Re: [Vo]:Black Holes from Newtonian Gravity? - discs.gif
The BH being a relatively small object, and there being near-continuous collisions in the accretion disk, it seems to me that matter from the disk attracted to the BH and missing it can make their closest approach from basically all directions (in 3D, not just 2D), and therefore get slingshot-ejected in all directions. Hence my hypothesis that only that which is ejected fastest and closest to the polar direction, a small minority, does not fall back on the disk (escape depending only on the near field in the central area of the disk as Horace pointed out, not on the far field which we all agree is not perpendicular to the disk). Michel 2008/10/13 Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 12 Oct 2008 15:19:12 -0800: > Hi, > [snip] > > My initial point was that Michel's explanation of jet formation was unlikely > to > be correct IMO, because there is little or no matter ejected at an angle > between > that of the disc and that of the jet. His explanation made use of the > supposition that the gravitational field of the disc was perpendicular to it, > and I was pointing out that that wasn't so. > In short, I still don't see how the slingshot effect can provide an adequate > explanation for the jets. > The only comment I made about your theory, was to point out that the disc is > not > infinite. > >> >>On Oct 12, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: >> >>> In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:49:52 >>> -0800: >>> Hi, >>> [snip] This is because the electric field about an infinite plane of uniform charge is given by: E = a rho/(2 * epsilon_0) so it is just a matter of applying the gravimagnetic isomorphism to obtain the result. In both formulations rho includes the sign of >>> [snip] >>> >>> >>> however in reality, the plane is not infinite. In fact if you >>> look at real >>> galactic jets, the jet usually extends much farther out into space >>> than the >>> diameter of the accretion disc. >> >>Sure, but that is probably irrelevant to the mechanism which creates >>the near light speed jets. Such a mechanism must occur very close to >>the black hole. Once the near light speed jets are formed there the >>effect of the BH or disk at great distance is likely moot, true? In >>any case, a model of jets which includes negative mass charge >>creation by black holes seems to me to make much more sense. >> >>BTW, congrats on the All Ordinaries being up 3% at the moment. A >>propitious sign for all markets Monday I hope. >> >>Best regards, >> >>Horace Heffner >>http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ >> >> >> > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
[Vo]:Bill B. on the Tee Vee
I'm on History Channel's show about the dust-bowl era, "Black Blizzard," attempting to demonstrate dust-impact electrification using a hand-held field mill and an old rusty plow. It was humid that day, but it did (barely) work. Dust storm voltages have been measured at a few hundred KV, with most of the field concentrated in a knee-high ground-level region of bouncing mineral grains. "Black Blizzard"showing Oct 12,13, 18, 19, 25 http://www.history.com/shows.do?action=detail&episodeId=366826 (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty chem washington edu Research Engineer billbamascicom UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
Re: [Vo]:Gel-Power
On Sat, 11 Oct 2008, Jones Beene wrote: > I think yes. In fact, if there was available a Graneau type of discharge > apparatus, I would at least compare the results of a gel, of a given > mass, to regular water of the identical mass. Lol, I *almost* did this with a big energy-storage cap bank back in 1993 or so. I was exploding small 2cm chunks of jello at various KV levels (stuck onto heavy wire electrodes.) The goal was to crudely test "container-less" water explosions. But I didn't compare them to the same with a container. Interesting result: below 2KV the jello acts as a resistor and melts from the heat. At a certain threshold voltage it explodes with a huge bang, and it launched a large tupperware bowl a couple of feet into the air (the bowl was there to contain the wet spatter.) At slightly higher threshold the sound is loud enough to completely shatter the tupperware bowl. PS Here at the UW, Dr. Pollack is down the hill and acoss the street from me. I had a long lunch with him this summer, discussing the weird psychology of science and the "suppression" of new ideas by the Peer Review process. He was already quite familiar with this phenomenon because of response to his book. For example, on Amazon book reviews there's a 'skeptic' spewing venom about Pollack's suggestion that neuron function might not be based upon sodium channels. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. Beatyhttp://staff.washington.edu/wbeaty/ beaty chem washington edu Research Engineer billbamascicom UW Chem Dept, Bagley Hall RM74 206-543-6195Box 351700, Seattle, WA 98195-1700
Re: [Vo]:Black Holes from Newtonian Gravity? - discs.gif
