Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
From: Jouni Valkonen jounivalko...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, September 9, 2011 7:17:18 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too 2011/9/9 Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com: The engine that truly drives the growth of jobs in the US economy is innovation and its handmaiden, new small company establishment and growth. Actually, creating jobs is rather irrelevant goal, because it is more important to create automation and robots who does the productive work. Of course, creating automation, does return into innovation. As the wealth is acquired from automation, then it is possible to create jobs into service sector by boosting the purchasing power of median people by introducing basic income. Basic Income for all, men, women, even children. Money should be created on a human basis. This is the solution! http://live.worldbank.org/open-forum-gender/ideas/basic-income-all Vote by adding your name. Most popular idea for achieving more equality will be discussed by a panel arranged by the World Bank on Sept. 21. Harry
RE: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
From Harry Veeder Actually, creating jobs is rather irrelevant goal, because it is more important to create automation and robots who does the productive work. Of course, creating automation, does return into innovation. As the wealth is acquired from automation, then it is possible to create jobs into service sector by boosting the purchasing power of median people by introducing basic income. I disagree. Vehemently so. Perhaps I should actually say that the above premise misses an important point that I will attempt to clarify - as I see it. It is inevitable that outsourcing, which is then permanently followed by automation robotics is what is in store for us, what the above comment completely misses is how will we go about employing increasing numbers of individuals who have been misplaced as a result of their traditional jobs having been outsourced and eventually taken over by automation and robotics. A subtle point the above premise may have gotten completely wrong is the fact that as automation takes over more and more jobs in traditional manufacturing sectors it is NOT necessarily true that these misplaced workers will end up being reemployed in various service sector areas of the economy. The problem many politicians seem oblivious to and subsequently refuse to acknowledge to their constituents is the fact that increasing numbers of service sector jobs are ALSO ending up being automated. This is happening because it is far cheaper for companies providing various services to automate rather than to continue employing troublesome people who need expensive health insurance and other bennies like unions that management hates. For example, the last time I called my cable company to complain about the fact that my internet service was down I never talked to a human. The ENTIRE phone conversation was handled through a combination of voice recognition and recorded responses that guided me step-by-step through a complex process that helped me restore internet access. At my place of employment, more and more individuals we employ for computer related work are contractors hired from India and China - (Outsourcing). Sooner or later many of these outsourced jobs will end up being automated as well. Other service sectors that one might think would be impervious to the ravages of automation are also in danger of being replaced, such as the lawyer industry. Specialized search engines can take over many tasks previously employed by lawyers whose job had been to search text for various rulings. National wealth will NOT be created if the ONLY thing we see happen to our nation is the inevitable implementation of more and more automation. All that will produce is increasing numbers of individuals thrown out of job market where they may remain permanently unemployed or underemployed as they desperately take up the only kinds of jobs they can find, such as flipping burgers at McDonalds or manning cash registers at Wall Mart or Office Depot. Time after time, amount of income these displaced workers end up earning after being reemployed is far less than what they were previously earning, and this inevitably results in the fact that they will not earn enough income to be able to afford the very fruits that automation is supposed to offer them. This issue has been going on for years and it is insidious. It is a major contributing factor to our current economic woes. It is vividly described in detail by author, Martin Ford in his book The Lights in the Tunnel which Mr. Rothwell originally brought to our attention not long ago. http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/ It's worth reading. As a nation, as a world, we will have to devise ways in which to both evenly and fairly redistribute income (currency) amongst the population regardless of whether these individual are employed in the traditional sense or not. Our economies are consumer based. This means that if too many remain unemployed they cannot consume anything, and our economy tanks permanently. It will make no difference if automation produces everything we need if too many individuals have no means at their disposal in which to earn a decent income in which to earn goods and services that end up being created via through automation. