Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo

Funny, Mark, you really didn't address the objection. You just attacked me. Sounds like you didn't understand the reason the change is significant, either. On 02/11/2010 01:48 AM, Mark Iverson wrote: > > "So, it looks to me like Naudin's playing games with his measurements. > His setup's inte

Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo

On 02/11/2010 09:03 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Mark Iverson wrote: > >> "So, it looks to me like Naudin's playing games with his measurements. >> His setup's interesting but I would hesitate to trust a single >> measurement on that page." >> >> You guys are pathetic... You're looking for any lit

Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo

Caveat: My reply, interspersed with the message, is too long. Oh, well. On 02/13/2010 04:35 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> >> Lovely page! Thanks, Harry! > > > You are welcome. > >> JLN has done a really clear job of des

Re: [Vo]:More-energetic Blue-shifted & safer processed Raney

On 02/13/2010 11:19 PM, Francis X Roarty wrote: > Scott, > > The EM drive link is > http://www.universetoday.com/2008/10/09/is-the-impossible-emdrive-possible/ > > > > > > *[snip] Actually, the untreated powdered alloy is pyrophoric, but once it has > been * > > *treated

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Feb. 14 Update

Gotta love Naudin's work on this -- it's so clear... Couple things, from a very quick skim of the new version of the page. ** Introductory text in a box at top of page: > The current required to get the temporary depolarization of the magnetic > domains of the ferrite is fully independent of the

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?

Very, very cute! Thanks, Harry! I'll definitely be passing this one along! On 02/15/2010 11:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > Naudin's Solid State Generator. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjDbIrKIVXs > > How do you explain this? It's the same principle as the Steorn motor, which also depends

Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo

On 02/17/2010 12:14 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > I did some googling on magnetic saturation... (some parts of the post > have been removed) No prob, I snip all over the place, myself. ... [sal] >> The distinction you're drawing between a "cloak" and a "shield" is >> interesting but I think

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Feb. 14 Update

On 02/18/2010 12:07 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 02:09 PM 2/17/2010, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: >> At the same time, there is one other piece of information which is >> missing, which makes it hard to judge the significance of the lack of >> measured change in the cur

Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo

On 02/18/2010 12:26 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To: >> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, February 17, 2010 3:43:49 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:latest from Naudin on the Orbo >> >> >

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?

On 02/18/2010 01:11 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > - Original Message >> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Tue, February 16, 2010 8:25:05 PM >> Subject: RE: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator? >> >> At 12:37 AM 2/16/2010, Wm. Scott Smit

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?

On 02/18/2010 08:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To: >> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, February 18, 2010 2:10:30 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator? >> >>

Re: [Vo]:Census Community Survay..what is the remedy if I fail to produce?

On 02/20/2010 07:56 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: > > > I have never committed a crime in my life. It says I have to answer > all of these questions by law. If I do not answer this will be my > first crime of violation of the law. If take my amendment rights of > Unreasonable search and Seizure

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?

On 02/18/2010 11:51 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > On 02/18/2010 08:39 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > >> Naudin has posted two more videos where he holds the magnet away from >> the torodial coils so that the pickup coil is between the magnet and >> th

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Storms’ Theory “Explains All Known Cold Fusion Phenomena”

On 02/22/2010 04:56 PM, Steven Krivit wrote: > http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/ The article begins: > According to an Oct. 5, 2009, press release on the Lyndon LaRouche > Political Action Committee Web site, Say ... what??

Re: [Vo]:Smoke ring collisions

On 02/22/2010 08:38 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > > *From:* Jed Rothwell > > Ø That's a splendid little video, and an elegant demonstration of spin > conservation. I urge people to see it. > > … if it is authentic, it is splendid indeed. > It looks authentic enough -- but it's *NOT* smoke rings. It'

Re: [Vo]:Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot

On 02/22/2010 10:32 PM, Rich Murray wrote: > > Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid > in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by > SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot spots from H and O > microbubbles: Rich Murray 2010.02

Re: [Vo]:Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot

instead of a HV supply. > > Michel > > 2010/2/23 Stephen A. Lawrence : >> >> >> On 02/22/2010 10:32 PM, Rich Murray wrote: >>> >>> Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid >>> in an insulated box with two e

Re: [Vo]:Extraordinary Error -- no electric field exists inside a conducting liquid in an insulated box with two external charged metal plates, re work by SPAWAR on cold fusion since 2002 -- also hot

On 02/23/2010 03:32 PM, Horace Heffner wrote: > > It is notable that even if ion redistribution fully negates a field > within the electrolyte, that negation occurs via an ion redistribution, > and thus an artificial concentration gradient is obtained. A change in > surface electron density and

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Can retarded gravity be counteracted by tidal acceleration?

