Re: OFF TOPIC: Vesica Piscis addenda
At 06:06 pm 26-02-05 -0800, you wrote: ...or, in Gnostic understanding, was Christianity originally a Pythagorean off-shoot? One more thing about this particular religious symbol which I forgot to mention, for those who enjoy religious symbolism, Gnostic mythology and codes ... and thankfully do not have to risk incurring the wrath of the Benedictines ;-) Some have interpreted the Vesica Piscis as evidence of the Gnostic contention that Jesus, his disciples, and the sect he belonged to was a Pythagorean sect instead of an Essene or other Jewish offshoot group (there is much debate as to which sect), but this Pythagorean connection would be highly doubtful, had not thousands died believing it, and had not Jesus' brother James and others who took up his cause (Paul) been practicing Jews. Most of the Gnostics slaughtered and burned at the stake for believing in the Pythagorean connection being the aforementioned Albigensians. Had Jesus spoken Greek, however, instead of Aramaic, it would be a closer call as brothers often do take separate spiritual paths. So far as I can tell, there is some, but little good evidence that Jesus spoke Greek, or if there is clear evidence, it is buried in some catacomb under Rome that was missed in Angels and Demons, along with the Gospel of Mary. http://www.ibiblio.org/bgreek/archives/greek-2/msg00315.html According to St. John, who was Greek, but is not believed to a contemporary, Jesus performed his first public miracle at a wedding feast in Cana, when he turned water into wine (John 2:1-11). Side note similarly, earlier Greek myth had Dionysus turning water into wine at his own wedding to Ariadne . Also in John, Jesus miraculously helped Peter and other disciples catch a large number of fish at the Sea of Galilee -- 153 fish, to be precise (John 21 : 11). Note: Christianity originally first turned up in all the exact places where Pythagorean sects were predominant (so called Asia minor), leading some to think it spread through this vector initially, before Paul and Peter took charge and spread it to Rome. The great mathematician Pythagoras, according to his disciples - which sects had been spreading for 500 years or so before Jesus, also performed this very same supernatural feat with fish. Since far more ancient times, the original fish story has been part of a mathematical ratio called the measure of the fish, which produces the mystical symbol of the vesica piscis (or pisces). This is the Icthus, or sign of the fish, which of course, is still widely used today as a symbol of Christianity. Icthus is a Greek word long associated with the Pythagoreans for hundreds of years prior to Jesus. Pythagoras' disciples established religious communities throughout the Greek world and some of them were in Galilee. All were vegetarians but ate fish. The number 12 was a common theme. Men and women were admitted equally, they took vows of celibacy and all possessions were held in common. Oil was used in the rites. Celibacy was defined somewhat differently than we do today - basically it meant no commitment to a single individual, what we would call a romantic commitment. All wore white robes. Pythagoras himself was reputed to have worked many miracles of healing, including reviving several dead people. He was said to be the son of a god, Apollo, and born of a mortal mother, who was called Parthenesis, which means virgin. The word Parthenon is a temple dedicated to a virgin, often her name is Athena, but she is also called Madonna. Like the great vegetarian miracle worker Pythagoras, Jesus is strangely associated with fish, but not only real fish, rather an allegorical code to explain a deep mystical relationships. The Pythagoreans had a diagram of 2 intersecting circles, one above, one below, with the circumference of one touching the center of the other. The 2 circles represented the spiritual and the material domains. The transcendental region where the circles intersect resembles a fish shape-exactly as used as the symbol for Christianity. The Pythagoreans even gave this symbol its latinized name, vesica piscis. The ratio of the height of this fish symbol to its length is 153 : 265, which is the *nearest whole number ratio to the square root of 3* (1.732 ...) and the controlling ratio of the equilateral triangle. Anyway, remember that key symbolic number =153. Now the stories of both Pythagoras and Jesus have them telling disciple fishermen - who have failed to catch fish all day, to now cast their nets again. Miraculously, the nets come in full. Pythagoras was said to have correctly predicted the exact number of fish caught but the mystic number is not revealed, after all it is a Gnostic story. But in the Gospel story of Jesus the number of fish caught is given by St. John, a Greek, as exactly 153. Coincidence? Dan Brown missed his chance in Angels Demons (don't waste your time with that one) but the NT book of John is my favorite by far, and if some new Dead Sea Scroll
Flux gates
I have a few questions on switching magnetic flux, as used in the Bearden Motionless Electromagnetic Generator, and numerous other free energy magnet motors. I can think of several ways to redirect or gate off magnetic flux: 1. Saturation of iron flux paths, either parallel to the flux as in the Bearden device, or orthogonally as in a magnetic amplifier. 2. Curie point modulation -- moving the temperature of an iron flux path above and below the Curie point. 3. Superconductivity modulation -- moving the temperature of a superconducting material above and below its critical temperature ( the Meissner effect will surely make this very effective ). 4. Physical movement of iron slugs into and out of the path. 5. Perhaps moving bismuth diamagnetic materials into or near the paths. Are there other ways? Acoustic effects? Rotating magnet effects? High voltage effects? RF effects? I would assume that all of the above methods, by conventional theory or experiment show that more energy is required to modulate the flux than could be gained by doing so -- has that been shown to be true by experiment? (Bearden (and others) claims it's not true). Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona
Re: a cause celebre'
RC Macaulay wrote: I will need the name of the University working with Mel. University of La Verne http://www.ulv.edu/ He is teaching there. - Jed
Re: A cause celebre?
