Hi Fran,
Thank you for your many well-thought out responses. Recently, however, I think
you have been making the underlying faulty assumption that equal and opposite
forces cannot indirectly result in a continuous net force on an objects.
Remember (Was it Huckleberry Finn?) "I reckon there's more than one way to skin
a cat" ? Please, consider this point without worrying about anything but the
mechanical logic of this analogy.
Stranded Astronaut & Newtonian Loophole
A first astronaut that has accidentally cut his tether
and is drifting away from his vehicle; initially, he is stranded
because has no reaction-mass to expel, so he cannot get back to the
ship without help. Two of his friends, upon seeing his dilemma,
throw identical hammers at him at the same instant, equally hard
from opposite directions in an effort to directly push him either
back to his vehicle or back to the Space Station. Unfortunately, he
catches both
hammers, so no net force is imparted to him, and his friends don't
have any thing else to throw at him; so is he still stranded? Of
course not! He now
has reaction mass. Furthermore, even though the hammers imparted
equal and opposite forces, even though there truly is no net
imparted-force, he is now
free
to expel
them both
in
any
direction he wants.
Even though no net momentum is
imparted by the equal and opposite forces of the hammers being
stopped by the stranded astronaut, net energy is being
imparted to the system, from outside of the system; because, it turns
out that our stranded astronaut is too lazy to expend his own
energy; instead, he allowed the colliding hammers to compress a
spring as they struck him; so now, he has a spring-loaded launch
mechanism that he can release in any desired direction; therefore, he
is not using internal energy or mass that he had to bring with him,
yet he can accelerate in any direction. Furthermore, in principle, he
can be continuously supplied with new reaction-mass to expel.
Do you acknowledge that it doesn't necessarily matter if the Quantum Flux
Hammers from all directions equally. What actually matters is whether the
materials can respond asymmetrically to this non-net-momentum transfer of
energy!
If you accept that the electromagnetic Q Flux "hammers" away on all sides of
all materials equally, then why are you so certain that the astronauts method,
or something like it cannot be made to work.
From: [email protected]
To:
Subject: R decay rates changed by high voltage?
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 13:32:17 -0700
What do you make of this?
US patent number #5,076,971. Barker places radioactive elements inside the
sphere of aVan de Graaff generator, runs it at a negative potential for
severalminutes/hours/days -- and finds that the rate of radioactive decayis
extremely enhanced -- with some relationship to the magnitude ofthe negative
potential. The principal investigator undertook a series of experiments to
testthe "Barker effect" and the "Keller Catalytic Process" in changing therate
of radioactive decay of heavy elements (elements heavier thanlead, such as
radium, thorium, or uranium, all of which areradioactive). Barker claims that
subjecting radioactive materials tohigh electrostatic potentials (50,000 volts
to 500,000 volts) canincrease or decrease the rate of radioactive decay, with
shortexposures of the high voltage capable of inducing erratic decay rateswhich
slowly return to normal over a period of weeks. Keller claimsthat subjecting
radioactive materials to the high heat and fusingreaction of a chemical process
(Keller Catalytic Process) caneliminate the radioactivity completely.-- Michael
Mandeville http://www.aa.net/~mwm/dexmrad1.html
