Re: [Vo]:Has the 'impossible' EM drive being tested by NASA finally been explained? | Examiner.com

[Axil Axil]

Here is the reference that explains the justification for this statement:

"Unruh radiation is the same as Hawking radiation by the equivalence
principle."

*Hawking radiation, Unruh radiation and the equivalence principle*


*http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.5564 *



On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:34 PM, Axil Axil  wrote:

> Assuming the radiation emitted by a LENR reactor is hawking radiation, it
> might be possible that the LENR reactor will accelerate in its frame of
> reference because it changes the nature of the vacuum in its frame of
> reference relative to the inertial frame of the universe. Hawking radiation
> makes virtual particles into real particles.
>
> Simply stated, if acceleration produces Unruh  radiation then Hawking
> radiation will produce acceleration, if Unruh radiation is the same as
> Hawking radiation by the equivalence principle.
>
> A LENR reactor in space will produce a reactionless drive.
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:
>
>>
>> http://www.examiner.com/article/has-the-impossible-em-drive-being-tested-by-nasa-finally-been-explained
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Has the 'impossible' EM drive being tested by NASA finally been explained? | Examiner.com

[Axil Axil]

Assuming the radiation emitted by a LENR reactor is hawking radiation, it
might be possible that the LENR reactor will accelerate in its frame of
reference because it changes the nature of the vacuum in its frame of
reference relative to the inertial frame of the universe. Hawking radiation
makes virtual particles into real particles.

Simply stated, if acceleration produces Unruh  radiation then Hawking
radiation will produce acceleration, if Unruh radiation is the same as
Hawking radiation by the equivalence principle.

A LENR reactor in space will produce a reactionless drive.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:24 PM, Jack Cole  wrote:

>
> http://www.examiner.com/article/has-the-impossible-em-drive-being-tested-by-nasa-finally-been-explained
>

[Vo]:Has the 'impossible' EM drive being tested by NASA finally been explained? | Examiner.com

[Jack Cole]

http://www.examiner.com/article/has-the-impossible-em-drive-being-tested-by-nasa-finally-been-explained

[Vo]:MIT Technology Review on the EM Drive

[Eric Walker]

See:

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601299/the-curious-link-between-the-fly-by-anomaly-and-the-impossible-emdrive-thruster/

Not a whole lot new, but interesting to see the MIT Technology Review pick
up the story.  The article briefly describes Mike McCulloch's suggestion
that Unruh radiation, a type of blackbody radiation, is at work.  I myself
suspect that the emission of neutrinos is involved.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

[Jed Rothwell]

Russ George  wrote:

Bob, I believe the number of ‘inventors’ named on rejected cold fusion
> patents is far more than 30.
>

In my opinion, some of those rejected patents deserved to be rejected.

I do not have a tally, and I do not know how many good ones there were, but
I have seen some that did not seem valid to me. Granted, I know little
about patents. Also, I read the correspondence between the P.O. and the
inventors, and I thought the P.O. examiners were making reasonable demands,
which the inventors did not meet.

I read some of the P.O. correspondence to F In that case, I think the
P.O. was being unreasonable.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Is the proton friable?

[Jones Beene]

Bob,

 

Here is more detail with a lot of reference which I am trying to wade through 
-- but you may find easier to navigate.

 

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Strong_gravitational_constant

 

Obviously – if there were a solid case for this proposition, it would have 
gotten traction many years ago in the Ivory Towers, and Dufour would be better 
known in the broader field of Physics. 

 

Maybe he is way ahead of his time?

 

 

From: Bob Higgins 

 

After having read Dufour's paper, it appears that it is complete hypothesis on 
the basis of the fact that the other forces seem to converge in magnitude at a 
sub-nuclear scale - so why shouldn't gravitation?  He presents no apparent data 
that his hypothesis has any basis.  Gravitation would have to change radically 
from the 100 micron scale to the 1 fermi scale.  While possible, it would be 
nice to have some real evidence.  It would seem like it would create a 
measurable change in the lines of hydrogen as predicted by the Dirac equation 
because this nonlinear gravity is not accounted in the Dirac equation (we know 
that the Schrodinger values are off for lack of inclusion of special 
relativity).

 

Jones Beene wrote:

One other thought about Dufour’s hypothesis of a VERY SIZEABLE INCREASE OF 
GRAVITATION AT PICOMETER DISTANCE (on the order of Coulomb repulsion). This 
provides the effective pressure, on the order of hundreds of gigapascals, which 
is required for the known version of metallic hydrogen. The denser version is 
merely a further step and not unexpected if gravity operates this way.