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: A subtle point the above premise may have gotten completely wrong is the fact that as automation takes over more and more jobs in traditional manufacturing sectors it is NOT necessarily true that these misplaced workers will end up being reemployed in various service sector areas of the economy. The problem many politicians seem oblivious to and subsequently refuse to acknowledge to their constituents is the fact that increasing numbers of service sector jobs are ALSO ending up being automated. Yes, the pace of progress has picked up. Progress in computers and robots was stalled for a long time. In the 1960s, some experts believed we might have something like the HAL computer portrayed in the movie 2001 by the year 2000. That did not happen. Many people went to the opposite extreme, saying that computers will never be able to translate, drive automobiles, or think in any sense of the word. Now we have effective translation and prototype antonymous automobiles (Google) and artificial intelligence in the Watson computer far ahead of what I expected a few years ago. I do not know the state of the art in robotics but I expect it will soon improve rapidly. This is bound to have a profound impact on all sectors of the economy. *All sectors* -- that's Johnson's point. The notion that we can go from manufacturing to service reminds me of Asimov's classic short story The Last Question which begins with two inebriated scientists arguing about entropy and the fate of the universe: . . . What I say is that a sun won’t last forever. That’s all I’m saying. We’re safe for twenty billion years, but then what? Lupov pointed a slightly shaky finger at the other. And don’t say we’ll switch to another sun. There was silence for a while. Adell put his glass to his lips only occasionally, and Lupov’s eyes slowly closed. They rested. Then Lupov’s eyes snapped open. You’re thinking we’ll switch to another sun when ours is done, aren’t you? I’m not thinking. Sure you are. You’re weak on logic, that’s the trouble with you. You’re like the guy in the story who was caught in a sudden shower and who ran to a grove of trees and got under one. He wasn’t worried, you see, because he figured when one tree got wet through, he would just get under another one. I get it, said Adell. Don’t shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
On 2011-09-08 22:48, Alan J Fletcher wrote: This is interesting too: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=16#comment-70924 Andrea Rossi September 10th, 2011 at 1:20 PM WARNING TO ALL OUR READERS: I AM RECEIVING THOUSANDS OF REQUESTS OF INVITATION TO VISIT OUR PLANT. FOR OBVIOUS REASONS OF SECURITY WE CANNOT RECEIVE MORE THAN FEW PERSONS PER VISIT. THE START UP TEST WILL BE RESTRICTED TO FEW SCIENTISTS AND SCIENTIFIC JOURNALISTS. THE TEST WILL BE PUT ONLINE, TO ALLOW EVERYBODY TO SEE IT. FURTHER VISITS WILL BE ALLOWED, BUT IN A LIMITED NUMBER AND RESERVED TO SPECIALISTS AND CUSTOMERS. I AM VERY SORRY TO SAY THAT FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY REASONS IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE TO ADMIT ALL THE REQUESTS OF VISIT. IN ANY CASE THE PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF OUR HOUSEHOLD E-CATS TO THE PUBLIC WILL BE MADE SOONER THAN EXPECTED, SINCE THE APPROVALS WILL BE FASTER THAN EXPECTED. VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ON THIS ISSUE ARE CLOSE TO BE MADE. WARM REGARDS, A.R. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
Thanks for posting this. harry - Original Message - From: Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Cc: Sent: Saturday, September 10, 2011 2:30:53 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes On 2011-09-08 22:48, Alan J Fletcher wrote: This is interesting too: http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=501cpage=16#comment-70924 Andrea Rossi September 10th, 2011 at 1:20 PM WARNING TO ALL OUR READERS: I AM RECEIVING THOUSANDS OF REQUESTS OF INVITATION TO VISIT OUR PLANT. FOR OBVIOUS REASONS OF SECURITY WE CANNOT RECEIVE MORE THAN FEW PERSONS PER VISIT. THE START UP TEST WILL BE RESTRICTED TO FEW SCIENTISTS AND SCIENTIFIC JOURNALISTS. THE TEST WILL BE PUT ONLINE, TO ALLOW EVERYBODY TO SEE IT. FURTHER VISITS WILL BE ALLOWED, BUT IN A LIMITED NUMBER AND RESERVED TO SPECIALISTS AND CUSTOMERS. I AM VERY SORRY TO SAY THAT FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY REASONS IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE TO ADMIT ALL THE REQUESTS OF VISIT. IN ANY CASE THE PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION OF OUR HOUSEHOLD E-CATS TO THE PUBLIC WILL BE MADE SOONER THAN EXPECTED, SINCE THE APPROVALS WILL BE FASTER THAN EXPECTED. VERY IMPORTANT NEWS ON THIS ISSUE ARE CLOSE TO BE MADE. WARM REGARDS, A.R. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
One can make the case that displaced old workers can't be retrained, and so should be kept alive on transfer payments, but their children should be able to take part in the new economy, as software workers, so there should never be a permanently displaced class. Sent from my iPhone. On Sep 10, 2011, at 10:14, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: From Harry Veeder Actually, creating jobs is rather irrelevant goal, because it is more important to create automation and robots who does the productive work. Of course, creating automation, does return into innovation. As the wealth is acquired from automation, then it is possible to create jobs into service sector by boosting the purchasing power of median people by introducing basic income. I disagree. Vehemently so. Perhaps I should actually say that the above premise misses an important point that I will attempt to clarify – as I see it. It is inevitable that outsourcing, which is then permanently followed by