Re: [Vo]:The hydrino.is discovered.
Mill's present and future- as creator of a new energy source will be decided at nd by the CIHT Technology. see http://www.blacklightpower.com/wp-content/uploads/presentations/TechnicalPresentation.pdf It seems that the essential action- scale up and intensification is going more slowly than planned. Let's hope Randy will invent CIHT+ the decisive step toward industrial success and will go from mW to MW. Peter On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Axil Axil wrote: > > http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/10/new-type-of-quantum-excitation-behaves-like-a-solitary-particle/ > > > New type of quantum excitation behaves like a solitary particle, a real > particle. > > They call it a "leviton", we know this fractional charged soliton as a > hydrino. > > What does Mills do now? > -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:The hydrino.is discovered.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/10/new-type-of-quantum-excitation-behaves-like-a-solitary-particle/ New type of quantum excitation behaves like a solitary particle, a real particle. They call it a "leviton", we know this fractional charged soliton as a hydrino. What does Mills do now?
RE: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works.
Thx Fran! RE: Ether never really left but nice to see it returning to center stage. It never left in reality, but it most certainly did as far as mainstream physics is, or was, concerned RE: HUP HUP is only a result of having to measure the weight of one of those angels on the head of the pin, with an 18-wheeler truck scale Really miss being able to contribute to the Collectives discussions on a regular basis, but I do keep tabs on the streaming consciousnesses Hope all is well on your side of the planet! -mark From: Frank roarty [mailto:fr...@roarty.biz] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 5:42 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works. Mark, Nicely said! Ether never really left but nice to see it returning to center stage. Changes in this ether / vacuum density due to nano geometry can however polarize - segregate larger pockets of altered vacuum pressure encompassing entire atoms and molecules and when these atoms or molecules happen to be of gas that is still being pushed around by vacuum fluctuations at the HUP level the stage is set for exploiting gas motion to propel them through DCE. IMHO a self assembled HUP trap capable of discounting disassociation and producing thermal energy. Fran From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:49 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works. Like Ive been saying for years, coherent, dipole-like oscillations of an isolated volume of the vacuum "If you take a snapshot of the position of electrons in a FQH state they appear random and you think you have a liquid," says Wen. Makes perfect sense if the snapshot (by a really, really fast strobe-light) is not occurring at the same frequency as the oscillation youre trying to observe; which is most assuredly the case here. It could also be strobing at a multiple, or sub-harmonic of that frequency. Sub, is what will happen first since we are getting close with attosecond physics. "But if you follow the motion of the electrons, you see that, unlike in a liquid, the electrons dance around each other in a well organized manner and form a global dancing pattern." If you are able to adjust the frequency AND phase of the strobe-light, then you could easily follow the motion, and youd see that its motion was not random at all Electric and/or magnetic fields oriented properly would also restrict that oscillation to a limited area. "What if electrons were not elementary, but were the ends of long strings in a string-net liquid which becomes our space?" The electron and the electron-hole are opposite ends of a dipole-like oscillation!!! If you take a dipole, and pivot it at its center, free to rotate on all three axes, it will APPEAR to be an orbital (at least the innermost one). When you add additional dipole-oscillations (aka, electrons) to an atom, they restrict each others motion and we get the familiar orbital shapes. These guys just have to explain it using a framework that they know best, which is string theory Normally, electrons prefer to have their spins to be in the opposite direction to that of their immediate neighbors, Like, DUH Because the like-ends of the dipole will repel each other, so only complementary (180degs out of phase) oscillations will pair up. So they prefer this state, but in a solid its not the norm; however, in a gas, they are pretty much free from neighbor interactions. This is also a simple *realistic* explanation for how two valence alectrons pair-up to form Cooper Pairs ya know, VIOLATING one of the tenets of physics which is like charges repel. Oh, but well make an exception and just give it a new name... So in their theory elementary particles are not the fundamental building blocks of matter. Instead, they emerge as defects or whirlpools in the deeper organized structure of space-time. Like Ive been saying for years, coherent, dipole-like oscillations of an isolated volume of the vacuum Ok, not exactly the same wording as mine, but theyll come around ;-) Wen and Levin found that, in a state of string-net liquid, the motion of string-nets correspond to a wave that behaved according to a very famous set of equations -- Maxwell's equations! A hundred and fifty years after Maxwell wrote them down, ether -- a medium that produces those equations -- was finally found." says Wen. Behold the rebirth of aether physics -Mark Iverson From: Rich Murray [mailto:rmfor...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 7:08 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; Rich Murray; Joshua Cude Subject: Re: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works. http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/NSart-wen.html New Scientist published an article about string-net theory and unification of light and electrons. The following is my mod
Re: [Vo]:2014 History of Cold Fusion Calendar Available Now!
