My units calculator inserted an erroneous 2pi constant into the conversion.
That's the first time its betrayed me. I'll report it to the authors. Here's a link to the web version: http://www.testardi.com/rich/calchemy2/ So, yes, 13mm looks like the figure. Are there electrodes with any dimensions in the range of 1.3cm? On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Arnaud Kodeck <[email protected]>wrote: > James,**** > > ** ** > > I’ve a problem with my HP calculator emulator which gives me 13.093 mm**** > > ** ** > > d= v * t = v / f ( with v=1/f)**** > > ** ** > > 5630/430E3 = 13.093E-3 m => 13.093 mm**** > > ** ** > > Arnaud**** > ------------------------------ > > *From:* James Bowery [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* jeudi 22 novembre 2012 22:21 > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:25 experiments completed with borax and nickels**** > > ** ** > > It's hard to know where to begin here but let me just say this that given the > speed of sound in > nickel<http://www.olympus-ims.com/en/ndt-tutorials/thickness-gage/appendices-velocities/> > :**** > > > 5630m/s > > and 430kHz: > > 5630m/s;430kHz?mm > > ([5630 * meter] / second) * (430 * [kilo*hertz])^-1 ? milli*meter > = 2.0838194 mm > > In other words, a 2mm electrode should exhibit resonance at ~430kHz.**** > > On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote:* > *** > > On the contrary James, at least two of us did look closely at this > possibility [electrode acoustics]. **** > > **** > > My associate went to trouble to find and download a mpeg sound file of a > bicycle bell of the same general size as Davey’s, and plugged it into a > program for this kind of analysis – in fact it is dedicated bell analysis > software that has proved very accurate for electrodes in the past. The > natural acoustic of this hemisphere are nowhere close.**** > > **** > > The main freq is 4,445.5 Hz, with some sub harmonics, the lowest being > around 521/545 Hz, but those are so faint as to be discarded. Higher > harmonics are barely above noise.**** > > **** > > Thus, since the acoustics of the electrodes were off by two orders of > magnitude over the signature sound, we did not think that electrode > acoustics were in any way relevant as an alternative explanation, or > otherwise worth pursuing.**** > > **** > > Jones**** > > **** > > **** > > *From:* James Bowery **** > > **** > > As I previously > advised<http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg73144.html> > :**** > > **** > > "Look at the acoustics of the electrodes."**** > > **** > > Since this advice seemed to make no impact on the discourse here at > vortex-l, let me expand:**** > > **** > > Acoustic resonance in the metallic electrodes does have a reasonable > chance of bearing directly on the creation of the "nuclear active > environment" hypothesized to exist. I don't think I need to expland on > list the possibilities here.**** > > **** > > Moreover, if one looks at the speed of sound in metals, the "430kHz LENR > signature" regime corresponds to the thickness of the cathodes frequently > reported as exhibiting the phenomena.**** > > **** > > Need I say more?**** > > **** > > ** ** >
