Space Elevators
I have been giving a lot of thought to space elevators recently, and wanted to run a few trhings by the collected wisdom that is Vortex. I have seen a lot of talk about how easily the cable could be damaged, but I'm wandering if they didn't forget something. Current estimations using carbon nanotubes predict a cable no more than a couple square centimeters in cross-section (average), and some are predicting less. With the tension on the cable, what prevents it from mimicing a cheese-cutter, and slicing right through anything unfortunate enough to impact it? Granted, that doesn't apply to the liftport group's concept, they have their cable flattened into a meter-wide ribbon, and presumably the strands in the impact area would not be up to withstanding an impact. Which brings up my next point, possibilities of damage from terrorism are estimated to be high, simply from the stature of the elevator, but honestly, how hard would it be to fly an airplane into a target that is at most 1 meter wide? - Enough with generalities, the cable/ribbon design I favor would actually be four cables, interconnected. Each cable would be slightly dumbel shaped 0-0 (although without the sharp corners), and approximately 3 cm wide and 1/2 cm thick. A pair of these cables would be interconnected 0-0><0-0 for a total width of 10 cm. This would then be similarly connected to the other pair 0-0><0-0>---<0-0><0-0 for an overall width of 1 meter. The interconnections between the cables would be an open lattice of small fibers at 45 degree angles to distribute forces in the event of a failure. Elevator cars would travel up one pair of cables, and down the other pair. The dumbell shape allows the car to get lateral grip, allowing it to hang off the side of the cable. Each cable would have a safety factor of 1.5, meaning it can carry 150% of the expected load. If a cable breaks, then the extra load is distributed to the other three. Due to the interconnected nature of the cables, at least 2 cables would have to be broken within a fairly short vertical distance to cause failure. There is a formula (which I am too lazy to track down and retype) which can be used to determine the minimum cable cross section at an height for any material, and IIRC the result is that a CNT cable would have approx. 9x the cross section at GSO as at the surface. Granted, by dictating a that the cables can carry 50% more load that would increase, but probably not more than 2x-4x. just something to while away idle neuron time. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Electron Flywheels and Turbines
The discussion of electron flywheels (UMES) has brought to mind a concept I had for an electron turbine. (warning! ASCII art follows) A series of saw-toothed rings with a collection surface on one side, set to rotate in opposing directions. -- Negative Terminal / Stationary Sawtooth - \ CW Ring - / CCW Ring - \ CW Ring - Stationary Collector Plate ++ Positive Terminal A charge imbalance existing between the input and output sides (negative and positive terminals resp.) would cause a flow of electrons through the turbine. An electron has a mass of 9.1095 x 10^-31 kg 1 Amp = 6.2415 x 10^18 electrons/sec. 1 Amp = 5.685 x 10^-12 kg/sec Electron velocity in a vacuum is governed by voltage AFAIK, and is approx. 6000 km/sec at 100 V. If the electrons travel at 45 degrees to the axis, reversing their direction should impart 5.296 x 10^-23 kg.m/sec momentum per electron, or 4.824 x 10^-4 kg.m/sec momentum per amp. So force exerted on the armature by 1A @ 100V should be 4.824 x 10^-4 N Unless I've misplaced some factors this looks completely impractical now that I've done the calculations. Ce La Vie Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Re The Horace Hiatus
Huh, You're right. Picturing it more clearly now, The vectors do always add up to equal the same as the pull at the center of the small sphere. So the g field is a constant inside a spherical hollow in a sphere with constant density. That being said, next time this comes up, you might want to summarize a little bit differently, because what threw me off was it appeared you were taking R1 and R2 to be constants, instead of taking the vector sum to be constant. --- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Merlyn wrote: > > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > > > > > > The field at any point inside a uniform sphere of > > density > > rho is > > > > F = -(4/3)*pi*G*rho*R > > > > where "R" is the _radius vector_ from the center > of > > the > > sphere to the point where we're finding the field. > > > > For the big sphere, let the radius vector be R1. > For > > the > > small (cut-out) sphere let the radius vector be > R2. > > (Note that they point from different origins, but > > that's > > OK, all we care about are the direction and > length.) > > Then the net field anywhere inside the small > (cut-out) > > sphere will be > > > > F(total) = -(4/3)*pi*G*rho*(R1 - R2) > > > > But (R1 - R2) is a _constant_, and is just the > vector > > from the center of the big sphere to the center of > the > > small sphere. > > > > So the force is also a constant, proportional to > the > > distance between the spheres' centers, pointing > along > > the > > line which connects the small sphere's center to > the > > big > > sphere's center. > > --- > > > > Not so. > > R1 and R2 are NOT the actual radii of the spheres, > but > > the radii to the point of measurement. > > Exactly. Outside the sphere, the field goes as > 1/R^2. > > Inside the sphere it goes as R. > > On the surface of a uniform sphere of radius R the > field strength is > (4/3)G*pi*rho*R. Here's why: > > The mass is (4/3)*pi*rho*R^3 (just the volume > times the density) > > The field behaves as though all the mass is > concentrated at the center, > at on point, and the field strength goes as > > G*M/R^2 > > Plugging in the value for the mass, this is > > (4/3)*G*pi*(R^3/R^2) = (4/3)*G*pi*R > > > This is > > because any spherical shell of constant density > has no > > net gravitational effect on an object within it, > > Right, which is why the field strength at any point > _inside_ a uniformly > dense sphere at a distance "Rc" from the center is > the same as the field > strength on the surface of an equally dense sphere > of radius "Rc". > > Or, in other words, _inside_ the sphere, the field > goes as > > (4/3)*G*pi*rho*R > > where R is the distance from the center of the > sphere to the point where > we're measuring the field (_not_ the distance to the > surface of the sphere). > > Since the field points directly toward the center of > the sphere, if we > replace the distance to the center with the vector > "[R]" which points > from the center to the point where we're measuring > the field, then the > actual field at each point will be > > -(4/3)*G*pi*rho*[R] > > and I seriously wish I had overbars to make this > look more readable. > > > so > > you only need the mass of the spherical volume > with > > radius equal to your distance from the center of > mass. > > Thus I can measure the gravitational field > strength > > along a constant radius from the center of the > large > > sphere (R1 constant) but at different locations > within > > the volume of the small sphere (R2 variable) and > > achieve different results. > > It seems that way, doesn't it? But keep in mind > that R1 and R2 are > vectors, so neither one is constant in this case -- > R1 has constant > _magnitude_ but its direction is varying. > > You need to draw a fairly careful picture here to > get an idea of what's > going on. > > Draw a circle around the big sphere's center, such > that the circle > passes through the small sphere's center. > > At the center of the small sphere, the gravity is > "normal" for the big > sphere -- the small sphere contributes nothing. > > As we move off along the circle, the small sphere > starts to contribute > something. But at the same time,
Re The Horace Hiatus
Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: It's a very cute example. [... cute example: A spherical chamber cut out of a uniformly dense planet ...] I ran across it here: http://www.geocities.com/physics_world/gr/grav_cavity.htm The field at any point inside a uniform sphere of density rho is F = -(4/3)*pi*G*rho*R where "R" is the _radius vector_ from the center of the sphere to the point where we're finding the field. For the big sphere, let the radius vector be R1. For the small (cut-out) sphere let the radius vector be R2. (Note that they point from different origins, but that's OK, all we care about are the direction and length.) Then the net field anywhere inside the small (cut-out) sphere will be F(total) = -(4/3)*pi*G*rho*(R1 - R2) But (R1 - R2) is a _constant_, and is just the vector from the center of the big sphere to the center of the small sphere. So the force is also a constant, proportional to the distance between the spheres' centers, pointing along the line which connects the small sphere's center to the big sphere's center. --- Not so. R1 and R2 are NOT the actual radii of the spheres, but the radii to the point of measurement. This is because any spherical shell of constant density has no net gravitational effect on an object within it, so you only need the mass of the spherical volume with radius equal to your distance from the center of mass. Thus I can measure the gravitational field strength along a constant radius from the center of the large sphere (R1 constant) but at different locations within the volume of the small sphere (R2 variable) and achieve different results. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: The Horace Hiatus
At least I wasn't the only one who got confused. BTW Keith, your reply-to header is screwy, and sends replies only to you, not thte entire list. --- Keith Nagel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey All, > > Horace writes: > >That was not my gedanken. It was Keith's. > > Woah, that's news to me. I do real experiments, > not gedanken ones (grin). A Horace hiatus indeed. > > Einstein throwing rocks at Poincare who turns > them into energy? That's Steves department. > > K. > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Horace Hiatus
Exactly! Te energy must go somewhere, and conventionally is converted into heat instead of mass. --- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Merlyn wrote: > > Having loads of fun here > > > > parts > > of the previuos messages, so no quote possible> > > > > Horace, your gedanken experiment involving the > dropped > > rock neglects the fact that light carries > momentum. > > In order for the rock to be turned into light > > ttraveling the opposite direction, a force must be > > applied to reverse its momentum. Equally, Einstein > at > > the top of the ladder must apply a force when he > > catches the light to stop it and turn it into a > > stationary rock. > > Actually it was my gedanken, or rather my quote of > Einstein's gedanken > experiment. But you're right, force is necessary to > change the momentum > of the rock/photon. > > But we can deal with the momentum issue. The rock > can exchange momentum > with the person who catches it _without_ exchanging > more than a > negligible amount of energy, and it's the total > energy we were concerned > with. Just make the planet on which the person who > catches it is > sitting sufficiently massive, so that the planet's > motion, and by > extension the motion of the person, is negligible. > > We see this effect all the time in real life. > Bounce a ball off a hard, > solid wall. The ball's momentum reverses, which > implies the wall gained > momentum equal to twice what the ball had to start > with, but if it's a > good hard rubber ball and the wall is good and > solid, the ball loses > almost none of its energy. The wall gains momentum > but (almost) no energy. > > A massive mirror, for another example, will flip the > momentum vector of > a beam of light very nicely while absorbing > essentially none of the energy. > > The reason is that "net impulse" -- transfer of > momentum -- depends only > on the duration of the applied force, while "work" > -- energy transfer -- > depends on the force and the distance the body it > acts on moves during > the application of the force. If the body is > massive and hence doesn't > move more than a miniscule amount during application > of the force, only > a negligible amount of energy will be transfered. > > Finally, if you throw a _sticky_ ball at a wall, and > it sticks but > doesn't bounce off, _and_ if the wall is good and > solid (and massive), > you find that the wall gains momentum equal to what > the ball had, _but_ > it still gains almost no kinetic energy. Instead, > the ball's kinetic > energy (almost) all turns into heat. > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Horace Hiatus
Having loads of fun here Horace, your gedanken experiment involving the dropped rock neglects the fact that light carries momentum. In order for the rock to be turned into light ttraveling the opposite direction, a force must be applied to reverse its momentum. Equally, Einstein at the top of the ladder must apply a force when he catches the light to stop it and turn it into a stationary rock. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Horace Hiatus