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Ruby wrote: cold fusion, LENR, LANR, AHE, quantum fusion, and HENI. > Maybe CFLLAQFH? Eric
Re: [Vo]:House of cards - the "big bang" model...
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Jones Beene wrote: A galaxy red-shifted to appear 30 billion years old is "really" much younger > when you apply the funky logic of "inflation" Kinda sounds like voodoo > economics to me. > Another variable in the abstract subject to creative bookeeping -- seems the rate of star formation was 100 times greater in the galaxies surveyed than that of the Milky Way. Personally, I do not mind a little creative accounting in astronomy if it prevents our understanding from falling completely apart. It is in business that cooking the books really bothers me. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: If they had something like a commercial prototype years ago, suitable for > testing, why are they still working with this crude gadget? > I recall seeing a link to slides somewhere on this list with advice to people giving demos -- something to the effect that you should demo an earlier model rather than your latest one. Eric
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:24:57 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] > >That would certainly explain the mystery. I have read some of the thoughts >about the lack of interaction, but others studies suggest that they do. I >recall some of the coding tricks that have been tested that prevent >interception of messages without detection of the tap. These techniques >appear valid. They are valid. But you don't need interaction to make them valid. When entangled particles are created they have perfectly correlated properties (i.e. they are "strongly" correlated). When a tap occurs, the properties of one of the pair will be altered, so it will no longer correlate with the other, and the tap will be detected. (As soon as you detect an error in my logic, please let me know! :) [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
By the way, there is NOTHING wrong with a crude prototype device. See the first transistor: http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/talk/transistor.gif An early Diesel engine, probably better than the prototype that exploded: http://image.dieselpowermag.com/f/features/0912dp_rudolph_diesel/25492076/0912dp_02%2Brudolph_diesel%2Bsingle_cylinder_diesel_engine.jpg See any airplane made before 1912, especially the improbable ones such as this, designed by Alexander Graham Bell: http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/up%20to%20WW%201/images/3a.jpg Not one of his better efforts. We don't need practical devices at this stage. We need working devices that can be tested. No one should care whether a device is practical or not. If we can persuade the public this is real, billions of dollars will be spent converting today's crude prototypes into practical devices. - Jed
[Vo]:Dispute between Nature and Britannica over Wikipedia
Okay, this is "inside baseball," meaning it is only of interest only to aficionados but . . . Years ago the journal Nature claimed that Wikipedia is nearly as reliable as Britannica. This article calls that finding into question: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/23/britannica_wikipedia_nature_study/ I do not know how reliable this article is. The article says that the staff at Britannica objected to the Nature article. Quote: "'Almost everything about the journal's investigation, from the criteria for identifying inaccuracies to the discrepancy between the article text and its headline, was wrong and misleading,' says Britannica. 'Dozens of inaccuracies attributed to the Britannica were not inaccuracies at all, and a number of the articles Nature examined were not even in the Encyclopedia Britannica. The study was so poorly carried out and its findings so error-laden that it was completely without merit.' In one case, for example. Nature's peer reviewer was sent only the 350 word introduction to a 6,000 word Britannica article on lipids - which was criticized for containing omissions." . . . This sounds like the same Nature we know and love. See, for example, my paper: "How Nature refused to re-examine the 1989 CalTech experiment." http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJhownaturer.pdf - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