automation robotics is what is in store for us, what the above comment completely misses is how will we go about employing increasing numbers of individuals who have been misplaced as a result of their traditional jobs having been outsourced and eventually taken over by automation and robotics. A subtle point the above premise may have gotten completely wrong is the fact that as automation takes over more and more jobs in traditional manufacturing sectors it is NOT necessarily true that these misplaced workers will end up being reemployed in various service sector areas of the economy. The problem many politicians seem oblivious to and subsequently refuse to acknowledge to their constituents is the fact that increasing numbers of service sector jobs are ALSO ending up being automated. This is happening because it is far cheaper for companies providing various services to automate rather than to continue employing troublesome people who need expensive health insurance and other bennies like unions that management hates. For example, the last time I called my cable company to complain about the fact that my internet service was down I never talked to a human. The ENTIRE phone conversation was handled through a combination of voice recognition and recorded responses that guided me step-by-step through a complex process that helped me restore internet access. At my place of employment, more and more individuals we employ for computer related work are contractors hired from India and China – (Outsourcing). Sooner or later many of these “outsourced” jobs will end up being automated as well. Other service sectors that one might think would be impervious to the ravages of automation are also in danger of being replaced, such as the lawyer industry. Specialized search engines can take over many tasks previously employed by lawyers whose job had been to search text for various rulings. National wealth will NOT be created if the ONLY thing we see happen to our nation is the inevitable implementation of more and more automation. All that will produce is increasing numbers of individuals thrown out of job market where they may remain permanently unemployed or underemployed as they desperately take up the only kinds of jobs they can find, such as flipping burgers at McDonalds or manning cash registers at Wall Mart or Office Depot. Time after time, amount of income these displaced workers end up earning after being reemployed is far less than what they were previously earning, and this inevitably results in the fact that they will not earn enough income to be able to afford the very fruits that automation is supposed to offer them. This issue has been going on for years and it is insidious. It is a major contributing factor to our current economic woes. It is vividly described in detail by author, Martin Ford in his book The Lights in the Tunnel which Mr. Rothwell originally brought to our attention not long ago. http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/ It's worth reading. As a nation, as a world, we will have to devise ways in which to both evenly and fairly redistribute income (currency) amongst the population regardless of whether these individual are employed in the traditional sense or not. Our economies are consumer based. This means that if too many remain unemployed they cannot consume anything, and our economy tanks permanently. It will make no difference if automation produces everything we need if too many individuals have no means at their disposal in which to earn a decent income in which to earn goods and services that end up being created via through automation. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:The effect of cold fusion on employment
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Yes has you read Lights in a Tunnel it is shareware and goes through this. Would free energy mean more or less jobs, perhaps Jed knows. When I wrote the book in 2004, in chapter 20 on employment I said that cold fusion would not have a large impact. Nearly everyone in the energy business will be put out of work, but a surprisingly small number of people work in that sector. Back then it was 1.2 million people in the U.S., including 0.9 million at gas stations. Many gas stations double as convenience stores, so not all of those people will lose their jobs. 1.2 million seems like lot, but consider that 6 million worked in finance and insurance back then. I concluded that this will not a big problem as long as society as a whole takes steps to re-employ people from energy sector. About half of them are highly skilled people who can build other things we will need, such as desalination plants for my pet megaproject (see chapter 8). The bigger question is: will the aggregate impact of cold fusion likely reduce employment, or increase it? There are two sets of answers: 1. Answers based on economics. 2. Answers based on technology. 