No, The principle that ring-laser gyro's work under is that the signals are no longer in ophase when they arrive. This can be accomplished either by allowing them to arrive at different times, or by allowing them to experience a different passage of time during their travel. For Hafele's clocks to show a difference in time passing, after they are brought back together, it does not actually matter whether the planes land at different times or even traveled at different speeds, because neither of which would affect the clocks. The solution probably has to do with the difference in gravity experienced by the planes, as the one traveling with the earth's rotation experiences a decrease in gravity (due to an increased centrepetal force) while the other plane experiences the opposite. --- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Merlyn wrote: > > Actually, because the planes fly at equivalent > speeds > > WRT the Earth, which is a rotating frame of > reference, > > when they get back to the geographical starting > place > > (which has moved), they arrive at the same "local" > > time > > Not right. See below. > > > and according to Hafele's experimentally obtained > > data the clocks do not agree. > > But that's right. > > The problem with the first item is that the clocks > disagree by some tiny > amount -- say, a millionth of a second (I'm guessing > but probably > close). So, one of the two planes actually arrived > a microsecond before > the other one. > > Such a small difference in arrival times of physical > aircraft can't be > measured!! At 500 mph the nose of the plane moves > 0.009 inches in a > microsecond. Using any earthly measurement system > the planes will > _appear_ to arrive back at their starting points > simultaneously. > Indeed, the imprecision in the _starting_ locations > of the two aircraft > is surely many orders of magnitude larger than the > difference in the > location at which they actually met when they came > back to home base again. > > The only thing which _can_ be measured is the > difference in their clock > readings. That's straightforward by comparison -- > both planes land, and > you put the clocks next to each other and compare > them. Or do it by > radio before they land - either way it's easy. > > If you want to actually observe the fact that they > don't arrive back at > together at the starting point at the same moment, > you need to use > something smaller and more precise than aircraft, > like light pulses, > whose arrival time can be measured _precisely_. And > when that's done, > you do indeed observe that the arrival times, > according to local clocks, > are different. As I've already pointed out, that's > the principle on > which ring-laser gyros are based -- if it were not > true they would not work. > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Horace Hiatus
ould slow right down since > > mass is the reciprocal of internal closed path > > velocity (see IHM note on Beta-atm.Yahoo site). > > > > The fact that the caesium clocks rate can be > altered > > merely by flying it around the globe shows the > utter > > insanity of using it to define length. If you do, > then > > you end up with the ludicrous result that the > distance > > around the globe clockwise is different from that > around > > the globe widdershins. > > Ring-laser gyros make hardly any sense, it's true. > You're right. > However, they exist and they work. All of special > relativity has this > problem: Intuitively it's absurd. But it's born > out by an enormous > mass of experimental data. > > But there's a point you may have missed in the > "airplane" experiment. > The two aircraft don't arrive back at the starting > point at the same > moment. According to each airplane's onboard clock, > the time to go > around the world was the same -- that doesn't depend > on the direction! > And so neither does the distance the airplane > traveled. What changes is > how long it takes in Earth-minutes for the planes to > go around the world. > > At the point at which the planes meet -- which is > _NOT_ the starting > point, because they got back to the start at > different times -- they > really have traveled different distances, and their > clocks really do > show different readings. There's no contradiction > and little surprise > in that. The odd thing is that the don't get back > to the starting point > at the same time. > > > > Frank Grimer Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: Airborne Backpack Blower
I stand corrected. This OEM list http://www.owwm.com/MfgIndex/Detail.asp?ID=222 indicates that most craftsman lawn equipment is manufactured by the Electrolux group, and is equivalent to the Poulan and Weedeater brands. Still havent tracked down the engine manuf. yet. --- John Steck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > B&S is not in the 2-stroke game, they do 4-stroke. > Craftsman outdoor power > is a private label by MTD out of Ohio. MTD brands > include Cub Cadet, > Troy-Bilt, Yard-Man, Ryobi, Yard Machines, Bolens > and Cub Cadet. Some > assembly stateside but the bulk of the manufacturing > and parts come from > overseas. > > OEM = original equipment manufacturer... and no, > Sears now private labels > just about everything under the Craftsman name now. > They are now a VAR = > value added reseller. > > -john > > > > -Original Message- > From: Merlyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 12:23 PM > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Subject: RE: Airborne Backpack Blower > > > Its probably a Briggs and Stratton out of Wisconsin. > And Craftsman IS an OEM, just not for the engine. > > --- John Steck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Craftsman is just a private label. They are not > an > > OEM. All 2-stokes are > > regulated by the EPA... You want to know who > really > > makes it, read the > > emissions label on the engine. My bet is it isn't > 'down-home-Amurcan' > > at all. > > > > -john > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 9:56 AM > > To: vortex-l > > Subject: Airborne Backpack Blower > > > > [snip] what is more down-home-Amurcan than > Craftsman > > ? > > > > > > > > > Merlyn > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Nanoparticle PVs Translate IR
Huh... Well, the only other thing I can think is that perhaps he was referring to percentage of total insolation at Top of Atmosphere? Roughly 46% of solar radiation is absorbed by the atmosphere. --- Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Oh, I just noticed the CRC table is located on page > 14-10, not 18-10 > as I noted. If you look at solar insolation factors > by frequency you > see it drops off to nothing at the tails. For > example, from 0 to 120 > nm there is only 0.00044 percent. From 120 to 140 > there is only > another .9 percent. The table actually shows > that from 0 to > 100,000 nm the cumulative percent of solar > insolation is 99.999002 > percent. So basically we are quibbling about a few > thousandths of a > percent. Below is an updated table using your > range. > > Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude: > > Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range > >0 - 10 *** less than 0.00044 percent*** > 10 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV > 400 - 700 46.87938.154 Visible > 700 - 10 99.99953.120 IR > 10 - 100 *** less than .000998 percent *** > > Derived from page 14-10 of the 74th Edition of The > CRC Handbook. > > The original article seems to leave out about 54 > percent, which is > not even close. > > Here is the quote again: > > > > >One challenge for organic solar cells has been > the efficient > > capture and conversion of sunlight. Sunlight is > comprised of > > photons (particles of light) that are delivered > across a spectrum > > that includes invisible ultraviolet (UV) light, > the visible > > spectrum of colors -- violet, indigo, blue, green, > yellow, orange > > and red -- and the invisible IR spectrum. The > amount of incoming > > photons across the UV, visible and IR spectrums is > about 4, 5 and > > 45 percent, respectively. > > > > > On Jan 17, 2006, at 8:11 AM, Merlyn wrote: > > > According to my table > > > (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems1.html) > > > > UV is only considered to be wavelengths between > 10nm > > and 400nm, and IR is wavelengths from 750nm to 1mm > > (1,000,000nm) > > > > So, your table does not include x- and gamma- > rays, > > nor the RF frequencies. > > > > --- Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> > >> On Jan 16, 2006, at 6:16 AM, Merlyn wrote: > >> > >>> Doesn't have to total to 100% > >>> IR, Visible, and UV do not cover the entire EM > >>> spectrum, the sun puts out energy over a very > >> broad > >>> range of frequencies. > >>>> > >> > >> > >> > >> Sure it does. Look at the table again. > >> > >> > >> > >>>> Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude: > >>>> > >>>> Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range > >>>> > >>>>0 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV > >>>> 400 - 700 46.87938.154 Visible > >>>> 700 - 10 99.99953.120 IR > >>>> > >>>> Derived from page 18-10 of the 74th Edition of > >> The > >>>> CRC Handbook. > >>>> > >>>> Horace Heffner > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > Merlyn > > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > > > __ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Gaia Scientist: DO PANIC
Yup! A quick google says Lake Ontario sits at 243' above sea level. If we raise the water that much we are all in trouble. --- Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jan 18, 2006, at 3:51 AM, Rhong Dhong wrote: > > > That reminds me of something I have wondered > about. > > > > I live in a town on the South shore of Lake > Ontario. > > If global warming results in a rise in sea-level, > will > > the raging waters travel down the St. Lawrence > Seaway, > > and raise the level of Lake Ontario and flood me > out? > > > > Or is there a stopper somewhere along the way? > > Don't worry! There is plenty of elevation at your > location. The > water surface elevation drops a lot on the way to > the sea. Niagra > Falls alone is a good stopper. > > The places that may be wiped out without billions in > intervention are > low lying, like Vienna, Holland, Bangladesh, New > Orleans and the > entire gulf coast for that matter, and much of > Florida. > > Horace Heffner > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: Airborne Backpack Blower
Its probably a Briggs and Stratton out of Wisconsin. And Craftsman IS an OEM, just not for the engine. --- John Steck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Craftsman is just a private label. They are not an > OEM. All 2-stokes are > regulated by the EPA... You want to know who really > makes it, read the > emissions label on the engine. My bet is it isn't > 'down-home-Amurcan' at > all. > > -john > > -Original Message- > From: Jones Beene [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 9:56 AM > To: vortex-l > Subject: Airborne Backpack Blower > > [snip] what is more down-home-Amurcan than Craftsman > ? > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Nanoparticle PVs Translate IR
According to my table (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/ems1.html) UV is only considered to be wavelengths between 10nm and 400nm, and IR is wavelengths from 750nm to 1mm (1,000,000nm) So, your table does not include x- and gamma- rays, nor the RF frequencies. --- Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 16, 2006, at 6:16 AM, Merlyn wrote: > > > Doesn't have to total to 100% > > IR, Visible, and UV do not cover the entire EM > > spectrum, the sun puts out energy over a very > broad > > range of frequencies. > >> > > > > Sure it does. Look at the table again. > > > > >> Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude: > >> > >> Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range > >> > >>0 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV > >> 400 - 700 46.87938.154 Visible > >> 700 - 10 99.99953.120 IR > >> > >> Derived from page 18-10 of the 74th Edition of > The > >> CRC Handbook. > >> > >> Horace Heffner > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: DENSO CO2 Heat Pump Innovation
I think the main point is simply that it is more efficient, and so reduces power consumption. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Our news media touted this as a method of reducing > greenhouse gases. > Well, I doubt enough CO2 will be sequestered to make > a difference. It > *does*, however, reduce the need for > clorofllurocarbons which damage > the O3 layer. Does our news media know the > difference? > > http://www.jsme.or.jp/English/awardsn03-3.html > > "As an environmental protection measure, public > attention is now > focusing on improving the energy savings of > residential water heating, > which accounts for about one-third of total > household energy > consumption. > One practical solution is to promote expanded use of > "EcoCute," a high > efficiency heat pump water heater using a natural > refrigerant (CO2). > As part of our efforts to increase the popularity of > EcoCute, we have > developed the world's first variable ejector > refrigeration cycle > technology for CO2 refrigerants. > This technology enables more efficiently designed, > larger-capacity > water heating systems that can supply hot water for > floor heating and > other purposes as well as standard hot water > systems." > ___ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Nanoparticle PVs Translate IR
