-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Cook <[email protected]>
To: vortex-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Sun, Dec 21, 2014 1:39 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1995- CETI 1kW reacto claim . fraud or not?
Frank--
Those numbers are impressive.
thanks Bob
Does the maximum range of the strong nuclear force match the idea of a sonic
velocity of the nucleus very well? It so it seems from a classical point of
view one may be able to calculate the change in the strong nuclear force as a
function of distance which would give an elastic constant for a nucleus as
well.
Some other questions:
What causes the strong force to be discontinuous at at any point?
It reaches an elastic limit.
You use the term "quantum of capacitance". What are the units of a quantum of
capacitance?
Skip that. Use the wave number and the elastic constant.
How did you convert this quantum to a quanta or energy or angular momentum?
(This may be the same basic question as the previous one.)
Unknown to me. The nucleus is like a liquid drop. The only question I have
asked and answered, is what is the speed of sound in that liquid.
Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Znidarsic
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, December 21, 2014 10:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:1995- CETI 1kW reacto claim . fraud or not?
I observed the velocity of one million meters per second at the CETI demo. I
felt that it was important. At first, as an Electrical Engineer, I produced
this velocity in terms of electrical units. I had a quantum of capacitance
and units of inductance. After taking some physics training, I realized that
nobody really understood this. So, I converted the units into mechanical
terms. Out came an elastic constant wave numbers. The new numbers are
listed below to 6 digits.
Fm = 29.0535 Newtons, The electron’s force maximum
K-e = 29.0535/r Newtons/meter, The elastic constant of the electron
Kf = 1.35969 x 10-15 meters , The nuclear spacing
rp = 1.40879 x 10-15 meters, The maximum range of the strong force.
2rp = 2.81794 x 10-15 meters, The classical radius of the electron
Sn = 1,093,850 meters per sec., The speed of sound in the nucleus
There were those that stated that my analysis was wrong because the wrong
numbers came out of it. Our Jones Bennie was one of them. He said the
radius of a nucleon was .866 fm not 1.36 fm. They bashed me badly. I knew I
was correct because so much came out of the analysis, like the energy levels
of the atoms and the Compton frequency of the electron. A typical bashing
is listed below.
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread628722/pg1
My numbers have proven correct. The 1.36 fm dimension was correct. It came
out of the analysis and I did not know it before hand. I now know that my
pundents were clueless.
http://applet-magic.com/He4nuclide.htm
The 1.41 fm dimension was correct. It has recently been discovered that
1.401 fm is the range of the strong nuclear force based of the mass the
neutral pion. It's in: "Neutrons, Nuclei and Matter: An Exploration of the
Physics of Slow Neutrons" (Dover Books on Physics)
I was told that you have nothing compared to the beauty of the Widdom Larson
and many others. Did they produce the entire quantum condition as a result
of there analysis?
It happened many times. A simple analysis based on the CETI observation has
produced correct results that were persevered wrong and later proven correct.
I believe that the still unknown result of how to control all of the
natural forces will also prove to be correct.
Frank Znidarsic
