On 12/31/05, Michael Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > David Jonsson wrote: > > > This effect can not be so unknown as some say. > > The inventor even says the effect is unknown. > > > http://www.rexresearch.com/blomgren/blomgren.htm > > > I think it is easy. Thermal motion causes the charges > > to emit radiation. > > I've played around with this effect a little. There > are a number of possibilities, none of which easily > explains the rather dramatic cooling. You can feel > this directly by placing your hand near one of those > negative ion generators. It feels like a cool breeze. > There just isn't enough ion wind to explain this. Likely > the fluid boundary layer is broken down, giving more > direct access to the surrounding air. > > The effect on red hot metal is not easily accounted > for by either the ion wind or boundary layer break- > down. I've no actual calorimetric data on it, but you > really have to see the thing first hand to appreciate > it. I'm surprised no commercial application has been > made of this.
It could be because the strategists don't want it to happen. Check http://www.fas.org/irp/mystery/unveil.htm and its reference 10: Scott, William, 'Black World Engineers, Scientists Encourage Using Highly Classified Technology for Civil Application," Aviation Week & Space Technology, 9 March 1992, page 67. The Stefan Boltzmann law and the Planck radiation laws can not be effective since they refer to radiation from neutral matter. If net charges are added to thermal vibrations they should radiate. There is probably a quantum mechanical explanation too. This is a very easy and plausible explanation. It is much more unlikely for charged matter to have the same temperature as neutral matter. This lowers entropy and that is exactly what Tom Bearden says it will do referring to D. J. Evans and Lamberto Rondoni, "Comments on the Entropy of Nonequilibrium Steady States," J. Stat. Phys., Vol. 109, Nov. 2002, p. 895-920 Alternatively if the mean free path is longer than the cyclotron diameter of the resulting magnetic fields then the heat would be transformed into magnetic momentum. Don't tell me I have to determine this myself. I don't have the right background to do that. I would say that statistical physics, quantum physics, thermodynamics and plasma physics is a suitable background for someone to work with this. At best I could have results in 2007. It is amazing and hard to understand how the strategists can have a grip over the sciences like this. I would say more than politics is in effect to stop science like this. It would have been natural for Planck and other physicists of his time to look at these issues. Now a century has passed. One can't do anything but congratulate the US government on a very successful policy. It seems like this technology is more controversial than nuclear arms. David