Doesn't have to total to 100% IR, Visible, and UV do not cover the entire EM spectrum, the sun puts out energy over a very broad range of frequencies. --- Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 15, 2006, at 7:19 AM, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > http://www.photonics.com/todaysheadlines/article.asp?id=6070 > > > > > >"With this approach, we are well on our way to > power levels > > exceeding 100 watts per meter," he said. > > > Pretty amazing, though I have to wonder what "well > on our way" means. > > > > >One challenge for organic solar cells has been > the efficient > > capture and conversion of sunlight. Sunlight is > comprised of > > photons (particles of light) that are delivered > across a spectrum > > that includes invisible ultraviolet (UV) light, > the visible > > spectrum of colors -- violet, indigo, blue, green, > yellow, orange > > and red -- and the invisible IR spectrum. The > amount of incoming > > photons across the UV, visible and IR spectrums is > about 4, 5 and > > 45 percent, respectively. > > Looks like a typo above. Doesn't add up to 100 > percent. Anyway, > more important than the number of photons is the > amount of *energy* > (per area) incoming in the various bands. > > > The visible spectrum is commonly (i.e. for most > people) 400 to 700 > nm. See: > <http://www.factspider.com/vi/visible-spectrum.html> > > Percent solar constant at aircraft altitude: > > Lambda (nm) Cum % % Range > >0 - 400 8.725 8.725 UV > 400 - 700 46.87938.154 Visible > 700 - 10 99.99953.120 IR > > Derived from page 18-10 of the 74th Edition of The > CRC Handbook. > > Horace Heffner > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Fw: Dash Files for LENR Patent
According to Bill B's Vortex lift theory, you might get better results by tipping the outer edge of your disk downwards (like an inverted pie plate)... --- Nick Palmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: Nick Palmer > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 1:10 PM > Subject: Re: Dash Files for LENR Patent > > > Hey Fred, I saw your hovercraft idea and thought it > was interesting but there is a lot of traffic on > Vortex these days and I am afraid I consigned it to > the file marked "I hope someone else follows this > up". I had a vague idea that it may be trying to > "lift oneself up by one's own bootstraps"... > > > > Nick Palmer Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Heim Theory: A Real Warp Drive
Actually, the whole 'warp' thing is a side effect of his original theory. During the 50's Heim began working on reconciling relativity and quantum mechanics. In order to do so he came up with an 8-dimensional universe, but later discarded 2 of the dimensions (Droescher reinstated those 2 dropped dimensions in an expansion of the theory). Not only does his theory and the equations coming from it predict a possible warp drive, but also the possibility of hyper-dimensional travel (FTL?) He never managed the funding to test the theory, but he did have a portion published which accurately predicts the masses of elementary particles based on their physical characteristics (which no one else has been able to do) They have the equations to back it, now if they can get their experiment to work, we might really have something. --- Wesley Bruce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > I came across this while searching for six > dimensional theories: > > > > > http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/mg18925331.200.html > > > > excerpt: > > > > Claims of the possibility of "gravity reduction" > or "anti-gravity" > > induced by magnetic fields have been investigated > by NASA before (New > > Scientist, 12 January 2002, p 24). But this one, > Dröscher insists, is > > different. "Our theory is not about anti-gravity. > It's about > > completely new fields with new properties," he > says. And he and Häuser > > have suggested an experiment to prove it. > > > > This will require a huge rotating ring placed > above a superconducting > > coil to create an intense magnetic field. With a > large enough current > > in the coil, and a large enough magnetic field, > Dröscher claims the > > electromagnetic force can reduce the gravitational > pull on the ring to > > the point where it floats free. Dröscher and > Häuser say that to > > completely counter Earth's pull on a 150-tonne > spacecraft a magnetic > > field of around 25 tesla would be needed. While > that's 500,000 times > > the strength of Earth's magnetic field, pulsed > magnets briefly reach > > field strengths up to 80 tesla. And Dröscher and > Häuser go further. > > With a faster-spinning ring and an even stronger > magnetic field, > > gravitophotons would interact with conventional > gravity to produce a > > repulsive anti-gravity force, they suggest. > > > > > > > > There's more here; but, this is harder to > understand than > > Beta-atmosphere: > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heim_theory > > > ___ > > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > > http://mail.netscape.com > > > Nice one! This guys just reinvented John Searls seg. > The seg self cools > to extremely low temperature and has spinning > rollers on spinning rings. > If only we could convert Johns theory into equations > we would be on our > way. The field strengths are about right. Dröscher > and Häuser may have > done the equations that we need. Wont it be cool to > have a true space > drive finally. Wont it be even cooler to discover > that we had a > prototype in the 1960's! That will give the skeptics > a migraine. > I wonder how the equations fit with Dr Podkletnov's > work? > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Re: 13 things that don't make sense
Doh! The article was from March! Sorry, still interesting though --- Merlyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > New scientist ran a year-end list titled "13 things > that do not make sense" > > http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600 > > This is a list of definite scientific phenomena > which > mainstream physics can't explain. > > Included on the list are placebos (#1), High energy > cosmic rays (#3), tetraneutrons (#7), and cold > fusion > (#13). > > It's light on details, but does present CF as a real > effect which is just not properly understood by > accepted science. > > Merlyn > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > > > __ > Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. > Just $16.99/mo. or less. > dsl.yahoo.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Re: More questions
You might have better luck seperating the magnet from the pipe. Assuming that a PVC pipe can withstand the high roattion speeds you are talking about, it would then be trivial to arrange permanent magnets around the pipe for whatever field geometry you wanted. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Google returns several hits on custom neodymium > magnets including: > > http://www.duramag.com/ > > They will need to know how you want the field > oriented. > > Regarding Q2, what *is* the resonant frequency of > water? > > -Original Message- > From: RC Macaulay > > Question One anyone know where we can purchase > (or have > fabricated) a section of permanent magnet, the > section being > cylindrical pipe shaped sized like 6 " sch 160 pipe > x 2 feet length ? > > Question two We want to experiment > using solenoids to generate a > magnetic path thru the wall of a 6" pipe. Anyone > ever have experience > with experinets using frequency controllers in an > attempt to "cycle" > the current applied to the solenoids at ultra high > frequencies > approaching resonance frequency of water? Tell me it > can't be done. > > ___ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
13 things that don't make sense
New scientist ran a year-end list titled "13 things that do not make sense" http://www.newscientistspace.com/article.ns?id=mg18524911.600 This is a list of definite scientific phenomena which mainstream physics can't explain. Included on the list are placebos (#1), High energy cosmic rays (#3), tetraneutrons (#7), and cold fusion (#13). It's light on details, but does present CF as a real effect which is just not properly understood by accepted science. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Re: Global Warming
Realistically, 23 seconds in 33 years sounds to me like our clocks are just now becoming accurate enough to tell us that our calender year is a couple seconds short. Friction from tidal crust distortion would create heat. Been doing it for years. Don't forget to account for the addition of mass to the system by way of "space dust", I remember reading somewhere that the Earth's diameter increases by a couple of millimeters annually due to addition of material from space (meteors, solar wind, etc.) Perhaps this additional mass is responsible for keeping the ever accelerating moon from flying off into space, and it's orbital radius is not much different from what it was when the system formed. --- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vortexians- The evening news on ABC ststed that the > clock watchers > are going to add a leap second to the > last second of > Dec.31,2005 to correct the clocks to > the earths rotation. > It seems that they have had to add 23 > seconds since > 1972 to correct clocks. The Earth has > been slowing down > its rotation speed. > The slowing of the earth should > increase its > temperature I would think (Im possibly > wrong.) > It does seem to coinside with the years > of biggest > increase of temperature. Or as many > suspect just a normal > cycle. > A cycle we are not aware of. > _ges- > > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Re: Atmospheric electric polarization
It was my understanding that the electric polarization has more to do with interaction with the earth's magnetic field than with gravity. You also need to take into account cosmic radiation being absorbed into the upper atmosphere. --- David Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I read in vortex-l many years ago about the > atmosphere on Jupiter or > Saturn being electrically polarized. The author said > that ions were > more attracted by gravity than electrons. > > It is also known on earth that there is an electric > field of 90-150 > V/m. Is it caused by the same effect? > > I am basically interested in electric polarization > in pressure gradients. > > David > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Space Tourist Trade
The concept artist who drew that doesn't seem to have a very good grasp of the concept. Virgin has licensed Burt Rutan's Spaceship One, which is shown in the concept rendering. What is not shown is the White Knight craft which carries Spaceship One to launch height. White Knight needs a standard length runway for takeoff, and both pretty much require a normal runway for landing. This means that your space-port functions under similar design constraints as a standard mid-size airport. I can think of some practical construction reasons to build underground, and if it were a vertical takeoff spaceship I can see excavation for exhaust tunnels, but I can't see any practical usage reasons for this design. BTW the iris is from the new Virgin Galactic Logo. PS oops. I went through Space.com and found the full article, which has an additional graphic, which does show White Knight, as well as a regular sized airstrip. I still don't understand why he sank the passenger hub underground. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > No, the spaceport control center will be below grade > as is indicated in > this cross section view. The plan view looks like a > human iris and > pupil: > > http://tinyurl.com/cjsjf > > The location is not far from the alleged crash site > of 1947 fame. > > -Original Message- > From: thomas malloy > > One of the interviewees on C to C AM said that Sir > Richard's proposed > design for the New Mexico space port involves > several hundred of > millions of dollars worth of excavation. Part of > this investment is Sir > Richard's, but the state of New Mexico is putting up > a significant sum > too. This begs the question of which way Sir Richard > wants to go, > alternatively, perhaps some of the customers will > come from the > underground. > ___ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: BMW ICE Steam Hybrid
Yup, but do they run into problems with backpressure? Cooling the exhaust necessitates that it becomes denser. I have heard that backpressure can be a problem with exhaust cooling, but do not have the references handy. --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Finally, someone finds a practical way to use the > wasted ICE heat: > > http://www.gizmag.com/go/4936/ > > "The concept uses energy from the exhaust gasses of > the traditional > Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) to power a steam > engine which also > contributes power to the automobile ? an overall 15 > per cent > improvement for the combined drive system." > ___ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: ZPE, Naked Women and UFOs
