[Vo]:(Video) Iwamura presents LENR transmutations at Nov ANS

[pagnucco]

(Video)
2012 - Yasuhiro Iwamura Presentation at American Nuclear Society Meeting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VefCEaLAkRw&feature=youtu.be

[Vo]:Lattice Energy comments on Mitsubishi ANS transmutations

[pagnucco]

Discussion of Mitsubishi Nov-14 ANS presentation on LENR transmutations.

Lattice Energy LLC- LENR Transmutation Networks Can Produce Gold-Dec 7 2012

http://www.slideshare.net/lewisglarsen/lattice-energy-llc-lenr-transmutation-networks-can-produce-golddec-7-2012

Re: [Vo]:[OT]Butterflies

[Terry Blanton]

Everyone appreciates butterflies:

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2012/11/gorilla-butterflies.html

On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 7:44 PM,   wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When butterflies are courting, they fly around one another, rather 
> appropriately
> drawing a sort of DNA spiral in the air.
>
> Who says God doesn't have a sense of humor? :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
>

Re: [Vo]:The Kiplinger Letter, Dec 7, 2012, Excerpts on TECHNOLOGY & ENERGY:

[mixent]

In reply to  OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson's message of Sat, 8 Dec 2012
10:13:14 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>Though pricey, backup batteries for solar power systems will gain favor in
>the wake of Hurricane Sandy, which forced many rooftop solar panels off-line
>to protect workers from shocks as they fixed damaged power lines. Most folks
>with solar systems ended up in the dark just when they most needed backup
>power.

What idiot designed these systems? The system should be isolated from the grid,
not from the home itself!

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 02:29 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:51 PM, Eric Walker 
<eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:


The problem is that you don't find out if it 
what you did was safe for five years, and then 
you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.



More accurately, I think it would be something 
like this -- for each interaction with the 
beryllium, there is a probability b that an 
adverse beryllium event B occurs. Â You'll then 
find out five years on average, with some amount 
of variation, whether B occurred. Â If B isn't 
seen one or two standard deviations out from 
five years from 2017, you will have been 
cleared, as far as the initial beryllium 
interaction went. Â If B does occur, you'll have 
a 1/3 chance of dying and a 2/3 chance of 
disability. Â But I assume you will need to 
repeat this process for each interaction that you have with the beryllium.


I would not go near it.


That's a personal choice. From what I've seen, 
the adverse event, B, simply does not happen with 
contact with pure beryllium metal, as a solid 
piece, nor with contact with BeO as a ceramic. It 
does happen with inhalation of Be, BeO, and other 
Beryllium compounds, if they are airborne (i.e., 
suppose one is machinging the metal, and it is 
being ground away. Or one is working the 
beryllium brakes, a real place where people have 
been seriously exposed -- i.e., mechanics).


BeO is very dangerous if crushed. Don't crush 
beryllium oxide insulators!!! If I whack my piece 
of beryllium with a hammer, it might make a few 
very small particles. I'm not going to do it. 
Turns out I don't need to. But if there was a 
good reason, it would be *highly* unlikely to generate a case of berylliosis.


It appears that a single adverse event that even 
produces an acute reaction only very rarely ends 
up causing chronic berylliosis. Much more 
dangerous is continued low-level exposure, which 
may produce no immediate symptoms at all, but 
which can then show up as much as twenty years 
later, as very serious chronic berylliosis.


Okay, my package arrived. No warning signs on it, 
and I don't think they are required. Opening it 
up, inside a plastic bag, is a piece of metal, 
6.55 x 19.45 x 25.88 mm. (It is not cut perfectly 
squarely, those are averages.) It is indeed very 
light, it weighs 6.02 grams. (It was sold as 5.85 
grams). Thus the density (from measured weight) 
is 1.83 g/cm^3. The density of Be is reported as 
(Wikipedia) 1.85 g/cm^3. Pretty close. (The 
surface is scored, and my dimensions are pushed 
as to accuracy, I only could find my vernier 
caliper, so the actual material there might be slightly less volume).


I scratched it with the point of a scissor, a 
short scratch. It made a clean shallow groove. 
Aong the edges, particularly corners, it is 
broken, tiny pieces are missing. That's how I'd 
expect beryllium to look, it's brittle.


It seems to have a bit of grey film or dark dust 
on the surface, on one or two edges. That's 
worrisome. I wiped some off on a piece of tissue 
paper, and examined it under a microscope. It 
looks like a fine powder. Each side of the piece 
is scratched with parallel lines, apparently from when it was cut.


I will now write the seller and find out more 
what I have. If that's machining dust, i.e., 
finely powdered beryllium, or mixed with 
beryllium, and maybe with an oil used to keep 
dust from flying when machining, it's a bit 
dangerous. The material is not readiliy airborne, 
though. It would not blow off, for example, I 
don't think -- and I'm not about to try it. None 
of this material fell off the piece in its plastic bag. 

RE: [Vo]:[OT]Butterflies

[Mark Goldes]

This video shows that butterflies are dying off due to EMF. We are affected in 
ways we are only beginning to understand.


RESONANCE - BEINGS OF FREQUENCY   http://vimeo.com/54189727 from James Russell 

RESONANCE is a sensational eye opening documentary which reveals the harm we 
are doing by existing in an ocean of man made wireless frequencies.

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: mix...@bigpond.com [mix...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 4:44 PM
To: VORTEX
Subject: [Vo]:[OT]Butterflies

Hi,

When butterflies are courting, they fly around one another, rather appropriately
drawing a sort of DNA spiral in the air.

Who says God doesn't have a sense of humor? :)

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

[Vo]:[OT]Butterflies

[mixent]

Hi,

When butterflies are courting, they fly around one another, rather appropriately
drawing a sort of DNA spiral in the air.

Who says God doesn't have a sense of humor? :)

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Hoyt A. Stearns Jr.]

How about using gadolinium:
http://unitednuclear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=16_17_69&products_id=141

I bought a beryllium marble from them a few years ago for a coupe of bucks,
but they aren't listing it anymore.

