mechanically available angular momentum. This reaction
may fit the definition of LENR.
Bob Cook
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 9:57 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
From: Chris Zell<mailto:chrisz...@wetmtv.com>
* …
. Attraction is narrow, repulsion is broad. And magnets set
in repulsion repeatedly may wear out.
I’d like to try to reproduce the Linevich device.
From: JonesBeene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 12:57 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
From: Chris Zell
➢ ….and what do we see? Things such as Bedini, Schauberger (liquid and air),
Rotoverters, flywheels with deliberately slipping belts, Linevich, claims by
Kanarev and a large proportion of the ‘tin foil hat’ devices reported on Rex
Research. The Wallace inventions
...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
From: Chris Zell<mailto:chrisz...@wetmtv.com>
* OK, here’s my current puzzlement: is it possible that physics has ignored
a free energy effect within rotational i
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net>
> *Sent: *Thursday, October 19, 2017 6:35 AM
> *To: *vortex-l
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
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
sBeene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 6:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto: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
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
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
ing “standard theory”.
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
> *From: *Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, October 18, 2017 7:38 AM
> *To: *vortex-l@eskimo.com
> *Subject: *RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Angular momentum is a vector quantity and in QM has kinetic energy
> associated with it.
>
>
>
> Is angular momentum in particles conservative? Does it violate laws of
> thermodynamics? Is spin left out of conservative formulas because it
> unbalances the results?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
:38 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
Angular momentum is a vector quantity and in QM has kinetic energy associated
with it.
Is angular momentum in particles conservative? Does it violate laws of
thermodynamics? Is spin left out of
Angular momentum is a vector quantity and in QM has kinetic energy associated
with it.
Is angular momentum in particles conservative? Does it violate laws of
thermodynamics? Is spin left out of conservative formulas because it
unbalances the results?
Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 2:36 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIlijUSJMmg=488s<https://nam02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUIlijUSJMmg%26t%3D488
Jones—
Yes to all your questions IMHO
Bob Cook
From: JonesBeene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:05 AM
To: Vortex List<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
Quantum spin (nanometer level and below) is always in motion, and
is useful as
occurs in LENR phenomena.
Bob Cook.
From: JonesBeene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:05 AM
To: Vortex List<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: [Vo]:Magnetic Spin Vortex
Quantum spin (nanometer level and below) is always in motion, and
Quantum spin (nanometer level and below) is always in motion, and the anomaly
would be lack of motion - yet at the micro-level self-generated spin as angular
momentum would imply “perpetual motion” if it were a reproducible and
“harvestable” phenomenon. Is there a middle ground
OK, here’s my
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIlijUSJMmg=488s
Start video at 8:00 to save time.
Rare earth magnets produce spin because these types of magnets produce
anisometric (unbalanced) magnetic field lines.
An electro magnet does not produce spin because it produces isometric
(balanced) field lines.
Quantum spin (nanometer level and below) is always in motion, and the anomaly
would be lack of motion - yet at the micro-level self-generated spin as angular
momentum would imply “perpetual motion” if it were a reproducible and
“harvestable” phenomenon. Is there a middle ground?
There are a
19 matches
Mail list logo