Re: [Vo]:WSJ blog: calling all cold fusion inventors

[Terry Blanton]

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:26 PM, grok  wrote:

> Whatever do you mean (rolls eyes. Thinx of Hitler).

How would you classify Robin Hood, politically?

Terry

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Duncan “Cold Fusion” Video Mystery

[Terry Blanton]

It means they can ax him any time.  He does not want to cause
controversy.  He is also probably not very well off financially.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-adjunct-professor.htm

Terry

On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Steven Krivit
 wrote:
> Duncan "Cold Fusion" Video Mystery
> http://newenergytimes.com/v2/blog/
>
> The part that I didn't write is that:
>
> 1) Duncan also expressed some concern to me about the fact that I had
> written something critical about Caltech in a previous article and
> 2  Duncan told me he was an adjunct faculty member at Caltech.
>
> I don't know exactly what it means relative to the video...or lack
> thereof...
>
> Steve
>
>

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Duncan “Cold Fusion” Video Mystery

[OrionWorks]

>From Terry:

> It means they can ax him any time.  He does not want to cause
> controversy.  He is also probably not very well off financially.
>
> http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-adjunct-professor.htm

Now, it gets really interesting.

The sense of outrage many could be feeling may need to be tempered
with what potential damage to "innocents" could ensue. It would
suggest to me that keeping Duncan clearly and deliberately out of the
decision making process to make the video available at You-Tube/Google
Videos would be the wiser choice of action at this time.  There is no
need to imply in any shape or manner that Duncan endorses or was in
any way involved in posting the video at these locations, which of
course he wasn't. Just make sure other other sites like lenr-canr.org
advertise where Duncan's comments can be viewed - as a simple service
to its readers.

Regards
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:Duncan “Cold Fusion” Video Mystery

[Terry Blanton]

I know a few adjuncts.  Most are bitter but cautious; although, they
may have been on staff for many years.

Terry

2009/5/13 OrionWorks :
> From Terry:
>
>> It means they can ax him any time.  He does not want to cause
>> controversy.  He is also probably not very well off financially.
>>
>> http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-adjunct-professor.htm
>
> Now, it gets really interesting.
>
> The sense of outrage many could be feeling may need to be tempered
> with what potential damage to "innocents" could ensue. It would
> suggest to me that keeping Duncan clearly and deliberately out of the
> decision making process to make the video available at You-Tube/Google
> Videos would be the wiser choice of action at this time.  There is no
> need to imply in any shape or manner that Duncan endorses or was in
> any way involved in posting the video at these locations, which of
> course he wasn't. Just make sure other other sites like lenr-canr.org
> advertise where Duncan's comments can be viewed - as a simple service
> to its readers.
>
> Regards
> Steven Vincent Johnson
> www.OrionWorks.com
> www.zazzle.com/orionworks
>
>

[Vo]:UDD - Big Story

[Jones Beene]

Check out Slashdot - or the SciNews feeds today- big story with no details:
Ultra Dense Deuterium

It is said to be much denser than metallic deuterium, where the bond
distance would be 153 pm (1.53 angstroms) or 2.9 times the Bohr radius of
the atom. Even metallic hydrogen has a density of approximately 0.6 kg /
dm3. (0.6 grams/cc or 0.6 times as dense as water- so yet it would float
easily) 

..yet this is said to be 100,000 times more dense. They do not even mention
bosons. Do they even appreciate what a boson is?

One of the worst written science articles of all times - that is why no
citation is given. Don't want to embarrass the turkeys. And these dufuss
science reporters are told that only LENR experimenters are on the fringe.
LOL

Of course - none of them considered highly redundant (Millsean) states -
i.e. the deuterino.

There could also a denser state exists for deuterium, which may or may not
be Millsean, and comes from Robert Carroll and others, called the inverse
quantum state. Others have called it D(-1) or the inverse of D(1).  The bond
distance could be very small, equal to 0.23 angstroms. 

Why not be (if the material is not imaginary altogether) give RM some credit
- Mills has a least stuck his neck out with a thousand page tome showing
that it could conceivably be something like D(sub 1/137) then heck -- why
not give RM some credit, if you are going to do abysmal journalism anyway ?