Hoyt Stearns





On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 4:04 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> *"If I want a small piece of beryllium that will fit in the well of an
> Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy some
> pieces like that."*
>  This is wrong thinking. To get the most neutron intensity, a very thick
> piece of beryllium (Be) is required to increase the probability of alpha
> particle interaction with a Be atom.
>
> A very thin piece of Be will not convert all the alphas to neutrons. After
> the neutron is produced, it will not be absorbed by Be atoms so a thick
> berillium tagret will not affect the neutron.
>  Cheers: axil
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
> wrote:
>
>> At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <>> a...@lomaxdesign.com>a**b...@lomaxdesign.com > wrote:
>>>
>>> Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could be
>>> a way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any
>>> dust. Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for
>>> now.
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for
>>> five years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.
>>>
>>
>> The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. However, it's also being
>> exaggerated here. If one is exposed to serious levels of airborn beryllium,
>> which are pretty small, yes, even a subacute exposure have no symptoms for
>> many years (sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very serious
>> chronic disease. But the experience with beryllium was with workers at
>> beryllium plants who were exposed to the material, at substantial levels,
>> day after day, for years, and if those people contracted berylliosis,
>> *then* there was a one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, like up
>> to and including death.
>>
>> If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil and cut it with some
>> snips, once or a few times, the chance of serious beryllium exposure is
>> extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm not going to engage in
>> without a lot more research, and possible some serious precautions. I'm
>> going to experiment first with my solid piece of beryllium, which is very
>> safe. As long as I don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other
>> unwise things.
>>
>> I have children. I have utterly no willingness to risk their health. If I
>> were to do anything more bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit
>> on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I would not do it here. And I
>> might easily not do it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium that
>> will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I
>> might arrange to buy some pieces like that. There are places selling
>> machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my cost by selling the
>> pieces for exactly that application.
>>
>> The children will not be allowed to handle the beryllium. They will know
>> about it, though, and they will know that it is dangerous. Even though it
>> appears that one can swallow pieces of beryllium metal without harm, we
>> will not run that experiment.
>>
>> Here is what I will say to anyone considering using beryllium. It's a
>> totally cool substance, in many ways. However, anyone who is going to
>> handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and take it very seriously. Many
>> people have died from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.
>>
>> There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/
>> **2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/
>>
>> It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for jet aircraft brakes.
>> That generates dust. I can see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air
>> Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, as described in the
>> f1fanatic site probably does not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust,
>> or else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by
>> testing.
>>
>> I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is reputed to be amazingly
>> light, very palpably so. Source after source said that beryllium metal
>> parts were not a problem, even while warning very seriously about dust
>> (metal, oxide, or salts of beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not
>> appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. They say that if a piece of
>> beryllium is lodged beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a
>> good idea, eh?
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Axil Axil]

*"The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which is a sheet of metal
(steel?) with a circular ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well
formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium on top of the ridge, it
will be elevated from the source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the
durn thing and measure it."*

Use a  Americium 241 button to get around the spacing issue.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6J_KqY81EmA


A closer look at the Americium 241 button from a smoke detector.

The Americium 241 button seems to be a standard product found in a large
verity of smoke detectors.

The design of the smoke detector must be radiation failsafe

The button is small but powerful. Use more than one button to increase
alpha intensity by stacking them on each other.


Only trying to help:axil




On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 6:03 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 01:56 AM 12/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote:
>
>  IMHO, Beryllium does not need to be reformed in any way no matter what
>> its original shape. It is a neutron moderator; most neutrons will pass
>> right through it.  But some will be slowed if the beryllium is very thick.
>>
>
> The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which is a sheet of metal
> (steel?) with a circular ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well
> formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium on top of the ridge, it
> will be elevated from the source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the
> durn thing and measure it.
>
> By some total miracle, I found the source in only a minute.
>
> The well is about 0.7 mm deep.
> It is about 2.3 mm diameter.
> The range of Am-241 alphas. 5.5 MeV, in air, is about 4 cm.
>
> Might not be a problem at all.
>
> Let's see: 1  Ci = 3.7 × 104 disintegrations per second = 2.22 × 10^6
> disintegrations per minute.
>
> about half of these, if I understand the situation correctly, will be
> absorbed by the Be if it's sitting on top of the well. From Wikipedia, "a
> representative alpha-beryllium neutron source can be expected to produce
> approximately 30 neutrons for every one million alpha particles."
>
> So, roughly, I'd expect rougly 33 neutrons per minute. I'd think they
> might be anisotropic, heading in more or less the same direction as the
> original alphas. Then I need to look at how many of these would be detected.
>
> Using a bunch of detectors, I could look for anisotropy LR-115 is
> cheap.
>
> I can detect fast neutrons through proton knock-on, that's an advertised
> usage for LR-115, and I have a boron-t10 converter screen which I can use
> to detect slow neutrons. Hey, this is cool: Am-241 -> alpha -> (Be9, alpha,
> C12, n) -> (B10, n, alpha). The key will be finding alphas on the other
> side of the Be ingot, and only with a B10 screen. Aside from that, just
> using direct neutrons, how many triple tracks will I find? Turns out they
> are really easy to spot, the alphas hit the LR-115 like a brick, they make
> really clear tracks, and three radiating from a point stands out clearly.
> Proton tracks are more subtle. And that's part of what I want to test.
>
> So, now, how do I get a real proton source? My guess is that,
> realistically, if I want to calibrate my LR-115 for proton detection, I'll
> need to find someone willing to expose the material. Much easier, I'd
> think, to move a few tiny pieces of plastic film to a source, like a linear
> accelerator, than to move the source to the film
>

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-08 23:27, Jed Rothwell wrote:


They are doing this now? Or do you mean they did it before but those
data points are not published yet.


That's what they did. The graphed calibration data points are in the 
document I previously linked. It's certainly not the full data set. It's 
supposed to be a small addendum to the 2-pages preview posted yesterday:


http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/Grafico%20calibrazione%20test%20per%20Celani.pdf

Data points, although are of different colors, are from the same run. 
That is just their fancy way to show the temperature ranges where 
normally (under activated conditions) there is excess heat and where 
there isn't.


I'm aware there's not enough information to properly understand what's 
and how's their method, but that's the way it is right now. We will know 
more in a week.



Calibrating with a gas other than hydrogen also seems like a bad idea to
me. They need a wire that is definitely inert, in hydrogen and other
conditions as similar to the active run as they can make them [...]


I didn't intend to enter into discussions whether their calibration 
approach is solid or not, just presenting the facts as they're coming in.


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Axil Axil]

*"If I want a small piece of beryllium that will fit in the well of an
Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy some
pieces like that."*
 This is wrong thinking. To get the most neutron intensity, a very thick
piece of beryllium (Be) is required to increase the probability of alpha
particle interaction with a Be atom.