I don't really understand how tidal and retarded effects can cancel. Tidal effects are only detectable on extended bodies, and the "tidal force" generally (always?) has nonzero divergence. On the other hand, the retarded gravity effect typically manifests itself as a rotation of the acceleration

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Can retarded gravity be counteracted by tidal acceleration?

On 03/03/2010 10:27 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > I don't really understand how tidal and retarded effects can cancel. > > Tidal effects are only detectable on extended bodies, and the "tidal > force" generally (always?) has nonzero divergence. Actually I think th

Re: [Vo]:Naudin's Solid State Generator?

;t show me the rest at all. So, I managed to watch the first part of the video but didn't get to the shot at 6:40. Can you summarize what it showed? Anyhow, I've addressed what I can, below: On 02/21/2010 03:17 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > - Original Message &g

Re: [Vo]:Alzheimer's and herpes zoster should be studied.

On 03/07/2010 10:37 AM, Horace Heffner wrote: > > On Mar 6, 2010, at 9:43 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > >> Possibly a new method of detecting Alzheimer's: >> >> Eye test that spots Alzheimer's 20 years before symptoms: Middle-aged >> could be screened at routine optician's visit >> >> http://www.dai

Re: [Vo]:MIT's Bettery

On 03/13/2010 11:07 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: > >From Terry, > > >> http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/thermopower-waves-0308 >> >> >> >> "A previously unknown phenomenon >> >> In the new experiments, each of these electrically and thermally >> conductive nanotubes was co

Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC Wozniak reports Prius problem

On 03/15/2010 06:14 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > This is off topic but it is related to technology, and to the latest > bruouhaha in the news. People have called into question the report > made by James Sikes that his Prius went out of control for several > miles. In the interest of disseminating te

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

But but ... he's driving it from a honkin' big 12 volt battery, looks like a lead acid motorcycle battery or UPS battery. So, it's *not* a self runner, no matter what it says in the title. He's got it charging a couple of caps, up to 17 volts or so, above the battery voltage. He makes a big

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

it away, turn it off. Otherwise, it's almost surely an example of just one more way to get power from point A to point B in a way that's sufficiently confusing that we can't figure it out from the information given in the video. > > > > > > > - Original M

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

On 03/17/2010 12:26 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > Maybe he thinks it is obvious that the energy stored in the capacitor > has (or will?) exceed the energy stored in the battery. > HAH! The battery obviously masses more than the caps. (Just look at the relative sizes, and consider for a moment ty

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

On 03/17/2010 02:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > George Holz wrote: > >> This setup is only interesting if the 12V >> battery is disconnected from the pulse generator. > > I assume you mean they should charge up the capacitor first, and then > attach it to the pulse generator instead of the battery.

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

On 03/17/2010 03:14 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> So, get rid of the battery -- I mean, *really* get rid of it, disconnect >> the wires at the battery terminals, and carry it a good distance away >> from the experiment -- and show the capacit

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

On 03/18/2010 12:45 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Wed, March 17, 2010 2:58:11 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets) > >> Even with the ba

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

BTW I think you may need to be signed into facebook to see this image. (At any rate, I couldn't see it until I signed in.) On 03/18/2010 12:15 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=3513566&l=e812a3f42e&id=676517267 > > http://tinyurl.com/yewd4sf > > Harry > > > >

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

So what we've got here is a toroidal coil with a neo magnet outside it. The neo magnet, by saturating /part/ of the ferrite core, essentially "cuts" the toroid, so it's no longer going to be a closed system; when we put a current through the coil, we're going to see a chunk of its field "leaking o

Re: [Vo]:add on: OU demonstrated ( with no secrets)

was being shown by the meters ... Am I going to have to to the overunity forum to get a handle on this? sigh... > > > > Harry > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

erfect winding geometry isn't really at issue here. It's surely swamped by the distortion imposed on the field by the external neo magnets. > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence To: >> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 1:

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

On 03/18/2010 05:58 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; >> vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, March 18, 2010 5:22:20 PM Subject: >> Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram >> >> Stephen A. L

