At 04:55 PM 8/20/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 18:27:41
-0400 (EDT):
Hi,
That would be consistent with my suggestion below.
I have always wondered exactly what happens to matter that is
heading directly toward the singularity.
As I mentioned before, quantum gravity pull has a few advantages:
1) It acts as a guiding beacon for incoming particle waves, aligning them
on the way in.
2) If you consider the particles as waves the incoming blueshift gives you
high power right where you need it at the point of collapse.
3)
@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Aug 21, 2012 12:52 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes - dangerous?
At 04:55 PM 8/20/2012, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 18:27:41
-0400 (EDT):
Hi,
That would be consistent with my suggestion
At 12:14 PM 8/21/2012, ChemE Stewart wrote:
As I mentioned before, quantum gravity pull has a few advantages:
1) It acts as a guiding beacon for incoming particle waves,
aligning them on the way in.
2) If you consider the particles as waves the incoming blueshift
gives you high power
Abd,
The micro black hole would begin life without momentum, so it would not
immediately zip off through the earth.
A 22 microgram black hole would not consume the earth, read up, lots of
recent studies. A micro black hole with the mass of a mountain only exerts
one gram of force on its
, 2012 3:05 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes - dangerous?
I realize you have been too busy profusely chatting AbdOgabble to read any of
them...
At 12:43 PM 8/21/2012, David Roberson wrote:
I suggest that the statement about the average Vortician is not
called for. Who placed you in a category above the others of the collective?
Enough said.
I suppose it's too much to expect
To make this clear, people here have the right to
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Well, I suppose it's too much to expect for the average Vortician to
understand relativity.
Having an imperious moment, eh, Abd?
T
is lecturing a Chemical Engineer about Relativity.
LOL
Jojo
- Original Message -
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 4:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes
Apology accepted Abd. Let's leave it at that.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax a...@lomaxdesign.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com; vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Aug 21, 2012 3:51 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes
At 02:05 PM 8/21/2012, ChemE Stewart wrote:
Abd,
The micro black hole would begin life without momentum, so it would
not immediately zip off through the earth.
I didn't say it would. Not immediately. If it's born very small, it
will, every time it eats a proton, accumulate a positive
That 22ug blackhole is the lightest one and thus the one that decays the
fatest.That blackhole would decay in 10^-44s. But to create one, you'd have
the mass-energy of 10^19 protons in 10^-35metes, that is, a radius 10^20
smaller than 1 proton. That's quite a small cross section. So, the expanse
a few atoms missing here and there.
Now think what that will do over time to any piece of equipment or
biological process which relies on any degree of certainty and
repeatability to function. As opposed to assuming fraud with all of these
companies I would like to believe they are all having
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 18:46:51 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
1) Very small black holes are much smaller than atoms. The mostly fall straight
through.
2) Upon giving this some further thought, it occurred to me that a charged back
hole won't remain charged for very long.
to the
intense gravity to such a degree that it appears to stop in mid path at the
horizon from our observation perspective?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Aug 19, 2012 6:00 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5
Once matter collapses it will still obey quantum mechanic and thermodynamic
laws. I am going to do some calculations and see what I come up with.
Once matter collapses, it is no longer part of this unicerse, and as such,
no longer obeys quantum mexhanics and thermodynamic laws.
A
I have been using black hole and singularity interchangeably and that is
confusing and inconsistent. I will refer to it as a quantum black hole
that obeys quantum mechanics:
In quantum mechanics, the black hole emits Hawking
radiationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawking_radiation,
and so can
In reply to MarkI-ZeroPoint's message of Sat, 18 Aug 2012 22:50:51 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Robin stated,
Other factors to take into consideration are that a neutral black hole
would oscillate back and forth through the planet
Funny, that's exactly how electrons behave in my physical model... with the
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 02:31:41 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
A *gravitational singularity* or *spacetime singularity* is a location
where the quantities that are used to measure the
gravitationalhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitationalfield become
infinite
Message-
From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Aug 19, 2012 6:00 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes - dangerous?
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 19 Aug 2012 02:31:41 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
A *gravitational singularity
At 10:14 AM 8/18/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Aug 17, 2012, at 18:28, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote:
Widom Larsen postulate that the neutrons are produced when a
proton captures an electron. The process is endothermic (energy
must be supplied or it will not occur) so the neutrons
CE, I think you need to gather your thoughts in one place, write a
comprehensive paper and flesh out many lacking details to your theory, instead
of repeating yourself ad nauseam here in Vortex, and interject your theory at
every post.
Your theory as posted in your blog is glaringly
On Aug 17, 2012, at 18:28, Jeff Berkowitz pdx...@gmail.com wrote:
Widom Larsen postulate that the neutrons are produced when a proton captures
an electron. The process is endothermic (energy must be supplied or it will
not occur) so the neutrons initially have extremely low energy (cold). As
In reply to ChemE Stewart's message of Sat, 18 Aug 2012 08:09:52 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
They are proposed to range from the largest of 6.6 billion solar masses
down to 23 micrograms, the planck mass, about a grain of sand, but
collapsed. I propose that they are not really stable they are always
, August 18, 2012 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Miley, et al - 62M Neutrons within 5 minutes - dangerous?
What I had in mind was a formula for the rate at which Hawking radiation
causes it to evaporate, which is apparently size dependant. Other factors to
take into consideration
Feed yor gremlin a steady diet of hydrogen without any powder and you will
not get neutrons. This thing is ripping atoms apart
On Friday, August 17, 2012, Robert Lynn wrote:
Neutrons are hard to shield and when absorbed can produce radioactive
materials. Could this be a potentially killer
Widom Larsen postulate that the neutrons are produced when a proton
captures an electron. The process is endothermic (energy must be supplied
or it will not occur) so the neutrons initially have extremely low energy
(cold). As a result they are nearly stationary and don't leave the
material. Also
In the other thread there is a comment to the effect that this is a
small-scale hot fusion effect (fractofusion). My comments would not
apply. Part of the complexity of the field is that there isn't just one
LENR; there are apparently a whole bunch of different phenomena requiring
distinct
In reply to Jeff Berkowitz's message of Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:28:04 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Widom Larsen postulate that the neutrons are produced when a proton
captures an electron. The process is endothermic (energy must be supplied
or it will not occur) so the neutrons initially have extremely low
If it involves a shock procedure it sounds similiar to the
piezonuclear systems studied by Cardone et al
and they too obeserved neutrons.
Piezonuclear neutrons from fracturing of inert solids
http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0903/0903.3104.pdf
(This was published in Physics Letters A)
Harry
On
This comment has apparently turned out to be astute ...
On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 6:35 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
If it involves a shock procedure it sounds similiar to the
piezonuclear systems studied by Cardone et al
and they too obeserved neutrons.
Piezonuclear neutrons
31 matches
Mail list logo