A very thin piece of Be will not convert all the alphas to neutrons. After
the neutron is produced, it will not be absorbed by Be atoms so a thick
berillium tagret will not affect the neutron.
 Cheers: axil


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 5:28 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <> a...@lomaxdesign.com>a**b...@lomaxdesign.com > wrote:
>>
>> Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would it crush? There could be a
>> way to pull this off safely, with capture and proper disposal of any dust.
>> Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.
>>
>>
>> The problem is that you don't find out if it what you did was safe for
>> five years, and then you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.
>>
>
> The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. However, it's also being
> exaggerated here. If one is exposed to serious levels of airborn beryllium,
> which are pretty small, yes, even a subacute exposure have no symptoms for
> many years (sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very serious
> chronic disease. But the experience with beryllium was with workers at
> beryllium plants who were exposed to the material, at substantial levels,
> day after day, for years, and if those people contracted berylliosis,
> *then* there was a one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, like up
> to and including death.
>
> If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil and cut it with some
> snips, once or a few times, the chance of serious beryllium exposure is
> extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm not going to engage in
> without a lot more research, and possible some serious precautions. I'm
> going to experiment first with my solid piece of beryllium, which is very
> safe. As long as I don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other
> unwise things.
>
> I have children. I have utterly no willingness to risk their health. If I
> were to do anything more bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit
> on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I would not do it here. And I
> might easily not do it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium that
> will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to get maximum neutron flux, I
> might arrange to buy some pieces like that. There are places selling
> machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my cost by selling the
> pieces for exactly that application.
>
> The children will not be allowed to handle the beryllium. They will know
> about it, though, and they will know that it is dangerous. Even though it
> appears that one can swallow pieces of beryllium metal without harm, we
> will not run that experiment.
>
> Here is what I will say to anyone considering using beryllium. It's a
> totally cool substance, in many ways. However, anyone who is going to
> handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and take it very seriously. Many
> people have died from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.
>
> There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/*
> *2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/
>
> It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for jet aircraft brakes.
> That generates dust. I can see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air
> Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, as described in the
> f1fanatic site probably does not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust,
> or else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by
> testing.
>
> I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is reputed to be amazingly
> light, very palpably so. Source after source said that beryllium metal
> parts were not a problem, even while warning very seriously about dust
> (metal, oxide, or salts of beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not
> appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. They say that if a piece of
> beryllium is lodged beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a
> good idea, eh?
>

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 01:56 AM 12/8/2012, Axil Axil wrote:

IMHO, Beryllium does not need to be reformed in 
any way no matter what its original shape. It is 
a neutron moderator; most neutrons will pass 
right through it.  But some will be slowed if the beryllium is very thick.


The problem is that I have an Am-241 source which 
is a sheet of metal (steel?) with a circular 
ridge welded onto it. The Am-241 is in the well 
formed by the ridge. So if I place the beryllium 
on top of the ridge, it will be elevated from the 
source by ... okay, damn it! I'll go find the durn thing and measure it.


By some total miracle, I found the source in only a minute.

The well is about 0.7 mm deep.
It is about 2.3 mm diameter.
The range of Am-241 alphas. 5.5 MeV, in air, is about 4 cm.

Might not be a problem at all.

Let's see: 1  Ci = 3.7 × 104 disintegrations per 
second = 2.22 × 10^6 disintegrations per minute.


about half of these, if I understand the 
situation correctly, will be absorbed by the Be 
if it's sitting on top of the well. From 
Wikipedia, "a representative alpha-beryllium 
neutron source can be expected to produce 
approximately 30 neutrons for every one million alpha particles."


So, roughly, I'd expect rougly 33 neutrons per 
minute. I'd think they might be anisotropic, 
heading in more or less the same direction as the 
original alphas. Then I need to look at how many of these would be detected.


Using a bunch of detectors, I could look for anisotropy LR-115 is cheap.

I can detect fast neutrons through proton 
knock-on, that's an advertised usage for LR-115, 
and I have a boron-t10 converter screen which I 
can use to detect slow neutrons. Hey, this is 
cool: Am-241 -> alpha -> (Be9, alpha, C12, n) -> 
(B10, n, alpha). The key will be finding alphas 
on the other side of the Be ingot, and only with 
a B10 screen. Aside from that, just using direct 
neutrons, how many triple tracks will I find? 
Turns out they are really easy to spot, the 
alphas hit the LR-115 like a brick, they make 
really clear tracks, and three radiating from a 
point stands out clearly. Proton tracks are more 
subtle. And that's part of what I want to test.


So, now, how do I get a real proton source? My 
guess is that, realistically, if I want to 
calibrate my LR-115 for proton detection, I'll 
need to find someone willing to expose the 
material. Much easier, I'd think, to move a few 
tiny pieces of plastic film to a source, like a 
linear accelerator, than to move the source to the film 

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Jed Rothwell]

Akira Shirakawa  wrote:


> They need to try a fully inert
>> wire made from another substance, calibrating through the full range of
>> temperatures that the active wire exposed to.
>>
>
> They're doing it with a deactivated/inert Celani wire.
> After the calibration process they reactivate it by loading it with
> hydrogen.
>

They are doing this now? Or do you mean they did it before but those data
points are not published yet.

Calibrating with a gas other than hydrogen also seems like a bad idea to
me. They need a wire that is definitely inert, in hydrogen and other
conditions as similar to the active run as they can make them.

It is iron-clad rule that you need to calibrate through the full range of
conditions you run the active experiment in. I hope they have done that.
Without that, there is no proof this is not an instrument artifact.

Mel Miles use to calibrate with Pd which later become activated. It takes a
week or more of loading before it produces heat. During that week he would
run it a various power levels to calibrate. That is an acceptable method,
in my opinion. You can't do that with Ni, since it turns on quickly, if it
is going to work at all.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 01:51 AM 12/8/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 10:47 PM, Abd ul-Rahman 
Lomax <a...@lomaxdesign.com> wrote:


Would it cut cleanly, if thin enough, or would 
it crush? There could be a way to pull this off 
safely, with capture and proper disposal of any 
dust. Do it under water? Waste disposal? So ... maybe. But that's not for now.


The problem is that you don't find out if it 
what you did was safe for five years, and then 
you have a 1/3 chance of dying or being disabled.


The danger of beryllium is real and subtle. 
However, it's also being exaggerated here. If one 
is exposed to serious levels of airborn 
beryllium, which are pretty small, yes, even a 
subacute exposure have no symptoms for many years 
(sometimes 20) and can pop up years later as very 
serious chronic disease. But the experience with 
beryllium was with workers at beryllium plants 
who were exposed to the material, at substantial 
levels, day after day, for years, and if those 
people contracted berylliosis, *then* there was a 
one-third chance of a seriously harmful outcome, 
like up to and including death.