Re: [Vo]:PewReserachCenter The Science Knowledge Quiz

On 03/18/2010 05:19 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > See: > > http://pewresearch.org/sciencequiz/ > > This was administered to 1,005 randomly sampled adults. The results are > pathetic. Oh, I don't know -- keep in mind that the "random" sample is actually self selected. Have you ever consented to an

Re: [Vo]:More tests from gotoluc

On 03/19/2010 12:58 AM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > test 8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbgwlJx0zNw With only a signal > generator attached. This is a variation on Stiffler's circuit, which, as you may recall, worked with just one wire from a signal generator connected. Capacitive coupling is

Re: [Vo]:Pi factor

On 03/20/2010 12:01 AM, Harvey Norris wrote: > > Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances > http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/ > > > --- On Fri, 3/19/10, Harvey Norris wrote: > >> From: Harvey Norris Subject: [Vo]:Pi factor To: >> vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Friday, Marc

Re: [Vo]:PewReserachCenter The Science Knowledge Quiz

On 03/20/2010 06:29 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > Oh, I don't know -- keep in mind that the "random" sample is actually > self selected. Have you ever consented to answer a phone survey? > > > It isn't sup

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

On 03/21/2010 09:55 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: > Which voltage? Volts on the caps attached to the output -- right, Harry? But the signal generator is still hooked up, and it's coupled to the output (at least) through the gate capacitance of the FET and the linked inductors of the "transformer",

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

the battery until > the latter is disconnected, which BTW isn't explained on the diagram. > Is the diagram not complete? > > > 2010/3/21 Stephen A. Lawrence : >> >> >> On 03/21/2010 09:55 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: >>> Which voltage? >> >> Vo

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

tage source. The fact that the signal generator which is driving this circuit is apparently making square waves, not sine waves, is what makes this relevant. > > He tried in test 10 but didn't succeed: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7CsBr7ouPE > > harry > > &g

Re: [Vo]:circuit diagram

On 03/21/2010 10:59 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > On 03/21/2010 07:25 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: >> The capacitor is on the input side. A pick up coil was added later to >> see if it is possible to close the loop and generate OU. > > Interesting. Sorry for m

Re: [Vo]:ACS press release for the upcoming cold fusion session: Krivit's folly.

On 03/23/2010 02:56 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 01:27 PM 3/23/2010, Steven Krivit wrote: ... > >> If that's the way you want Vortex to be, not a problem. Journalists >> are used to people coming unglued when we report hard-hitting facts >> that ruffle people's feathers. > > Or when they

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Wired: America's Wind Energy Potential Triples in New Estimate

On 03/30/2010 10:09 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > > If they [China] were moving ahead rapidly in cold fusion I would be thrilled. > Actually, they may be, since they are paying for Arata's work, and > reportedly replicating it back in China. Yow! That's wild! Can you provide more info on that --

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Andrea Rossi interview on Ca$h Flow: “I translate pressure as responsibility.”

In general, in areas where I have lived, anyone can do electrical work as long as it's inspected by a licensed electrician before it goes into service. Ditto plumbing, IIRC. (And if you look at rental apartments that started out as pieces of single family homes, you'll find that enforcement o

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Andrea Rossi interview on Ca$h Flow: "I translate pressure as responsibility. "

On 12-01-03 03:19 PM, Alan J Fletcher wrote: At 12:10 PM 1/3/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote: http://www.homedepot.com/hdus/en_US/DTCCOM/HomePage/Docs/HVAC_Trane_ENG_Online.pdf Yeah .. but that one says: The Home Depot works only with home service professionals who meet the highest standards for

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:"A competent observer's assessment of Defkalion‏" - Revisited

On 12-01-04 01:35 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: 2012/1/4 Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint > Mary Yugo stated, for the millionth time, “A much better theory is that, as Rossi says, they have nothing to show.” Same old tired repetition, despite numerous requests t

Re: [Vo]:Meter for measuring electromagnetic radiation

Sounds like RLS to me, and most specifically carpal tunnel problems. Laptops tend to force a really bad hand position, and some also require high pressure on the keys to get them to fire reliably, which exacerbates it. Cell phones may require a bad wrist angle; just holding your hand in a fi

Re: [Vo]:Meter for measuring electromagnetic radiation

On 12-01-08 01:41 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Sounds like RLS 'Scuse me, I meant RMS (off by one in the alphabet) to me, and most specifically carpal tunnel problems. Laptops tend to force a really bad hand position, and some also require high pressure on the keys to get them to

Re: [Vo]:Ecat production will be robotized...