And catch-22 - what keeps it from fusing? D-D fusion would be expected to
take place way too easily in this material for it to be stable. 

BTW isn't this also approximately the same concept as "degenerate matter"?

Jones

Re: [Vo]:UDD - Big Story

[Terry Blanton]

Here's the abstract:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VND-4VP66CS-4&_user=10&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C50221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ec9093be8b72a328c121a8092c95ac67

http://snipurl.com/hy1j9

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Check out Slashdot - or the SciNews feeds today– big story with no details:
> Ultra Dense Deuterium
>
> It is said to be much denser than metallic deuterium, where the bond
> distance would be 153 pm (1.53 angstroms) or 2.9 times the Bohr radius of
> the atom. Even metallic hydrogen has a density of approximately 0.6 kg /
> dm3. (0.6 grams/cc or 0.6 times as dense as water- so yet it would float
> easily)
>
> …yet this is said to be 100,000 times more dense. They do not even mention
> bosons. Do they even appreciate what a boson is?
>
> One of the worst written science articles of all times – that is why no
> citation is given. Don’t want to embarrass the turkeys. And these dufuss
> science reporters are told that only LENR experimenters are on the fringe.
> LOL
>
> Of course – none of them considered highly redundant (Millsean) states –
> i.e. the deuterino.
>
> There could also a denser state exists for deuterium, which may or may not
> be Millsean, and comes from Robert Carroll and others, called the inverse
> quantum state. Others have called it D(-1) or the inverse of D(1).  The bond
> distance could be very small, equal to 0.23 angstroms.
>
> Why not be (if the material is not imaginary altogether) give RM some credit
> - Mills has a least stuck his neck out with a thousand page tome showing
> that it could conceivably be something like D(sub 1/137) then heck -- why
> not give RM some credit, if you are going to do abysmal journalism anyway ?
>
> And catch-22 – what keeps it from fusing? D-D fusion would be expected to
> take place way too easily in this material for it to be stable.
>
> BTW isn’t this also approximately the same concept as “degenerate matter”?
>
> Jones
>

Re: [Vo]:Latest from Mylow

[Horace Heffner]

On May 12, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote:




--- Harry Veeder  wrote:


Kyle,

I have a construction suggestion. If you haven't
already thought of
this, try using double sided tape to position the
rotor magnets instead
of glue.


Have to remember that for future. On Saturday, I spent
a while hot gluing them down to the aluminum disk. The
hot glue didn't like to stick unless pressed JUST
right and fast enough. The magnets didn't like
standing in line, so to speak, either. 2-sided tape
might have saved a few swear words. :)

--Kyle




It's also a worry that heating magnets can demagnetize them.

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

Re: [Vo]:Latest from Mylow

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
> On May 12, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Kyle Mcallister wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> --- Harry Veeder  wrote:
>>
>>> Kyle,
>>>
>>> I have a construction suggestion. If you haven't
>>> already thought of
>>> this, try using double sided tape to position the
>>> rotor magnets instead
>>> of glue.
>>
>> Have to remember that for future. On Saturday, I spent
>> a while hot gluing them down to the aluminum disk. The
>> hot glue didn't like to stick unless pressed JUST
>> right and fast enough. The magnets didn't like
>> standing in line, so to speak, either. 2-sided tape
>> might have saved a few swear words. :)
>>
>> --Kyle
> 
> 
> 
> It's also a worry that heating magnets can demagnetize them.

According to Wikipedia, high temp hot melt guns run around 195 C.  Of
course the object being glued won't typically get quite so hot as the
heater in the gun itself, so we can probably take that as an upper bound
 on how hot the magnets would get.

Also per Wikipedia, the Curie point for iron is 768 C.  That's over 500
C margin between the hot melt temp and the Curie point, so one would
guess that hot gluing the magnets is probably harmless.


> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:WSJ blog: calling all cold fusion inventors

[grok]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


As the smoke cleared, Terry Blanton 
mounted the barricade and roared out:

> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 8:26 PM, grok  wrote:
> 
> > Whatever do you mean (rolls eyes. Thinx of Hitler).
> 
> How would you classify Robin Hood, politically?
> 
> Terry

Leaving aside that he appears to be an amalgam of real people, taken over
time from a general context, I'd say he was a forerunner of liberal
forces (i.e. the liberal bourgeoisie from the next century or so onwards)
struggling against the growing menace of a totalitarian, centralizing
absolute monarchy (as opposed to the old, decentralized feudal order,
which was in fact breaking down) -- which, of course, affected this
nascent bourgeoisie's bottom line: i.e. basic right to do business, etc.

Much the situation as we have today, in fact!
;P

Seriously, tho': It's no coincidence that it was this very King John --
in whose name the Sheriff of Nottingham acted -- who was the one forced
to sign the Magna Carta (and I hope we all understand the importance of
that legal concession). Nor is it a coincidence, either, that our present
decadent bourgeois ruling-class has just ripped up that 800 year-old
declaration of human and individual rights and used it for toilet paper.

And youse guys want MONEY from these people..??
GEEeeze...
;P


- -- grok.






- -- 
Build the North America-wide General Strike.

TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
ALL power to the councils and communes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkoK/aQACgkQXo3EtEYbt3F3awCePUTInGT77og0L3E/hKsUkaOe
qVoAn2sx6d1UqczCySjchLXmmawkCyya
=EdxW
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Vo]:Latest from Mylow

[Horace Heffner]

On May 13, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:




Also per Wikipedia, the Curie point for iron is 768 C.  That's over  
500

C margin between the hot melt temp and the Curie point, so one would
guess that hot gluing the magnets is probably harmless.


The Curie point of iron is irrelevant.  However, I am quite surprised  
to see the Curie point of Nd-Fe-B magnets is 320 degrees C.  I  
thought it was much lower.  I've destroyed magnets with heat, but I  
don't recall what kind, or how.  Maybe soldering.



Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

A couple decades ago I was, for a brief time, a (not very good) hardware
design engineer.  In the lab, we used cyanoacrylate to glue parts to
boards, and we used spray bottles of activator to harden the stuff.  And
so I learned that Krazy glue and related products, which normally only
stick well to fingers, can be made to stick where and when you want them
to, if you just use a spritz of activator on it.

After that little epiphany, I purchased cyanoacrylate at the local Radio
Shack a number of times, and always got hardener with it.  Later I
purchased some at a hardware store, and again got the hardener with it.
 The stuff was great; it would stick, no questions asked, to just about
anything -- as long as one used the activator.

Then a few years went by during which I didn't buy the stuff -- didn't
do any projects which needed it, hadn't used up the old stock.

And one day I went to the local hardware store and looked for
cyanoacrylate with hardener.  No luck -- none on the shelves.  I asked a
clerk; he'd *never* *heard* of hardener for cyanoacrylate!  (Of course
that just means they hadn't carried it any time in the last couple
months, but none the less it was a bit startling.)

Later I checked Radio Shack.  Same deal -- no hardener, clerks had never
heard of the stuff.  Hardener is for epoxy, that's all they knew about.

I've looked in other stores since; it's always the same. They don't
carry it and as far as they know, there is no such thing, and never was.

Somebody seems to have erased cyanoacrylate activator from the page of
time.  Anybody here know what happened?

Why'd it get pulled from the market?  Does the stuff turn out to make
your head swell up and turn purple or something?  Or can you get high
off of it?

(Or have I just been unlucky in 5 out of 5 stores I've tried, and the
stuff really is still on the shelves *somewhere*?)

Re: [Vo]:Latest from Mylow

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
> On May 13, 2009, at 8:32 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>> Also per Wikipedia, the Curie point for iron is 768 C.  That's over 500
>> C margin between the hot melt temp and the Curie point, so one would
>> guess that hot gluing the magnets is probably harmless.
> 
> The Curie point of iron is irrelevant.  However, I am quite surprised to
> see the Curie point of Nd-Fe-B magnets is 320 degrees C.

Oops!  I didn't look hard enough.