Chi has very little to do with accumulation. Like most energies, it is only useful when flowing. Intercourse doesn't really deplete male chi anymore than it depletes female chi, it simply connects the 2 energy networks, allowing for an exchange. To reiterate IMHO you cannot 'lose' chi. You cannot 'have' chi. You are merely a conduit for a flow of energy which neither begins nor ends within your self. You are like a dam across a river, controlling a small portion of the flow available and using it to do useful work. In the end, life is what you make it. Merlyn Swimmer in the Chi --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Jack suffered from loss of Chi. He would not have > destroyed the world > had he practiced Sexual ChiKong, sexual orgasm > without ejaculation: > > http://www.actionlove.com/cases/case8792.htm > > Chi, BTW, is believed to be related to the ZPE, > Orgone energy, etc. (by > some). > > -Original Message- > From: OrionWorks > > Yes a profound sense of fatigue, a feeling of > emptiness followed. > Luckily I was > able to interpret these feelings correctly: loss of > essence. > ___ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your > Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Correa attacks Wikipedia
Gosh Bill, Now I feel bad for using a free email and online handle. What's in a name? Is a long-used handle any more or less informative than the name your parents gave you? A family name tells where you came from. A nickname tells what your friends think about you. A Nom de Cyber tells what you feel about yourself. I go by Merlyn because thats simply the way I think of myself. My real name (for those interested) is Adam Thomas Cox, and I'm from Wichita, Ks. Since anyone can claim to be anything online, the answer is not to demand a proven identity, but perhaps to demand an identity with some history behind it. BTW Bill, thanks for not requiring a verified email addy instead of the pay ones, it would complicate thinks greatly. Adam --- William Beaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 16 Dec 2005, Steven Krivit wrote: > > > Bill B's got a good point. This is one of the > aspects which makes Vortex > > such a valuable group. > > Most people are willing to identify themselves and > stand behind their words. > > In observing (or fighting with) flamer types over > the years, I noticed > that one of the major characteristics that reliably > defines "flamer" is... > anonymity! Serious people give their real names > (and often provide a > message sig with personal website, city, etc.) > Immature or abusive people > use handles. > > (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) > ))) > William J. BeatySCIENCE > HOBBYIST website > billb at amasci com > http://amasci.com > EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby > projects, sci fair > Seattle, WA 206-789-0775unusual phenomena, > tesla coils, weird sci > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: OT: Secrets of bee flight revealed
Ok, time to wade through and clarify... (will try to snip tyhe unimportant) --- William Beaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Merlyn wrote: > > > I don't agree with Bernoulli, but pressure is > still > > the key. > > First see: http://amasci.com/wing/airfoil.html, and > especially the FAQ at > http://amasci.com/wing/airfoil.html#faq > Which is basically what I was saying, but explained much better. > > > As the wing pushes through the air, the leading > edge > > divides the air into roughly equivalent parts > flowing > > above and below. > > Nope, doesn't happen. When the pattern of air > flowing above and below the > wing are the same, then the lift is zero. For > example, here's a diagram > of a tilted plate at high viscosity where the > lifting force is zero: > > http://www.av8n.com//how/img48/barn20x.png > > And here's a diagram of the same plate at low > viscosity, where inertia > effects dominate, and the lift is non-zero: > > http://www.av8n.com//how/img48/barn20z.png > I meant roughly equivalent mass, I said nothing about equivalent air flow patterns. > > Here's another effect: whenever an airfoil is > creating lift, it starts > separating the upper and lower parcels permanently. > Check out the blue > band behind the airfoil in the diagram below when it > is tilted to produce > zero, medium, and high lift: > > http://www.av8n.com//how/img48/3v.png > > "Phase lag" between upper and lower parcels is > proportional to lift. > > > > > The thickest part of the wing lies > > in the front third of it's depth. > > Explanations of lift must be able to handle flat > plates, and symmetrical > thick airfoils, as well as cambered airfoils both > thin and thick. If you > start out by visualizing a thick cambered airfoil, > you're going to run > into trouble. Instead, start out by visualizing a > tilted thin plate (with > no nonlinear flow detachment, of course.) Once you > can explain the tilted > flat thin wing, then you can easily explain the > un-tilted cambered thin > wing... and both these explanations remain the same > for thick streamlined > wings. > OK, I was simplifying a typical airfoil section. The pressure dfferential explanation (which we both promote) still explains all lift. > > > As far as wingtip vortices go, I have some > > counterexamples for you. > > Airplane engineers have often over the years > sought to > > reduce or even eliminate the vortices coming off > the > > wingtips of a jet, many methods of this were > > accomplished, without reducing the wings lift. > > No, they only redistribute the flow pattern without > affecting the total > "vorticity." Because kinetic energy varies as the > square of velocity, a > flow pattern with high velocity near the "vortex > core" will have greater > net KE than a flow pattern that's distributed > differently. > > > Also, many military planes mount missiles on the > very > > tip of the wing, which would dramatically change > the > > flight capability of a plane if the vortices were > the > > primary source of lift. > > The total flow pattern, the "vorticity," is the > primary source of lift. > > Thinking in terms of the "rotating disk balloons" > analogy at this site: > http://amasci.com/wing/rotbal.html , the overall > rotary motion of the > entire "balloons" is what's important, while any > swirling of a central > core of air is unimportant (and wastes energy.) A > wing must produce a > downward-moving pair of rotating cylinders made of > air. Whether the very > center of the cylinders is spinning fast or slow is > irrelevant. It's the > downward acceleration of oncoming still air which > produces lift. > > Perhaps confusion arises because the word "vortex" > can mean "vortex core," > (where "vortex" applies only to the high speed > spinning air near the > center of the flow pattern,) **OR** the word can > apply to the entire > aircraft wake (the entire "rotating balloons" > animated in my article > above.) > > So by adding small winglets to the wing tips, we can > eliminate > the "vortex" (meaning the vortex core only,) while > having no effect on > the "vortex" (meaning the net rotation of the > overall flow pattern.) > Ah, see here is where you had me confused, because typically a "wingtip vortex" is considered to be the vortex "core". >
Re: OT: Secrets of bee flight revealed
I most humbly (or perhaps not so humbly) beg to differ. --- William Beaty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In other words... (and in big capital letters,) > >ALL FLIGHT IS BASED ON VORTEX-SHEDDING > > Corellary: if your explanation of flight does not > include vortex-shedding, > then it is wrong. > I don't agree with Bernoulli, but pressure is still the key. As the wing pushes through the air, the leading edge divides the air into roughly equivalent parts flowing above and below. The thickest part of the wing lies in the front third of it's depth. After this point, the top of the wing drops, while the bottom remains effectively flat. This produces an area above the wing of lower pressure which lifts the wing. The area below the wing has a slightly higher pressure, and when this spills up around the wingtip it creates the vortex. As far as wingtip vortices go, I have some counterexamples for you. Airplane engineers have often over the years sought to reduce or even eliminate the vortices coming off the wingtips of a jet, many methods of this were accomplished, without reducing the wings lift. http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-94.htm http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/c-20.htm Also, many military planes mount missiles on the very tip of the wing, which would dramatically change the flight capability of a plane if the vortices were the primary source of lift. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-16.htm Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
Re: Maser
Sorry RC, but sound is a physical phenomenon, no matter how you slice it. A sound wave is composed of particles oscillating back and forth and transmitting energy in the direction of wave motion by physical collisions. Light is composed of photons (which may or may not be physical) and travels directly. Sure, if you believe in aether theory then light would be similar to sound. However a sonic weapon equivalent to a laser is not possible due to diffraction angles. Sound is NOT light. Light MAY be sound on a different hierarchal scale, but the two points are NOT equivalent. Tom, the sonic equivalent of a laser would be a focused shockwave, but focusing sonic energy like that does not really work. Plus, to really tear stuff up you would need a high-frequency oscillating wave, and the only good way to create a shockwave (bomb) only gives you one wavefront, not the repeated fronts needed. --- RC Macaulay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Leaking Pen, > Your analogy is only ONE manifestation of sound. > i.e. heat > - Original Message - > From: leaking pen > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 9:58 PM > Subject: Re: Maser > > > no, sound is particles moving in a wave motion, > and light is a wave motion in its own right. sound > is closer to teh heat generated by shining light on > something. > > > On 11/28/05, RC Macaulay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > Hi, > Sound is light. Recent experiment demonstrating > that light can be " frozen" > is only one indication. > Richard > - Original Message - > From: "Rick Monteverde" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 5:24 PM > Subject: RE: Maser > > > > Aren't phonons the storage of momentum/sound > at the atomic or crystal > > lattice level? And wouldn't they be more or > less in-phase when a bulk > > object resonates at that internal frequency? I > suspect that a "singing > > stone" which has a resonant frequency *not* > dictated by the cut size of > > the stone is just such an animal - a sort of > sound laser. I suspect that > > the acoustic output is ordinary and isn't any > more beam-like than any > > sound at that frequency (legends of acoustic > stone levitation not > > withstanding). It might be called an AASER - > acoustic amplification (by) > > stimulated emission (of phonon) radiation. > Needs a better acronym, > > though. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: Robin van Spaandonk > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ] > > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2005 11:06 AM > > To: vortex-l@eskimo.com > > Subject: Re: Maser > > > > > > In reply to leaking pen's message of Mon, 28 > Nov 2005 12:51:32 > > -0700: > > Hi, > > [snip] > >>no, its a beam of em radiation in the > microwave band similar to a > >>laser. > > > > You missed the "of sound" bit. AFAIK there is > no such thing for sound, > > because there is no way of storing sound > energy at the atomic level, > > hence no inverted populations can be created, > and therefore no > > stimulated emission is possible. > > > >> > >>On 11/28/05, thomas malloy < > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Is a maser a beam of sound similar to al > laser? > >>> > >>> > >>> --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - > $8.25/mo! -- > >>> http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - > $19.99/mo! --- > >>> > >>> > > Regards, > > > > Robin van Spaandonk > > > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > > > Competition provides the motivation, > > Cooperation provides the means. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > "Monsieur l'abbé, I detest what you write, but I > would give my life to make it possible for you to > continue to write" Voltaire Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
Re: BYU. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC
Yeah, I have noticed that most conspiracy theories have focused on a scientist saying "the collapse was not possible without assistance, according to the laws of physics" or something similar. Most individuals actually related to construction are unwilling to say it could not have happened. The science types forget that real-world physics is different than lab physics, because of the number of uncontrolled variables. I have done a little qualitative research during the past week on structural failure due to fire, and would like to interject a few facts that are typically overlooked by the conspiracy theorists. 1. Temperature I don't have a figure on what the temp. could have been at the fire, but I do know that standard fire tests start at 1000 F and go up to 2400 F. Burning jet fuel is hot, but not neccesarily as hot as burning carpet and plaster. 2. Structural Integrity Concrete (like the floor slabs in the building) undergoes explosive spalling at temperatures as low as 600 F, especially when subjected to a steep temperature gradient. Concrete and steel both lose signifacant structural strength at temperatures above 400 F. Steel and Concrete have thermal expansion coefficients which differ by a factor of 1000, so under these temperatures, the concrete slab would seperate from the steel deck below which greatly reduces the strength of the composite floor. 3. Vertical Demolition The structural support for the tower was at the perimeter and center. Most of the vertical load was taken by the core around the stairwells and elevator shafts. If the fire spread down these shafts and weakened this central support structure, an implosion would have to follow. Also, with something of this size, the only way to topple the building sideways would be to start at the bottom, if you start anywhere within the top half, the floors have nowhere to go but down. 4. Explosions I have already mentioned the explosive spalling of concrete under high temperature gradients, add this to the rapid thermal expansion of steel and you have a very plausible mechanism for throwing debris to the extent witnessed. Also, any finely powdered material will burn and (in a confined space) explode, which could provide a natural explanation for the explosions. The point is that there are no experiments designed to mimic what we know about the towers' collapse, and so we are left with guesswork and theory, which can never account for every real-world variable in the event. --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 07:35 pm 20/11/2005 -0600, Richard wrote: > > > Hi Harry, > > > Don't know about the physics but the mechanical > > and structural engineering aspects of the > > collapse make for a wide range of theories > > for the cause of the (near symmetrical) > > collapse of the buildings. Add to the > > confusion caused by FEMA and the standard > > operating procedure of the government and > > you have a quagmire of conflicting views > > even among the structural engineering > > studies that resulted. > > > > Having worked in the Structural Engineering > Division of the British Building Research > Establishment for 30 years and taken part in > the collapse of an 80 high model of a tower > block of flats made from concrete panels I > thought it would be appropriate to add my > two pennyworth to this thread. > > I was lucky enough (perhaps not the best > choice of words) to see the 911 incident > as it happened. After the second impact > (live) I turned to my daughter and said, > "You are going to see both those towers > collapse in a minute." I should have been > saying a prayer for those about to die but > I was so fascinated by the huge structural > failure experiment taking place before my > eyes that any noble thoughts deserted me > completely. > > When the towers did eventually fail, > the mode of failure (straight down) was > exactly the same as I had witnessed in > the BRE model so it did not surprise me > in the least. I was also interested to > observe the huge cloud of dust thrown > up which was again the same as the BRE. > model though in the 911 case it was > mainly plaster dust, not concrete dust > as with our model. > > If you think about pictures of the vertical > walls left in bombed British and German > cities in WW2 I think you will see that > cellular structures do generally pancake > rather than topple. > > Frank Grimer > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com
Vertical Axis wind turbine
http://opensourceenergy.org/txtlstvw.aspx?LstID=99b82ae5-287f-4bb4-868d-2a44417a564b "Design creates pull on the back side, contributing to 40%+ wind conversion efficiencies; doesn't kill birds; runs more quietly; and doesn't need to be installed as high, blending better with landscape. Generating costs estimated at 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, surpassing conventional energy sources." He is designing units for between 1 kW for home use and 1 MW for utility power generation. The 1 kW unit is 18' high overall, the 1 MW unit is 220'. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com
Re: Well Read
Well, if the vortex is in a magnetic field, perhaps you are ionizing the water. Then the charged particles forced into the tube can be influenced by the magnetic field as they exit out the top. My 2 cents. --- RC Macaulay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BlankFor those Vorts that may wonder if their posts > are read.. keep posting. Every bit of information, > conjecture, disagreement, analogy etc, raises the > level of interest and learning curve . For me, I > digest each post and examine the thought expressed. > Solomon penned that " business is conducted over a > multitude of words". Only an occasional thought > expressed in the posts can have a profound effect on > someone searching for a particular answer. > > Now if I could figure out how a small flow through a > clear poly tubing section can spiral in the shape of > a coil spring I can move to the next step. The water > actually forms a separate and distinct coil inside > the clear tubing and increases its rotational speed > just prior to exiting to atmosphere.i,e, this is > a part of an applied research project in water > vortex studies where we mechanically produce a > vortex inside a ring of magnets with the overflow > at the top of the vortex exiting via the clear poly > tubing. > > Richard > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: COP >21 repeatedly - claim by Naudin
http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/tests/index.htm The description right below the cross section view at the top of the page says "The MAHG tube has been specially designed : It is composed by a water cooled vaccum tube filled with hydrogen at 0.1 atm." The temp measurements are for the cooling water, the reaction occurs in the gaseous hydrogen only. I cannot find any logic for the varying coolant flow rates, perhaps that is a faulty sensor? --- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > >>Do I have this right? See the graphs on this page: > >> > >>http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/tests/mahg2c.htm > >> > >>In the graph for test run 76, the fluctuating > green line is water flow in > >>liters per minute. The red and blue lines do not > fluctuate. They are > >>"temp input" and "temp output" which I presume > means cooling water > > > >Don't think so. That's the water he's running the > reaction with; it's not > >'disinterested' "cooling water". > > That's what I thought at first, but it seems like > the gadget is closed, and > this is cooling water flowing around the inner > shell. Isn't that what is > shown here? > > http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/tests/index.htm > > This looks like a cooling water loop to me: > > http://jlnlabs.imars.com/mahg/setup.htm > > Also, the flow is so large it would have to be > fracturing water at a > fantastic rate. 500 to 600 ml per minute! Actually, > I think that is too > much for ordinary flow calorimetry but maybe they > have a lot of heat to > remove from the cell. 500 ml = 28 moles. If that is > how much water they are > disassociating, it works out to be 8 MJ per minute, > or 133 kW, which is > ridiculous. > > - Jed > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: ICEs can't burn h2
http://www.isracast.com/tech_news/231005_tech.htm "THE CAR THAT MAKES ITS OWN FUEL A unique system that can produce Hydrogen inside a car using common metals such as Magnesium and Aluminum was developed by an Israeli company. The system solves all of the obstacles associated with the manufacturing, transporting and storing of hydrogen to be used in cars. Amnon Yogev, one of the two founders of Engineuity, and a retired Professor of the Weizmann Institute, suggested a method for producing a continuous flow of Hydrogen and steam under full pressure inside a car. The Hydrogen car Engineuity is working on will use metals such as Magnesium or Aluminum which will come in the form of a long coil. The gas tank in conventional vehicles will be replaced by a device called a Metal-Steam combustor that will separate Hydrogen out of heated water. The basic idea behind the technology is relatively simple: the tip of the metal coil is inserted into the Metal-Steam combustor together with water where it will be heated to very high temperatures. The metal atoms will bond to the Oxygen from the water, creating metal oxide. As a result, the Hydrogen molecules are free, and will be sent into the engine alongside the steam. The solid waste product of the process, in the form of metal oxide, will later be collected in the fuel station and recycled for further use by the metal industry." --- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vortexians- Any type of hydrogen source would be > acceptable. > Either hydrogen made on board or > hydrogen bought from > your local supplier. I was hopping the > race would also > demonstrate the infracstructure > requirements and solutions > for the so called hydrogen economy > coming. > -ges- > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Plug-and-play Prius Problems
Ah, but Jed are there actually that many drivers like you? I happen to live in Wichita, Ks and I can honestly say I have never driven a day in my life which did not involve 45 mph at minimum. My daily commute of 7 miles each way has me driving 55 mph for the majority, and that is without taking the major highways. Speed limits around here are typicaclly 40 mph, which means if you don't drive 45 you are somewhat of a road hazard. I will soon be changing jobs to one located downtown, and then will probably not have to drive over 40 for the majority of the commute, but that kinda depends on if I can miss rush hour or not. Point is that except for major metropolitan areas, most drivers need highway speeds for at least a portion of their daily commute. --- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Take someone like me, who hardly ever drives at > highway speeds. If I stick > with the parallel Prius+ design, using the ICE at > speeds above 40 mph, I > will end up burning five or 10 gallons per year of > gasoline more than I > would with your serial hybrid design. I would still > reduce overall > consumption by huge margin, in compared to an > ordinary driver I would use > practically no gasoline. On the other hand, since > there are millions of > urban commuters like me, overall this would consume > many millions of > gallons of gasoline extra. There are more of us than > there are people who > drive 500 miles per day on a routine basis. So you > are right: looking at > the big picture, the serial configuration probably > would be better for most > drivers under most circumstances, and the Prius > design would probably be > better for things like long-haul trucks. However, as > I said, there is much > to be said for going with the design we now have, > since that design has > been tested for many years and debugged. > > - Jed > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click. http://farechase.yahoo.com
Re: deceptively simple question
Because as the hot air rises the cold air rushes in to fill the low pressure region left behind. A high-pressure system is the result of the warm air not being able to rise and so it pushes the cold air in front of it making a warm front. --- Robin van Spaandonk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > if hot air rises, and thereby creates a low pressure > region, then > why are low pressure regions always accompanied by > cold fronts > rather than warm fronts? > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > In a town full of candlestick makers, > everyone lives in the light, > In a town full of thieves, > there is only one candle, > and everyone lives in the night. > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: CF and popular culture, "Outer Limits" episode
I guess my memory is wonky and I really should follow links... --- Merlyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I vaguely remember that episode, it started with a > > --- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Wikipedia mentions an episode on "Outer Limits" > > about CF. Here is a synopsis: > > > > > http://www.theouterlimits.com/episodes/season4/412.htm > > > > Keywords: CF bomb; evil CF researcher > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > > > Merlyn > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam > protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: CF and popular culture, "Outer Limits" episode
'Chain Reaction' actually had only the slightest connection to CF. It was really about sonoluminescence, and using lasers and a resonant cavitation effect to disasociate water into hydrogen and oxygen. 'The Saint' was about CF, periferally. --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 05:11 pm 22/09/2005 -0400, Jed wrote: > >Wikipedia mentions an episode on "Outer Limits" > about CF. Here is a synopsis: > > > >http://www.theouterlimits.com/episodes/season4/412.htm > > > >Keywords: CF bomb; evil CF researcher > > > Not as good as the film Chain Reaction - but I > suppose > "no publicity is bad publicity". > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: CF and popular culture, "Outer Limits" episode
I vaguely remember that episode, it started with a college physics test, having a question which stated "Explain in your own words why cold fusion is impossible" or some such. One student, after some furious figuring, wrote that it was possible. He flunked. 6-mos to a year later he comes back having spent the intervening time locked in his lab tinkering, with a CF bomb, to prove that it is possible. As I recall he never intended to use it, but it was accidently set off and destroyed the lecture hall and very little else. --- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Wikipedia mentions an episode on "Outer Limits" > about CF. Here is a synopsis: > > http://www.theouterlimits.com/episodes/season4/412.htm > > Keywords: CF bomb; evil CF researcher > > - Jed > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Beta-Atmosphere