Alain Sepeda wrote: I agree that Elforsk and all evidence we have don't eliminate the risk that > E-cat does not work well... that it is unstable, unreliable, or have > problems... > Yes. On the contrary, the ELFORSK paper shows that it is unstable. It melted! The Hotcat version is clearly not ready for commercial use. I do not know whether the low temperature versions are ready. Frankly, I doubt they are. I do not think any cold fusion device should be allowed on the market until production line models have been subjected to millions of hours of testing in hundreds of different labs and places like Underwriter's Laboratory. We do not allow automobiles to be sold until they have been crash tested. Those tests cost many millions of dollars for each model. It is a small price to pay for automobile safety. The notion that cold fusion devices can be sold to corporations or individuals now, in this primitive state of development, is a reflection of the amateur status of the research. If Rossi and the people at Defkalion seriously believe they might start sales in a year or two, even before they crank out a few thousand devices to be safety tested, they are either naive, ignorant of safety standards, or they are trying to sell investors a bill of goods. Defkalion used to claim their devices were being safety tested by the Greek government. I didn't believe it then, and I sure don't believe it now, having seen their demonstration. Who on earth would test that for safety!? We can't even be sure it is working, given the problems measuring the flow rate. It is a crude, laboratory prototype. If they had something like a commercial prototype years ago, suitable for testing, why are they still working with this crude gadget? I will grant it is no more crude or unreliable than any other cold fusion device, but no government agency would subject it to consumer product safety testing. That's absurd. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
That would certainly explain the mystery. I have read some of the thoughts about the lack of interaction, but others studies suggest that they do. I recall some of the coding tricks that have been tested that prevent interception of messages without detection of the tap. These techniques appear valid. And then, there have been experiments reported where entanglements are transferred between distantly located particles which would seem to be impossible unless valid throughout the entire system. This entire subject is bazaar and leads to strange behavior. But then again, gravity is a tad bit strange as well. Dave -Original Message- From: mixent To: vortex-l Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2013 5:12 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:04:58 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >As I have mentioned before, the speed at which entangled particles interact appears to be infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. > >If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should gravitational interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement to untangle this mess. :) > >Dave Entangled particles only appear to have an infinite speed limit because it is assumed that they interact. They don't. The only interaction occurs at the moment of their creation. This explanation completely does away with the mystery. (Perhaps the reason that no one likes it? ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
If you read M theory they believe gravity may "leak" from one dimension to another as closed oscillating strings. This is why I believe our solar brane is leaking energetic strings in our solar wind and we interpret them as weather disturbances as they decay overhead and around us in jet streams and low pressure troughs in our atmosphere. On Wednesday, October 23, 2013, Craig wrote: > On 10/23/2013 05:04 PM, David Roberson wrote: > > Is there any evidence that gravitational waves travel at the speed of > > light? As far as I know, that velocity is merely assumed by > > Einstein. This may not be true since there are no measurements of the > > components of gravity such as magnetic and electric fields which > > define the speed of electromagnetic radiation. As I have mentioned > > before, the speed at which entangled particles interact appears to be > > infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. > > > > If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should > > gravitational interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement > > to untangle this mess. :) > > > > Dave > > > > I saw a study done a couple of years ago, and I don't remember the > procedure, but they concluded that gravity travels at the speed of > light, with a margin of error of plus or minus 50%. > > Craig > >
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
I would like to see how this measurement was performed. Does anyone else recall the source? Dave -Original Message- From: Craig To: vortex-l Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2013 5:09 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable On 10/23/2013 05:04 PM, David Roberson wrote: > Is there any evidence that gravitational waves travel at the speed of > light? As far as I know, that velocity is merely assumed by > Einstein. This may not be true since there are no measurements of the > components of gravity such as magnetic and electric fields which > define the speed of electromagnetic radiation. As I have mentioned > before, the speed at which entangled particles interact appears to be > infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. > > If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should > gravitational interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement > to untangle this mess. :) > > Dave > I saw a study done a couple of years ago, and I don't remember the procedure, but they concluded that gravity travels at the speed of light, with a margin of error of plus or minus 50%. Craig