1. Economics I don't know enough about economics to address this in any depth. Hal Fox envisioned an ever increasing economy after cold fusion removes the limits to growth. I don't see how that would work. I can't imagine what we first-world people would need with twice or three times or ten times more GNP. There is a practical limit to consumption. My wife I have two cars already. We don't need a dozen. I have Netflix and I don't have time to watch more than 2 or 3 movies a month. What would I do with dozens of new movies a month? I sure as heck do not want to consume more healthcare if I can avoid it. I wouldn't want to eat filet mignon every day even if it were grown as cultured meat. No one in Atlanta wants to drive a car if it can be avoided. You could hand out free gasoline and free Mercedes-Benz cars, but you would not increase the consumption of transportation here because the traffic is so bad. I have not read this in the newspapers, but I get a sense that one cause of the Japanese economic doldrums of the last few decades is most people in Japan have enough stuff. Consumer demand is satiated. They reached the practical limits of consumption in the 1980s and 1990s. Population growth came to a halt, so there were no new consumers. Of course there are poor people there. Unfortunately, the number are growing, as is the gap between rich and poor. But most people are middle-class. I know many middle-class professionals of my age. By the 1990s, they all had enough living space (because they are not in Tokyo), plenty of books, electronics, nice cars, televisions, washing machines and so on. They did not need or want anything more. Automobiles and television sales are clearly at the replacement rate, and those machines last a long time. 2. Technology I am well qualified to address this, and I think the answer is clear. It is an easy question. There is no doubt in my mind that cold fusion will take far fewer workers than conventional sources such as fossil fuel, wind or fission. The 1.2 million people in this sector will be replaced with a few thousand people, who manufacture specialized cold fusion related materials and equipment such as finely divided nickel or purified hydrogen. Most energy will be built into the product. For example, automobile engines will have a supply of powder and nickel built in, which is replaced about as often as lubricating oil is now. It will not take any more production line employees to fabricate these engines than it now takes to fabricate something like a Prius hybrid engine. A cold fusion engine will not call for more expensive materials, greater precision, or more labor than conventional engines do, and of course there is no need for fuel. So everyone employed in extracting, purifying, transporting, or refueling engines of all types will be out of a job. In the transportation sector, all of those people will be replaced by a handful of auto mechanics who swap out the powder and hydrogen tank once a year, or once every 5 years. The electric power and natural gas sectors will vanish completely in the time it takes to replace space heating HVAC equipment, water heaters, and so on. That's about 15 years in the residential sector, and 30 in the commercial sector. However, once the electric power and other energy utility companies lose a about a third of the customers and revenues they will collapse. This should happen roughly 8 years into the transition. The U.S. Post Office has lost about 37% of its First Class business because of e-mail and it is on the verge of collapse. European and Japanese post offices survive, but they are downsized. The Japanese Post Office still doubles as a banking and insurance system, I believe. (Not sure what happened to Koizumi's plans to break it up. The actual Post Offices look
Re: [Vo]:The effect of cold fusion on employment
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sat, 10 Sep 2011 16:27:43 -0400: Hi, [snip] To summarize, if we decide to live more or less the way we do now, consuming about as much energy per capita as we do now, with roughly as much transportation, space-heating, illumination, data transmission and so on, then cold fusion will reduce overall employment by 1.2 million people. Inexorably. [snip] This may well be true in the USA which already has a high standard of living, however CF will make a huge difference in the developing world, where billions of people currently can only dream of your standard of living. CF could make it possible for the entire world to enjoy a standard of living equivalent to that in the USA, in fact better, in as much as all waste will be recycled leading to a far less polluted planet, where we can all lead a healthier life. [snip] BTW don't forget all the new jobs that will be created in the manufacturing sector as all your everyday items are upgraded to utilize the new energy source, and also for newly created products, such as personal flying equipment; currently not practical due to the limited amount of fuel that can be carried. BTW2 note that when the price of oil goes up, the stock market goes down, because investors believe that higher energy prices reduce overall production. Conversely, cheaper energy process should increase production, and consequently there should be an unparalleled boom in the stock market. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:09:17 -0400: Hi, [snip] I get it, said Adell. Dont shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too. This is of course not true. New stars are being born all the time. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 09 Sep 2011 17:07:55 -0400: Hi, [snip] Peter Gluck wrote: But Xanthi Press wrote no testing by State authorities no plant. Confusing. The Sept. 1 report said they do not have a license for the plant yet. Defkalion confirmed they are still working on that. I do not think the report said there has been no testing. There is also some confusion about the nature of the factory. Apparently a local university professor thinks they need a license for the use and storage of massive amounts of hydrogen; ~150 tons. That would require a license. They do not need that much, obviously. My guess is that the professor thinks this is a conventional fuel cell, which would call for lots of hydrogen. They are talking about catalysts and reactors so this mistake would be understandable. - Jed I don't see why they would need to store any Hydrogen. They could just produce it on demand through electrolysis. If they can't do this then the device is worthless anyway. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I don't see why they would need to store any Hydrogen. They could just produce it on demand through electrolysis. If they can't do this then the device is worthless anyway. It is a bad idea to produce hydrogen on demand with electrolysis. That adds to the complexity and cost of the machine; it causes explosions, and the hydrogen is impure. Since you only need minute quantities of hydrogen it is much better to purchase it in pressure vessels. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:I love Obama, great speach on jobs, patents too
