Re: OT: The will of God
Of course I'm being nit-picky Stephen, I believe the bible to be a good book, and to have some excellent lessons for our society, but I do not believe it to be the revealed word of God as you obviously do. The main point is that the bible you and I read is not only a translation of a translation, but the original written text had been passed by oral tradition for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Fundamentalists always cite that God influenced those keepers of knowledge so that the translation is just as accurate as the original, but I have problems believing that. History abounds with examples of men misinterpreting scripture to justify heinous acts. --- Stephen A. Lawrence [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Merlyn wrote: As for prophecy, that's all in the interpretation, Oh, dear, you're being much too nit-picky here. Check out the book of Isaiah, which, one could argue, is the most important OT book (that's Old Testament, not Off-Topic) for most liturgical Christians. But first, note well that scholars and Christians agree that Isaiah lived and died a number of decades _before_ the Exile. OK so far? Now let's look at Isaiah 45:1 (NRSV): Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped to subdue nations before him and strip kings of their robes, to open doors before him -- This verse NAMES CYRUS, specifically, and designates him the instrument to be used in ending the Exile. Cyrus was born perhaps 150 years after Isaiah died. No way this was just a lucky guess!! And it's not open to much interpretation. So, if we accept that the book of Isaiah was written by Isaiah (which, surely, all those who accept the entire Bible as being 100% divinely inspired and accurately transmitted and properly attributed must agree is the case), this seems to prove, in one easy step, the miraculous nature of Biblical prophecy. And whatever it is, it's certainly not just a matter of interpretation! Of course, the more skeptical among us might feel this example could be taken to indicate that parts of Isaiah were not correctly attributed, but such an absurd and heretical viewpoint can surely be safely dismissed. After all, if we accept that parts of Isaiah were mis-attributed and anachronistic, then we might have to consider that some other parts of the Bible could have been similarly mis-dated, which could affect the interpretation of other examples of highly inspired prophecy, perhaps even some in the New Testament itself... If I didn't think the Bible was a truly fine text I would not have read it a second time. But I make no attempt to explain away the anachronisms, peculiarities (e.g., the incident of Melchizedek), 4-legged insects, or strange fate(s) of Judas. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
5 tesla sphere / was RE: Budding Scientist 8^)
Scientist? That ape is cut from Presidential timber, my friend. You write: Occasionally one runs across something that MUST be shared. When I read this, what came to mind was something more like - http://mag-net.ee.umist.ac.uk/reports/P14/p14_2.html A sweet piece of magnet engineering there, huh? K. -Original Message- From: Horace Heffner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 12:43 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Budding Scientist 8^) Occasionally one runs across something that MUST be shared. Curiosity: an essential ingrediant for science. See: http://home.pacbell.net/dianna_do/monkeysniff.htm Regards, Horace Heffner
Fusion is easy
A message on another forum got me to thinking about a possible cross-over regime between LENR, particularly Mizuno-type glow discharge,and the seemingly unrelated IEC warm fusion (Farnsworth Fusor). Check out this"Homemade Amateur Nuclear Fusion Reactor" : http://www.brian-mcdermott.com/fusion_is_easy.htm Jon Rosenstiel's Fusor (shown here): This small fusor currently holds the amateur record with a fusion output of 10^7 (100 million") fusion reactionsper second. This is rock-solid robust fusion, but there is little scale-up potential for the Fusor (in contrast to CF) because the tiny central "convergence reaction zone" gets less-efficient, the larger it is. Although this reaction rateof 10^7 is quite impressive in terms of neutrons, especially compared to LENR reactions, it is actually farther from energy breakeven than is CF in terms of P-in to P-out, but it does have *striking QM implications,* and may point the way towardsan enhancement technique for hybrid-LENR (unfortunately in a relatively complicated experiment.) Many observers nowadays (R. Mills in particular) are trying to re-write Quantum Mechanics in keeping with new discoveries. I will leave that subject of the experts, but for the purposes of this idea, let us assumethat there is a QM "probability distribution curve"for tunneling fusion, which curve can be enhanced merely by proximity to ongoing reactions of the same type. This is an off-shoot of quantum entanglement, which is a proven phenomenon, to some degree. There are Russian experiments which claim this kind of enhancement, and some older work in CF also claims to benefit this (Nelson Ying) but his work was flawed from the start and never