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 12 Oct 2008 15:19:12 -0800: Hi, [snip] My initial point was that Michel's explanation of jet formation was unlikely to be correct IMO, because there is little or no matter ejected at an angle between that of the disc and that of the jet. His explanation made use of the supposition that the gravitational field of the disc was perpendicular to it, and I was pointing out that that wasn't so. In short, I still don't see how the slingshot effect can provide an adequate explanation for the jets. The only comment I made about your theory, was to point out that the disc is not infinite. > >On Oct 12, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: > >> In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:49:52 >> -0800: >> Hi, >> [snip] >>> This is because the electric field about an infinite plane of uniform >>> charge is given by: >>> >>>E = a rho/(2 * epsilon_0) >>> >>> so it is just a matter of applying the gravimagnetic isomorphism to >>> obtain the result. In both formulations rho includes the sign of >> [snip] >> >> >> however in reality, the plane is not infinite. In fact if you >> look at real >> galactic jets, the jet usually extends much farther out into space >> than the >> diameter of the accretion disc. > >Sure, but that is probably irrelevant to the mechanism which creates >the near light speed jets. Such a mechanism must occur very close to >the black hole. Once the near light speed jets are formed there the >effect of the BH or disk at great distance is likely moot, true? In >any case, a model of jets which includes negative mass charge >creation by black holes seems to me to make much more sense. > >BTW, congrats on the All Ordinaries being up 3% at the moment. A >propitious sign for all markets Monday I hope. > >Best regards, > >Horace Heffner >http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ > > > Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: [Vo]:Another Dam Good Idea
Jones Beene wrote: This EZ-water hypothesis of Dr. Pollack et al. has recently spawned many infinitely improbable, but nevertheless potentially valid (no obvious hitchs) ideas for improving water-based devices already in service: the main one of interest today being the hydroelectric dam. Damn the torpedoes of the bureaucracy, full speed ahead! I have previously mentioned the fan in the can which generates a tornado. The small end of the tornado is then deflected off of a curved plate onto a plate with spiral groves. The air takes on a swirling motion similar to a smoke ring. It expands to the edge of the plate. For some reason this process is said to generate X Rays. It is also said to produce enough energy to self power the machine. The same effect works in water. I've seen the pictures of Viktor Schaugerber with a device which was said to use water. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:Black Holes from Newtonian Gravity? - discs.gif
On Oct 12, 2008, at 1:24 PM, Robin van Spaandonk wrote: In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:49:52 -0800: Hi, [snip] This is because the electric field about an infinite plane of uniform charge is given by: E = a rho/(2 * epsilon_0) so it is just a matter of applying the gravimagnetic isomorphism to obtain the result. In both formulations rho includes the sign of [snip] however in reality, the plane is not infinite. In fact if you look at real galactic jets, the jet usually extends much farther out into space than the diameter of the accretion disc. Sure, but that is probably irrelevant to the mechanism which creates the near light speed jets. Such a mechanism must occur very close to the black hole. Once the near light speed jets are formed there the effect of the BH or disk at great distance is likely moot, true? In any case, a model of jets which includes negative mass charge creation by black holes seems to me to make much more sense. BTW, congrats on the All Ordinaries being up 3% at the moment. A propitious sign for all markets Monday I hope. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
[Vo]:Sound , lights, ... action ...
"NASA scientists hope to hear what it sounds like on the surface of Mars for the first time when they attempt to switch on the Phoenix Mars Lander's microphone..." http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/081001-tw-phoenix- microphone.html http://tinyurl.com/46sfco Not only that, but an additional imager .. "The imager might also catch a glimpse of some so-called "barnacles" attached to Phoenix's legs. Smith describes these as "bright dots on the legs" that are pieces of the Martian surface that were splashed onto the legs by the thrusters during landing." "Some of the dots have grown and some have moved around over the course of the mission, which is now entering its fifth month on the Martian surface. Mission scientists aren't sure why the dots have such unusual behavior." Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Black Holes from Newtonian Gravity? - discs.gif
In reply to Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 11 Oct 2008 17:49:52 -0800: Hi, [snip] >This is because the electric field about an infinite plane of uniform >charge is given by: > >E = a rho/(2 * epsilon_0) > >so it is just a matter of applying the gravimagnetic isomorphism to >obtain the result. In both formulations rho includes the sign of [snip] however in reality, the plane is not infinite. In fact if you look at real galactic jets, the jet usually extends much farther out into space than the diameter of the accretion disc. Therefore, consider a point e.g. 10% in from the edge of an accretion disk and some distance away from it. An inscribed circle in the plane of the accretion disk centered on the normal projection of the point onto the plane thereof, and with a radius of 10% of that of the accretion disc will have perpendicular gravity vector components that cancel one another, while the parallel components (toward the disc) all reinforce one another. IOW if that small (non-concentric) circle were all there were, then the point mass would indeed experience an attractive force normal to the disc. However it isn't all there is. The rest of the accretion disc is there too, and it is largely to one side of the small "virtual" disk, hence its gravitational component will shift the direction of the overall vector toward the centre of the accretion disk. (and that's without taking the mass of the black hole itself into account). (The "virtual" disc is inside the real one, has a smaller radius, and it's outer edge just touches the outer edge of the real disc - see attached gif file). Regards, Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <>
