
@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Jan 16, 2014 4:24 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Increasing probability of Rossi being real upwards, to 35%
So, Dave, I guess you're at .. what? 95%? 90%?
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:54 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
John, it does seem rather arbitrary how his game
, 2014 at 1:31 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
At this point I would have to be shown iron clad evidence that the ECAT does
not generate additional heat beyond what is used for drive. That would have to
fall into the upper 90's.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Blaze
I mentioned the energy lost to the catalyst when I actually meant to include
all of the various sinks. The main point I was intending to make is that
energy and thus the mass associated with that energy exits the hydrino. I have
one idea as to how that loss of mass may be distributed among
Axil,
The magnetic effects on the sun are a long way from Earth. It is true that the
net field at the surface of the Earth is a vector combination of the Sun's
field at that location with the Earth's, but the Earth's field is far dominate.
The effect should have been seen by experiments
It will be interesting to get more details about this device. Hopefully, the
testing is solid and not subject to interpretation. The current level being
injected into the cell seems enormous and capable of causing difficulties in
the measurement system. Also, the pulse nature of the activity
Eric,
Not so fast with doing away with CoE. I have not seen any proof that it is
violated in any of these reactions. My suspicion is that it remains valid.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Jan 14,
Axil,
It is premature to worry about understanding how LENR operates. One day it
might appear very simple and we wonder why we did not understand it earlier.
One look at a microprocessor and you have to realize how complicated it is, but
we know how to make them by the boat full now. My
That is amazing! I suspect that we are safe in assuming that none of the large
objects will be traveling at greater than 3000 kilometers/second (1% of the
speed of light). Unfortunately, that is plenty fast to destroy the planet if
the object is large.
I have never considered how much damage
It would be interesting for that speed gap to be filled. We might be able to
guesstimate the density of these smaller object in some manner, although at the
moment I am at a loss. The main thought that comes to my mind is along the
lines that I mentioned previously about the bombardment of
There is interesting evidence that cosmic ray induced clouds determine the
earth's temperature to a significant degree. The recent weak sun spot activity
allowed more rays than usual and hence the colder weather. Let's hope that
they return to normal levels so that we do not all freeze and
901 - 1000 of 2774 matches
Mail list logo