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I get it, said Adell. Don’t shout. When the sun is done, the other stars will be gone, too. This is of course not true. New stars are being born all the time. They know that. The basic point remains valid. Read the whole story: http://filer.case.edu/dts8/thelastq.htm - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Fran Group: Please Reconsider the following pointTime-Frame-Based Casimir Effect
I agree that we can view virtual photons as expanding through our lower dimensional 3-di Plane I think of this expansion in terms of a photon traveling half a wavelength then disappearing. From any standpoint the Quantum Photon Flux is imparting momentum to matter (or else it doesn't matter anyway!) Furthermore, if we consider a photon flux from 3-space through 2-space, it is as you say, a dot appears to expand into a circle, then contract again into a dot and disappear.When a 4 or 4+ space sends photons through our 3-space, then these appearing-disappearing circles intersect every possible plane in our 3-space. I really don't see why this perpendicularity prevents these photons from exerting real forces in the many ways that have been attributed to the Quantum Flux. If you accept that there is an electromagnetic Q-Flux then you must acknowledge the possibility that it exerts radiation pressure on matter. If this is true, then my various proposals are very plausible. Incidentally, light in a medium other than space moves slow, yet imparts more momentum to a mirror that is located inside the medium; therefore, even a stationary photon may impart momentum to an adjacent surface in the direction of its propagation, since its action on matter is due to the transverse movement of the wave. Researchers have created materials that have negative (not fractional) indices of refraction, it is thought that light might exert tension on a material instead of pressure. Again, such light could only do this if its transverse field motion is what causes it momentum-effects. Again, I really think I can do this, but I really need help. Scott From: froarty...@comcast.net To: scott...@hotmail.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Fran Group: Please Reconsider the following pointTime-Frame-Based Casimir Effect Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 20:20:14 -0400 Scott, You are knocking on precisely the door I have been trying to open but the language so easily perverts between time and space when you switch perspectives between different inertial frames. The task is further obscured by our position that an apparently “stationary” region inside a cavity can utilize suppression to generate a different [equivalent?] inertial frame based on changes in the unit time instead of changing the velocity of an object[a gravity hill].I agree with your “pressure” analogy which can trace its origin back to Puthoff’s atomic model which is then further accumulated / segregated by virtue of Casimir geometry. Where I disagree however is that these “pressures” could have a spatial bias without use of a 3rd body to create an asymmetry – My posit is that the stream of virtual particles exist in a rolled up dimension that is 90 degrees displaced to our spatial plane and where this stream intersects with the spatial plane the virtual particles appear to grow from nothing outward into our spatial dimension at a specific xyz coordinate and then just as quickly shrink back out of our spatial dimensions in a never ending stream. Therefore the “pressure” is balanced along the time axis and it requires a 3rd body to interact with these fields in an asymmetrical manner to force the balance to redistribute between time and space. My bet is that hydrogen atoms used by Rossi or Mills are exchanging time for energy and would be much older than hydrogen that was never circulated through a cavity – We know the difference in light speed thru a Casimir region is only infinitesimally faster than C as perceived outside the cavity but this is the most rapid example of an object transitioning the region and piloted directly thru center of the cavity – think about the accumulating dilation of an object such as a gas atom residing for hours and slowly migrating into ever decreasing geometry with the possibility of fractionalized atoms achieving confinements up to 137 times smaller than a normal atom could achieve.RegardsFran On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 15:38:41 -0700 Wm. Scott Smith wroteThe Quantum Vacuum itself exerts radiation pressure all of the time on everything. As measured within the accelerated time-frame, photon collisions of a given intensity are happening at exactly the same rate as the corresponding photons that manifest outside of the cavity, as measured from that external time frame; however, when we stand outside of the cavity, we see these equally energetic collisions as happening at a faster rate, inside the cavity and we conclude that more outward directed momentum is being imparted, inside the cavity than outside the cavity.The observer inside the cavity would see the same difference in forces, except he thinks the outside world is passing through time more slowly; therefore, he concludes that his side of the cavity walls are receiving momentum at a normal rate, but that the corresponding photons are striking the external walls more slowly.In other words, both observers agree that there is more