At 06:10 pm 26-02-05 -0500, Jed wrote: A mainstream CF researcher asked Ed Storms and I to tone down or remove the Manifesto we posted on Thursday, THE DOE LIES! I asked Mel Miles whether he thinks it is over the top. He replied with a very depressing message. He says he understands why traditionally minded academic researchers may feel this is excessive, but he thinks the Manifesto is justified, and he agrees we should leave it. snip As for what else we can do . . Does anyone here have suggestions? snip I have a suggestion - but you will probably find it far too Machiavellian. I believe, and I speak from real life experience, that the best way to get people's attention is to scare the shit out of them. As an illustration consider this personal history. = When I was working in the Structural Division of the Building Research Station, my particular section was charged with the responsibility of anticipating systemic structural failure before they happened. Our cutting edge research on concrete had shown that existing ideas about concrete failure were seriously defective. This had relevant implications for the safety of the British AGRs (Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors) since they use prestressed concrete for their pressure vessels. However, though what we had discovered suggested that AGRs weren't as safe as people imagined, I wasn't to fazed about it since I didn't live near one. g However, Chernobyl and a BBC TV programme on the Hartlepool AGR which described how they were tightening the loose tendons (rather than loosening the tight ones) brought home to me the frailty of human endeavours. I acquainted my division head with my views just in case he ever came across more detailed information of problems in that area. Some years later we had a re-tread Director (from Porton Down) who happened to read one of my way out internal notes to which he took violent exception. So much so that I was banned from internal publication on my own authority. As you might expect this really pissed me off. So, to his utter fury, I appealed against the decision on the grounds that the suppression had implication for the safety of nuclear reactors. Now about that time there had been a lot of worry about civil servants whistle blowing by taking information on internal shenanigans to the press. To reduce this leakage an appeal system was set up giving every civil servant the right of appeal to the very head (Permanent Secretary) of his Department. Furthermore, if the PS saw fit, the appeal could proceed all the way up to the Head of the Home Civil Service and Cabinet Secretary, Robin Butler himself, (now Lord Butler) and, not unnaturally in view of the subject matter, the buck was passed right to the top. Nigel and I finished up in the RB's room in the Cabinet Office explaining the problem. Needless to say poor Robin was as out of his depth as Christopher Robin would have been. He was very nice about though but explained that he had no choice but to rely on the advice of his underlings. On its journey our appeal went through the scrutiny of a supposedly Expert Committee (what a farce that was but I'll save that for another time) with the inevitable fudge that I was given 15 weeks to write a paper going into the reasons for my concerns in greater depth. I said I needed 2 years to do the job properly (that being the time to my retirement ;-) ) and if they weren't prepared for that then they obviously weren't taking the matter seriously. There the matter rested. = So if you want to get people's attention, all you have to do is to point out to the great unwashed, in as lurid a way as you can, that if the Evil Empire harnesses Cold Fusion before the US, they will all finish up reading the koran and wearing chadors. It's no good saying the development of small CF bombs is unlikely. Until we know why and how cold fusion works we are only guessing as to what's likely and what ain't. The point is, since nine-eleven the American public are running scared. Why else do you think that they re-elected Bush. They are scared that next time things will be nucular (to use my favourite Bushism). And the more extreme religious right are probably even more scared that muhammadan hoards are going to come sweeping across America as they did across Africa in the middle ages. You need to play upon that fear - just like the insurance companies play on the fear of all sorts of unlikely injuries and happenstance. And if the claimed percentages for belief in flying saucers and little green men is true (we may even include some Vortexians) then the evidence of a group of respectable scientists who are prepared to stand up and shout
Re: A cause celebre?
