I know Ken Shoulders' work Axil. In fact, I've devoted a small section to Ken over at blue-science (amongst many other relevant people from the OU world I've investigated/archived): http://www.blue-science.org/articles/suggested-articles/. His work is an important piece of the next generation of energy & propulsion technologies (beyond granting insight into the nature of space-time itself).
You are obviously a very intelligent person and I don't disagree with parts of your theoretical framework, but from my perspective, you always seem to think there is only "one way" of perceiving/interpreting the evidence. This is very convenient for the perpetuation of your particular belief system. Then conversations devolve into pointless polemics over minutia. I just don't really understand the pointless tunnel-vision and lack of self-awareness. You take your loose associations too seriously, insist on their reality, and assume there could be no other plausible explanation/interpretation beside your own. There are many reality tunnels by which "truth" can be arrived at -- if I prefer Schauberger to Shoulders what does it matter? There is no "right" or "wrong" here -- everyone is fishing: http://evgars.com/Shauberger.htm On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 12:37 AM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > *just another wannabe who can't take criticism* > > If you want to understand the origin, development, and effect of > longitudinal waves, then look at the theory and experiments of Ken > Shoulders. He observe dark mode vortex production and the resultant > projection of a monopole magnetic field a long time ago. I am just reviving > the doctrinaire that Ken developed over a long and brilliant career. > > You want to understand this subject, but stop looking at waves in a river > and understand what happens during a spark discharge, there is no slit > involved unless you use this as an analogy for the production of > nano-particles. > > > On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: > >> picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material and re-depositing >> it elsewhere >> >> With all respect, this is some conceptual junk that you pick up along the >> way as an inappropriate analogy. >> >> The key is that the magnetic field has an effect on the vacuum which >> results in a complicated set of results. Spin flipping (the Higgs >> mechanism) cannot be described in any context with the sedimentation of >> material. >> >> Axil -- Do I really have to qualify everything I write with a wall of >> text -- like you for instance? Why don't you ask for clarification instead >> of calling it "conceptual junk"? It's a simple analogy. Take it for what it >> is, or ask for more detail, instead of pissing all over it. I've asked you >> many clarifying questions in the past when confronted with your baffling >> ideas -- a courtesy you are unable to reciprocate. >> >> I get it -- you have everything figured out, and you're annoyed that I >> don't agree with you. If you want to convert more people to your >> extremely outlandish and completely unsubstantiated ideas, run some >> calculations, put an actual white paper together, start using your actual >> name, suggest some experiments (in actual LENR systems), and have it >> subjected to scrutiny. Otherwise you're just another wannabe who can't take >> criticism. >> >> >> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material and re-depositing >>> it elsewhere >>> >>> With all respect, this is some conceptual junk that you pick up along >>> the way as an inappropriate analogy. >>> >>> The key is that the magnetic field has an effect on the vacuum which >>> results in a complicated set of results. Spin flipping (the Higgs >>> mechanism) cannot be described in any context with the sedimentation of >>> material. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I'm not so sure one needs to posit Higgs Field interactions -- maybe. I >>>> see it in a very basic way without too much esoterica. In over-unity >>>> electrical systems (possibly cold fusion) we initiate non-linear coupling >>>> between appropriate materials. This non-linear coupling produces these >>>> collective anharmonic modes. Moray B. King calls them "ion acoustical >>>> modes", T. Henry Moray was one of the first to propose this mechanism was >>>> at play in his plasma tubes. Harold Aspden eventually arrived at the same >>>> conclusion while attempting to explain the Correa PAGD -- which both he and >>>> Mallove believed was legitimate. >>>> >>>> So once the non-linear mode is setup, if all the conditions for >>>> material requirements and proper integration are met, the system will set >>>> up these nano-vortices -- usually magnetic -- which, like any other vortex, >>>> is quite good at picking up and displacing very "fine grained" material and >>>> re-depositing it elsewhere -- in this case from the "Aether" into >>>> our 3D-space (Higgs field, ZPF, or whatever) (think of a longitudinal wave >>>> in a riverbed). We know ball-lightning solitons result from >>>> fracto-emissions -- perhaps it is in these domains of the nano-material >>>> that these coherent structures can become stable and setup resonance with >>>> the vacuum. >>>> >>>> All speculation of course. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 2:09 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Another area that Ahern needs to look into is the way the Higgs field >>>>> seems to connect together magnetism and quantum chromodynamics (QCD), >>>>> which is the theory of quark-gluon interactions. >>>>> >>>>> When Ahern is postulating that nanomagnitism is effecting the vacuum, >>>>> he may mean to address how the Higgs field and nanomagnitism interact, >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Most scientists are constrained in their focus by their >>>>>> specialization to a limited field of study. To understand a system fully, >>>>>> many fields of study must be considered to put all the pieces together. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> One obvious area of inquiry that Ahern never pursued is to understand >>>>>> how magnetism affects the vacuum and/or nuclear stability. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Another important piece of the puzzle that Ahern neglects in the >>>>>> critical role of quantum mechanics plays as a powerful amplification >>>>>> mechanism toward powering up Nanomagnetism to huge levels. When the >>>>>> dimensions of the lattice get below 100 nm, quantum effects predominate. >>>>>> To >>>>>> understand Nanomagnetism, quantum mechanics is the sole factor that >>>>>> reveals >>>>>> all the facts in the story of the nano system >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Furthermore, Ahern never mentions the pivotal role the spin plays in >>>>>> Nanomagnetism, including what defeats Nanomagnetism and what supports it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Yeah he's pretty dismissive of the Heat/Helium work, which I >>>>>>> disagree with for PdD at least, and we're still waiting on reliable ash >>>>>>> measurements from NiH, but he's of course entitled to his opinion and I >>>>>>> still have a lot of respect for his views. I think, like he said, his >>>>>>> theory applies better to mysterious electromagnetic "free energy" >>>>>>> systems >>>>>>> than it does to LENR, but he thinks the same phenomenon is at play in >>>>>>> both. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think non-linear anharmonic modes may indeed be at play here. As I >>>>>>> think I mentioned in the interview, on a personal level, I like the >>>>>>> analogy >>>>>>> of loaded hydride in a wet or gaseous system as a non-equilibrium, >>>>>>> non-linear, open system of sorts -- so I think energy concentration (in >>>>>>> "violation" of the second law) may indeed be at play. But on the flip >>>>>>> side >>>>>>> I can't totally dismiss Storms' point of view that doesn't think any >>>>>>> sort >>>>>>> of abnormal energy concentration is necessary -- that linear >>>>>>> reaction-diffusion can get H/D to the NAE efficiently enough without >>>>>>> needing to invoke non-linear dynamics. It's hard to say. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm hoping the ash analysis being carried out by ELFORSK can shed >>>>>>> some light on what's going on (i.e. fusion or not fusion). I'm banking >>>>>>> on >>>>>>> that, because I don't really have a lot of faith DGT will be releasing a >>>>>>> wealth of mass spectrometer work anytime soon, even though they >>>>>>> promised to >>>>>>> at last years ICCF. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>> John >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 12:35 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is an excellent interview. Have not finished yet, but there >>>>>>>> are a few things to add. Ahern is strongly impressed with a magnetic >>>>>>>> invention (Manelas device) since he did the 8 day test - and which >>>>>>>> device >>>>>>>> others have belittled. It is similar to the Floyd Sweet device (for the >>>>>>>> historians of overunity). The cross-connection to LENR is not easy to >>>>>>>> explain but is there. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It can be noted up front that Ahern does not believe that there is >>>>>>>> any evidence whatsoever for nuclear fusion in LENR. That includes >>>>>>>> deuterium >>>>>>>> fusion to helium and especially Ni-H. He thinks it is all nanomagnetic. >>>>>>>> Nanomagnetism is roughly equivalent to a combination of >>>>>>>> superferromagnetism >>>>>>>> and superparamagnetism. They are two are extremes of the same >>>>>>>> phenomenon. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He believes that the helium seen in Pd-D is basically measurement >>>>>>>> error - noise. Krivit is probably pleased with that assessment. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> *From:* Alan Fletcher >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Foks0904 wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm sure many of you know of Brian Ahern from his EPRI report, >>>>>>>> his MIT colloquium appearance earlier this year, and now his >>>>>>>> collaboration >>>>>>>> with MFMP. Even if you're not aware of him, I think this conversation >>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>> enough for 3-4 threads worth of topics. We even flirt with the >>>>>>>> ever-so-dangerous & taboo possibility of "perpetual motion". Titled: >>>>>>>> "Nanomagnetism, Cooperative Modes, & Non-Linear LENR". Hope you >>>>>>>> guys/gals >>>>>>>> enjoy: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_kID_E-3tY >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> An outline can be found here: >>>>>>>> http://jmag0904.wordpress.com/2014/07/25/dr-brian-ahern-nanomagnetism-cooperative-modes-non-linear-lenr/ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That's a MUST-LISTEN link. (And I'm only half-way through!) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Goes into some of the history of anharmonic modes (related to >>>>>>>> discrete breathers, Quodons we've discussed recently). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> At about 19minutes he says superconductivity and >>>>>>>> (super?)-ferro-magnetism are closely related (and that the latter >>>>>>>> persists >>>>>>>> up to a thousand degrees.). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Then I *think* he says that LENR could be a localized ferromagnetic >>>>>>>> effect tapping into vacuum energy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Needs a transcript. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