On 12-01-11 08:57 AM, Wolf Fischer wrote: Hi all, Rossi made the following statement on his journal: / January 10th, 2012 at 4:05 PM/ /[ ... ] ready to make order confirmations in *_Autumn_*; [ ... ] first deliveries will start _*perhaps *_*within the year*, but I

Re: [Vo]:Ecat production will be robotized...

On 12-01-11 02:53 PM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: Peter, Rossi is already one of many -- the new researchers that we hear about here on Vortex are less than the tip of the iceberg. Interesting. Can you cite any evidence to support that statement? What other labs are reli

Re: [Vo]:Preparata's Intra-Cathode Current?

On 12-01-12 05:05 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: As far as I know, most cars traveling ~80 miles an hour burn ~4 gallons of gasoline per hour. That's 20 mpg. You must be thinking of SUVs. :-) Most cars nowadays ARE SUVs.

Re: [Vo]:Preparata's Intra-Cathode Current?

On 12-01-12 06:49 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Most cars nowadays ARE SUVs. Yeah, they jolt my Scion Xb as they flash by. Huh. Annoying, aren't they. Well, if you want to add a little more "getup&go (right-past-t

Re: [Vo]:Preparata's Intra-Cathode Current?

On 12-01-12 04:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Okay, I mixed up ounces and grams. Various sources say: Catalytic converters cost between $400 and $900, depending on the size of the vehicle. Average is around $500 retail replacement cost. Catalytic converters have "1/20 of a troy ounce of" pallad

Re: [Vo]:Rossi : customer can refill

On 12-01-13 12:21 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: Hum, seems hard to do. my point of view is that maybe it will be replacing the full core, with Ni, H, primary cooling, and maybe electronic... once shutdown, the reactor will be simply plumbed/pluged-out like a printer cartridge... Good analogy. L

Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show

On 12-01-14 06:59 PM, Wolf Fischer wrote: Hi there, Rossi was just on the Smart Scarecrow Show. There were some new information / clarification ... 4. Price of the Home Ecat is down to 500$ 5. Ecat is thought for heating the home, not for heating the water for showering etc. 6. Refueling th

Re: [Vo]:Rossi on the Smart Scarecrow Show

On 12-01-14 09:40 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence mailto:sa...@pobox.com>> wrote: These prices are just plain silly. He's going to manufacture furnaces for the home for $500 each. Sure he is, like I really believe that... On the contrary, it is quite

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 04:15 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: As far as I know, Rossi he discovered this method of doing cold fusion. I would urge everyone to go back and take a look at an earlier thread: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 04:55 PM, Terry Blanton wrote: On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Say what? Where's all that atomic hydrogen coming from? Are we back to splitting molecules using ZPE, or is there some other energy source breaking the bond? Geeze, Stephen, don&

Re: [Vo]:Rossi comments on the "It was sent back" statement

On 12-01-16 05:11 PM, Zell, Chris wrote: Edison was a greedy liar and cheat who was cruel to animals. Schrodinger was a bigamist. MLK and possibly Einstein were plagiarists. I've read Poincare's papers Einstein supposedly plagiarized. In a word ... he didn't. Poincare had a lot of the pi

Re: [Vo]:Heat Output

ChemE: Not to worry, while real names are preferred, the frown on pseudonyms is not especially intense. If you want to call yourself ChemE I dare say nobody's going to care much (unless you start trolling). We've had people using pseudonyms off and on for as long as I can recall; some were c

Re: [Vo]:Interesting new video from ecat.com

On 12-01-19 10:13 AM, Jones Beene wrote: Here is the scenario that best fits all the facts: (1) the container was shipped to a customer in the USA (2) the container wasn't returned to Bologna, per se. (3) the footage in the 12 Jan YT video was older footage (4) the container did not work to th

Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean

On 12-01-19 10:11 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: This discussion about Rossi's 1 MW reactor is silly. The reactor has not shipped anywhere. He said it has not shipped, and it is obvious from the photos it has not. Previously he said he did ship it. Now he says he did not. He is contradicting himse

Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean

On 12-01-19 02:09 PM, Wolf Fischer wrote: Some of us tried to find where he said that the thing was shipped. The only thing that we found was his answer on the question "Is it gone?" --> "Yes". The question leaves a little room for interpretation in my opinion, but really - it's only very lit