Also, I referenced them and Puthoff when I pointed out the link between B-A and mass, their recent paper links gravitational and inertial mass to the ZPF, which is analogous to the B-A --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 04:48 pm 25/08/2005 -0400, you wrote: > >> From: Grimer > > > >> Also, I searched the site with "Herda" and got > nada - so I am at a > >> complete loss as to what you are on about. 8-) > > > >I'm sure Tom meant Haisch and Rueda. > > > >http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/9802031 > > > Thanks for the info. Terry. > > Neither of those names appear on the B-atm. Yahoo > site either. > > Even in the Vortex archives there is only one > reference to > Haisch and Rueda, and this is in a post by Jones on > Sat, 05 Mar 2005 where he says, > > > === >Unlike Puthoff, Sarfatti, Haisch, Rueda, etc Don > can bring >his thinking, and Dirac's mathematics, down to > earth in >understandable English. Actually Puthoff 'can' do > this as >well, but seldom does. Donald's writing style is > so clear >and logical, that one often scarcely realizes how > deep into >a precise understanding of complex math that he > can take >you. His Dirac articles are published in > 'Infinite Energy' >issues 43 and 44, available at : >www.infinite-energy.com >www.openseti.org. >This broadening of Dirac by Hotson is the only > causal, > *direct-contact model* of the EM field with ZPE > which is out >there, at least in accessible non-mathematical > form. > > === > > Frank > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Beta-Aether as UFT
I'm trying to avoid tying myself to the concept of particles fluctuating in the vacuum (although I realize that is the best explanation to date) Perhaps we should call it Beta-Atmospheric Flux Concentration. --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 07:12 pm 22/08/2005 -0700, Merlyn wrote: > > > >--- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > >> At 11:08 am 22/08/2005 -0700, Merlyn wrote: > > > > >> > Your explanation of the strength of materials > as a > >> > result of the difference between B-A pressure > >> > internally and externally would seem to require > the > >> > reduction of B-A pressure / density in the > presence > >> > of matter. > >> > >> > >> Pressure yes - concentration yes - density no, > since... > > > > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Frank > >> > >> > > > > What I meant by density was (not mass... not > matter > > exactly... um, I suppose 'stuff' isn't precise > > enough...) I guess field density as a measure of > > vacuum / Zero-Point fluctuations per unit volume, > so > > 'concentration' of the Beta-Aether, as you said > and I > > read right over, dang ADD. > > > > Cheers > > > > Merlyn > > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > > > Fine. We will settle for concentration then. > > In your case concentration of the Cheshire Cat's > grin > (concentration of the Zero-Point fluctuations per > unit > volume). > > In my case concentration of the Cheshire Cat's grin > along with the Cheshire Cat (concentration of the > Zero-Point fluctuations per unit volume along with > the particle wot is doing the fluctuatin'). 8-) > > Cheers, > > Alice > > > == > "I wish you wouldnt keep fluctuating so > rapidly; you > you make one quite giddy!" said Alice > > "All right," said the Cat; and this time it > fluctuated > quite slowly, beginning with the end of the > tail, > and ending with the grin, which remained some > time > after the rest of it had gone. > > "Well! Ive often seen a cat without a grin," > thought Alice; "but a grin without a cat! Its > the > most curious thing I ever saw in all my life!" > > = > > > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Beta-Aether as UFT
--- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 11:08 am 22/08/2005 -0700, Merlyn wrote: Snip > > Your explanation of the strength of materials as a > > result of the difference between B-A pressure > > internally and externally would seem to require > the > > reduction of B-A pressure / density in the > pressence > > of matter. > > > Pressure yes - concentration yes - density no, since snip > Cheers, > > Frank > > What I meant by density was (not mass... not matter exactly... um, I suppose 'stuff' isn't precise enough...) I guess field density as a measure of vacuum / Zero-Point fluctuations per unit volume, so 'concentration' of the Beta-Aether, as you said and I read right over, dang ADD. Cheers Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Beta-Aether as UFT
Frank, I've been giving some thought to your whole Beta-Atmosphere theory and reading your papers on the strength of materials, and I was shaken by the epiphany of a Unified Field Theory. Hal Puthoff, Alfonso Rueda, Bernard Haisch and others have demonstrated that inertia and gravity can both be explained by the effect of Zero-Point Fluctuations, with the gravity explanation requiring the warping of space by matter. Your explanation of the strength of materials as a result of the difference between B-A pressure internally and externally would seem to require the reduction of B-A pressure / density in the pressence of matter. Assuming that Beta-Atmosphere (Beta-Aether) and the ZPF are the same thing, allow me to synthesize the concepts together and expostulate upon the result. This reduction in B-A pressure would explain the apparent warping of space which results in gravity. Also, it would explain the apparent effect of gravity on light. I have never followed the theory that light could be directly effected by gravity, as it has no mass. However, the speed of a compression wave is inversly dependant upon the density of the medium through which it travels. Refraction of the light as it enters an area of progressivly reduced B-A density would bend it towards the "source", just as gravity would if it could effect light. Electro-Magnetism has also been linked to the ZPF (and thus B-A), and proposed as a means of harnessing its energy. The differing power laws related to the various manefestations of this effect could well be due to some form of hierarchal relationship in the B-A, At Casimir distances only certain types of ZPF fluctuations are allowed by the boundary conditions of scale. As the scale increases, you can get more and more types of ZPF fluctuations which result in different aspects of the B-A pressure. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: space elevator
Posted before I RTFA (Read The F'n Article) His design calls for almost half the weight of the system to be in a counterweight, so all of the ribbon above the break (wherever it is) would fly off into space. The rest is so light that terminal velocity would be minimal. Now Terminal velocity for the climbing rig situated just below the cut would be another matter entirely. --- Merlyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It would entirely depend on how high the break in > the > cable was, the top half hangs from orbit, so would > fly > off into space instead of falling. > > --- thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I've always regarded this idea as science fiction > > wearing scientific > > clothes. I noticed with interest that the author > is > > a credentialed > > scientist. I've often wondered what would happen > if > > the "cable" > > parted, I suppose if you were to build it over the > > ocean, the answer > > would be splash. This location would be a good > idea, > > particularly > > when the liability consequences were taken into > > consideration. > > > > > > > Merlyn > Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist > > > > > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: space elevator
It would entirely depend on how high the break in the cable was, the top half hangs from orbit, so would fly off into space instead of falling. --- thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've always regarded this idea as science fiction > wearing scientific > clothes. I noticed with interest that the author is > a credentialed > scientist. I've often wondered what would happen if > the "cable" > parted, I suppose if you were to build it over the > ocean, the answer > would be splash. This location would be a good idea, > particularly > when the liability consequences were taken into > consideration. > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Penrose on Brains
I subscribe to the concept of time as an illusion. It was summed up quite well in a (fictional) book I was reading the other day, in that God (or rather the gods of the book) saw time as one moment, incompassing all possibilites past and future, but the fate of the world depended on the mortal perception of time as a progression, a window which gives meaning and definition to the endless possibilities. I realize that this has almost no applicability to scientific reasoning, based as it is on cause and effect. I feel that non-physical effects such as ESP and certain energetic healing disciplines can transcend this temporal barrier, but our physical reality is forced into a linear timeline by the demands of consciousness. --- RC Macaulay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > BlankChris Zell wrote.. > > The difference between ESP and intuitive leaps of > understanding is simply a matter of degree. Those > who denigrate psychic phenomena > probably have no problem with the sterotype of a > light bulb appearing above their heads, as new > concepts simply pop into their minds. > Chris, thats a stretch. I can accept the intuitative > rather than the physic. As I read the various posts > on this and IT vs. Darwin etc. I think about one > subject often ignored. > > TIME > > If we presume time to have a beginning, we place > ourselves in a box. If we attempt to conceive time > as " eternal" with no ending we in turn are faced > with the question.. what if time had NO start.. it > is eternal.. no beginning. Tryng to grasp a concept > of time eternal is impossible to gather into one's > focus. It would mean that... > > No matter how much time elapses from this moment on > into eternity.. that measure of time would NEVER > equal the amount of time that has passed. This is > one on paradoxes facing the true scientist. The > paradox is that it is the one scientific fact that > is impossible to grasp in its significance. > > A proper view of time will open understanding to the > depth of the task facing CF research. > > Richard > > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Comment by J. Barandes
Has anyone considered the fact that by choosing to publish such an unprofessional reply by a GRAD STUDENT that perhaps The Crimson is actually showing covert support for CF by undermining the case against it? --- Steven Krivit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Jed, > > Oh, one more thing, > > Look who you are up against: a grad student. I went > up against one like him > from Columbia last year in a Wikipedia match. > Believe it or not, he may > actually be an innocent victim who's been spoon-fed > myths and > misinformation by his teachers. > > Want to see how this may be occurring? > > Look here for an example from Berkeley: > > http://newenergytimes.com/students/AcademicPerspective2004.htm > > It's no wonder our cold fusion friend and professor > at Berkeley needs to > keep off the record, lets he be labeled a heretic or > kook. > > s > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Insipid New York Times editorial
Jed, you shouldn't put so much reliance on hybrid gas-electric engines. Diesel cars in the 80's could get 50 mpg A vaporizing carbeurator was demonstrated in the 30's that got 100 mpg The standard internal combustion engine is grossly inefficient, but there are technologies out there (most of which have patents which have lapsed) that could fix the situation. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
What I meant was that if momentum is to be conserved, and the neutral mass particle has by definition zero momentum, then the collision cannot change the momentum of a normal positive mass particle. A particle with negative mass would, when impacted immediately proceed towards the impetus pushing on it rather than away as a positive mass particle would. --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 05:56 am 27/07/2005 -0700, you wrote: > >Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative > Mass > >particles boggles the mind. > > > >How would a particle with Neutral mass affect > >momentum? > > > > Good question. > > It would send it spinning off at right angles, > perhaps. > > In the ultimate, mass (and energy) is merely an > aspect > of momentum "Quis non agit non existit" (Leibniz); > so neutral mass implies zero momentum. > > If a materon consists of two parts, ones spinning > clockwise and one widdershins then because momentum > is a vector the particle has zero momentum. > > However, I'm sure you can conjure up plenty of > alternatives with the aid of your Metaphysical > Magic. ;-) > > Cheers, > > Frank Grimer > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: future printer = future replicator?