Margin between 320 and 195, just 125 C, seems a bit thin, if, as I
believe is the case, the magnets become less permanent as one
_approaches_ the Curie point.  Granted the Curie point represents an
abrupt phase transition, none the less that doesn't mean they emerge
entirely unscathed from heating to any temperature below that.

Gluing to an aluminum disk, AKA a big heat sink, one might also wonder
if the magnets might get hotter than usual during the operation as one
struggles to get everything hot enough so the glue sticks to the disk
rather than just freezing solid as soon as it touches down.



>  I thought it
> was much lower.  I've destroyed magnets with heat, but I don't recall
> what kind, or how.  Maybe soldering.
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Horace Heffner
> http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[leaking pen]

try searching cyanoacrylate accelerator

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
> A couple decades ago I was, for a brief time, a (not very good) hardware
> design engineer.  In the lab, we used cyanoacrylate to glue parts to
> boards, and we used spray bottles of activator to harden the stuff.  And
> so I learned that Krazy glue and related products, which normally only
> stick well to fingers, can be made to stick where and when you want them
> to, if you just use a spritz of activator on it.
>
> After that little epiphany, I purchased cyanoacrylate at the local Radio
> Shack a number of times, and always got hardener with it.  Later I
> purchased some at a hardware store, and again got the hardener with it.
>  The stuff was great; it would stick, no questions asked, to just about
> anything -- as long as one used the activator.
>
> Then a few years went by during which I didn't buy the stuff -- didn't
> do any projects which needed it, hadn't used up the old stock.
>
> And one day I went to the local hardware store and looked for
> cyanoacrylate with hardener.  No luck -- none on the shelves.  I asked a
> clerk; he'd *never* *heard* of hardener for cyanoacrylate!  (Of course
> that just means they hadn't carried it any time in the last couple
> months, but none the less it was a bit startling.)
>
> Later I checked Radio Shack.  Same deal -- no hardener, clerks had never
> heard of the stuff.  Hardener is for epoxy, that's all they knew about.
>
> I've looked in other stores since; it's always the same. They don't
> carry it and as far as they know, there is no such thing, and never was.
>
> Somebody seems to have erased cyanoacrylate activator from the page of
> time.  Anybody here know what happened?
>
> Why'd it get pulled from the market?  Does the stuff turn out to make
> your head swell up and turn purple or something?  Or can you get high
> off of it?
>
> (Or have I just been unlucky in 5 out of 5 stores I've tried, and the
> stuff really is still on the shelves *somewhere*?)
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

leaking pen wrote:
> try searching cyanoacrylate accelerator

Sigh... OK, yes, I should have done that to start with.  Actually I
rather hoped there was some interesting tale behind the disappearance
which someone here would know.

So it appears the stuff is still available mail order, from some places
-- but why'd it disappear from retail store shelves?  20 years ago it
was in the glue section of every hardware store I shopped in.  It
certainly seems like something happened and I still don't know what.
Quote from one page:

"I finally ran out of Zip Kicker and the hobby shop I purchased it from
originally is long gone. All the local hobby shops fail to carry it as
well."

No explanation, and none of the replies mentioned any explanation; just
a statement of what I've already observed.

And, I should add, a lot of alternatives for use as accelerators were
mentioned, including baking soda and white glue, which I didn't know
about.  Useful info, maybe.

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[leaking pen]

hunh. I've seen it at craft stores, but not hardware.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 11:17 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence  wrote:
>
>
> leaking pen wrote:
>> try searching cyanoacrylate accelerator
>
> Sigh... OK, yes, I should have done that to start with.  Actually I
> rather hoped there was some interesting tale behind the disappearance
> which someone here would know.
>
> So it appears the stuff is still available mail order, from some places
> -- but why'd it disappear from retail store shelves?  20 years ago it
> was in the glue section of every hardware store I shopped in.  It
> certainly seems like something happened and I still don't know what.
> Quote from one page:
>
> "I finally ran out of Zip Kicker and the hobby shop I purchased it from
> originally is long gone. All the local hobby shops fail to carry it as
> well."
>
> No explanation, and none of the replies mentioned any explanation; just
> a statement of what I've already observed.
>
> And, I should add, a lot of alternatives for use as accelerators were
> mentioned, including baking soda and white glue, which I didn't know
> about.  Useful info, maybe.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[Horace Heffner]

On May 13, 2009, at 10:17 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:


No explanation, and none of the replies mentioned any explanation;  
just

a statement of what I've already observed.