If I were to take a piece of thin beryllium foil 
and cut it with some snips, once or a few times, 
the chance of serious beryllium exposure is 
extremely small. And even that "bold move" I'm 
not going to engage in without a lot more 
research, and possible some serious precautions. 
I'm going to experiment first with my solid piece 
of beryllium, which is very safe. As long as I 
don't heat it seriously, or do any of a number of other unwise things.


I have children. I have utterly no willingness to 
risk their health. If I were to do anything more 
bold than allowing this piece of beryllium to sit 
on top of an Am-241 smoke detector source, I 
would not do it here. And I might easily not do 
it at all. If I want a small piece of beryllium 
that will fit in the well of an Am-241 source, to 
get maximum neutron flux, I might arrange to buy 
some pieces like that. There are places selling 
machined beryllium. And I'd attempt to recover my 
cost by selling the pieces for exactly that application.


The children will not be allowed to handle the 
beryllium. They will know about it, though, and 
they will know that it is dangerous. Even though 
it appears that one can swallow pieces of 
beryllium metal without harm, we will not run that experiment.


Here is what I will say to anyone considering 
using beryllium. It's a totally cool substance, 
in many ways. However, anyone who is going to 
handle it should study the MSDS guidance, and 
take it very seriously. Many people have died 
from contact with beryllium. Airborn, it is totally nasty.


There can be a bit of hysteria around it, see 
http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/02/08/banned-beryllium/


It's a judgment call. Beryllium has been used for 
jet aircraft brakes. That generates dust. I can 
see why people would get upset. Bad News for Air 
Force Mechanics. Beryllium for an engine piston, 
as described in the f1fanatic site probably does 
not emit serious beryllium in engine exhaust, or 
else the piston would wear out quickly. But that could be addressed by testing.


I'm looking forward to handling the metal, it is 
reputed to be amazingly light, very palpably so. 
Source after source said that beryllium metal 
parts were not a problem, even while warning very 
seriously about dust (metal, oxide, or salts of 
beryllium). Absorption through the skin does not 
appear to be a problem, doesn't seem to happen. 
They say that if a piece of beryllium is lodged 
beneath the skin, remove it... that does seem like a good idea, eh? 

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-08 22:01, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Those are the same data points shown in the other graph.


Indeed the graphs doesn't show this very clearly, but if you compare 
both of them carefully (check again!), in this case all data points are 
aligned with the linear/"no excess heat" trend line. This is because... 
[read below]



So, in other words, they are using the active wire at temperatures below
where the effect turns on, and this is their inert or blank calibration.


...actually, they make the active wire "inert" in a way that 
temperatures where the effect would normally show (the "con produzione" 
red data points) can be reached without excess heat production and used 
for calibration. No details on how this is achieved have been provided 
yet (although I expect they used a fully hydrogen-unloaded wire under an 
inert gas mixture).



That's not a good method, in my opinion. They need to try a fully inert
wire made from another substance, calibrating through the full range of
temperatures that the active wire exposed to.


They're doing it with a deactivated/inert Celani wire.
After the calibration process they reactivate it by loading it with 
hydrogen.


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Jed Rothwell]

Akira Shirakawa  wrote:


> In an update posted by Daniele Passerini on his 22passi blog, Ubaldo
> Mastromatteo, main author of this Celani effect replication at STM labs,
> forwarded a graph showing a [one of many?] calibration run:
>
> http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/**Grafico%20calibrazione%20test%**
> 20per%20Celani.pdf
>
> In short, by using different testing conditions which make the active wire
> "inert", they obtained a linear relationship of output power with
> temperature. Wire performance under conditions which make it "active" is
> then compared to this linear trend curve fit.
>

Those are the same data points shown in the other graph.

So, in other words, they are using the active wire at temperatures below
where the effect turns on, and this is their inert or blank calibration.

That's not a good method, in my opinion. They need to try a fully inert
wire made from another substance, calibrating through the full range of
temperatures that the active wire exposed to.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-07 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote:

I do not like this graph on page 2:

http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/2%20layers%20constantan%20wire%20EDX%20and%20extra%20heat.pdf

There are no calibration points above 0.5 W input, and no live run data
points below that. You have to have calibration points at the same power
levels as the live run. There has to be overlap. If your highest input
power during the live run is 4.6 W (as shown here) you have input 4.6 W
during the calibration, or better yet 5 W.


In an update posted by Daniele Passerini on his 22passi blog, Ubaldo 
Mastromatteo, main author of this Celani effect replication at STM labs, 
forwarded a graph showing a [one of many?] calibration run:


http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/Grafico%20calibrazione%20test%20per%20Celani.pdf

In short, by using different testing conditions which make the active 
wire "inert", they obtained a linear relationship of output power with 
temperature. Wire performance under conditions which make it "active" is 
then compared to this linear trend curve fit.


A relatively detailed description of how to read this and the previous 
graph (for those who didn't get it at first) and other clarifications on 
the status of this research at STMicroelectronics was also provided. 
It's in Italian, however. Those interested please use Google Translate 
at your own risk:


http://22passi.blogspot.it/2012/12/nuove-energie-nella-scuola-contributi-e.html?showComment=1354986585787#c7435918095815006356

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro trolling

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

At 06:23 AM 12/8/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
The pattern is obvious with this spinmiester.  It's always elevating 
some irrelevant aspect of the debate as if it were that important to 
the discussion.  A classic debate strategy I am aware of and quite 
franky, being employed by lomax with great skill.


Thanks.

Indeed, we are covering "irrelevant aspects of the debate," and the 
whole "debate" is irrelevant to the purpose of this list. These 
topics were brought up by Jojo, not by me.


Jojo is demonstrating what I've called paranoid thinking. That is, 
the paranoid thinks something is True. They have developed ten 
reasons why it is true, why it must be true. If, in debate, one of 
these reasons is shown, clearly, to be spurious, his opinion does not 
change; after all, he has nine other reasons.


If another reason is shown to be spurious, no problem. He has, after 
all, nine other reasons. The number of reasons does not decline. It 
demonstrates a certain way of thinking, where the "weight of 
evidence" is based on the number of arguments, and there is no 
turning off of individual arguments. It doesn't matter how silly they 
are. They stand.


And so when one of Jojo's tropes is exposed, he doesn't say, "oops! 
that was a mistake," he holds on to all of it, they are an arsenal, 
and he's not about to give up any ammunition. So, later, he brings it 
up again, as if *nothing had been said.* It truly is a waste of time 
to argue with him, if the purpose is to convince him of anything. The 
only sane purpose would be something other than that, to juxtapose 
better arguments with weaker ones, for example, for future 
generations of readers.