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
In reply to David Roberson's message of Wed, 23 Oct 2013 17:04:58 -0400 (EDT): Hi, [snip] >As I have mentioned before, the speed at which entangled particles interact >appears to be infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. > >If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should gravitational >interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement to untangle this mess. >:) > >Dave Entangled particles only appear to have an infinite speed limit because it is assumed that they interact. They don't. The only interaction occurs at the moment of their creation. This explanation completely does away with the mystery. (Perhaps the reason that no one likes it? ;) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
On 10/23/2013 05:04 PM, David Roberson wrote: > Is there any evidence that gravitational waves travel at the speed of > light? As far as I know, that velocity is merely assumed by > Einstein. This may not be true since there are no measurements of the > components of gravity such as magnetic and electric fields which > define the speed of electromagnetic radiation. As I have mentioned > before, the speed at which entangled particles interact appears to be > infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. > > If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should > gravitational interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement > to untangle this mess. :) > > Dave > I saw a study done a couple of years ago, and I don't remember the procedure, but they concluded that gravity travels at the speed of light, with a margin of error of plus or minus 50%. Craig
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
Is there any evidence that gravitational waves travel at the speed of light? As far as I know, that velocity is merely assumed by Einstein. This may not be true since there are no measurements of the components of gravity such as magnetic and electric fields which define the speed of electromagnetic radiation. As I have mentioned before, the speed at which entangled particles interact appears to be infinite and not limited by electromagnetic rules. If entangled particles have no speed limit, why should gravitational interaction be restricted? We need a firm measurement to untangle this mess. :) Dave -Original Message- From: Hamdi Ucar To: vortex-l Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2013 3:57 pm Subject: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable "How Did Supermassive Black Holes Grow So Big?" http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131023090952.htm Gravitational waves are never found, even there is no encouraging clue. GW possibly does not exist becuase c is not alimit. It is a comedy to give the 'upper limit' argument of non existing GW in BH (non)observations. Of course: Absence of evidanceis not evidence of absence.
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
I agree that Elforsk and all evidence we have don't eliminate the risk that E-cat does not work well... that it is unstable, unreliable, or have problems... what this article rules out is that e-cat does not exist, is not working at all, is a fraud... of course some will try to stick on their position taht it is a fraud, because if it is not a fraud, it mean that LENr is real, and that the physicists claims in 89 were absurds, and all the others claims who parroted the initial ones, were absurds parroting with less and less excuse with time passing. in fact this "less and less excuse" explain the desperate delusion... they are like the last square of soldiers who know that they will die in the battle, because they will have too many opponents blood on their hand. denying LENr today is pff... you can be prudent, careful, expert murphism, denounce exaggerations... but denying all is denialism. 2013/10/23 Jed Rothwell > Blaze Spinnaker wrote: > > Impressive. Looks like Elforsk has decided that the May report has >> some merit. >> > > As noted they already said that in the previous press release: "The > measurements show that the catalyst gives substantially more energy than > can be explained by ordinary chemical reactions." I doubt they would have > approved the Levi paper acknowledgement for publication if they did not > think it has merit. (I mean they would have asked Levi et al. to remove > their name from the paper.) Organizations such as ELFORSK and EPRI are > careful about what they endorse. > > > >> This is definitely an event which increases the probability of what Rossi >> is doing will work. >> > > You mean this increases your confidence that what Rossi is doing will > work. The actual likelihood that it will work depends on physics, and on > Rossi's skill. > > I agree this boosts Rossi's credibility. The actual EFORSK report was a > bigger boost, but this helps. I look forward to the overview in this > month's edition of the "Perspectives." This is good for cold fusion. > > - Jed > >
[Vo]:2014 History of Cold Fusion Calendar Available Now!