The partial disappearance could be due to the fact it can no longer  
be shipped by USPS air mail?


Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/

[Vo]:Calculate the torque from the stress tensor

[David Jonsson]

Hi

Can someone explain to me how to calculate the torque from the stress
tensor?

David

David Jonsson, Sweden, phone callto:+46703000370

RE: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[Rick Monteverde]

Fellow time traveller:

Went to the hardware chain store here the other day to get a bag of plaster.
They didn't have any, and the clerk wasn't even really sure what it was and
got suspicious - asked what I wanted it for. I should have told her I was a
terrorist and I was going to jump on a subway train and plaster everybody's
feet to the floor so they couldn't get off at their stops. 

Jeez.

> -Original Message-
> From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:47 AM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?
> 
> A couple decades ago I was, for a brief time, a (not very 
> good) hardware design engineer.  In the lab, we used 

Re: [Vo]:Calculate the torque from the stress tensor

[David Jonsson]

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM, David Jonsson  wrote:

> Hi
>
> Can someone explain to me how to calculate the torque from the stress
> tensor?
>

It seems to be this simple

Torque = T12 - T21

For a two dimensional tensor

T= T11 T12
 T21 T22

Right?

Now I will do some nice calculations, but first I would like to have this
confirmed.

David

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[grok]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


As the smoke cleared, Rick Monteverde 
mounted the barricade and roared out:

> Fellow time traveller:
> 
> Went to the hardware chain store here the other day to get a bag of
> plaster.  They didn't have any, and the clerk wasn't even really sure
> what it was and got suspicious - asked what I wanted it for. I should
> have told her I was a terrorist and I was going to jump on a subway
> train and plaster everybody's feet to the floor so they couldn't get
> off at their stops. 
> 
> Jeez.

Stupid people are dangerous.

Good thing you didn't mention Cold Fusion.


- -- grok.





- -- 
Build the North America-wide General Strike.

TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
ALL power to the councils and communes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkoLK8UACgkQXo3EtEYbt3E9SgCfdOpbqSuMCidhr9IUuAQH/Ip3
VE4AoOX0fuPSYCbF7rF0NEHgkn8a0wnP
=Tx/0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Vo]:Calculate the torque from the stress tensor

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

What you just said sounds right, but what you've actually got looks to
me like the torque per unit volume.  I think you need to integrate that
over a volume to get the actual torque acting on that volume.

OTOH if that value is nonzero then your object is spinning up -- it's
not just sitting there.  If you're looking at something like a steel
shaft which is under torsion but stationary then T12 = T21 and you need
to look at something more complicated to figure out what the torque on
the shaft is -- maybe the gradient of the stress tensor?


David Jonsson wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM, David Jonsson
> mailto:davidjonssonswe...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> Hi
> 
> Can someone explain to me how to calculate the torque from the
> stress tensor?
> 
> 
> It seems to be this simple
> 
> Torque = T12 - T21
> 
> For a two dimensional tensor
> 
> T= T11 T12
> Â Â Â Â  T21 T22
> 
> Right?
> 
> Now I will do some nice calculations, but first I would like to have
> this confirmed.
> 
> David
> 
> 

RE: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[Rick Monteverde]

Plaster of paris. Sounds European and vaguely seditious, I guess.

- R.

> -Original Message-
> From: leaking pen [mailto:itsat...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 10:16 AM
> To: r...@highsurf.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?
> 
> plaster of paris plaster, or concrete plaster?
> 
> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Rick Monteverde 
>  wrote:
> > Fellow time traveller:
> >
> > Went to the hardware chain store here the other day to get 
> a bag of plaster.
> > They didn't have any, and the clerk wasn't even really sure what it 
> > was and got suspicious - asked what I wanted it for. I should have 
> > told her I was a terrorist and I was going to jump on a 
> subway train 
> > and plaster everybody's feet to the floor so they couldn't 
> get off at their stops.
> >
> > Jeez.
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Stephen A. Lawrence [mailto:sa...@pobox.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 7:47 AM
> >> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> >> Subject: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?
> >>
> >> A couple decades ago I was, for a brief time, a (not very
> >> good) hardware design engineer.  In the lab, we used
> > 
> >
> >
> 

Re: [Vo]:[OT] Cyanoacrylate activator: Where did it go?