Dear Frank, I totally agree with you. The time for being nice has past. The DOE has shown gross dishonesty and the energy situation is getting out of hand. The Manifesto is just the start. With a little luck and enough effort, we hope to get the public concerned. However, I have no allusions about the difficulty. If the issue involved any subject other than Cold Fusion, and perhaps UFOs, the press would be interested. Unfortunately, so many other issues are being generated these days by the US government that the press has difficulty keeping up even when it wants to. Anyway, if you know anyone in the press who might take an interest, please let me know. Regards, Ed Grimer wrote: At 06:10 pm 26-02-05 -0500, Jed wrote: A mainstream CF researcher asked Ed Storms and I to tone down or remove the Manifesto we posted on Thursday, THE DOE LIES! I asked Mel Miles whether he thinks it is over the top. He replied with a very depressing message. He says he understands why traditionally minded academic researchers may feel this is excessive, but he thinks the Manifesto is justified, and he agrees we should leave it. snip As for what else we can do . . Does anyone here have suggestions? snip I have a suggestion - but you will probably find it far too Machiavellian. I believe, and I speak from real life experience, that the best way to get people's attention is to scare the shit out of them. As an illustration consider this personal history. = When I was working in the Structural Division of the Building Research Station, my particular section was charged with the responsibility of anticipating systemic structural failure before they happened. Our cutting edge research on concrete had shown that existing ideas about concrete failure were seriously defective. This had relevant implications for the safety of the British AGRs (Advanced Gas-cooled Reactors) since they use prestressed concrete for their pressure vessels. However, though what we had discovered suggested that AGRs weren't as safe as people imagined, I wasn't to fazed about it since I didn't live near one. g However, Chernobyl and a BBC TV programme on the Hartlepool AGR which described how they were tightening the loose tendons (rather than loosening the tight ones) brought home to me the frailty of human endeavours. I acquainted my division head with my views just in case he ever came across more detailed information of problems in that area. Some years later we had a re-tread Director (from Porton Down) who happened to read one of my way out internal notes to which he took violent exception. So much so that I was banned from internal publication on my own authority. As you might expect this really pissed me off. So, to his utter fury, I appealed against the decision on the grounds that the suppression had implication for the safety of nuclear reactors. Now about that time there had been a lot of worry about civil servants whistle blowing by taking information on internal shenanigans to the press. To reduce this leakage an appeal system was set up giving every civil servant the right of appeal to the very head (Permanent Secretary) of his Department. Furthermore, if the PS saw fit, the appeal could proceed all the way up to the Head of the Home Civil Service and Cabinet Secretary, Robin Butler himself, (now Lord Butler) and, not unnaturally in view of the subject matter, the buck was passed right to the top. Nigel and I finished up in the RB's room in the Cabinet Office explaining the problem. Needless to say poor Robin was as out of his depth as Christopher Robin would have been. He was very nice about though but explained that he had no choice but to rely on the advice of his underlings. On its journey our appeal went through the scrutiny of a supposedly Expert Committee (what a farce that was but I'll save that for another time) with the inevitable fudge that I was given 15 weeks to write a paper going into the reasons for my concerns in greater depth. I said I needed 2 years to do the job properly (that being the time to my retirement ;-) ) and if they weren't prepared for that then they obviously weren't taking the matter seriously. There the matter rested. = So if you want to get people's attention, all you have to do is to point out to the great unwashed, in as lurid a way as you can, that if the Evil Empire harnesses Cold Fusion before the US, they will all finish up reading the koran and wearing chadors. It's no good saying the development of small CF bombs is unlikely. Until we know why and how cold fusion works we are only guessing as to what's likely and what ain't. The point is, since nine-eleven the American public are running
RE: Flux gates
Hi Hoyt. You've covered most of the major methods. And yes, the standard theory about these things is that you don't get more out than you put in. That said, there is a wealth of new phenomena that you don't see with linear resonators, and is well worth study on your part. It is better to think of flux switching/parameter change as being a means to an end rather than the end itself. K. -Original Message- From: Hoyt A. Stearns Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2005 10:12 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Flux gates I have a few questions on switching magnetic flux, as used in the Bearden Motionless Electromagnetic Generator, and numerous other free energy magnet motors. I can think of several ways to redirect or gate off magnetic flux: 1. Saturation of iron flux paths, either parallel to the flux as in the Bearden device, or orthogonally as in a magnetic amplifier. 2. Curie point modulation -- moving the temperature of an iron flux path above and below the Curie point. 3. Superconductivity modulation -- moving the temperature of a superconducting material above and below its critical temperature ( the Meissner effect will surely make this very effective ). 4. Physical movement of iron slugs into and out of the path. 5. Perhaps moving bismuth diamagnetic materials into or near the paths. Are there other ways? Acoustic effects? Rotating magnet effects? High voltage effects? RF effects? I would assume that all of the above methods, by conventional theory or experiment show that more energy is required to modulate the flux than could be gained by doing so -- has that been shown to be true by experiment? (Bearden (and others) claims it's not true). Hoyt Stearns Scottsdale, Arizona
Re: A cause celebre?