 

 http://www.iscmns.org/asti06/J-DUFOUR%20-%20ASTI%20PRESENTATION%20-%202006.pdf

Ten years ago, Durour is talking about a model with several binding energies 
for hydrogen in the range of several hundred eV and actually mentions the value 
of 650 eV which Holmlid settles on. No one paid much attention then.

But Dufour goes further to imply that LENR does not need nuclear reactions if 
“picochemistry” involves any kind of asymmetry since the chemical energy level 
is so great. That would open a Pandora’s box which apparently he wishes to 
avoid, so the details of how picochemistry would ultimately be powered (ZPE ?) 
are missing. In so doing, he left open the door for Holmlid to get most of the 
credit… but LH deserves it. He has taken a huge risk, published tirelessly - 
and could come out of it with a big prize.

 

[Vo]:I Sing the Car Electric

[Terry Blanton]

Who said they killed it.  The Netherlands are moving to eliminate ICE
altogether.

http://www.sciencealert.com/the-netherlands-is-making-moves-to-ban-all-non-electric-vehicles-by-2025

Even Mercedes has seen the light:

*https://youtu.be/_hFsig7hDcM *


I wonder if the SNL writers know the Tesla S uses 7,104 batteries similar
to the AA?

RE: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

[Russ George]

Bob, I believe the number of ‘inventors’ named on rejected cold fusion patents 
is far more than 30. Of course my effort is asking for people with such 
standing to participate in sharing some initial information is in part an 
effort to get some real data on this number! I know of more than half a dozen 
who are named as ‘inventors’ alongside me on rejected CF patents. 

 

One always needs permission of the government to sue the government but in this 
case past and current events have them very well cornored and they’ll not be 
able to slither away. Of course they can, and might, declare this field secret 
at any time and cover their asses but then secret negotiations would follow. I 
think the government will choose to pay off we few surviving wronged inventors 
out of court rather than engage in a public stewing of the USTPO in a 
cannibal’s pot full of self-heating heavy water! 

 

In helping prepare the cannibal’s stew pot picnic you and many others can help 
without having ‘standing’ the more people supporting this by standing by to 
witness it and support the effort the better… they can be an ‘amicus curiae 
cannibali’ ;)

 

From: Bob Higgins [mailto:rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 10:07 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

 

Russ, have you estimated the number of people that would have standing in such 
a case against the USPTO?  I think, to have standing, an inventor would have 
had to make a LENR patent application that was rejected.  They may be later 
found to have been rejected for reasons other than LENR, but forget that for 
now.  How many inventors do you believe have actually submitted LENR patents 
and have been rejected?  I suspect the number would be less than 30.

 

While personally I would be sympathetic, I would have no standing in such a 
case for not ever having filed a patent application for LENR.  >From what 
Mitchell Swartz told me at ICCF-13, he was very frustrated with what he 
believed was intentional subterfuge by the USPTO in his applications.

 

It would be interesting to hear if there would be other conditions that would 
expand the group size that would have standing in such a suit.

 

Also, because the USPTO is a government agency, don't you need some kind of 
congressional approval to sue them? 

 

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Russ George  > wrote:

Thanks Peter I do believe that this will ring some alarm bells in Washington. 
Hopefully no more SWAT teams appear to break down my door again. 

 

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com  
] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 2:38 AM
To: VORTEX
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

 

Thanks it is done.Your papers makes reader to think.

 

peter

 

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Russ George  > wrote:

Peter,

 

You might publish something about my new idea.  I am serious about this.

 

http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/

 

 

Fusing as always



 

Russ George

Atom-ecology.russgeorge.net

 

 

 

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com  
] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:19 AM
To: Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Brian Ahern; CMNS; Dagmar Kuhn; David Daggett; 
doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian; Gary; Haiko 
Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter Bjorkbom; Peter 
Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio; Steve Katinski; 
Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad; VORTEX
Subject: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

 

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-19-2016-lenr-info-smaller-bitter.html

 

Let's prepare for good news, we are already familiar with the bad ones.

Where is the heavy artillery of the Trolls?

 

Peter

-- 

Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





 

-- 

Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

 

Re: [Vo]:Is the proton friable?

[Bob Higgins]

After having read Dufour's paper, it appears that it is complete hypothesis
on the basis of the fact that the other forces seem to converge in
magnitude at a sub-nuclear scale - so why shouldn't gravitation?  He
presents no apparent data that his hypothesis has any basis.  Gravitation
would have to change radically from the 100 micron scale to the 1 fermi
scale.  While possible, it would be nice to have some real evidence.  It
would seem like it would create a measurable change in the lines of
hydrogen as predicted by the Dirac equation because this nonlinear gravity
is not accounted in the Dirac equation (we know that the Schrodinger values
are off for lack of inclusion of special relativity).

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 6:53 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> One other thought about Dufour’s hypothesis of a VERY SIZEABLE INCREASE
> OF GRAVITATION AT PICOMETER DISTANCE (on the order of Coulomb repulsion).
> This provides the effective pressure, on the order of hundreds of
> gigapascals, which is required for the known version of metallic
> hydrogen. The denser version is merely a further step and not unexpected
> if gravity operates this way.
>
>
> *http://www.iscmns.org/asti06/J-DUFOUR%20-%20ASTI%20PRESENTATION%20-%202006.pdf*
> 
>
> Ten years ago, Durour is talking about a model with several binding
> energies for hydrogen in the range of several hundred eV and actually
> mentions the value of 650 eV which Holmlid settles on. No one paid much
> attention then.
>
> But Dufour goes further to imply that LENR does not need nuclear reactions
> if “picochemistry” involves any kind of asymmetry since the chemical energy
> level is so great. That would open a Pandora’s box which apparently he
> wishes to avoid, so the details of how picochemistry would ultimately be
> powered (ZPE ?) are missing. In so doing, he left open the door for
> Holmlid to get most of the credit… but LH deserves it. He has taken a
> huge risk, published tirelessly - and could come out of it with a big
> prize.
>
>

[Vo]:LENR- are there harbingers of clarification?

[Peter Gluck]

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-20-2016-lenr-harbingers-of-coming.html
My impression is that the enthusiasm for the evil part in the conflict is
eroding. This is diplomatic and neutral -you can decide which part is
(more) evil

greetings,

peter

-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

[Bob Higgins]

Russ, have you estimated the number of people that would have standing in
such a case against the USPTO?  I think, to have standing, an inventor
would have had to make a LENR patent application that was rejected.  They
may be later found to have been rejected for reasons other than LENR, but
forget that for now.  How many inventors do you believe have actually
submitted LENR patents and have been rejected?  I suspect the number would
be less than 30.

While personally I would be sympathetic, I would have no standing in such a
case for not ever having filed a patent application for LENR.  From what
Mitchell Swartz told me at ICCF-13, he was very frustrated with what he
believed was intentional subterfuge by the USPTO in his applications.

It would be interesting to hear if there would be other conditions that
would expand the group size that would have standing in such a suit.

Also, because the USPTO is a government agency, don't you need some kind of
congressional approval to sue them?

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Russ George  wrote:

> Thanks Peter I do believe that this will ring some alarm bells in
> Washington. Hopefully no more SWAT teams appear to break down my door
> again.
>
>
>
> *From:* Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 20, 2016 2:38 AM
> *To:* VORTEX
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue
>
>
>
> Thanks it is done.Your papers makes reader to think.
>
>
>
> peter
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Russ George 
> wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
>
>
> You might publish something about my new idea.  I am serious about this.
>
>
>
>
> http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/
>
>
>
>
>
> Fusing as always
>
>
>
> Russ George
>
> Atom-ecology.russgeorge.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:19 AM
> *To:* Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Brian Ahern; CMNS; Dagmar Kuhn; David
> Daggett; doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian;
> Gary; Haiko Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter
> Bjorkbom; Peter Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio;
> Steve Katinski; Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad; VORTEX
> *Subject:* [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue
>
>
>
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-19-2016-lenr-info-smaller-bitter.html
>
>
>
> Let's prepare for good news, we are already familiar with the bad ones.
>
> Where is the heavy artillery of the Trolls?
>
>
>
> Peter
>
> --
>
> Dr. Peter Gluck
>
> Cluj, Romania
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Dr. Peter Gluck
>
> Cluj, Romania
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>

RE: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

[Russ George]

Thanks Peter I do believe that this will ring some alarm bells in Washington. 
Hopefully no more SWAT teams appear to break down my door again. 

 

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 2:38 AM
To: VORTEX
Subject: Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

 

Thanks it is done.Your papers makes reader to think.

 

peter

 

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Russ George  > wrote:

Peter,

 

You might publish something about my new idea.  I am serious about this.

 

http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/

 

 

Fusing as always



 

Russ George

Atom-ecology.russgeorge.net  

 

 

 

From: Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com  
] 
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:19 AM
To: Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Brian Ahern; CMNS; Dagmar Kuhn; David Daggett; 
doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian; Gary; Haiko 
Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter Bjorkbom; Peter 
Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio; Steve Katinski; 
Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad; VORTEX
Subject: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

 

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-19-2016-lenr-info-smaller-bitter.html

 

Let's prepare for good news, we are already familiar with the bad ones.