reproduced. Not surprising, in retrospect. I think the reasonthat the Ying experimentwas not reproduced is clear now. He was thinking, and wrongly asserting, that "any kind" of external gamma source would raise the QM probability for CF, a glaring error ! ...which error was made all the more unfortunate, because he may have been 'half-right' insofar as the single issue of entanglement is concerned. BUT because he tried to 'cut corners' with the specific way in which entanglement is applied, he ended up 'poisoning' what would have been a great underlying idea with a badly-conceived implementation. The clear consequence of the QM entanglement-theory is that the correlation is very specific as to cross-identity, and is not related to simply any gamma emission, per se. There is also the related A-B effect, which might have some application to cold fusion, in that the magnetic vector potential of *specific* gamma radiation, may end up being the transfer medium for entanglement (in the broadest sense). I am trying to find some online references for just the 'entanglement part' of the equation - from other related fields, but for now -this is just a rough hypothesis. Here is a college physics lecture by Ludwik Kowalski which offers some background concerning QM probability and tunneling http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/cf/40lecture.html He stops short of the treatment ofQuantum entanglement, which is a quantum mechanical phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more proximate objects must be described with mutual reference to each other, even though the individual objects may be spatially separated. This leads to "strange" correlations between observable physical properties of the systems. For example, it is possible to prepare two particles in a single quantum state such that when one is observed to be spin-up, the other one will always be observed to be spin-down - and vice versa. This despite the fact that it is impossible to predict, using quantum mechanics, which set of measurements will be observed. The A-B (orAharonov-Bohm) effect is connected to entanglement and violation of Bell Inequality and one suspects that the modality is the magnetic vector potential of whatever radiation is present. Using that as a jumping-off point, (and it is admittedly a big leap) there is this anecdotal evidence that the QM probability in cold fusion is enhanced by proximity to ongoing reactions of the same type, because of quantum entanglement. IOW in looking at reaction rates, there areclassical and QM probability distribution curves- which do vary significantly - by many orders of magnitude. But then there is also this enhanced QM probability curve based upon proximity to ongoing reactions of the same kind, which might be orders of magnitude higher yet. IF this were true, then a combined Fusor/LENR device might possess enough **synergy** (derived from QM entanglement)to push it overthe top, in terms of energy breakeven. Actually if you can get any small device to produce 10^11 neutrons per second (about 10,000 times more than the Fusor mentioned above but stillless thannet breakeven) then voila, you have essentially created the "enabling technology" for the small subcritical natural
Re: Budding Scientist 8^)
True empirical observations. I guess it could have been worse..there are other senses he could have used. ;) At 08:42 PM 3/21/2005 -0900, you wrote: Occasionally one runs across something that MUST be shared. Curiosity: an essential ingrediant for science. See: http://home.pacbell.net/dianna_do/monkeysniff.htm Regards, Horace Heffner
Re: Budding Scientist 8^)
At 11:11 AM 3/22/5, Steven Krivit wrote: True empirical observations. I guess it could have been worse..there are other senses he could have used. ;) For sure! 8^) Now, if only he were a trained chemist he would have known to hold the sample with the right hand and waft the aroma towards the nostrils with the left hand. Regards, Horace Heffner
Oil Crash
This article says that the Canadian Sands won't save us because you can't squeeze it out fast enough: http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
[OT] Tools for the Development of Humanity
I received an invitation to the following. I post it so that you might regard the sponsors list to the right: http://www.arlingtoninstitute.org/TAICON2005/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Oil Crash
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Tue, 22 Mar 2005 17:39:21 -0700: Hi, I wonder why the article ignores the fact that deuterium is the only energy source that is in sufficient amount with a sufficiently high energy density? What does it take to make this fact part of government policy? Even the hot fusion program, as poor a method as it is, receives little support and, as we know, cold fusion is actively ignored. This is rather like people on a sinking ship ignoring the life boat because it is not painted with their favorite color. [snip] Actually the crew is in the hold boring holes in the hull, and the passengers are paying them to do it, while they stand around and watch. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk All SPAM goes in the trash unread.