Jed wrote: Because he said he will probably retire. He is giving up. He has been trying for years to get funding. He even thought of going to China. I shot back an answer saying Wait! I will do my best to help. The other readers here should pitch in, and tell Mel Miles you stand with him. Would you care to tell us how much money would constitute funding for Mel Miles? When you know what your goal is it's usually easier to reach. M. ___ Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com The most personalized portal on the Web!
Re: A cause celebre?
Michael Foster writes: Would you care to tell us how much money would constitute funding for Mel Miles? When you know what your goal is it's usually easier to reach. Good question. I have no idea. I have copied this response to Miles. Perhaps part of the goal here is to get official money from a credible source. Sometimes this helps when it is time to submit a paper to peer-review at a journal. Also, Miles needs the cooperation of the government and the U.S. Navy in particular, since he wants materials from Szpak et al. (See his comments in the Manifesto.) - Jed
Re: A cause celebre? - with two for one benefits
If Mel does get an experiment going, it might attract more attention than most CF research does. Suppose he is funded after a well-publicized battle, partly because a half-dozen reporters publish his story. Six months later, we call those reporters back and say, guess what, it worked. My guess is they would be inclined to publish a follow-up story. - Jed
RE: A cause celebre?
Frank writes: You wrote I asked Mel Miles whether he thinks it is over the top. Goodness me! You sound like Ned Flanders. All credit to Mel Miles for his gutsey reply. Why on earth did it depress you. I can't answer for Ed or Jed, but it depresses me because it's a sign of desperation and failure. Fear is a good motivator for destroying things; the techniques and methods you describe are generally used for destructive purposes. For example, if we wished to _stop_ CF research fear would be a good way to go about it. But we're trying to _create_ something here. And therein lies the rub. If you're looking to engage the emotions, the relevant one here is seduction, not fear. Think Clinton, not Bush. Needless to say, if you think scientists are bad at the fear game, their general ineptitude at seduction is legendary (grin). But you can't frighten people into the new, they must be seduced there. By the way, what's so horrible about China? K.
Re: A cause celebre?
Keith Nagel wrote: Frank writes: You wrote I asked Mel Miles whether he thinks it is over the top. Goodness me! You sound like Ned Flanders. All credit to Mel Miles for his gutsey reply. Why on earth did it depress you. I can't answer for Ed or Jed, but it depresses me because it's a sign of desperation and failure. Fear is a good motivator for destroying things; the techniques and methods you describe are generally used for destructive purposes. For example, if we wished to _stop_ CF research fear would be a good way to go about it. Granted this is a sign of failure. However, we are not using fear, only embarrassment, at least with respect to the DOE. The population needs to realize the advantages of CF. The fear only comes if the advantages are ignored, in the same manner death comes if the advantages of medicine are ignored. But we're trying to _create_ something here. And therein lies the rub. If you're looking to engage the emotions, the relevant one here is seduction, not fear. Think Clinton, not Bush. Needless to say, if you think scientists are bad at the fear game, their general ineptitude at seduction is legendary (grin). But you can't frighten people into the new, they must be seduced there. Tell me Keith, how does one go about seducing the DOE? My experience with the government is that it is immune to seduction. It can be bought, it can be threatened by popular pressure, or it can be embarrassed. Otherwise, it does what current attitudes dictate. By the way, what's so horrible about China? If China gets CF before we do, we are toast. Also, China is not a pleasant place to work, being very polluted. Regards, Ed K.