So, here we go with the birther claim.

In the matter of Obama qualifications.  Lomax throws in irrelevant 
facts to confuse the matter.


Notice: no irrelevant fact is cited. It's just a trope, a standard 
argument: call your opponent's arguments "irrelevant." Maybe it will 
irritate him.



But one thing is clear.


Okay, let's see if he states something clear.


If Obama has a valid Birth Certificate, why doesn't he simply release it.


That is far from a clear statement. It's a "how come" argument. And 
it rests on an assumption that is false.



   Not a faked scanned copy on the net.


Does Jojo expect to open up a file, and the original birth 
certificate falls out? What does he expect to be on the net other 
than a scanned copy?


As far as anything actually possible, the original Birth Certificate 
has been released. That is, original birth certificates never leave 
the archive. If someone asks me for my birth certificate, I don't go 
to the Registry of Births and ask for it, I ask for a "certified 
copy." That is legally equivalent.


I have copies of my birth certificate (from Los Angeles in the 40s). 
It was always a photocopy, and those were real photocopies. However, 
what made this a legal "birth certificate" was the seal and 
certification on it, testimony of the official that it was a true copy.


As to the facts about Obama's certificate, I researched all this 
previously, and reported it all. That had zero impacdt on Jojo. He's 
still making the same misleading claims and asking the same 
misleading question, "How come?"


Originally, Obama was asked to provide a copy of his birth 
certificate. So Hawaii issued him a certified copy. But Hawaii had 
gone to a computer system that prints a summary certificate, it omits 
some of the original information that is legally irrelevant. I think 
they don't want to touch the originals. But you can, with special 
permission, get a copy of the "vault" certificate. That is the 
original, real paper, real ink on the signatures, etc. After the 
birther drumbeat did not cease with the release of the certified copy 
(and note: if that certified copy was falsified in some way, there 
would be felonies being committed), Obama obtained a certified copy 
of the vault certificate. Printed. But, of course, printed from a 
scan. That's how copiers work nowadays. However, hopefully, that scan 
was not compressed. I lose track of some details here.


However, at the press conference, the original print was viewed by 
the press. And a scanned copy was released onto the internet. That 
scanned copy was, *by necessity* -- or the server would have crashed 
-- compressed. The compression algorithm creates certain artifacts, 
which amateur "sleuths" on the internet detected and used to claim 
that the document was forged. However, bottom line: this whole debate 
was very public. If somehow the real copy were altered to show false 
information, the officials that certified the copy would see it. Do 
we think they'd keep quiet about this?


No, if they were going to participate in a conspiracy, they'd do it 
in a much less detectable way: they would create an *original* that 
resembled a real certificate, and they would substitute it for the 
actual original, which would disappear. Difficult, but, remember, I'm 
not thinking "conspiracy

Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro trolling

[Abd ul-Rahman Lomax]

Hah! I see that when I added the tag to the subject, I mispelled Jojo Jaro

At 04:14 AM 12/8/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:


So, this libtard from Wisconsin claims that I do 
not have emotional maturity and that I am 10 or 
that I did not get feedback and all that 
crap.  O well, if I am a turd, what do you call 
somebody who keeps playing with a turd knowing full well its a turd.


Someone who is not willing to give up on the idea 
that a "turd" is a human being.


Foolish, perhaps. Jojo is giving us plenty of 
evidence that he wants us to think he's a turd.


Libtard claims that I am emotionally volatile, 
so why does he keep on provoking me other than 
to elicit a strong reaction from me.


Jojo would not understand the reason, but there are many possibilities.

1. It's so much fun.
2. We like watching Jojo make an idiot out of himself.
3. We have a hope (foolish?) that the pimple will finally pop.
4. We have nothing better to do at the time we write the post.
5. We have something better to do and we are avoiding doing it.
6. Just because.
7. We care.
8. ???

  This behavior from libtard seems to be what 
is classically defined as trolling.


It could be, were it not clearly provoked. 
Responding to trolling is not trolling. However, 
not all "insult" is trolling. The essence of 
trolling is an attempt to provoke outraged 
response. The sequence here began with something 
other than that, but Jojo responded to it as an 
insult. It could be argued that it was mildly 
insulting, but it clearly was not, from context, 
trolling. It was just a comment on what had just 
happened, and it did not insult, beyond calling 
Jojo a "bible fanatic." Is that an insult? It can 
be so. Am I a "cold fusion fanatic"?


Someone who said so would not necessarily be 
insulting me. They might just be describing how my behavior looks to them.


It is a clear pattern with this individual that 
he would say something to provoke me for the fun of it.


And then we might need to look at what "fun" 
means. Why would it be "fun" to poke at a bear in 
a cage? What I can say is that boys do this. It's 
juvenile human behavor. Some of us never grow up. 
Occasionally we poke the wrong bear, and we don't 
survive. Jojo seems to want us to think that he 
is that bear, because he threatens eye for an 
eye, or two eyes for an eye. That's why I don't 
agree with characterizations of Jojo as a 
Christian. His behavior is quite distinct from 
Christian behavior. He's hostile, pugnacious, and 
he retaliates, quickly and readily.


If he does really think he's a Christian, he is 
then the kind that his Lord will reject on the 
Day of Judgment; he might well read his Bible on 
that topic. The idea that "believing in Jesus" 
will wipe all sin, even sin continually committed 
after supposedly trusting Jesus, even defiant sin 
that attacks everyone and refuses to surrender to 
love, is surely naive or worse. It's actually evil.


 But it costs me little to throw an insult back 
so I indulge this retard, cause obviously, only 
a retard would continually provoke an "attack 
dog" knowing he'll be bitten each time he does.


So if you do it back, Jojo, surely, then, you 
understand it. Answer your own question. Why do *you* do it?


 One will clearly notice that I did not insult 
him in this thread until such time as he started insulting me.


Actually, he explored the implications of your 
logic, and tested your response. Jojo's claim to 
only be responding to others does not match the 
record. With regard to one sequence, I just 
posted an examination of that history. I just saw 
more. Basically, a speculation that wasn't aimed 
at Jojo was posted. And then Joho showed up and 
commented, with what had the effect of trolling, 
and matching the speculation. Jojo explicitly 
promised to "give back what he gets," but he 
gives back, always, more. Many times, I've 
directly examined his factual claims, and he 
responds with insults. He's very ready to claim 
that the posts of others are insults directed at 
him, but this much should be clear: he 
*deliberately* insults others. He's been quite explicit about that.