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sat, 10 Sep 2011 18:44:06 -0400: Hi, [snip] mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I don't see why they would need to store any Hydrogen. They could just produce it on demand through electrolysis. If they can't do this then the device is worthless anyway. It is a bad idea to produce hydrogen on demand with electrolysis. That adds to the complexity and cost of the machine; it causes explosions, and the hydrogen is impure. Since you only need minute quantities of hydrogen it is much better to purchase it in pressure vessels. - Jed Over the long haul, it's going to need to come from electrolysis anyway. That's where most of our hydrogen is. It doesn't need to cause explosions if done correctly. As to purity, I seriously doubt that the purity need be any less than that obtained from natural gas (once again, if done correctly), and I don't think purity is of such a concern for the Rossi device anyway, judging by procedures used during testing. Furthermore, it may eventually even prove possible to ensure that any impurity comprises the catalyst itself, so that it may even be beneficial. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:The effect of cold fusion on employment
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: then cold fusion will reduce overall employment by 1.2 million people. Inexorably. [snip] This may well be true in the USA which already has a high standard of living, however CF will make a huge difference in the developing world, where billions of people currently can only dream of your standard of living. CF could make it possible for the entire world to enjoy a standard of living equivalent to that in the USA, in fact better, in as much as all waste will be recycled leading to a far less polluted planet, where we can all lead a healthier life. I hope that is what happens, but even if it does, it will not have much affect on U.S. employment. The 1.2 million people I referred to are in the U.S. They will not be replaced by other workers in the U.S. producing equipment such as cars or space heaters for the third world because we do not sell industrial equipment to the third world. Japan, China and Korea have those markets sewed up. Nowadays they sell gasoline cars; in 20 years they will sell cold fusion cars. More of them, I hope. But I doubt the U.S. will have any role in it. In any case, modern manufacturing requires very few people. In the U.S. the prospects are for more unemployment, because we refuse to invest in new technology or manufacturing. We have handed over the markets for computers, iPads and most consumer goods to the Chinese in return for cheap stuff at Walmart. Hey, it wasn't my decision. [snip] BTW don't forget all the new jobs that will be created in the manufacturing sector as all your everyday items are upgraded to utilize the new energy source, The upgrade transition will not last for long and it will not create new jobs after it is done. On the contrary, the upgrade will be to newer production lines which take fewer workers. and also for newly created products, such as personal flying equipment; currently not practical due to the limited amount of fuel that can be carried. In my first message I specified: if we decide to live more or less the way we do now, consuming about as much energy per capita as we do now, with roughly as much transportation . . . Personal flying equipment would be a change from the way we live now. It would require more energy. Whether it would also call for more employment or not I cannot judge. - Jed
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
mix...@bigpond.com wrote: Over the long haul, it's going to need to come from electrolysis anyway. That's where most of our hydrogen is. It doesn't need to cause explosions if done correctly. Of course. Over the short-haul too. But it should be done at specialized facilities by experienced people. Do-it-yourself or automated electrolysis equipment has been tested. It often explodes. It is really bad idea when all you need is a tiny amount anyway. As to purity, I seriously doubt that the purity need be any less than that obtained from natural gas (once again, if done correctly) . . . Not according to Mizuno, who is an expert. He designed elaborate equipment to purify hydrogen that was already commercial grade. Doing it correctly is the key point. It cannot be done correctly with a small-scale, automated, do-it-yourself machine. Perhaps this will be possible in the future. There is no need for it now. Commercial-grade hydrogen from a tank will not add any measurable extra cost to a cold fusion device. . . . and I don't think purity is of such a concern for the Rossi device anyway, judging by procedures used during testing. Mizuno, Storms and others have told me that purity is always an issue. Also, Rossi's tests have been short, and in the laboratory. These are crude devices with bad performance. For a cell that will run in an automobile, an airplane or factory for years flawlessly, you want the cleanest, best materials you can get. Furthermore, it may eventually even prove possible to ensure that any impurity comprises the catalyst itself, so that it may even be beneficial. In that case you would want carefully controlled dopants added to the hydrogen. Not random contamination. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Fran Group: Please Reconsider the following pointTime-Frame-Based Casimir Effect
