Spin seems to be a focal issue for alternative energy scenarios.  The Manelas 
device operated with two input signals some how amplifying and producing excess 
energy accompanied by significant cooling of the strontium ferrite billet.

The billet has a complicated field profile with multiple changes in polarity 
across the billet.

From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com <bobcook39...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 1:02 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ferrous alloys and spin energy transfer - mostly overlooked 


Nice find.

When Maxwell his four differential equations, I doubt he realized the 
importance of the curl operator and how quantized spin  would modify his theory 
of the continuity of EM phenomena.  Maxwell had an inkling, however, given his 
concern about singularities.

Bob Cook

Sent from 
 for Windows 10

From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 6:58:13 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ferrous alloys and spin energy transfer - mostly overlooked 


Twisted Cavity Is a One-Way Light Path

The monopole (aka anisotropic) magnetic beam produced by spin polarization is 
the key to the LENR reaction. The spin can be produced by polaritons or atoms 
as in this experiment. Besides producing a monopole magnetic field, spin 
polarization also generates a change of state in time symmetry where light 
energy is forced to flow only in one direction. This one way flow of energy is 
what allows the soliton (AKA EVO) to accumulate gamma energy and down convert 
that energy into light and heat.

For a post discussing time symmetry breaking see

The process by which the proton decays in 

For a post discussing one way energy flow see

The process by which the proton decays in 

On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 8:03 PM, 
<bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>> wrote:


I have been indicating that phonic spin energy in orbital atomic electronic 
structures  are likely coupled via magnetic fields to nuclear spin states with 
appropriate EM resonant conditions.  See about 50% of my comments on Vortex-l 
over the last 3 years.  The coupling allows transfer of nuclear potential 
energy to phonic kinetic energy (lattice heat) consistent with a coherent  
system’s  increase of entropy.

It explains LENR given an absence of real particles with high linear 
momentum/kinetic energy.   LENR is devoid of normal nuclear reactions involving 
two or three particle interactions.)   It depends upon a coherent system of 
many particles including electrons and nucleons and maybe some virtual 
particles as well.

Bob Cook

From: Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com<mailto:ahern_br...@msn.com>>
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2018 3:13:22 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Ferrous alloys and spin energy transfer - mostly overlooked 

Arnaud, What do you fing interesting in the spin energy concept. I want to 
learn more about thisnew concept.

From: Arnaud Kodeck <arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be<mailto:arnaud.kod...@lakoco.be>>
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 1:41 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ferrous alloys and spin energy transfer - mostly overlooked 

Like Mizuno but Mu metal instead of Ni.

From: JonesBeene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>]
Sent: Friday, 12 January 2018 19:35
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Ferrous alloys and spin energy transfer - mostly overlooked 

To clarify:

Variance of good catalysts from the ideal 2Ry = 27.2 eV in ionization potential 
(the catalytic “hole”)

1)      Molybdenum              .07

2)      Potassium               .09

3)      Rubidium                .09

BTW - palladium has a fit at 27.77 eV (.57 variance) which is much further from 
an ideal catalytic value than moly. But moly is a poor proton conductor.

This may indicate that hydrogen absorption is more important than catalytic fit.

AFAIK – no one has ever tried the tactic of alloying or electroplating Pd onto 
Mu metal to optimize both goals.


… which brings to mind Claytor’s statement that the best alloy he has found for 
LENR was a Mu metal alloy.

The use of Mu Metal as the active matrix for LENR could turn out to be the most 
valuable detail relative to spin and LENR if Claytor is correct … using “ 
Co-Netic” as the matrix alloy. Mu-metal is a nickel-iron alloy, and the 
proprietary alloy  in question, Co-Netic - has high added molybdenum.


The high permeability makes mu-metal useful not only for shielding against 
static and low-frequency magnetic fields but also in converting most of the 
energy of an anomalous self-generated field into heat. This is a "soft" 
magnetic material that saturates at low magnetic fields and that is the key to 
the coupling magnons into heat. The high number of inherent Rydberg levels in 
the ionization potential of this alloy could be the key. BTW – it should be 
noted that  Molybdenum is the closest Rydberg ionization fit to Mills theory of 
all metals. That could be another key to understanding. No other metal is as 
close to the precise value.

Reply via email to