RE: A cause celebre?
Hi Ed, you write: Granted this is a sign of failure. However, we are not using fear, only embarrassment, at least with respect to the DOE. The population needs to realize the advantages of CF. The fear only comes if the advantages are ignored, in the same manner death comes if the advantages of medicine are ignored. I was responding more to Frank Grimers suggestions; as far as I have seen so far you and Jed are dabbling in populism, in particular the sort of victimhood politics which previously were the domain of the left and are now the dominant domain of the right. I say this in a descriptive fashion, please don't take offense here. I don't think we can get very far on this issue without talking about things in a way which will repulse and disgust most rational people. So as it applies here, the DOE is the big bad government monster, and Mel is the poor downtrodden victimized scientist. That's the frame you're using, yes? Tell me Keith, how does one go about seducing the DOE? My experience with the government is that it is immune to seduction. It can be bought, it can be threatened by popular pressure, or it can be embarrassed. Otherwise, it does what current attitudes dictate. That's what most men think about women, which is why it always shocks them when the wife/girlfriend runs off with the personal trainer. That said, I was under the impression that the DOE was a dead issue at this point. RC seems to be leaning towards Houston money people ( wouldn't you love to be a fly on the wall when he tries to convince them to donate money to a California liberal arts college professor to do work that will undermine the petroleum industry? More power to you RC, if you can sell them on this I'll personally fly to Texas just to shake the hand of such a master salesman ). Everyone else seems to be leaning towards populist methods. As regards the seduction approach, you've got the wrong poster boy for starters. Read that post I did a few days ago about my Soho gallery experience, it was easy to pick out the artist, she was the most gorgeous girl in the room. Hardly an accident. I'll be really crass and say, why don't you get a hold of this person http://www.lenr-canr.org/images/Leeexperimentlarge.jpg as the public face of your effort. I can at least say that if you do an internet begging site as John suggests you'll get far more donations from that photo than from this one... http://www.ulv.edu/chemistry/img/biopic_miles.jpg Feeling oily yet? It only gets worse my friend... If China gets CF before we do, we are toast. Also, China is not a pleasant place to work, being very polluted. Why? Who do you think will be manufacturing the CF devices? The manufacturing base in this country is long gone. We'll be buying it from them no matter how things play out. In fact, the patent situation being what it is, we're already precluded from commercial success here in America. I mean, if all that business with the DOE wasn't about trying to change things at the USPTO, then what was it? K.
Re: A cause celebre?
At 02:28 pm 27-02-05 -0500, Jed wrote: Frank Grimer writes: I have a suggestion - but you will probably find it far too Machiavellian. I believe, and I speak from real life experience, that the best way to get people's attention is to scare the shit out of them. I could frighten them if I could get their attention, You want people's attention? I'll give you people's attention. Repeat the Pons and Fleishmann experiment, only this time, instead of a one centimeter cube, use a 6 inch cube. == In EXCESS HEAT, page 36, Beaudette writes, -- Kevin Ashley was a graduate student of Pons in the chemistry department. He witnessed the scene the morning after the meltdown. This one morning I walk in, the door is open and Pons and Fleischmann are in the room with Joe:.. The lab is a mess and there is particulate dust in the air. On this lab bench are the remnants of an experiment. The bench was one of those black top benches that was made of very, very hard material. There were cabinets under one end of the bench, but the experiment was near the middle where there was nothing underneath. I was astonished that there was a hole through the thing. The hole was about a foot in diameter. Under the hole was a pretty good sized pit in the concrete floor. It may have been as much as four inches deep. What really surprised me, Ashley continued, was that Stan and Martin Fleischmann had these looks on their faces as though they were the car that had just swallowed the canary. The:' were clearly not displeased with this mess, They were happy about what had happened. I was rather surprised by this, very surprised by this. == I know how they felt. I felt exactly the same when I inspected GRC clad buildings which were falling