Scott, I am not saying the perpendicularity prevents these virtual photons from exerting real forces - only that the forces divide equally between the 3 spatial axis unless you use another body or field that interacts with the photon in an asymmetrical manner -like tacking a sail boat to derive a different vector from the ambient wind direction by utilizing a rudder and centerboard between wind and wave. My issue with Vtec is that it seems like you are trying to pick yourself up by your hair - the forces you propose to exploit are sourced and sinked in the same v shaped geometry. That said I do agree these growing and contracting spheres do represent motion but they impart force equally into our spatial plane. I think gas motion is a perfect example of how these chaotic occurrences equal out to supply random forces that keeps gases expanded but without any specific spatial bias - just pressure. I don't think you can reuse the same object that creates the pressure to steer itself. Regards Fran Wm. Scott Smith Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:57:05 -0700 I agree that we can view virtual photons as expanding through our lower dimensional 3-di Plane I think of this expansion in terms of a photon traveling half a wavelength then disappearing. From any standpoint the Quantum Photon Flux is imparting momentum to matter (or else it doesn't matter anyway!) Furthermore, if we consider a photon flux from 3-space through 2-space, it is as you say, a dot appears to expand into a circle, then contract again into a dot and disappear.When a 4 or 4+ space sends photons through our 3-space, then these appearing-disappearing circles intersect every possible plane in our 3-space. I really don't see why this perpendicularity prevents these photons from exerting real forces in the many ways that have been attributed to the Quantum Flux. If you accept that there is an electromagnetic Q-Flux then you must acknowledge the possibility that it exerts radiation pressure on matter. If this is true, then my various proposals are very plausible. Incidentally, light in a medium other than space moves slow, yet imparts more momentum to a mirror that is located inside the medium; therefore, even a stationary photon may impart momentum to an adjacent surface in the direction of its propagation, since its action on matter is due to the transverse movement of the wave. Researchers have created materials that have negative (not fractional) indices of refraction, it is thought that light might exert tension on a material instead of pressure. Again, such light could only do this if its transverse field motion is what causes it momentum-effects. Again, I really think I can do this, but I really need help. Scott
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Rossi quotes
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:24:14 -0400: Hi, [snip] mix...@bigpond.com wrote: Over the long haul, it's going to need to come from electrolysis anyway. That's where most of our hydrogen is. It doesn't need to cause explosions if done correctly. Of course. Over the short-haul too. But it should be done at specialized facilities by experienced people. ...or dedicated specialized equipment should be acquired, and trained people hired. Essentially what I'm saying is that a company that is going to make it's business from selling devices that use Hydrogen as fuel, should probably invest in the means of producing it. Do-it-yourself or automated electrolysis equipment has been tested. It often explodes. It is really bad idea when all you need is a tiny amount anyway. Who said anything about do it yourself? I didn't mean to imply that every device sold should have an electrolyzer included. What I meant was that the factory could have a dedicated unit that they used to produce bottled Hydrogen for inclusion in the devices. That would mean that they didn't need to store large amounts of the gas, as they could produce it at the same rate at which they sold it (bottled). As to purity, I seriously doubt that the purity need be any less than that obtained from natural gas (once again, if done correctly) . . . Not according to Mizuno, who is an expert. He designed elaborate equipment to purify hydrogen that was already commercial grade. Unless I'm mistaken, commercial grade is what you get in bottles. It comes from natural gas, and is usually contaminated with hydrocarbons (+ perhaps some Helium). IOW Hydrogen from electrolysis may well be more pure, not less. Doing it correctly is the key point. It cannot be done correctly with a small-scale, automated, do-it-yourself machine. Perhaps this will be possible in the future. There is no need for it now. Commercial-grade hydrogen from a tank will not add any measurable extra cost to a cold fusion device. . . . and I don't think purity is of such a concern for the Rossi device anyway, judging by procedures used during testing. Mizuno, Storms and others have told me that purity is always an issue. Also, Rossi's tests have been short, and in the laboratory. These are crude devices with bad performance. For a cell that will run in an automobile, an airplane or factory for years flawlessly, you want the cleanest, best materials you can get. You're guessing here. :) The truth it that neither of us knows what effect impure Hydrogen has in Rossi's device, or for that matter whether or not it makes any difference. Furthermore, it may eventually even prove possible to ensure that any impurity comprises the catalyst itself, so that it may even be beneficial. In that case you would want carefully controlled dopants added to the hydrogen. Not random contamination. ...I was thinking more along the lines of which chemicals are used during electrolysis to provide conductivity. If e.g. NaOH is used, then some of it may get carried along with the gas, and end up in the device, where it could potentially function as a Mills catalyst. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
[Vo]:Asymmetry Reaction is the key
In my more recent work, I am not talking about altering the Quantum Vacuum itself; rather, I am trying to alter the way matter reacts to the Quantum-flux. Granted, the expanding circle of the virtual photons as it winks-in is expanding in all directions, but it can only be pushing on a particular object in just one direction! But of course, the real problem is that different virtual photons are pushing equally on all sides of an object in equally in force but in opposite directions. Of course, if we were talking about using ambient stationary air pressure, it would take just as much- or more- energy to reduce the pressure on one side of an object than might be obtained from the resulting unbalanced forces. Fortunately, we are not dealing with air, but with electromagnetic radiation. The major difference is this, the only part of the flux that exerts any pressure on any material is those few vp's that wink-in immediately adjacent or even overlapping the surface of the material. As we have noted, the same flux is incident on opposite sides of an object, creating equal and opposite forces. There are at least five ways that we might potentially make objects that have asymmetric interactions with the equal but opposite radiation pressure that acts on two opposite sides of an object. For example, a radiometer is bathed in equal but (rotationally) opposite light sources, and all applied forces are equal and opposite; in other words, the absorbing light imparts the same amount of momentum as it strikes the one side of the radiometer as the reflecting light as it first strikes the opposite side of the radiometer. Here is where the net force comes from: on the one hand, absorbed radiation is always re-emitted as Black Body Radiation according to the temperature of a body; therefore, as long as we have good heat transfer between the two sides,both sides will re-emit the same amount of originally absorbed energy---even though most of this originally-absorbed energy was originally collected on the one, more-absorbent side. Therefore, the absorbed radiation is re-emitted fairly equally in opposite directions so it contributes zero net force. On the other hand, the reflected light rebounds (mostly) from one side only, so its rebound force is mostly unopposed, thus leaving us with a net force. Again, the applied forces are equal and opposite, but the object's reaction to these applied objects is asymmetrical. Now this does not prove that we can do such a thing with the Q-flux, but merely proves that the omni-directional, uniform nature of the Q-flux is not necessarily an insurmountable obstacle. Materials with negative refraction are likely to be attracted to the source of incident light instead of being pushed away from the source, as is usually seen. Again, this does not prove that we can do this with the Q-flux in practice, except in principle. Again, it is the axial Lorentz force that imparts the momentum of mass-less light to matter; again, we would not be altering the q-flux itself, but we would be altering the manners in which at least one side interacted with the Q-flux, as compared with the opposite side. In other words, one side would be pulled on by certain frequencies of the Q-flux while the opposite side was pushed-on by the normal radiation pressure of the same frequencies. The pressures wavelengths between 9 and 10 nm is greater than atmospheric pressure. We have had mirrors that reflect x-rays at very shallow angles for many years, so even tapping just photons at very shallow angles gives us a lot of pressure to work with. The small size of these wavelengths is not as daunting as they first appear. For example, high quality lenses are coated with a refractive coating that is only 0.25 wavelengths thick. They bend incident light that is approaching the lens at too shallow an angle, so that it passes through the lens at a more-perpendicular angle so as to not reflect off the surface of the lens to create glare inside the space in front of the lens. One nm is 10 typical atoms across; therefore, atoms are still small enough to work with at these scales, yet the quantum forces are great enough to be potentially very useful. Even hard x-rays are refracted by atoms that are 10 times larger than their wavelength (0.01nm.) From: froarty...@comcast.net To: scott...@hotmail.com CC: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Fran Group: Please Reconsider the following pointTime-Frame-Based Casimir Effect Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 19:56:41 -0400 Scott, I am not saying the perpendicularity prevents these virtual photons from exerting real forces – only that the forces divide equally between the 3 spatial axis unless you use another body or field that interacts with the photon in an asymmetrical manner –like tacking a sail boat to derive a different vector from the ambient wind direction by utilizing a rudder and centerboard between wind and wave. My