Re: [Vo]:Rossi often says things he does not mean

On 12-01-19 03:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: Personally I stopped believing anything Rossi said after the "wet steam/dry steam" business blew up early last year. That is unfair to Rossi. No, it's not. He did not select the meter which is contr

Re: [Vo]:Keef Versus Greg Watson

On 12-01-20 03:25 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Jones Beene > wrote: If anyone is still in doubt that Greg and Aussi Guy are one and the same, here is a thread from another forum - that turned up today - where other posters ar

Re: [Vo]:Keef Versus Greg Watson

On 12-01-20 04:39 PM, Craig Haynie wrote: On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 13:25 -0800, Eff Wivakeef wrote: What is for sure is that Greg advertised the SMOT all over the net and lived off the income for a few years. [ ... ] This is news to me too. The way he approached this list back in the mid-90s, wa

Re: [Vo]:Ian Bryce and Rossi

On 12-01-21 02:13 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: You, Mary Yugo and the other trolls... I disagree with the characterization of MY as a "troll". Trolling generally refers to making outrageous, offensive, or clearly bogus statements to get a reaction from people. Attacking Rossi, and asserting t

Re: [Vo]:Greg Watson is VERY rude!

Eff: Who cares? This is personal garbage. Please get it OFF VORTEX. Take your personal vendetta someplace else.

Re: [Vo]:Greg Watson is VERY rude!

Eff: I don't need this kind of garbage from you, or anyone else on this list. The occasional worthwhile content of your semi-literate contributions isn't sufficient to justify digging through the offensive and repetitious attacks which constitute most of what you have to say. *plonk* On 12

Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog

On 12-01-22 04:24 AM, Shaun Taylor wrote: On 22/01/2012 6:57 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 11:45 PM, Shaun Taylor mailto:shauntaylor...@gmail.com>> wrote: Rossi faked the 6 Oct data and fooled all the "Experts" that attended the demo. Some BIG names there. I see

Re: [Vo]:University testing of the E-cat question asked on Rossi blog

On 12-01-22 02:45 AM, Shaun Taylor wrote: Horton saw through the 6 Oct data fraud and reported it. Did anyone here give Horton a "High 5 Good Job Mate"? NO. Now he appears to have gone away as no one listened to him. Horton mate, I agree with you. (a) It's Horace, not Horton (Horton was t

Re: [Vo]:Opponents should please go away and form your own group

On 12-01-22 02:18 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: A message from Mary Yugo caught my attention before falling into the trash. Howzat work? My filters dump the folks I'm filtering before I ever see them. The important point is, my messages do not violate any of the rules set forth by Beaty: "

Re: [Vo]:non radiative transfer of energy

On 03/30/2010 11:20 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > > This came up a few years ago as a possible explanation to the Moller > MAHG which was claimed to have a gigantic COP >20 until Naudin’s silly > measurement error was discovered by George Holz. BTW – side note - to > his discredit, JLN has never ackn

Re: [Vo]:non radiative transfer of energy

On 03/30/2010 01:53 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > Stephen, > >> "Unfortunately he never showed actual real time volts and amps going in, > so it's anybody's guess how "true" the RMS numbers from the Fluke 123 > really are (unless you've run your own tests on that particular meter). > Sticking the la

Re: [Vo]:non radiative transfer of energy

On 03/30/2010 03:02 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > > Do you by any chance have a URL? > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aH-gen Thanks; I will check that out. (In fact I think you already posted that link, but I didn

Re: [Vo]:non radiative transfer of energy

e of JLN's OU was. On 03/30/2010 04:03 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > >> If JLN was reading peak amps and dividing by 20 to get RMS amps, then he > was off by a factor of about 4.5. Square output with a 5% duty cycle &g

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 03/31/2010 12:46 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > At 09:30 PM 3/30/2010, Harry Veeder wrote: >> I don't see anything wrong with the way Krivit presented the data in >> order to make his point. > > As I just mentioned in another post, I haven't studied "his point" in > this case. Perhaps you'd

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 03/31/2010 10:56 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: > Friends, > > I object to the heavy Krivit bashing, it is not called for, After looking over his slides, I actually think it is called for. I am, in fact, extremely surprised by your defense of him. Krivit appears to be accusing much of the CF co

Re: [Vo]:non radiative transfer of energy

On 03/30/2010 05:26 PM, Jones Beene wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Stephen A. Lawrence > >> That's certainly true -- it looks suspicious. But again, it's not > conclusive, and it doesn't point to any specific error. > > Thinking back on

