Dave,
I think this is where geometry comes in, these anomalies are
confined to fewer dimensions creating an imbalance to this normal cancelation
you correctly identified. It is bordering on 2d when suppression is at its most
robust as an inverse cube of the spacing between boundaries.
Fran
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 3:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
Interesting. But how does the net field become large unless some mechanism
coordinates the destruction of the balls? Many random direction vectors yields
near zero sums.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 2:55 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
Yes, there is a load of fun in this sort of speculation. One possibility is
that micro sized magnetic balls as described by DGT that start small and grow
to huge power until they explode could produce a varying magnetic field that
would induce a current through changing magnetic flux..
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:46 PM, David Roberson
<dlrober...@aol.com<mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
That brings back fond memories. He does say e.m.f. which makes me wonder how
he performed that measurement. I would anticipate that he must use at least
two probes to come to that conclusion and his active material hopefully does
not short out the voltage.
Another possibility is that he measured a large magnetic field which he assumes
must be as a result of DC current flowing. Since DC current or AC for that
matter requires a loop voltage in order to flow, it makes sense to believe that
an e.m.f. is present. Actually, an e.m.f. should be present in that case and
what Rossi states below about an expert observing it falls into line.
I find myself wondering if there are other good ways to achieve very high
strength magnetic fields without currents flowing. Permanent magnets offer a
clue.
I am guessing here and attempting to decode Rossi speak at the same time. That
has its hazards! :-)
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 2:25 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
Andrea Rossi
> December 30th, 2012 at 3:01 PM
> http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=771&cpage=4#comment-514345
Dear Bernie Koppenhofer:
You are touching a very important point: during these very days, and also
during the more recent tests, we are working on this issue. I think we will
be able to produce directly e.m.f. , but much work has to be done.
Actually, we already produced direct e.m.f. with the reactors at high
temperature, and we measured it with the very precise measurement
instrumentation introduced by the third party expert, but we are not ready
for an industrial production, while we are at a high level of
industrialization for the production of heat and, at this point , also of
high temperature steam, which is the gate to the Carnot Cycle. Thank you
for your good comment.
Warm Regards,
A.R.
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Axil Axil
<janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>> wrote:
I believe that heat is not the only product of the LENR reaction. It may not
even the most important sink for LENR power generation. I believe that electron
production is a major magnification of over unity power generation.
Rossi indicated that there was an unknown source of current production in his
reactor and he was looking into how this could happen.
I know that the PAPP engine produced current out of whole cloth. The design of
the engine depended on it.
Here is my take on where these electrons are coming from. When the magnetic
field strength gets strong enough, mesons are condensed out of the vacuum. The
final decay products of mesons are electrons.
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 1:34 PM, David Roberson
<dlrober...@aol.com<mailto:dlrober...@aol.com>> wrote:
I also find it amazing that DGT seems to overlook the implications of their
discovery. It reminds me of not seeing the forest through the trees.
Since Rossi made an earlier claim that he might be able to generate electricity
directly by some obscure discovery, I suspect that he realized the importance
of the large magnetic fields residing within his device. So far he has kept
this type of information private, carefully leaking out the news of some non
specific discovery. Rossi knows when to release findings that might assist
competitors.
Dave
-----Original Message-----
From: Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>>
Sent: Sun, Mar 2, 2014 1:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:"Christopher H. Cooper"
Like you, any one of us can only do so much of what is required. To come up
with an all inclusive theory, we must trust the word and the work done by
others.
I must admit that I trust DGT. So far, their experimental observation about
magnetic field strength has no impact on the theory (HEMI) that they put
forward.
They have no theroritical based interest in misleading us to advance their
theory base on Dr. Kims work.
Like us, DGT is simply amazed at the magnetic nature of their experimental find
but have not connected it to HEMI in any way. This is hard to understand.
On the part of DGT, there is no self interest in tossing an almost unbelievable
finding into their finding and in fact this finding undercuts HEMI.
In fact such a finding is a major distraction. They really need to do a major
rethink of their experimental position on HEMI and BEC as per Dr. Kim.
On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Edmund Storms
<stor...@ix.netcom.com<mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com>> wrote:
On Mar 2, 2014, at 10:47 AM, Axil Axil wrote:
> These Nanoplasmonic experiments with uranium can be done inexpensively, why
> can’t Ed replicate these experiments?
Because I have only two hands and no financial support. If you want this
replicated, I suggest you hire someone to do this.
Ed Storms