Here is what I wrote last night about Jojo's 
behavior, with links, contradicting his claim 
that he stops when others stop. Quite simply, he doesn't.


http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg73717.html

He takes everything written about him as an 
insult, if it isn't positive. Steven's exercise 
with the name Jojo was obviously not serious, he 
was simply applying the kind of logic Jojo uses 
in his claims about "truth." He found evidence 
that "Jojo" was an African name, and other 
evidence that it was the name of a pet, so ... he 
wrote that Jojo was obviously a black dog. And 
then he cited the cartoon about, "On the 
internet, nobody knows that you are a dog," with 
a very interesting exchange being present on the 
site hosting the cartoon, about net behavior.


People have written things about me, like that. 
"Enemies" have do

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[David Roberson]

You are making excellent points Jed.  I likewise am concerned that the results 
appear too orderly, but I could modify my thoughts if enough information about 
calibration were presented.  It would be very useful if these guys released the 
amount and quality of data that is coming from the MFMP.  It takes a lot of 
effort to uncover the hidden processes and without several examples to operate 
on one is left wondering whether or not this example is an artifact.


I can not help but to wonder why a curve fit was not conducted upon the data 
since it obviously is not linear.  If it can be proven that the device 
calibrates to a straight line without excess power then perhaps so.



Dave



-Original Message-
From: Jed Rothwell 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Sat, Dec 8, 2012 10:46 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's 
constantan wires


Akira Shirakawa  wrote:

 
Combining data from the table on the left and the new graph (and some plausible 
assumptions) I managed to plot a graph of input power vs excess power:

http://i.imgur.com/L9CV7.png

At the highest point it's 21.8% more output power than the input.



Good job.


Again, this gives me a bad feeling. The curve is too smooth. Too predictable. 
Cold fusion excess heat never happens in a fixed ratio compared to input, or as 
a varying function of input. It is not predictable. With powder, you see 
nothing at low temperatures, and then it appears, but it fluctuates.


This kind of smooth, predictable-looking curve is characteristic of an 
artifact. I am not saying it is an artifact for sure, but it makes me 
uncomfortable.


As I said yesterday, above all, they need calibration data in the same range as 
the anomalous heat. That would put to rest most of my concerns.


- Jed



 

Re: [Vo]:Next Big Future..LENR Photogaphs

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-08 17:40, Ron Kita wrote:

Greetings Vortex-L

I just saw the photographs:
http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/12/lenr-transmutation-replication-and.html

Did Vortex show this before?


Yes; see thread:

[Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's 
constantan wires

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg73573.html

Or:

[Vo]:Probable Celani replication
http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg73622.html

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Teslaalset]

Another thing I wonder is whether STM obtained the piece of wire from
Celani or did the pre-processing by them selves using a different type of
constantan wire. The briefing seems not very clear on that.


On Sat, Dec 8, 2012 at 4:46 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Akira Shirakawa  wrote:
>
>
>> Combining data from the table on the left and the new graph (and some
>> plausible assumptions) I managed to plot a graph of input power vs excess
>> power:
>>
>> http://i.imgur.com/L9CV7.png
>>
>> At the highest point it's 21.8% more output power than the input.
>>
>
> Good job.
>
> Again, this gives me a bad feeling. The curve is too smooth. Too
> predictable. Cold fusion excess heat never happens in a fixed ratio
> compared to input, or as a varying function of input. It is not
> predictable. With powder, you see nothing at low temperatures, and then it
> appears, but it fluctuates.
>
> This kind of smooth, predictable-looking curve is characteristic of an
> artifact. I am not saying it is an artifact for sure, but it makes me
> uncomfortable.
>
> As I said yesterday, above all, they need calibration data in the same
> range as the anomalous heat. That would put to rest most of my concerns.
>
> - Jed
>
>

[Vo]:The Kiplinger Letter, Dec 7, 2012, Excerpts on TECHNOLOGY & ENERGY:

[OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

ENERGY (exerpt):

 

Look for a wave of new, small nuclear reactors to enter service in a decade.
A merging of interests.electric utilities' need to replace old coal-fired
production units and steel manufacturers' desire to supply the new market.is
giving nukes new life. Lehigh Heavy Forge of Pa. will supply vessels for
Babcock & Wilcox nuclear reactors. They'll be the first such structures from
a U.S. steelmaker in 30 years. The units, now under development at
N.C.-based Babcock & Wilcox and NuScale of Ore., can be preassembled and
delivered via rail or ship. They generate only a fraction of the output of
traditional plants, but the cost per unit of output compares favorably. Plus
their small size means they are easier to site near existing transmission
lines.

 

TECHNOLOGY:

 

Uncle Sam is pulling out all the stops to advance battery technology.

 

A new partnership between the Dept. of Energy's network of national labs,
university researchers and private firms will spend up to $120 million over
five years to mastermind batteries of the future. The goal: Cut costs and
boost energy storage.

 

Call it the moon landing of battery research. The country's top chemists
will rethink fundamental battery design, with engineers turning the
resulting insights into real-world prototypes and venture capitalists
deciding how to commercialize them. The focus will be on promising but
untried chemical ingredients, such as magnesium and yttrium. Both
potentially have far higher energy storage capacity than lithium.

 

Many industries stand to benefit.autos, renewable power, electronics, etc.
The high cost and limited staying power of today's batteries are the twin
barriers to affordable electric vehicles. And to compete with coal and
natural gas, solar and wind power need efficient storage of electricity
that's produced ahead of need.

 

Though pricey, backup batteries for solar power systems will gain favor in
the wake of Hurricane Sandy, which forced many rooftop solar panels off-line
to protect workers from shocks as they fixed damaged power lines. Most folks
with solar systems ended up in the dark just when they most needed backup
power.

 

Emergency batteries can make a rooftop system truly independent of the
electric grid during outages. Solar-panel-generated electricity that's
stored in the batteries can power lights and other equipment during extended
blackouts.

 

 

* * * *

 

Personal Thoughts:

 

Predictably, I've yet to see the slightest hint of any kind of "CF/LENR"
discussion within this subscription service. Apparently, any kind of private
discussion concerning "CF/LENR" R&D, if there has been any, has not yet
risen to a point where the editors feel it warrants being brought up to
their subscriber base. It's been my experience that this subscription
service tends to be very conservative when it comes to subjects like ENERGY.
They cater primarily to the business world. Nevertheless, in my experience
the subscription service does have a good track record in sniffing out a lot
of political innuendo that eventually spills out into the public domain.
sometimes months or even years in advance.

 

Subscribe to the news service to get more interesting & timely data.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

 

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Jed Rothwell]

Akira Shirakawa  wrote:


> Combining data from the table on the left and the new graph (and some
> plausible assumptions) I managed to plot a graph of input power vs excess
> power:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/L9CV7.png
>
> At the highest point it's 21.8% more output power than the input.
>

Good job.

Again, this gives me a bad feeling. The curve is too smooth. Too
predictable. Cold fusion excess heat never happens in a fixed ratio
compared to input, or as a varying function of input. It is not
predictable. With powder, you see nothing at low temperatures, and then it
appears, but it fluctuates.

This kind of smooth, predictable-looking curve is characteristic of an
artifact. I am not saying it is an artifact for sure, but it makes me
uncomfortable.

As I said yesterday, above all, they need calibration data in the same
range as the anomalous heat. That would put to rest most of my concerns.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-08 11:15, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

I attempted to reinterpret the (new) graph on page 2 to make it easier
to understand. I admit that at first I had almost no idea of what it was
trying to convey. Now I think I do:

http://i.imgur.com/A0OBf.png


Combining data from the table on the left and the new graph (and some 
plausible assumptions) I managed to plot a graph of input power vs 
excess power:


http://i.imgur.com/L9CV7.png

At the highest point it's 21.8% more output power than the input.

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro trolling

[Jojo Jaro]

The pattern is obvious with this spinmiester.  It's always elevating some 
irrelevant aspect of the debate as if it were that important to the 
discussion.  A classic debate strategy I am aware of and quite franky, being 
employed by lomax with great skill.


In the matter of Obama qualifications.  Lomax throws in irrelevant facts to 
confuse the matter.  But one thing is clear.  If Obama has a valid Birth 
Certificate, why doesn't he simply release it.   Not a faked scanned copy on 
the net.  Lomax likes to argue that based on his "expertise" in computer 
compression algorithm, (notice that lomax claims to be an expert in a lot of 
things.)   the scanned BC was not fake.  If he is so confident about that, 
why doesn't he call for the release of the vault record from Hawaii. 
Clearly, if it exists since they proportedly made a scan of it and presented 
it, they should present it since there is no other information in there 
worth hiding if they did in fact scan it as they claim.  The 
messiah-in-chief can quickly end the birther movement with one stroke, yet 
he persist on letting it linger.  What kind of leader is that?  Instead of 
healing the nation, he continually pokes the wound to keep it raw and sore. 
Some great leader eh?


In the matter of Allah being a moon god.  Lomax expertly and deftly 
attempted to deflect this true criticism by employing irrelevant name 
meanings.  The name of someone has very little to do with what that person 
really is.  But lomax expertly claims that because allah does not mean "moon 
god" that he is not the mood god.  Like I said, a simple study of islamic 
history will show that allah was muhammed's tribe moon god that was promoted 
to be the universal god.  Lomax criticizes me for not providing references. 
That is deliberate on my part.  I do not provide references precisely for 
the reason that I want people to do their own research.  Any reference I 
cite will be rejected as biased anyways, so why bother.  But do your own 
research and you will see that I speak the truth.  Allah is the mood god of 
muhammed's tribe.


In the matter of muhammed's "dozens of wives", lomax once again attempts to 
divert the attention to what really is the crux of this argument.  When a 
man has intercourse with a woman, the marriage is completed and consumated 
whether on not there was a cermony or not.  Clearly this was illustrated 
clearly in the marriage of Isaac with Rebekkah and the marriage of Adam with 
Eve.  None of these involved any ceremony.  In fact, if you look at Jacob. 
Jacob had 2 wives Leah and Rachel, but he also had 2 of what we would call 
concubines - Bilhah and Zilphah.  He had children with these 2 concubines 
and were always considered part of his family.  The Bible treated Bilhah and 
Ziphah as proper wives though no ceremony was involved.  Even our modern 
laws recognize intercourse as the definition of marriage.  In our laws, a 
person is not officially marriage to another "until" such time as the 
marriage is "consumated".  Similary, If a man cohabitates with a woman, they 
are recognized as married even without any ceremony.  We call it "common law 
wives".  The record is clear.  Muhammed's appetite for women as sex  toys, 
even girls as young as 9 years old, is both legendary and well documented 
even by muslim scholars.  This is a source of great embarassment to muslims 
and people like lomax always try to spin it away with lengthy esasys to 
confuse the issue.


Frankly, I don't see the appeal of worshipping a second rate moon god with a 
pedophile prophet as the leader.  But, that's just me.  LOL 



Jojo


BTW, the koran teaches that a man should only have 4 wives.  This "great" 
leader can't even follow his own propaganda.  Some great leader eh?
And, anybody can confirm everything I've said here, if you don't consider 
Wikipedia as your final authoritative source. LOL ...






- Original Message - 
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" 

To: ; 
Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 10:21 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro 
trolling




At 03:49 PM 12/7/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
10 for effort there spinmiester, self-appointed physics expert who do not 
have a physics degree or any degree for that matter; and now 
self-appointed arabic etymology expert.


Well, in physics I state the obvious, and I do as well so with respect to 
Arabic etymology. Generally, when I'm in the company of experts, literally 
or on a mailing list, they correct me when I'm wrong, and they can tell me 
exactly where I err. Now, Jojo Jaro might think he has a better physics 
education than I, though I did sit with Richard P. Feymnan for two years 
at Caltech. He is correct that I don't have a degree. However, it's 
totally irrelevant. I don't assert authority from degrees or "superior 
knowledge." I just say what I see and understand.


I do the same with everything, including the behavior of writers on 
mailing lists. And I cite evidence, I

Re: [Vo]:Independent validation of thermal anomalies from Celani's constantan wires

[Akira Shirakawa]

On 2012-12-07 16:02, Jed Rothwell wrote:

I do not like this graph on page 2:

http://www.22passi.it/pirelli/2%20layers%20constantan%20wire%20EDX%20and%20extra%20heat.pdf


I attempted to reinterpret the (new) graph on page 2 to make it easier 
to understand. I admit that at first I had almost no idea of what it was 
trying to convey. Now I think I do:


http://i.imgur.com/A0OBf.png

Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro trolling

[Jojo Jaro]

So, this libtard from Wisconsin claims that I do not have emotional maturity 
and that I am 10 or that I did not get feedback and all that crap.  O well, if 
I am a turd, what do you call somebody who keeps playing with a turd knowing 
full well its a turd.

Libtard claims that I am emotionally volatile, so why does he keep on provoking 
me other than to elicit a strong reaction from me.  This behavior from libtard 
seems to be what is classically defined as trolling.   It is a clear pattern 
with this individual that he would say something to provoke me for the fun of 
it.  But it costs me little to throw an insult back so I indulge this retard, 
cause obviously, only a retard would continually provoke an "attack dog" 
knowing he'll be bitten each time he does.   One will clearly notice that I did 
not insult him in this thread until such time as he started insulting me.  It 
is quite easy to go back the archive record and see that every insult I've 
directed at this libtard is always a response to a recent insult to me from 
him.  No need to argue and spin it.  The archive records speak for itself in 
this matter.

Moreover, not only did he make an insult with "dog"; he made it racists by 
calling it "black".  What is the difference between a black dog and a dog of 
any other color.  Alll dogs generally behave the same.  So the post qualifying 
"black" to "dog" is clearly a racists attempt to paint me as some radical and 
stereotype all black people as violent uncontrollable dogs.  The intent was 
obvious.

This trolling from libtard needs to be stopped by banning him.  Banning him 
would solve two problems - his trolling and his repeated and blatant disregard 
for the rules with his incessant off-topic posting.


Jojo


  - Original Message - 
  From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2012 2:57 PM
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:How bad is this news? Jed Rothwell -> about Jaro Jaro 
trolling


  From Dave,

   

  ...

   

  > Jojo has strong Christian beliefs that we all should respect.  I am

  > sure there are other religions represented here that should be

  > equally treated.

   

  Just to be clear, it is not Jojo's religious beliefs that I am challenging. 
It is Jojo's inappropriate posting behavior that needs to be addressed.

   

  Some time ago I realized I that had had enough of Mr. Jaro's philosophy on 
life. As others have already done I chose to route his email into my kill file. 
Nevertheless, I continue to get snippets of diatribes when others repeat 
portions of his text within their own replies. The latest conversation, this 
one concerning what I presume are hidden meanings behind the word "Allah", as 
discussed between Mr. Jaro and Mr. Lomax, seem to indicate that at least from 
Mr. Jaro's perspective there exists some unsavory meanings attributed to the 
name "Allah". However… I suspect the true meaning of "Allah" has very little to 
do with what is really upsetting Jojo, but I'll get to that later.

   

  After pondering Lomax’s post I found myself wondering what would happen if I 
decided to perform some intentionally creative research of my own on the name 
of "Jojo". Eventually, I came up with a couple of definitions that suited my 
objectives of intentionally and with pre-thought, implying that the name "Jojo" 
could possibly mean something less respectful than that of a human being. It 
seems to me that if Jojo felt justified in casting doubt over the meanings of 
the word "Allah", then surely the name of "Jojo" ought to be fair game as well.

   

  I proceeded to assemble a collection of "definitions" that I made sure anyone 
could readily go out to the Internet and confirm, as well as challenge. The 
point being, however creative or misleading my personal interpretations might 
have been, I didn't pluck the meanings & definitions completely out of my own 
ass. My exercise in name-definitions was to show how easy it is to assemble and 
misconstrue a collection of meanings attributed to a name. It was also to show 
how idiotic it can be to come up with a ridiculous bunch of misleading 
definitions.

   

  I suspected Jojo would not let my exercise of stand without comment so I made 
sure to watch for his response. Indeed, I found his response.

   

  It was of little concern to me that I was called me a "retard". (I've been 
called worse, as has Mr. Obama.) What interested me was the fact that Mr. Jaro 
did not seem to pick up on the fact that my exercise was an attempt to show how 
moronic it is for anyone to assemble a bunch of definitions that had been 
blithely pulled out of the Internet in order to support a personally contrived 
meaning behind the name of "Jojo".

   

  This may be a subtle point that some on this list may not have gotten, so let 
me once again clarify my objective.

   

  I attempted to show how idiotic it would be for anyone to assemble a 
mish-mash of definitions in an effort to suppor

Re: [Vo]:Unobtainium and Beryllium (Belynium?)

[Susanna Gipp]

Actually I heard that in Savona (Italy) University they found a rare
isotope of Beryllium. They named it Belynium an there are strong suspects
that (along Unobtainium) is part of Rossi's and Defkalion catalyzer secret
mixture.
As soon I found it I'll post the related paper.




2012/12/7 Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 

> At 05:02 PM 12/6/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Yes, a more powerful reaction would be nice, but we must work with what
>> we have, as Abd stresses. We will die of old age if we sit around waiting
>> UPS to deliver a $1.5 million package of unobtainium.
>>
>
> It's coming? And the reward of patience is ... patience.
>
> Actually, I asked for $1.5 million so I could *attempt to obtain* this
> crucial material. That would include my overhead, travel expenses, etc. You
> don't think it's easy to buy unobtainium, do you?
>
> If we actually find some, we might need to go back for more funding to
> actually purchase it.
>
> However, the bright side: unobtainium is expected to be simply a catalyst.
> So it will not be destroyed in the experiments, and we could resell it.
> Given how much work it will have taken to find the material, we could
> probably break it down into smaller pieces and resell them to recover the
> funding, with the profit from resale covering the initial outlay.
>
> Actually, seriously, I just bought a bit over 5 grams of beryllium metal,
> 99.9% pure,on eBay for $37. What I really wanted was a very small piece of
> beryllium foil, but was I patient? No
>
> Did I ask if someone had a small piece they could spare? No
>
> I found how insanely expensive beryllium foil was and assumed that
> beryllium itself must be so as well. No, I paid a reasonable price, it
> turns out, for 5 grams. However, what I really want is a tiny piece that I
> can fit in the well of an Am-241 ionization source from a smoke detector,
> because the conversion rate for alphas to neutrons by Be-9 is very low, and
> so getting the beryllium as close as possible to the alpha source is
> desirable. In commercial Am-Be neutron sources, they actually blend the Be
> and Am oxide. And they use a thousand times as much Am-241, i.e., one
> mCurie, instead of the 0.9 uCurie in a smoke detector source.
>
> (My goal is to test LR-115 SSNTD material for neutron detection. I had the
> naive idea that I might be able to bash the Beryllium metal with a hammer
> to make a thin foil, then cut a piece. Maybe. Probably not a great idea.
> Beryllium is very hard, it might shatter. I don't want to use machining or
> cutting techniques that would create small fragments, turning my apartment
> or basement into a hazardous waste area. I may try using this little ingot
> directly, and maybe the Be itself will multiply the neutrons a bit. But any
> ideas?)
>