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 03/31/2010 12:24 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Jed Rothwell > > Even if you do not intend to create an exaggerated impression, >> people like me will assume that is your intention. You have made a naive >> mistake. So don't do it without a good

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 03/31/2010 02:11 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 31, 2010, at 10:56 AM, Michel Jullian wrote: > >> In fact, I was wondering, who cares about the heat, helium production >> alone is an indisputable proof of LENRs, isn't it? >>> >>> >>> > > A familiarity with

Re: [Vo]:global warming

On 03/31/2010 05:29 PM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: > Another speaker from Switzerland. Showed a picture of the top of > Matterhorn. It broke off and slid down. The culprit, the melting of > the permafrost due to global warming. This happened in 2003, according to stories I saw when I googled

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 03/31/2010 11:52 PM, Francis X Roarty wrote: > Am I correct in believing a near luminal basketball could pass through > the eye of a stationary needle? > No. The basketball is contracted fore-and-aft, but not side-to-side, as viewed by an observer sitting next to the needle. So, it's going

Re: [Vo]:BlackLight Power, Inc. Announces First Commercial License in Europe

Any hints as to what, if anything, the license cost? So far there's been no clear indication that any power company has actually *bought* a license from BLP, as far as I know. (I'll be happy to be corrected on this.) On 04/01/2010 10:54 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > They are starting to play in the

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

ill runs slower at the "bottom" of the chamber than at the "top". > > Regards > > Fran > > <http://www.mail-archive.com/> > > > *Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction* > > Stephen A. Lawrence > Thu

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 04/01/2010 01:54 PM, Michel Jullian wrote: > 2010/3/31 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax : >> Sent from my iPhone >> But when the helium findings >> correlate with excess heat, it all changes. The results confirm each other. > > Too much proof makes people doubt. In what way does that statement make sens

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 02:06 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: >>From Mr. Lawrence > > ... > >> For example, if we dig a spherical chamber in the center >> of a planet, there will be *no* gravitational "field" >> within that chamber caused by the mass of the planet. >> However, the gravitational

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 02:20 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Steven V Johnson wrote: > >> Can someone refresh my memory about the precise time measurements >> conducted with atomic clocks positioned at different elevations on the >> surface of Earth. > > Gravity or acceleration slow down time. *WRONG* A mom

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 02:29 PM, OrionWorks - Steven V Johnson wrote: >>From Jed: > >> Gravity or acceleration slow down time. They are one and the same in general >> relativity theory. >> >> If you start with 2 atomic clocks synchronized together, and you move one up >> 10 m to another floor, that cause

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 03:08 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> >> Can someone refresh my memory about the precise time measurements >> >> conducted with atomic clocks positioned at different elevations on the >> >> surface of Earth. &

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 03:51 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 2:53:15 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction &

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 05:37 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >> > This becomes a real problem with the GPS >> > satellite clocks. > >> Well, not really a "problem", because the engineers who designed them >> knew about GR. > &

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 05:31 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 4:01:43 PM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction &

Re: [Vo]:Did I get this right?

On 04/01/2010 07:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction > > At 02:04 PM 4/1/2010, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote: > >> But there is a limit suggested by this, that the maximum flattening is >> by one-half. This is false. There is no maximum.

Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick

On 04/01/2010 08:45 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > > - Original Message >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com >> Sent: Wed, March 31, 2010 9:40:19 AM >> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Krivit comments on his annoying trick > >

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/01/2010 08:37 PM, Harry Veeder wrote: > > > > Only if potentials exist without fields, can it be said that time > dilation "doesn't depend in any way on *variations* in the *strength* of > the gravitational field." I thought what I said was pretty clear. Are you just trying to pick nit

Re: [Vo]:checking my understanding of Lorentz contraction

On 04/02/2010 08:28 AM, Roarty, Francis X wrote: > Stephan, > > No, Like Harry I am having trouble too but I think you are simply > making a distinction between different sources of time dilation. I > know that time dilation is much greater sitting on the surface of a > dead star vs. a small plane

Re: [Vo]:Life on Mars? Yes, Us.

On 04/02/2010 11:04 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: > 9/9/2009 > > http://www.examiner.com/x-2912-Seattle-Exopolitics-Examiner~y2009m9d9-Two-whistleblowers-independently-report-teleporting-to-Mars-and-meeting-Martian-extraterrestrials > > http://tinyurl.com/l853hy > > Two whistleblowers independently

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >