You got me on that, Stephen. When you try to interpret Tom Bearden it could be ELLIOT NESS or LOCH NESS. :-)
Fred > [Original Message] > From: Stephen A. Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Date: 1/2/2006 9:41:50 AM > Subject: Re: OCCULT ETHER PHYSICS vs BETA AETHER > > I found this totally opaque. Is it possible to shed a little light on > it in a few words? > > > Frederick Sparber wrote: > > Tom Bearden Sez. > > > > "The point is that any charge produces a continuous flow of real, > > usable EM energy from the vacuum. > > Say what? What is he talking about here? > > The field of a fixed charge, as I understand it, is conservative. It's > got a fixed amount of energy; there's no "flow" involved. > > So, again, what's he talking about with the "flow" of "real usable EM > energy"? > > > > Thermodynamically we are describing a > > nonequilibrium steady-state (NESS) system, and such a system is > > permitted to continuously emit energy (received from its environment). > > The charge also falsifies the present second law of thermodynamics to > > any size level and time duration desired, because the emitted photons > > As a rule fixed charges only emit real "photons" when they accelerate, > and that requires adding energy. > > Or is he talking about virtual photons which mediate the fixed E field? > > > > do > > form deterministic EM fields and potentials as a function of radial > > distance. One calculates the field intensity and potential intensity at > > any radial point, by a deterministic formula -- not by the use of > > statistics. Stated in the language of thermodynamics, the charge > > consumes positive entropy (disordered and uncontrolled energy) in the > > virtual state, and coherently integrates it to ordered and controlled > > energy in the observable state, which is a negative entropy operation > > producing useful EM energy in the observabl! e state." > > > > "The end result is to put some real substance into Lyne's observations > > on the excess energy from atomic hydrogen, which is equivalent to the > > excess energy from the proton. The proton (and any other charge, viewed > > in the quantum field theory manner) is continuously and ceaselessly > > pouring out real EM energy extracted and coherently integrated > > (RE-ORDERED and RECOVERED) from the disordered virtual energy of the > > seething vacuum. So the only barrier to COP>1.0 EM performance with > > atomic hydrogen is in the process or method used to diverge and collect > > sufficient of the continuously flowing "gusher" of real EM energy from > > each atom (each proton). Or, viewed thermodynamically, COP>1.0 > > performance is permitted by the NESS process, as is already well known > > in the thermodynamics of nonequilibrium steady state systems. It's > > rather like a windmill in a steady wind. It can permissibly change the > > form of its input energy to a different form of output energy, and par! > > t of that output energy can be intercepted, collected, and dissipated to > > power external loads. The common solar cell does the same thing, > > receiving observable photons from its environment and outputting > > electrical energy." > > " So the reader is urged to simply consider the fundamental > > information in Lyne's cogent writing, in light of the foregoing > > discussion, and sort out the science as he sees fit. The real point of > > the article is the excess energy output, and its availability for use to > > perform real work. " > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > *From:* Frederick Sparber <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > *To: *vortex-l <mailto:[email protected]> > > *Sent:* 1/2/2006 2:53:17 AM > > *Subject:* Re: OCCULT ETHER PHYSICS vs BETA AETHER > > > > The CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics gives the H - H bond > > energy of 498,000 > > Joules per mole (119,000 cal/gram mole) or 472 BTU/gram mole. > > > > Conspiracy, Frank? :-) > > > > Fred > > > > http://www.cheniere.org/misc/a_h%20reaction.htm > > > > " 109,000 cal./gram mole equals 432.6 BTU/gram mole--- roughly the > > heat energy contained in _60 loaves of bread_---the "extra heat > > energy" which they have asked us to believe is 'stored' in an amount > > of atomic hydrogen which weighs 1/28th of an ounce, during its brief > > passage through the arc! How could the transformer produce that much > > energy, especially when it uses only half what it does in > > conventional welding processes? It seems more likely that excess > > heat could be stored in molecules than in 'almost naked' atomic > > hydrogen atoms. What ever happened to Bohr's little atom! It got > > bigger, and bigger, and........ > > > > Between the older text (1921-1950, from the first and sixth > > editions) and the newer (1976) Norton science encyclopedia, it was > > obvious that science was much more straightforward in the > > pre-National Security Act days, and that . . . . . . " > >