apart. On one occasion at the high security Midland Bank Computer Building in Sheffield my glee was so manifest I had to explain to my minders that though they were attending a funeral I was celebrating a wedding. And if buildings crumble and grad students die - tough! When will Americans learn that success in things that really matter cannot be bought with dollars - it has to be bought with blood. If Brits hadn't learned the blood, sweat toil and tears. lesson well in 1940s the Falklands would now be under the jackboot of an Galtieri dictatorship. You want press attention? I'll give you press attention. Start a research program to develop a CF bomb with the avowed intention of saving America by getting there before the terrorists do. You will get all the press attention you can handle - and then some. Probably get quite a lot of financial support from crazy gun lobby billionaires too, I shouldn't wonder. As for global warming, only overfed western liberals who've nothing better to worry about give a damn. Who cares whether the world lasts another hundred or another thousand years. We'll all be dead long before that anyway. Cheers ;-) Frank Grimer
Re: a cause celebre
A defeatist attitude insures only one thing .. defeat. A short story follows.. a few years back, at the national Weftec conference we had a booth exhibiting our product line. At the time Vivendi-US Filterof France was the king of the hill in water treating equipment manufacturing. Overheard was a comment by one of their people stating they would run our small firm ,building a single product line ,out of business in a year. Shazzaam! They are now back in the porn movie business where they belong, having sold US Filter to Seimens of Germany. Seimens, being too smart to fight a winner is ceding the specific market to us just as Severn-Trent is doing. All of which means if you are tough smart and tenacious you have, at the least, a chance. LENR-CANR has a chance, perhaps slim or great..For sure, you cant play poker with scared money. No more defeatist chatter.. organize, develope a winning strategy and assign tasks.. time is on your side as long as progress is being made. Battles are won and lost in the mind before any shots are fired. Ask Napoleon who won and how? Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif
Re: a cause celebre'
Gosh! Keith.. Grimer has me in here because I'm crazy, not stupid. Going to Houston doesn't mean sticking my head in Exxon's mouth. The idea is to approach money for " seed " money. Foundations love to" participate" NOT carry the bucket. Besides, you fudged on the pic of the girl.. she's not wearing safety goggles. a no no! Richard Blank Bkgrd.gif
Re: a cause celebre?
RC Macaulay wrote: Suggestion,, the University may be challenged to match funds pledged by private business interests for the advancement of science. As I said, Miles needs the cooperation of the government, not only for the money, but for materials from the Navy. - Jed
Re: A cause celebre?
--- Grimer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's no good saying the development of small CF bombs is unlikely. Until we know why and how cold fusion works we are only guessing as to what's likely and what ain't. On the contrary, consider the hypothetical situation that the reason the DoE won't fund the project is because of how *easy* it is to make a leaner (LENR) bomb. It's a lot harder to build a nuke pile in a stadium in Chicago than a hot jar in Utah. drip, drip, drip __ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
[OT] Gnosticism
Vorts interested should read Pagels Beyond Belief: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0375703160/qid=1109550256/sr=8-2/ref=pd_bbs_2/103-8739248-7293410?v=glances=booksn=507846 __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Sports - Sign up for Fantasy Baseball. http://baseball.fantasysports.yahoo.com/
Re: A cause celebre?
Frank, You want press attention? I'll give you press attention. Start a research program to develop a CF bomb with the avowed intention of saving America by getting there before the terrorists do. You will get all the press attention you can handle - and then some. Probably get quite a lot of financial support from crazy gun lobby billionaires too, I shouldn't wonder. Charles called the incident a meltdown. I'm not quite sure why he labeled it as such. I interviewed Ashley as well, and also read Taubes' interview of Ashley. They all match. I talked with Martin about this in as much detail as he was willing and able to remember. There was particulate in the air in the morning - but nothing was burning. The hole in the concrete floor was 30cm wide by 10cm deep. Somebody want to tell me that the concrete *melted*? I don't think so. Steve
Re: A cause celebre?
Because he said he will probably retire. He is giving up. He has been trying for years to get funding. He even thought of going to China. I shot back an answer saying Wait! I will do my best to help. The other readers here should pitch in, and tell Mel Miles you stand with him. - Jed Jed, I think our best tools and weapons are the Internet. In light of the fact that what we have here is a failure to communicate between the cold fusion community and the rest of the world, I am thinking of developing some video documentary segments and putting them up on New Energy Times. These are my understandings: - The general public is much more receptive to video than they are print. - Since we are dealing with a -belief- and -perception- problem, and not a fact problem, the effect of a real live person talking, appearing visually, can not only have a far more powerful effect to reach people, but it also has the ability to carry emotions, which text does not. And emotions, not facts, are what drive people to act and respond. This is my situation and proposal: I am in a position to create a short video documentary of Mel. He lives just an hour away from me. I just went down to SPAWAR and filmed Szpak, Boss and Gordon a few weeks ago in anticipation of their forthcoming Volume 3. We shot about 1.5 hours talking about many aspects in general, as well as their unique contribution to the field, co-deposition. I did that shoot on the cheap with a local filmmaker who's had some experience doing documentaries and who is sympathetic to cold fusion. Mind you, he's not a producer-type, deep-pockets-type, Chris is a hands-on tech-type and knows how to stage, shoot and edit. I have not yet figured out what level and quality of post-production I want to do on the SPAWAR segment yet. Part of that depends on funds. So I can see doing some film work with Mel's situation. I know his story and could easily have a nice talk with him on-camera, maybe get some of the ULV administrators on camera showing their support of Mel, etc. Here is my situation: My computer niche has slowly obsoleted itself, down to now about 5% of my time. I've had plans to start up in a new business altogether, but a few weeks ago, after I produced newsletter #8, an individual said he liked what I was doing - and offered to kick in some limited support. For the moment, I am doing everything I can for this cause, directing my attention to provide news and educational information on the field. I've got a few projects on the burner right now. I'm giving two presentations at APS in March, and I have newsletter #9 in the works. Between the Mizuno explosion and the Miles/Horwitz issue, I'm scrambling as quick as I can to write and edit. Once that's done, I'm going to engage in a hunt for additional funding to continue this work. The point of all this, coming back to the thread, is that if anybody is interested in helping to pay the post-production costs for either/both the SPAWAR segment and a future M.Miles segment, I will make them happen and make the documentaries freely available on the Web. The costs to shoot are relatively inexpensive, but I don't know off the top of my head the post-production (editing etc.) costs. If anyone is interested in funding this project, I can get pricing options. Also, tax-deductible donations can be arranged. However, there is an unavoidable fact that must be considered with this outreach idea: We still need a news hook. We can make the most interesting, inspiring short documentary, but if the public doesn't CLEARLY have something to tie the situation to in their own lives - it won't go any further than preaching to the choir. The story needs to reach people that have not yet been reached on the subject of cold fusion. What would drive people to learn about this story? What fear? What desire? People need to picture gasoline at $10 or $20 a gallon. Or rising ocean water levels. Or more extinct species. Or buying cold fusion batteries from China. By the way, the predecessor to my book, The 2004 Cold Fusion Report has been translated into Chinese (by volunteers, no less) and is in the editing and proof-reading phase...I think this shows some rather strong interest. So I guess this is where I come full circle - and arrive without a crucial answer to this enigma. How to get the attention of people who don't know and don't care, but would really want to know and care - if they only knew -- just a little more. I leave this question in the hands of the brilliant group mind of Vortex. One further thought...as Grimer noted, on the subject of Machiavelli. Do we really expect the government to support cold fusion? Is this a fantasy? Honestly, I think the best way to get the USG to fund cold fusion is for China to show up with a cold fusion reactor or heater. Sputnik, the sequel. Steve
Unified Theory
In a message dated 2/24/05 12:01:10 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: this is mostly new from the BLP site. http://www.blacklightpower.com/pdf/Theory%20Pres%20020905%20std%202.pdf The above link discusses the Unified Maxwell Theory based on Relativity which is very helpful, but we should also consider the comments below by Konstantine Meyl, in his book Scalar Waves about Unified Theory: Scalar Waves by Konstantine Meyl, Pg. 530 to 566., 2003 Indel: "Demokrit (460-370 BC) equated the vortex concept with "Law of nature "= the first attempt to formulate a unified physics. Comparison of Faraday's Universal Theory of Objectivity to the special case of Maxwell's Theory and Relativity: Faraday's Universal Theory of Objectivity based on the law of unipolar induction 1. The Farady approach is universal 2. It reveals a physical principle 3. The field is the cause for the particles 4. Principles of causality are preserved. 5. Particles are probably field configurations 6. Quanta can be calculated as field vortices without any hypothesis. 7. All quantum properties can be calculated likewise. 8. Potential vortices form electrical field vortices. The E field is a source free vortex field. 9. Field vortices carry momentum and form a scalar wave. 10. Longitudinal wave with arbitrary velocity of propagation v. Maxwell Theory and Relativity: 1. Maxwell's field equations can be derived. 2. The field equations describe only a special case 3. Particle and field are cause and effect at the same time. 4. Violation of the rules of causality. 5. Particle consist of hypothetic subparticles. 6. Quark-hypothesis must replace missing calculation. 7. Sorting and systematizing of the properties of the standard model. 8. The electric field is irrotational. The E field is an irrotational field of sources 9.Electromagnetic wave is a transverse wave. 10. Constant propagation with the speed of light c. According to the Maxwell theory there exists no vortixes of the electric field (no potential vortices) and therefore no scalar waves. ... For the description of the losses the Maxwell theory on the one hand only offers field vortices and those only in the conductive medium. On the other hand do the dielectric losses occure in the nonconductor and in the air. In conductive materials vortex fields occur, in the insulator however the fields are irrotational. That isn't possible, since at the transition from the conductor to the insulator the laws of refraction are valid and these require continuity! Hence a failure of the Maxwell theory will occur in the dielectric. As a consequence the existence of vortex fields in the dielectric, so called potential vortices should be required! The Maxwell equations on the one hand dictate that as the reason for a wave damping only field vortices should be considered. On the other hand the same laws merely describe eddy currents, which can only occur in the electrically conducting parts of the antenna. On the one hand the field vortex interpretations makes it possible to explain the noise of the antenna perfectly ... In field physics on the other hand is missing a useful description of electrical field vortices in a dielectric, which could found the noise signal. According to Maxwell Theory: Longitudinal waves run in the direction of a field pointer. The field pointer oscillates, the vector of velocity oscillates along! At relativistic velocities field vortices are subject to the Lorentz contraction. The faster the oscillating vortex is on its way, the smaller it gets. The vortex permanently changes its diameter. With the diameter the wavelength decreases. The swirl velocity is constant (=speed of light c). The eigenfrequency of the vortex oscillates with opposite phase to the wavelength. The vortex acts as a frequency converter! The measurable mixture of frequencies is called noise. The antenna noise corresponds to the antenna losses! Mathematically seen the damping- resp. vortex according to Maxwell can be put equal to the scalar wave term according to Laplace. Physically seen the generated field vortices form and found a scalar wave. .. In the case of the antenna example the vortex part amounts to 20 percent, then that's tantamount to 20 percent scalar wave part, resp. 20 percent noise. The scalar wave part constitutes with regard to the Hertzian useful wave something like an error term in the wave equation. The part definitely is to big, as that it might be equal to zero. Even so all error considerations in textbooks is missing, if the scalar wave term is assumed to be zero. That violates all rules of physics and of taught scientific methodism. .. If an antenna on the one hand produces field vortices and as a consequence eddy losses and on the other hand dielectric losses, then we can assume that besides the eddy currents in the conductor also vortices in the dielectric must exist. Potential vortices explain div. phenomena in the dielectric: 1.
Re: A cause celebre?
At 05:18 pm 27-02-05 -0800, you wrote: Frank, You want press attention? I'll give you press attention. Start a research program to develop a CF bomb with the avowed intention of saving America by getting there before the terrorists do. You will get all the press attention you can handle - and then some. Probably get quite a lot of financial support from crazy gun lobby billionaires too, I shouldn't wonder. Charles called the incident a meltdown. I'm not quite sure why he labeled it as such. I interviewed Ashley as well, and also read Taubes' interview of Ashley. They all match. I talked with Martin about this in as much detail as he was willing and able to remember. There was particulate in the air in the morning - but nothing was burning. The hole in the concrete floor was 30cm wide by 10cm deep. Somebody want to tell me that the concrete *melted*? I don't think so. Steve That is an extremely valuable confirmation of the facts, Steve. As an expert in the failure of concrete I can definitely say, that ain't no meltdown. ;-) I'm glad we've now got your independent testimony in the Vortex archives for all to read and reference. Frank
Re: A cause celebre?
Jed, Just a thought .. it may be more strategic to posture DOE as acting more ridiculously rather than unfairly. Steve
Re: Explosive Antimony on Platinum, Cold Fusion in 1855?
At 01:21 pm 27-02-05 -0600, Sparber wrote: Is it possible that the Platinum-Antimony, Platinum-Hydride interface set up conditions for Cold Fusion, that released 82 Kilojoule per gram of Explosive Antimony in Gore's 1855 experiments? That's quite a thought, Fred. History has often shown, with hindsight, that there were clear precursors to paradigm shifting discoveries which at the time were just too mind blowing for people to take in. Frank Grimer