Ah, but have you looked at stereolithography lately? http://www.zcorp.com/ This company markets 3D rapid prototyping machines based on inkjet printers. They lay out a base of starch powder and then the printhead comes along and sprays a binding agent instead of ink. I've been to a demo they did, and the level of detail and speed were pretty amazing. I would say they create prototypes (in up to 4 colors) accurate to 1/100th inch. IIRC they use standard HP inkjet printheads. --- Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eat you heart out "Gutenberg"... > > yes, it is just a name these days, a symbol not > a real person, but it now has an even-more > undeserved-legacy than anyone could have > imagined...(see footnote 1) > > Anyone who has bought a computer recently realizes > that the manufacturer or retailer practically > gives-away an ink-jet printer to go with it. > (Catch-22 : the printer company makes enormous > profits on the quickly depleted ink cartridges) > > In the near future, however, surprising things are > being anticipated in the field, based on the > evolution and convergence of several connecting > technologies (in the James Burke tradition). > > One of them is ink. The other is paper (or > film)Doh > > The result is a computer printer which will print > not just a document but real computer circuits- even > a CPU, memory chips, op-amps, RFID stuff like that > (IOW= brains) - the sky is the limit for printing. > > Imagine ink which is conducting, semiconducting, or > controllably corrosive (so as to burn several > million holes through special paper, in an applied > pattern. Imagine printing five to fifteen sheets of > special paper or film, with circuit patterns aligned > on each sheet and then laminating (the collating > printer of the future will do all of these things > automatically). > > Just on more step in the evolution towards the > (under-appreciated) goal of machines being able to > reproduce. Self-replication is NOT a limitation for > machines of the future. > > Move over, simple-minded bipeds, the next dominant > species of planet earth is on the way... > > http://www.intertechusa.com/conferences/conferenceDetail.aspx?displayDetail=overview&WCID=105 > > Jones > > (1) a rare vortex footnote. One thing to remember > is that Gutenberg gets credit for an invention that > is thought to have been developed over many > centuries by many un-named folks simultaneously in > Holland, Prague and ... not to mention, mostly in > China and elsewhere. > Block print technology in China was probably as > important as what Gutenberg contributed, but racism > is deeply ingrained in Western History. Some of the > other inventions brought together by Gutenberg in > his pursuit of a printing press were: > > > a.. The adaptation for printing of the screw-type > press, which had been in use for hundreds of years, > throughout Europe and Asia, for making wine or olive > oil. The adaptation of block-print technology - > known in Europe only since the return of Marco Polo > at the end of the 13th century. > b.. The development of mass production > paper-making techniques. Paper was brought from > China in the 12th century. > c.. The development of oil-based (rollable) inks. > These had been around since before the 10th century > in China for use with block printing. > d.. Gutenberg's contribution to printing was the > amalgamation of a complete SYSTEM. > e.. It was a punch and mold system which allowed > the mass production of the movable block type. > Everything but the system was in place in China at > the time - but one disadvantage of having too many > people, even then (and cheap labor) is that there is > no incentive for the labor-saving system of > Gutenberg - and that is primarily what it was. > f.. Necessity is the mother of invention > g.. The lack of population in Gutenberg's time > caused by the black plague coming around every other > generation supplied the necessity. > h.. Shouldn't the bacterium "Yersinia pestis" or > the rodent "ratus ratus" be given some of the > credit? Actually the bacterium may have come from > the East also, but they had more skill at > controlling the population of "ratus ratus" - can > you say "mum, that was a tasty stir-fry and what was > that meat that tastes like chicken, General Hsu ?" > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Langmuirs paradox and ZPE
Contemplating collisions with Neutral or Negative Mass particles boggles the mind. How would a particle with Neutral mass affect momentum? --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 11:17 am 27/07/2005 +0200, you wrote: > >Hi > > > >I wonder if ZPE can be involved in the distribution > of thermal motion > >of low density plasmas. These distributions are > found to be of > >Maxwellian type even when collisions are too few to > maintain the > >distribution. This is called the Langmuir paradox. > > > >I wonder if ZPE, or any other radiation, can be the > cause for > >upholding Maxwell distribution in lack of > collisions. (There aren't > >many other forces involved, except quantum > phenomena, than > >electromagnetic.) > > > >I know this could take months to investigate but I > am just interested > >in a hint to a solution. > > > >David > > > MmmInteresting 8-) > > Sounds to me as though the distributions are > being maintained by ZPE Brownian type motion. > If so, it rather argues in favour of a > particulate nature for the Beta-atmosphere. > > Which means that there are collisions which > we fail to recognise since we don't believe > in the existence of neutral mass particles > like the materon. > > Perhaps people will come the same conclusion > as many of Brown's contemporaries and believe > that particles of a low density plasma are > alive, eh! 8^) > > Cheers, > > Frank Grimer > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: Insipid New York Times editorial
Ya know, it ain't the heat that kills ya... And it ain't the humidity either. It's dehydration! The current heatwave in arizona has pushed temps up to 115 farenheit. It hit 121 here in Kansas back in 1936, Colorado had 118 back in 1888! (Record high temperatures courtesy of Google) Yes, the world is getting warmer in general, but the reason people die in heat waves is that they don't know to drink water. I spent a couple summers as a camp counselor in SE Kansas in the late 90's, without any form of AC, (we lived in canvas army tents which were much hotter than the outside air. It routinely hit 110 in the shade during the afternoon. Heat Stroke and Heat Exhaustion were expected and when they did show up the med trailer was cooled. The point is that people have survived (and survive everyday) conditions similar to the ones which are decried as heat waves and the only reason people die in them is that they are unprepared. It has very little to do with needing more efficient AC systems. --- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The New York Times has an editorial today about > global warming. It begins: > > "A Few Degrees > > By any measure, this has already been a summer of > extremes. The brutality > of the record-setting heat that lay over the desert > Southwest for the past > two weeks may have broken at last, but it has not > really dissipated. . . > . Life is barely tolerable in Phoenix during an > ordinary summer, when the > monsoons arrive on schedule. . . ." > > I did not know they had monsoons in Phoenix, > Arizona. > > Anyway, the editorial ends: "We survive at such high > temperatures only with > huge expenditures of energy. Those who cannot afford > the energy run the > risk of death." To which I would respond: "Yo! Mr. > Times! That would be all > of us. Our whole civilization. And it is not a > 'risk.' Death is inevitable > unless we develop radically new sources of energy." > > Anyway, the New York Times will never print a letter > from me, but I asked > Ed Storms and some others to send a brief message. > > > Here is a message I sent to some newspaper reporters > yesterday: > > > The on-line German magazine Telepolis published an > article today advocating > a crash program to develop cold fusion to combat > global warming. This is > what your editorial should have said. See: "Time to > act! The world needs an > Apollo-type program for cold fusion": > > English version: > http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/20/20585/1.html > > German version: > http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/20/20562/1.html > > . . . > > > Haiko's article is a huge contrast to the New York > Times, isn't it? > > - Jed > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
The radiating electron and Casimir
Suppose that the Casimir Force is caused by something other than the fluctuations of the ZPE field. At atomic distances where the Casimir comes into play the difference between the position of an electron at either side of it's orbit is a considerable portion of the distance between said electron and another atom. This means that an atom, rather than being electrically neutral would appear to have an oscilating charge based on the orbit of the electron. This is simplest to visualize with a hydrogen atom (1 electron, 1 proton) but can be extended to more complicated systems. If 2 nearby atoms where to have their electron orbits (and charge oscilations) synched then they would experience an electrostatic attraction or repulsion. This would drop off considerably with distance as the radius of the electron orbit becomes a smaller component in the distances involved. The energy which the electron radiates in this manner is continually replenished by the energy radiating from every other electron in the universe, it's a zero-sum closed system. I personally think that electrons don't actually travel in regular circular orbits, but rather in either high ellipticals or even stranger rosettes passing near (or through) the origin. I see the atom as not unlike a Farnsworth Fusor, with the nucleus as the grid. Honestly, how else can you explain the unusual shapes of electron orbitals? (http://www.orbitals.com/orb/) Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Secret of Sonoluminescence
--- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 12:24 pm 22/07/2005 -0700, Merlyn wrote: > > > It is a very compelling theory Frank, > > You say the nicest things, Merlyn. 8-) > > > but I don't think it works out. > > But here comes the "but" ;^) > > > > >Picture it this way... > > > >I have a spring (coulomb force) separating 2 steel > >plates (protons) > >Note that the space between the plates is open to > the > >surroundings atmosphere and not sealed. > >The force required to move the plates closer > together > >is very precisely calculated in air at 14.7 psi. > >Now if I were to place the entire apparatus under > >water where the pressure was raised to 100 psi > would > >it make any difference in the force needed to > compress > >the spring? The added pressure acts equally on all > >sides of the plates and so cancels out. > > > I don't see the repulsive force between two like > charges > as something static, but something dynamic, a flux, > a > flow of substance. Now, clearly, the repulsive > pressure > this flow will exert will be proportional to the > difference > between the pressure of the outgoing flow and the > ambient > pressure of the field. If both pressures are the > same, > for example, then there can be no repulsion. > > The nature of the "attractive" force is quite > different. > It doesn't emanate from the charges themselves but > from > the ambient field. > > It is brought about by the Bernoulli pressure drop > in the > flow and counter flow between the electron (at a > pressure > above B-a ambient) and the proton (at a pressure > below > B-a ambient). > > To give a loose analogy which I wouldn't want to > press too > far. The earth receives directed radiation from the > sun > at one average wavelength and transmits it > isotropically > at a lower wavelength. > > The higher wavelength is analogous to the > Gamma-atmosphere. > the lower to the Beta-atmosphere. > What I was trying to illustrate, is that AFAIK the ambient electric and magnetic fields can not really be shielded, and effect the particles from all sides. By considering charge as a pressure you lose the ability to amass charge by collecting particles. pressure being force over area, increasing the number of particles at a given pressure (charge) results in the same pressure instead of a collection of charge. FWIW I have seesawed back and forth in my analysis of your theory. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: The Secret of Sonoluminescence
It is a very compelling theory Frank, but I don't think it works out. --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I find myself in this situation with regard to the > effect of drop in Beta-atmospheric (B-a) pressure > on the strength of the attraction and repulsion of > positive and negative charges. I am confident that > the explanation I have given is correct, albeit > obscenely unorthodox, but I find I have to demand > a justification, an explanation, from myself (my > own worst critic) as to why. > > To summarize the situation. > > The repulsive force between like charges is affected > > by the drop in B-a pressure as one enters into a > material such as water, steel, concrete, palladium > etc. > > The attractive force between unlike charges is > unaffected by a change in the B-a pressure as one > enters the material. > > So the problem is: > > > Why are repulsive forces affected and attractive > forces not affected by the B-a change? > > === > ! A TENSILE STRESS THEREFORE IS ! > ! MERELY A REDUCTION IN THE AMBIENT ! > ! COMPRESSIVE STRESS AND THE ! > ! CONCEPT OF ACTION AT A DISTANCE ! > !IS NO LONGER REQUIRED! > === > > .and that really is the crux of the > matter. The force that pushes the like charges > apart emanates from those charges - but - the > force that pushes the unlike charges together > emanates, not from the charges, but from the > charges' enveloping environment. > > Let's, give it a name. Lets call it the > Gamma-aether, the Gamma-atmosphere (G-a), > for we are assuredly dealing with two vastly > different levels of the total Aether. > > The need for a Gamma-atmosphere was implicitly > recognised in the Southampton paper by > designating the familiar atmosphere, the air, > as the Alpha-atmosphere (A-a)to both distinguish > it from the Beta-atmosphere and to provide for > up to 22 more enveloping atmospheres as they > become required. > > Now it is not that the change in the B-a pressure > does not affect the value of the Gamma atmosphere > pressure at all. It does affect it. But the G-a > pressure is so bloody enormous that the change > brought about by a change in the B-a is negligible. > Anybody familiar with calculus will be very > familiar with thingees being negligible when > they are very small compared with other thingees. > > > When the B-a pressure is lowered, as it is > in the "FLUID PHASE" reduced B-a pressure of > a material such as water or metal, the > repulsion between positive charges is reduced. > In other words, the Coulomb Barrier between > positive charges is lowered. This is the > essential key to understanding Cold Fusion. > > And in order to make progress in bringing CF to a > commercial product, without blowing oneself up in > the process, one would be well advised to take > Whitehead's good advice. > > > Picture it this way... I have a spring (coulomb force) seperating 2 steel plates (protons) Note that the space between the plates is open to the surroounding atmosphere and not sealed. The force required to move the plates closer together is very precisely calculated in air at 14.7 psi. Now if I were to place the entire apparatus under water where the pressure was raised to 100 psi would it make any difference in the force needed to compress the spring? The added pressure acts equally on all sides of the plates and so cancels out. Frank, as I understand it you see charge as relative to the background (beta-aether) rather like temperature. If we were to call protons hot at 71 degrees and electrons cold at 69 degrees then a hydrogen atom would be neutral at 70 degrees because it averages out. however if you seperated the particles / charges, having 10 electrons @ 69 degrees each on one side of a wall and 10 protons at 71 degrees each on the other, the charge imbalance shoud be 20, but the temperature difference is still only 2 degrees. IMHO it is the absolute difference in charge rather than the ratio that is important. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Olympic runners versus bicycle riders
Having spent a number of years as a councilor at a BSA
summer-camp in Kansas, I'm sorry to say that your
common-sense approach will not work.
