Re: [Vo]:Carver Mead's ISSCC 2013 Keynote Address
Thank you, dear James! Really fundamental ideas, exposed masterfully! Peter On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:27 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: 15 minutes of brilliance before the most important professional society of the information industry. http://player.vimeo.com/video/69961273 -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Achenbach the Simple disparages cold fusion
This is not actually a cold fusion scenario. These are top-notch scientists doing excellent, if difficult, work. Yeah, there is a special place in hell reserved for this guy. Everyone should post a comment on his blog. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: This simpleton with a degree in politics from Princeton (gawd is that not the most useless education in history?) feels free to write about science as if he knew something, even though he has not the slightest training in science. The dustup over the BICEP2 scandal caused this person to invoke cold fusion as the ne plus ultra of bullshit.. see for yourself; http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/wp/2014/05/19/bicep2s-cosmological-conundrum If you ever feel yourself wondering why civilization seems to be collapsing, look no farther than the professional society of narcissists who feel free to speak on any topic with authority, as long as it brings in a buck. They know their equally narcissistic readers will be both incapable of telling fact from fiction, and unconcerned about the difference - or even worse, they may themselves believe they are allowed to understand nature's deepest secrets without ever working hard - at anything. Profoundly depressing. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin
Re: [Vo]:Achenbach the Simple disparages cold fusion
Or you can email him: joel.achenb...@washpost.com On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.comwrote: This is not actually a cold fusion scenario. These are top-notch scientists doing excellent, if difficult, work. Yeah, there is a special place in hell reserved for this guy. Everyone should post a comment on his blog. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: This simpleton with a degree in politics from Princeton (gawd is that not the most useless education in history?) feels free to write about science as if he knew something, even though he has not the slightest training in science. The dustup over the BICEP2 scandal caused this person to invoke cold fusion as the ne plus ultra of bullshit.. see for yourself; http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/wp/2014/05/19/bicep2s-cosmological-conundrum If you ever feel yourself wondering why civilization seems to be collapsing, look no farther than the professional society of narcissists who feel free to speak on any topic with authority, as long as it brings in a buck. They know their equally narcissistic readers will be both incapable of telling fact from fiction, and unconcerned about the difference - or even worse, they may themselves believe they are allowed to understand nature's deepest secrets without ever working hard - at anything. Profoundly depressing. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin
Re: [Vo]:Carver Mead's ISSCC 2013 Keynote Address
One important idea that was put forth by this convocation keynote address is how complicated effects can derive from more simple fundamental causes. Being significant to us, one of the issues that cloud our understanding of LENR is what really causes LENR since the cause produces so many emergent consequences. The large number of LENR theories now discussed center on the emergent consequences as LENR cause rather than its most fundamental causation. We do not yet understand quantum mechanics on its most basic level to understand what are its fundamental causation and what is the web of secondary principles that emerges from that most basic causation. Consider Feynman Checkerboard as a Model of Discrete Space-Time http://arxiv.org/html/cs/0607018 Feynman shows how quantum mechanical principles like the limit of the speed of light, the uncertainty principle and relativity derive from the digital nature of the universe. In addition, Xiao-Gang Wen suggests that the richness of EMF phenomena derive from the vacuum being a spin net liquid. I see that both these ideas are emergent from a more fundamental concept that can derive from the vacuum being viewed as a sea of roiling virtual particle creation and destruction with each virtual particle possessed of a randomized spin. The digital nature of the vacuum comes from how the virtual particles (photons as a Majorana particle) space themselves naturally when they are created at a constant average rate with spacing as a result of the random nature of their spins. Magnetic fields are derived from how a real particle changes the spins of the virtual particle that fill the vacuum and the speed of this disturbance in the spins of the virtual particles are where the speed of light comes from. Now with this good start, it is straightforward to work out the remainder of reality as an emergent corporeality. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:27 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: 15 minutes of brilliance before the most important professional society of the information industry. http://player.vimeo.com/video/69961273
Re: [Vo]:Achenbach the Simple disparages cold fusion
I did email him - this is what I said (no response of course).. --- Mr. Achenbach; Regarding this.. http://tinyurl.com/maky823 Your article linked above concerning the controversy surrounding BICEP2, trots out the worn-out phrase, Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This is not how science works at all. ALL claims, no matter how mundane or cosmic, require exactly the same sort of evidence - reproducible results that can be explained within a known framework. If such a framework is not at hand, a new one must be constructed. It is not the nature of the claims, but the robustness of the framework, that is in question. This phrase has become a sort of mantra for those who insist on pushing worn-out idioms to the breaking point, and are unwilling to consider new ideas. If anything actually new comes up - and I have in mind the observations of Lopez-Corredoira et al regarding objects such as NGC 7603 - it is pushed aside with your phrase, as if the very idea that something new might come to light were offensive to the entire enterprise. Now, it may be that subtle claims - e.g. the neutrino exists - require subtle evidence - as from a giant reservoir of carbon tetrachloride buried deep in a mine coupled to photoreceptors of extremely exquisite sensitivity. But that is not the phrase in question. A tacit assumption is made that world is divided into ordinary and extraordinary parts, each with its own form of evidence. This is nothing but a tacit retreat to the world view of Aristotle and his imaginary ethereal realm. When stated this way, I'm sure it is now clear to you that the phrase is offensive to the spirit of science. -drl --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin From: Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com To: Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com Cc: vortex-l@eskimo.com vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:00 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Achenbach the Simple disparages cold fusion Or you can email him: joel.achenb...@washpost.com On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com wrote: This is not actually a cold fusion scenario. These are top-notch scientists doing excellent, if difficult, work. Yeah, there is a special place in hell reserved for this guy. Everyone should post a comment on his blog. On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 10:19 PM, Danny Ross Lunsford antimatte...@yahoo.com wrote: This simpleton with a degree in politics from Princeton (gawd is that not the most useless education in history?) feels free to write about science as if he knew something, even though he has not the slightest training in science. The dustup over the BICEP2 scandal caused this person to invoke cold fusion as the ne plus ultra of bullshit.. see for yourself; http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/achenblog/wp/2014/05/19/bicep2s-cosmological-conundrum If you ever feel yourself wondering why civilization seems to be collapsing, look no farther than the professional society of narcissists who feel free to speak on any topic with authority, as long as it brings in a buck. They know their equally narcissistic readers will be both incapable of telling fact from fiction, and unconcerned about the difference - or even worse, they may themselves believe they are allowed to understand nature's deepest secrets without ever working hard - at anything. Profoundly depressing. --- I write a little. I erase a lot. - Chopin
Re: [Vo]:A Relativistic catalyst for LENR
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 21 May 2014 07:19:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] Mercury is one of a few metals or eutectics which remain a liquid down to fairly low temperature, and notable for Hg alone is the gas-phase. Mercury is a singularity in the periodic table in that it can exist as a monatomic gas, usually denoted as Hg(g). This lack of bonding is due to electron contraction by relativistic effects - which explains why the bonding for Hg-Hg is weak enough to allow for Hg to be a liquid at room temperature. Perhaps also of interest is that the sum of the first four ionization energies is 108.99 eV, which is quite a good match for a Mills catalyst of m=4, representing an energy hole of 108.78 eV. Given that Mercury is atomic in the gas state, this should make the gas a good Mills catalyst. A pair of Hydrinos combined in a Hydrino molecule might be even be able to supply sufficient energy to cause Mercury to fission, giving rise to the tales of mercury powered Vimana. (Such a fission reaction would yield roughly 140 MeV.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:A Relativistic catalyst for LENR
or to red mercury? On Sat, 24 May 2014 10:27:48 +1000, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: In reply to Jones Beene's message of Wed, 21 May 2014 07:19:30 -0700: Hi, [snip] Mercury is one of a few metals or eutectics which remain a liquid down to fairly low temperature, and notable for Hg alone is the gas-phase. Mercury is a singularity in the periodic table in that it can exist as a monatomic gas, usually denoted as Hg(g). This lack of bonding is due to electron contraction by relativistic effects - which explains why the bonding for Hg-Hg is weak enough to allow for Hg to be a liquid at room temperature. Perhaps also of interest is that the sum of the first four ionization energies is 108.99 eV, which is quite a good match for a Mills catalyst of m=4, representing an energy hole of 108.78 eV. Given that Mercury is atomic in the gas state, this should make the gas a good Mills catalyst. A pair of Hydrinos combined in a Hydrino molecule might be even be able to supply sufficient energy to cause Mercury to fission, giving rise to the tales of mercury powered Vimana. (Such a fission reaction would yield roughly 140 MeV.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Recent news on Podkletnov's gravity shielding work...