Greetings, For a second year, I have made a calendar that showcases the incredible achievements in the field of cold fusion, LENR, LANR, AHE, quantum fusion, and HENI. This year's "theme" is schools and colleges with faculty who have pursued experimental research, and gotten students involved. There were many revisions, but the final photos are tremendous. You can purchase a calendar and support our work at Cold Fusion Now AND get a great gift for the holidays! The calendars are suitable for sending to friends, family, industry and agency. They are a great promotional tool for education and advocacy. Read more about it here: http://coldfusionnow.org/2014-history-of-cold-fusion-calendar-available-now/ Order a calendar and have it mailed to your door here: http://coldfusionnow.org/store/2014-history-of-cold-fusion-calendar/ You can also order from http://www.Infinite-Energy.com Thank you for your support, Ruby -- Ruby Carat r...@coldfusionnow.org Skype ruby-carat www.coldfusionnow.org
Re: [Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
I found the "cosmic" strings and gravity waves last year, they are looking in the wrong place :)... http://darkmattersalot.com/2013/07/21/just-for-the-hell-of-it-now-that-i-have-your-attention-i-am-going-to-repeat-myself/ Stewart Darkmattersalot.com On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Hamdi Ucar wrote: > "How Did Supermassive Black Holes Grow So Big?" > > http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131023090952.htm > > Gravitational waves are never found, even there is no encouraging clue. GW > possibly does not exist becuase c is not a limit. > > It is a comedy to give the 'upper limit' argument of non existing GW in BH > (non)observations. > > Of course: Absence of evidance is not evidence of absence. > > >
[Vo]:How is the mainstream science misarable
"How Did Supermassive Black Holes Grow So Big?" http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131023090952.htm Gravitational waves are never found, even there is no encouraging clue. GW possibly does not exist becuase c is not a limit. It is a comedy to give the 'upper limit' argument of non existing GW in BH (non)observations. Of course: Absence of evidance is not evidence of absence.
Re: [Vo]:House of cards - the "big bang" model...
I agree Jones. It will not surprise me to find that much that is thought to be true about science will be overturned with time. LENR acceptance by the physics establishment will become a perfect example. Dave -Original Message- From: Jones Beene To: vortex-l Sent: Wed, Oct 23, 2013 1:46 pm Subject: [Vo]:House of cards - the "big bang" model... How to spin what would otherwise be a major embarrassment http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v502/n7472/full/nature12657.html A galaxy red-shifted to appear 30 billion years old is "really" much younger when you apply the funky logic of "inflation" Kinda sounds like voodoo economics to me.
[Vo]:House of cards - the "big bang" model...
How to spin what would otherwise be a major embarrassment http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v502/n7472/full/nature12657.html A galaxy red-shifted to appear 30 billion years old is "really" much younger when you apply the funky logic of "inflation" Kinda sounds like voodoo economics to me. <>
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
Blaze Spinnaker wrote: Impressive. Looks like Elforsk has decided that the May report has some > merit. > As noted they already said that in the previous press release: "The measurements show that the catalyst gives substantially more energy than can be explained by ordinary chemical reactions." I doubt they would have approved the Levi paper acknowledgement for publication if they did not think it has merit. (I mean they would have asked Levi et al. to remove their name from the paper.) Organizations such as ELFORSK and EPRI are careful about what they endorse. > This is definitely an event which increases the probability of what Rossi > is doing will work. > You mean this increases your confidence that what Rossi is doing will work. The actual likelihood that it will work depends on physics, and on Rossi's skill. I agree this boosts Rossi's credibility. The actual EFORSK report was a bigger boost, but this helps. I look forward to the overview in this month's edition of the "Perspectives." This is good for cold fusion. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
It is a finding from david...he posted it on the forum. probably from the mouth of the horse... ;-) 2013/10/23 Jed Rothwell > Alain: > > Thanks for posting this. Do you know where the original Swedish document > is? > > - Jed > >
RE: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works.