[Vo]:Another Dam Good Idea
This EZ-water hypothesis of Dr. Pollack et al. has recently spawned many infinitely improbable, but nevertheless potentially valid (no obvious hitchs) ideas for improving water-based devices already in service: the main one of interest today being the hydroelectric dam. This specific 'angle' which has been explored to a limited degree in a few older patents is based on the capillary (wick) effect and on increasing the effective head of a hydroelectric dam. Obviously increasing the head at a dam would be of little benefit if it could not be accomplished using less energy than normal pumping. Also only a fraction of the water flow could be channeled this way, as the throughput of such a system is far less than optimum for flood control. But it is not an 'either/or' situation, and if a means is provided to increase the output for a fraction of the flow, that is valuable since all dams represent an already 'sunk' cost. Plus, there is the dual advantage of using the higher effective tensile strength of EZ water to increase the flow rate to the venturi of a ultra high velocity Pelton wheel, and then prior to impact with the wheel to increase the flow rate through an energy-feedback arrangement. Given that doubling of the rpm of a generator with the same torque can produce a sixfold increase in power, this could be a useful addition to most dams. All that needs to be done is to 'augment' gravity by feeding back some of the electrical energy produced. (more on that later). I should mention that this type of electrical "feed-back" for the purpose of increasing the net output is almost, but not quite, an alien concept to hydroelectric. In the long history of 'perpmo' devices, many have considered variations of the wick-effect to raise water against gravity. If 100 ft redwood trees can do it, so the argument goes, then why not an engineered system? the main problem is low flow rate, excruciatingly low, and prior to about 2005, the very low value of a kWhr of electrical power in the USA. The result was that you could not just 'super-size' it back then. All of that has changed now, since the oil crisis has not only tripled the price of coal and natural gas, but raised raised the cost of a kWhr considerably (which is averaged with lower cost power) - plus - there is reason to believe that mass-produced capillary tubing with thousands of channels can be extruded or roll-formed, from the cheaper polymers such as polypropylene to give a flow rate which makes the system look pretty good with today's economic realities. An unanswered question, relative to maximizing the use of EZ-water is: will a very large percentage of the water which is raised against gravity this way- immediately be "structured" in-transit, or will that nearly full structuring require additional 'growth' time? If the bulk of the water raised is structured by the few dozen seconds of contact within the capillary tube (some added mechanical pumping can be used to augment the low natural flow in a hybrid arrangement), then the EZ-water which emerges will have several times more (effective) tensile strength than bulk water, and this will allow a number of additional features to be added to the 'down' portion - or generator-side of the device. All of this requires careful study first. The main purpose of this posting is simply to put the basic idea for this kind of system out there into the public domain, with the hope that some bureaucrat engineer in the hydro-industry, somewhere like maybe TVA or WPPSS (whoops), will read this and take an interest. Yes, even in the entrenched power bureaucracy there are probably a handful of lurking creative 'trouble-makers' willing to take a risk in todays new high-priced-energy economy. I suspect that there are many good ideas out there -- languishing now, which have been written-off back when economic realities were very different. Plus one thing which is worth mentioning is that most of the year, maybe 9-10 months of a year, the flow rate through any dam is far lower than the peak rate, and the peak rate is already provided for in the sunk cost. So if one can make the add-on cost look good with only its own overhead to cover, then much of the average flow rate can be converted this way. The end result could possibly be substantial and applicable to huncreds of dams, thereby substituting for tens of billions of dollars of additional nuclear capacity - so this is definitely worth pursuing. Needless to say, my services are available (for a modest consulting fee) to push this concept along through the Dam-bureaucracy, which is no-doubt slower for advancing good ideas than capillary action itself. Damn the torpedoes of the bureaucracy, full speed ahead! Jones
Re: [Vo]:Black Holes from Newtonian Gravity?
I wrote: "... and epsilon_0_g is given by: epsilon_0_g = 1/(4 Pi G) = 1.192299(31)x109 kg s^2/m^3 as specified on Table 2, on Page 11 of: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/FullGravimag.pdf. The exponent superscript was dropped upon copying. The formula for epsilon_0_g is given by: epsilon_0_g = 1/(4 Pi G) = 1.192299(31)x10^9 kg s^2/m^3 Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