In reply to MarkI-ZeroPoint's message of Sun, 18 May 2014 17:27:53 -0700: Hi, [snip] Just a FYI for those interested in superconductors and gravity. http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/05/update-on-podkletnov-gravity.html The propagation time of the pulse over a distance of 1211 m was measured recording the response of two identical piezoelectric sensors connected to two synchronized rubidium atomic clocks. The delay was 631 ns, corresponding to a propagation speed of 64c. Unless I'm mistaken, 1211 m in 631 ns is only 6.4 times the speed of light, not 64 times. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:An emerging diproton plus halo hypothesis
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 18 May 2014 17:07:47 -0700: Hi Jones, [snip] Tritium is seen in Farnsworth Fusor, for instance and zero helium is seen - indicating that a different channel that looks more like hot fusion is available for tritium. Do you have a reference for this? All the references to Farnsworth Fusors that I can find speak of the normal hot fusion channels producing both T He3. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
RE: [Vo]:A Relativistic catalyst for LENR
-Original Message- From: torulf.gr...@bredband.net …or to red mercury? This topic comes up from time to time here. No surprise there: both red mercury and vimanas actually are intriguing in the spy-vs-spy maneuverings of officials despite whatever science could be involved. Many would like to brand everything related to Hg as nothing more than SciFi or scam, but there are connections to LENR which can explain some things. Sam Cohen, the main proponent - has adequate credentials to be believed, even if he is not the father of the neutron bomb… but he could be that as well. He claimed for some time that red mercury is a powerful ballotechnic and BTW - the red indicates only that it was developed by Russian commies - not a coloration (that came as part of the scam). Ballotechnics can be defined as supra-chemical - in that inner orbitals are accessed; and with Hg such a happenstance brings up the relativistic connection. Even Cohen may not have fully realized the implications of Hg relativist electrons, nor the close Rydberg fit… and the possibility of the two working together for LENR. In fact, the end result may go beyond what Cohen has claimed -imagine a cold fusion trigger for hot fusion. Cohen thought that the supra-chemical energy released during the Hg reaction is enough to directly compress a fission secondary without the need for a fissile primary. He claimed that Soviets perfected grapefruit-sized pure fusion weapons, but there is no validation of this claim from any official source. However, if what was really happening was fusing deuterons into helium by Hg from reduced orbitals, then the need for both fissile material and tritium would be completely eliminated. Yikes. Undetectable. This is the worst imaginable nightmare for DHS. In fact, it would not surprise me, if the US was the developer of this technology - or co-developer, back in the early eighties - and some Russian entrepreneurs later were able to built a scam on top of it, selling junk on the black market for OPEC megabucks - possibly to discredit the technology in another way. If this is even partly true: that Hg can catalyze D+D cold fusion, then that fact alone explains why cold fusion was officially ignored at the highest levels - from the start in 1989. And… to tell the truth … that level of official neglect may make logical sense on one level, since a 9/11 style act could have been much worse if red mercury is really a cold fusion trigger for hot fusion. Mercury is one of a few metals or eutectics which remain a liquid down to fairly low temperature, and notable for Hg alone is the gas-phase. Mercury is a singularity in the periodic table in that it can exist as a monatomic gas, usually denoted as Hg(g). This lack of bonding is due to electron contraction by relativistic effects - which explains why the bonding for Hg-Hg is weak enough to allow for Hg to be a liquid at room temperature. Robin van Spaandonk wrote: Perhaps also of interest is that the sum of the first four ionization Energies is 108.99 eV, which is quite a good match for a Mills catalyst of m=4, representing an energy hole of 108.78 eV. Given that Mercury is atomic in the gas state, this should make the gas a good Mills catalyst. A pair of Hydrinos combined in a Hydrino molecule might be even be able to supply sufficient energy to cause Mercury to fission, giving rise to the tales of mercury powered Vimana. (Such a fission reaction would yield roughly 140 MeV.) attachment: winmail.dat
Re: [Vo]:Cyril Smith Paper may have relevance to LENR
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Wed, 21 May 2014 20:24:38 -0700: Hi, [snip] On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: For instance, relativistic electron pumping via Dirac mechanics would not be nuclear. Is this a Dirac sea mechanism? Aside from a nuclear source, we have as possibilities f/H shrinkage, something coming out of the Dirac sea, and pure pair production from light. I'm inclined to invoke Occam, but I guess that's not so persuasive here. ;) Will f/H shrinkage provide a specific energy of 10E7 Wh/kg? When I think of f/H, the thought ~100 eV comes to my mind. Eric I assume that by 10E7 you actually mean 1E7 , i.e. 10 million ;). Going on this assumption, an energy density of 1E7 Wh/kg for an individual Hydrogen atom implies an energy of 373 eV, which is well within the range of Hydrinos. (Even 3730 eV would be possible, though less likely.) (However if you include the Ni mass in the energy density calculation and assume 1 H/Ni, then you get about 21640 eV / H atom which is beginning to stretch the friendship a bit.) (Still not impossible, as the maximum energy you can get from Hydrinos is 137^2 x 13.6 eV ~= 255 keV (actually precisely half an electron mass) from each Hydrogen atom.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Cyril Smith Paper may have relevance to LENR
In reply to Nigel Dyer's message of Wed, 21 May 2014 17:31:32 +0100: Hi, [snip] And not just LENR. I am currently looking at how this may occur in the copper that is associated with DNA/DNA/RNA triple helixes Are triple helices involved in DNA replication, and if so if the copper attached to the end of the molecule? Nigel Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Cyril Smith Paper may have relevance to LENR
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:52 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: I assume that by 10E7 you actually mean 1E7 , i.e. 10 million ;). Yes -- it would be nice for my argument if it were 10E7, but really it's 1E7. :) (However if you include the Ni mass in the energy density calculation and assume 1 H/Ni, then you get about 21640 eV / H atom which is beginning to stretch the friendship a bit.) To get a number comparable to the number used in the calculation of the Elforsk team, I think one would have to include some nickel. :) If this is true, I think that means that both you and I suspect that it's beginning to stretch things, and we might want to look for something other than f/H in this particular instance. :) Eric
Re: [Vo]:Cyril Smith Paper may have relevance to LENR
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:52 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote: (Still not impossible, as the maximum energy you can get from Hydrinos is 137^2 x 13.6 eV ~= 255 keV (actually precisely half an electron mass) from each Hydrogen atom.) This is to full redundancy? I think there's an effect that is believed to decrease the likelihood of shrinkage in direct proportion with increasingly redundancy, such that even level 1/4 is hard to get to? Eric