[grok]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


As the smoke cleared, Rick Monteverde 
mounted the barricade and roared out:

> Plaster of paris. Sounds European and vaguely seditious, I guess.
> 
> - R.

And Paris is where they have all those there revolutions -- and (GASP!)
them revolutionaries too..! And they hate our Freedom (Fries) there in
France as well -- let's not forget that, either. Close the borders! Take
my freedoms, in fact! Please!!


What can we say in a world where Bull O'Really And Rash Limburger are
our heroes..?


- -- grok.








- -- 
Build the North America-wide General Strike.

TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
ALL power to the councils and communes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkoLQwcACgkQXo3EtEYbt3GZWQCfeEhNau+WypaR2YhlTUrsPmRE
yi0AoPEOabkUUrNZ6oEYJZJZP5j0dD2v
=C8f7
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [Vo]:Calculate the torque from the stress tensor

[Stephen A. Lawrence]

I think, for a stationary shaft...

Assume you're given a stationary shaft lying along the x axis. Assume
further that it's under torsion.

To find the applied torque, I think you would want to integrate

R x (Txy, Txz)

over the surface of a cut through the shaft, where "R" is the radius
vector from the center of the shaft to each point on the cut surface,
and "x" is the cross product.  But I'm not sure; these comments of mine
are pretty half-baked.

Of course, if the shaft is stationary (or rotating at constant velocity)
then the applied torque must be the same no matter where you look along
the shaft.

Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
> What you just said sounds right, but what you've actually got looks to
> me like the torque per unit volume.  I think you need to integrate that
> over a volume to get the actual torque acting on that volume.
> 
> OTOH if that value is nonzero then your object is spinning up -- it's
> not just sitting there.  If you're looking at something like a steel
> shaft which is under torsion but stationary then T12 = T21 and you need
> to look at something more complicated to figure out what the torque on
> the shaft is -- maybe the gradient of the stress tensor?
> 
> 
> David Jonsson wrote:
>> On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM, David Jonsson
>> mailto:davidjonssonswe...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> Can someone explain to me how to calculate the torque from the
>> stress tensor?
>>
>>
>> It seems to be this simple
>>
>> Torque = T12 - T21
>>
>> For a two dimensional tensor
>>
>> T= T11 T12
>> Â Â Â Â  T21 T22
>>
>> Right?
>>
>> Now I will do some nice calculations, but first I would like to have
>> this confirmed.
>>
>> David
>>
>>
> 

Re: [Vo]:UDD - Big Story

[mixent]

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 13 May 2009 07:32:15 -0700:
Hi,

See also my previous post
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg31710.html.

>Check out Slashdot - or the SciNews feeds today- big story with no details:
>Ultra Dense Deuterium
>
>It is said to be much denser than metallic deuterium, where the bond
>distance would be 153 pm (1.53 angstroms) or 2.9 times the Bohr radius of
>the atom. Even metallic hydrogen has a density of approximately 0.6 kg /
>dm3. (0.6 grams/cc or 0.6 times as dense as water- so yet it would float
>easily) 
>
>..yet this is said to be 100,000 times more dense. They do not even mention
>bosons. Do they even appreciate what a boson is?
>
>One of the worst written science articles of all times - that is why no
>citation is given. Don't want to embarrass the turkeys. And these dufuss
>science reporters are told that only LENR experimenters are on the fringe.
>LOL
>
>Of course - none of them considered highly redundant (Millsean) states -
>i.e. the deuterino.
>
>There could also a denser state exists for deuterium, which may or may not
>be Millsean, and comes from Robert Carroll and others, called the inverse
>quantum state. Others have called it D(-1) or the inverse of D(1).  The bond
>distance could be very small, equal to 0.23 angstroms. 
>
>Why not be (if the material is not imaginary altogether) give RM some credit
>- Mills has a least stuck his neck out with a thousand page tome showing
>that it could conceivably be something like D(sub 1/137) then heck -- why
>not give RM some credit, if you are going to do abysmal journalism anyway ?
>
>And catch-22 - what keeps it from fusing? D-D fusion would be expected to
>take place way too easily in this material for it to be stable. 
>
>BTW isn't this also approximately the same concept as "degenerate matter"?
>
>Jones
>
>
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/Project.html