Mark, Nicely said! Ether never really left but nice to see it returning to center stage. Changes in this ether / vacuum density due to nano geometry can however polarize - segregate larger pockets of altered vacuum pressure encompassing entire atoms and molecules and when these atoms or molecules happen to be of gas that is still being pushed around by vacuum fluctuations at the HUP level the stage is set for exploiting gas motion to propel them through DCE. IMHO a self assembled HUP trap capable of discounting disassociation and producing thermal energy. Fran From: MarkI-ZeroPoint [mailto:zeropo...@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 23, 2013 12:49 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works. Like Ive been saying for years, coherent, dipole-like oscillations of an isolated volume of the vacuum "If you take a snapshot of the position of electrons in a FQH state they appear random and you think you have a liquid," says Wen. Makes perfect sense if the snapshot (by a really, really fast strobe-light) is not occurring at the same frequency as the oscillation youre trying to observe; which is most assuredly the case here. It could also be strobing at a multiple, or sub-harmonic of that frequency. Sub, is what will happen first since we are getting close with attosecond physics. "But if you follow the motion of the electrons, you see that, unlike in a liquid, the electrons dance around each other in a well organized manner and form a global dancing pattern." If you are able to adjust the frequency AND phase of the strobe-light, then you could easily follow the motion, and youd see that its motion was not random at all Electric and/or magnetic fields oriented properly would also restrict that oscillation to a limited area. "What if electrons were not elementary, but were the ends of long strings in a string-net liquid which becomes our space?" The electron and the electron-hole are opposite ends of a dipole-like oscillation!!! If you take a dipole, and pivot it at its center, free to rotate on all three axes, it will APPEAR to be an orbital (at least the innermost one). When you add additional dipole-oscillations (aka, electrons) to an atom, they restrict each others motion and we get the familiar orbital shapes. These guys just have to explain it using a framework that they know best, which is string theory Normally, electrons prefer to have their spins to be in the opposite direction to that of their immediate neighbors, Like, DUH Because the like-ends of the dipole will repel each other, so only complementary (180degs out of phase) oscillations will pair up. So they prefer this state, but in a solid its not the norm; however, in a gas, they are pretty much free from neighbor interactions. This is also a simple *realistic* explanation for how two valence alectrons pair-up to form Cooper Pairs ya know, VIOLATING one of the tenets of physics which is like charges repel. Oh, but well make an exception and just give it a new name... So in their theory elementary particles are not the fundamental building blocks of matter. Instead, they emerge as defects or whirlpools in the deeper organized structure of space-time. Like Ive been saying for years, coherent, dipole-like oscillations of an isolated volume of the vacuum Ok, not exactly the same wording as mine, but theyll come around ;-) Wen and Levin found that, in a state of string-net liquid, the motion of string-nets correspond to a wave that behaved according to a very famous set of equations -- Maxwell's equations! A hundred and fifty years after Maxwell wrote them down, ether -- a medium that produces those equations -- was finally found." says Wen. Behold the rebirth of aether physics -Mark Iverson From: Rich Murray [mailto:rmfor...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 7:08 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com; Rich Murray; Joshua Cude Subject: Re: [Vo]:A new theory of electromagnetism is in the works. http://dao.mit.edu/~wen/NSart-wen.html New Scientist published an article about string-net theory and unification of light and electrons. The following is my modification of the article trying to make it more accurate. -- Xiao-Gang Wen The universe is a string-net liquid A mysterious green crystal may be challenging our most basic ideas about matter and even space-time itself Zeeya Merali (March 15, 2007) In 1998, just after he won a share of the Nobel prize for physics, Robert Laughlin of Stanford University in California was asked how his discovery of "particles" with fractional charge would affect the lives of ordinary people. "It probably won't," he said, "unless people are concerned about how the universe works." Well, people were. Xiao-Gang Wen at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Michael Levin at Harvard University ran with Laughlin'
Re: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
Impressive. Looks like Elforsk has decided that the May report has some merit. This is definitely an event which increases the probability of what Rossi is doing will work. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:27 AM, Sunil Shah wrote: > An overview is to be expected. The final paragraph says: > > "There are an estimated 20 something players, who in one way or another > are active or doing research in the cold fusion domain. On behalf of > Elforsk, an overview of the current stance in research, findings, etc., is > being compiled. The overview will be available on Elforsk's web page in > October." > > .s >
RE: [Vo]:Elforsk publish a "perspective" mini magazine, with E-cat among the stars
An overview is to be expected. The final paragraph says: "There are an estimated 20 something players, who in one way or another are active or doing research in the cold fusion domain. On behalf of Elforsk, an overview of the current stance in research, findings, etc., is being compiled. The overview will be available on Elforsk's web page in October." .s