Where is the heavy artillery of the Trolls?

 

Peter

-- 

Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com





 

-- 

Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania

http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:cold fusion class action

[H LV]

Ruby,

In this three minutes video clip Brian Eno discusses "scenius" in
relation to Basic Income.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkD7JBspgas

Harry

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 10:55 AM, Ruby  wrote:
> Love this vocabulary.
> Been a fan of Eno for decades, never heard this!
> Ruby
>
> On 4/19/16 5:19 PM, H LV wrote:
>>
>> In exchange for a small royalty fee, the State could provide free
>> patent services. The royalties would affirm the existence of a
>> collective intelligence or what the artist Brian Eno calls "scenius"
>> from which an individual genius emerges.
>>
>> Brian Eno on genius vs “scenius”:
>>
>> What really happened was that there was sometimes very fertile scenes
>> involving lots and lots of people – some of them artists, some of them
>> collectors, some of them curators, thinkers, theorists, people who
>> were fashionable and knew what the hip things were – all sorts of
>> people who created a kind of ecology of talent. And out of that
>> ecology arose some wonderful work.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> So I came up with this word “scenius” – and scenius is the
>> intelligence of a whole… operation or group of people. And I think
>> that’s a more useful way to think about culture, actually. I think
>> that – let’s forget the idea of “genius” for a little while, let’s
>> think about the whole ecology of ideas that give rise to good new
>> thoughts and good new work."
>>
>> Harry
>>
>>
>>
>> http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/
>>
>
> --
> Ruby Carat
> Eureka, CA USA
> r...@coldfusionnow.org
> www.coldfusionnow.org
> lenrexplained.com
>
>

Re: [Vo]:cold fusion class action

[Ruby]

Love this vocabulary.
Been a fan of Eno for decades, never heard this!
Ruby

On 4/19/16 5:19 PM, H LV wrote:

In exchange for a small royalty fee, the State could provide free
patent services. The royalties would affirm the existence of a
collective intelligence or what the artist Brian Eno calls "scenius"
from which an individual genius emerges.

Brian Eno on genius vs “scenius”:

What really happened was that there was sometimes very fertile scenes
involving lots and lots of people – some of them artists, some of them
collectors, some of them curators, thinkers, theorists, people who
were fashionable and knew what the hip things were – all sorts of
people who created a kind of ecology of talent. And out of that
ecology arose some wonderful work.

...

So I came up with this word “scenius” – and scenius is the
intelligence of a whole… operation or group of people. And I think
that’s a more useful way to think about culture, actually. I think
that – let’s forget the idea of “genius” for a little while, let’s
think about the whole ecology of ideas that give rise to good new
thoughts and good new work."

Harry


http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/



--
Ruby Carat
Eureka, CA USA
r...@coldfusionnow.org
www.coldfusionnow.org
lenrexplained.com

Re: [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue

[Peter Gluck]

Thanks it is done.Your papers makes reader to think.

peter

On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 1:15 AM, Russ George  wrote:

> Peter,
>
>
>
> You might publish something about my new idea.  I am serious about this.
>
>
>
>
> http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2016/04/19/cold-fusion-class-action-lawsuit-puts-uspto-in-heavy-water/
>
>
>
>
>
> Fusing as always
>
>
>
> Russ George
>
> Atom-ecology.russgeorge.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Peter Gluck [mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 19, 2016 9:19 AM
> *To:* Arik El Boher; Bo Hoistadt; Brian Ahern; CMNS; Dagmar Kuhn; David
> Daggett; doug marker; Dr. Braun Tibor; eCatNews; Gabriel Moagar-Poladian;
> Gary; Haiko Lietz; jeff aries; Mark Tsirlin; Nicolaie N. Vlad; Peter
> Bjorkbom; Peter Mobberley; Pierre Clauzon; Roberto Germano; Roy Virgilio;
> Steve Katinski; Sunwon Park; Valerio Ciampoli; vlad; VORTEX
> *Subject:* [Vo]:LENR INFO- a smaller, bitter issue
>
>
>
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2016/04/apr-19-2016-lenr-info-smaller-bitter.html
>
>
>
> Let's prepare for good news, we are already familiar with the bad ones.
>
> Where is the heavy artillery of the Trolls?
>
>
>
> Peter
>
> --
>
> Dr. Peter Gluck
>
> Cluj, Romania
>
> http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
>



-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck
Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com