[Vo]:Vortices Redux

[grok]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


FYI:  

- -- grok.





- -- 
Build the North America-wide General Strike.

TODO el poder a los consejos y las comunas.
TOUT le pouvoir aux conseils et communes.
ALL power to the councils and communes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkoLVCcACgkQXo3EtEYbt3FRrACgsWmqFVrN6cVRYJhePEmWBY6N
ufsAn2keLg5xv7KS/23Khla2oe+giMve
=tzr4
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Harry Veeder]

Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor with six bar magnets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY
ylow's instrutional videos:  http://www.youtube.com/user/magneticmotor1
Rick Serling and Rick Friedrich demonstrate a replication with three bar magnets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOO7VpOwNEM
on going discussion here:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mylow_magmo/
Harry
 
 
 
 

[Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Harry Veeder]

*typos corrected*

Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor with six bar 
magnets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY

Mylow's instructional videos:  
http://www.youtube.com/user/magneticmotor1

Rick Sterling and Rick Friedrich demonstrate a replication with three 
bar magnets:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOO7VpOwNEM

on going discussion here:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mylow_magmo/

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Harry Veeder]

oops that should be John Sterling and Rick Friedrich.

> 
> *typos corrected*
> 
> Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor with six bar 
> magnets:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY
> 
> Mylow's instructional videos:  
> http://www.youtube.com/user/magneticmotor1
> 
> Rick Sterling and Rick Friedrich demonstrate a replication with 
> three 
> bar magnets:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOO7VpOwNEM
> 
> on going discussion here:
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mylow_magmo/
> 
> Harry
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Kyle Mcallister]

>--- Harry Veeder  wrote:
>
>
>-
>
>Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor
>with six bar magnets:
>
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY

Watching this with my wife now.

Something about the video seems odd. I cannot put my
finger on it, but it is not the obvious. Will go back
to the workshop in a minute and try this with what we
have here.

I'll do a bit more with this, but then have other
things to work on.

Cheers,
--Kyle


  

Re: [Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Harry Veeder]

Sorry! My mistake again.
The name is John Bedini and not John Sterling.
Harry

> 
> Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor with six bar 
> magnets:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY
> 
> Mylow's instructional videos:  
> http://www.youtube.com/user/magneticmotor1
> 
> John Sterling and Rick Friedrich demonstrate a replication with 
> three 
> bar magnets:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOO7VpOwNEM
> 
> on going discussion here:
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/mylow_magmo/
> 
> Harry
> 
> 

Re: [Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor

[Harry Veeder]

- Original Message -
From: Kyle Mcallister 
Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 8:36 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Apparent replication of Mylow's magnetic motor


> > > >--- Harry Veeder  wrote: > > > > > >- > > > >Mylow (and his twin brother) demonstrate the motor > >with six bar magnets: > > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_KQ8tldXnY > > Watching this with my wife now. > > Something about the video seems odd. I cannot put my > finger on it, but it is not the obvious. Will go back > to the workshop in a minute and try this with what we > have here. > > I'll do a bit more with this, but then have other > things to work on. > > Cheers, > --Kyle > 
Anyway, I just joined the yahoogroup for Mylow's magnetic motor
and posted this:
> Hi, > I am new here. > I heard about Mylow's motor on vortex-l. > Some people on that list have suggested that if this is a fake, > all it needs is a small battery, a sense coil and some circuitry > hidden in the stator assembly, or even inside a small container > shaped to look like a stator magnet. 
Harry