Thirst has very little to do with the actual level of
body fluids in your system.
At camp drinking water is the prescribed treatment for
all ailments (except missing limbs) and it works very
well 95% of the time.
The easiest way to prevent hyponatremia is not to
drink water but rather an electrolyte cocktail such as
a sports drink. Seasoning your water with a pinch of
salt also works pretty well.
Also of note, caffeine withdrawl can also mimic
dehydration.
--- Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:
>
> >I have one small nit to pick, which is that a
> soaring bird is not at all
> >equivalent to a bicycle "traveling downhill the
> whole way".
> >
> >A soaring bird is taking advantage of wind shear to
> obtain ("free") energy
> >from the atmosphere, which can be used to travel in
> pretty much whatever
> >direction the bird wants. By soaring, birds (and
> sail planes, and, in
> >similar fashion, sailboats) . . .
>
> That's true. I did not mean it quite so literally. I
> just meant that the
> energy comes from outside the system, so this is not
> a fair comparison.
>
> For that matter, the Olympic runners must run faster
> downhill than up. I do
> not know how much faster. But the difference is
> nowhere near as large as it
> is with a bicycle. In other words, most of the
> energy expended while
> running is for "overhead" or mechanical friction in
> the body.
>
> Bicycles have two giant advantages:
>
> 1. Low friction. Only a small amount of rubber meets
> the road, and the
> friction from the chain and wheel bearings is very
> low. Automobile engines
> produce far more friction.
>
> 2. Air cooling. Because he goes so much faster than
> a runner, a bicyclist
> is cooled down by the headwind. This advantage was
> demonstrated
> accidentally when researchers tried to test the
> athletic ability of the
> famous bicyclist Eddy "Iron Man" Merckx in the
> 1960s. They hooked up probes
> and had him ride a stationary bicycle in a clinic.
> He pooped out hours
> earlier than normal, and he was covered with sweat.
> He was upset and the
> researchers were baffled. It wasn't until later that
> everyone realized it
> was because he was not being cooled by the usual 20
> mph headwind.
>
> A few experimental enclosed bicycles and pedaled
> aircraft have shields to
> reduce air resistance, and eliminate this headwind.
> An athlete can go
> faster on one of these, but over a long distance he
> will soon be covered
> with sweat and weakened by an elevated body
> temperature. Sweat is an
> inefficient, last-stage method of cooling the body.
> I believe the cooling
> effect of sweat is enhanced when you wear a light
> cotton shirt, which
> catches and holds the water near the skin rather
> than shedding it. Better
> still to dump a liter of water over the shirt.
>
> Contrary to the advice that has been often been
> published in recent years,
> you should not drink a lot of water while running or
> bicycling intensely.
> Apparently several people who died during marathons
> lately were killed by
> drinking too much water (hyponatremia) rather than
> heatstroke or
> dehydration as originally thought. The symptoms of
> hyponatremia and
> dehydration are similar: "apathy, confusion, nausea,
> and fatigue." The
> cause & treatment are exactly opposite but the
> symptoms look the same! I
> think a little common sense would help: if you are
> not thirsty, do not drink.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions no fees. Bid on great items.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
Re: (OT)Liberals and conservatives
--- thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Merlyn posted > > > > >I took the Dennis Prager are you a liberal test. > > > >Per his test I answered yes to 6 out of 23 > questions. > > I'm glad to hear that you took the test. I answered > no to all 23, but > I spend 15 hours per week listening to him. > > > > >However his questions are incredibly biased, being > >based on his conservative interpretation of the > >outlook of certain vocal liberal institutions. > > Prager is a political animal. The problem is that > the Liberals have > taken words like progressive and applied it to their > agenda. Anyone > who questions them, or worse attempts to thwart > their schemes is a > neathanderthal. Prager and I are Tzionists > (Zionists). We believe we > are doing G-d's will by supporting Israel. > > > > >Prager presents a caricature of liberals, rather > than > >a reasoned analysis. > > If you listen to his show, I think you will find > that he spells out > real clearly where we differ from the Liberals. > > > > >Here in the middle of the bible belt, I am a > liberal. > >If I were to travel to California, I would probably > be > >considered a conservative. > > Given your low score on the test, I think that you > are not > particularly liberal Merlyn. I'm curious to see how > Leaking and Ed > score. > > > > >It is not all black and white, red and blue, there > is > >a whole spectrum to politics and everyone is > somewhere > >in the middle. > > We believe that there are certain core values which > tend to make > people conservative. It is proven that if you go to > church and Bible > Study each week, you are more likely to be > conservative. > > Given my low score on the test (26%) I would say that the test isn't written very well. The vast majority of the American People are somewhere in the middle of the political spectrum. However because the political parties cater to the vocal minorities on the fringe they have pulled further and further apart on certain "key" issues while trying to remain near a common ground on the issues the extremists ignore. If Prager's test (http://www.dennisprager.com/areyouliberal.html) actually defined the difference between Liberal and Conservative, then Bush would have won by a significant margin, much more than his 2.5% margin. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004) Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
(OT)Liberals and conservatives
I feel I had to reply to the whole culteral relativism issue regarding liberal and conservative issues. I took the Dennis Prager are you a liberal test. Per his test I answered yes to 6 out of 23 questions. However his questions are incredibly biased, being based on his conservative interpretation of the outlook of certain vocal liberal institutions. I could as easily ask are you a conservative based on 23 questions asking about how much you agree with GWB or Dennis Miller or Rush Limbaugh. Prager presents a caricature of liberals, rather than a reasoned analysis. Here in the middle of the bible belt, I am a liberal. If I were to travel to California, I would probably be considered a conservative. It is not all black and white, red and blue, there is a whole spectrum to politics and everyone is somewhere in the middle. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Re: [OT] A.I. or Conscious?
Man is conscious of consciousness, not of biology. We are aware of what our senses tell us and the fact that we are aware of being aware. A person understands that he is biological, but it is an intellectual thing, a matter of information rather than consciousness. --- Terry Blanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/interview/story/0,12982,1511931,00.html > > "A conscious robot, for example, should be aware of > being a piece of tin with silicon circuits just as a > person is conscious of being a biological organism. > If an artificial device sophisticated enough to hold > a discussion with a person insists that it is > conscious like a human then, says Aleksander, it is > malfunctioning." > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Yahoo! Sports Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
Re: The hydrogen model
--- thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is IIRC? > If I Recall Correctly Also useful IMHO In My Humble Opinion Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Loopy field lines
UM... There shouldn't be ANY magnetic field associated with a capacitor unless it is undergoing charge or discharge. A magnetic field is (traditionally) assumed to be created by a moving charge. In a capacitor there are no moving charges present in the space between the plates, that is what makes it a capacitor. Might I ask how you came to your spiral field realization? --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The comparison between the field structures > of inductors and capacitors is really so > straight forward to explain in words that a > diagram is hardly necessary. > > Mind you, I have to confess I am heavily > influenced by the fact I don't have a decent > 3D drawing programme. ;-) > > In the traditional inductor we have a spiral > electric flux of the fist order and a linear > axial magnetic flux of the first order. > > Now think of the capacitor as the traditional > form of two plates separated by a gap. > Consider a single positive charge on one plate > and a single negative charge on the other. > Between the two plates there is an electric > flux of the second order. This is surrounded > by a spiral magnetic flux of the second order. > > It can be seen therefore that the action of a > capacitor is simply a hierarchal inverse of > the action of an inductor. > > If we conceptually invert the capacitor, small > becomes large, spiral becomes axial, axial > becomes spiral, electric becomes magnetic, > magnetic becomes electric and we wind up with > an inductor. > > Oh, and I could add, many becomes one since > for the simple capacitor there are many > separate spiral/axial fluxes whereas for the > simple inductor there is only one. > > It seems clear we are dealing with different > scales of vortex tubes for which the spiral > flow around the axial flow is not in question > - and what could be more reasonable than that. 8-) > > > Cheers > > Frank Grimer > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Loopy field lines
OOPS! I need more coffee before EM discussions I guess. Please ignore the topographical / 3d surface analogy. Strength of a magnetic field is measured by the density of the field lines, not by number of lines between you and the source. --- Merlyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > An interesting insight certainly, but does it > matter? > > Magnetic Field Lines are an artificial visualization > tool akin to the lines on a topographical map, the > actual magnetic field is seamless. > > Even if you are correct and the field lines do in > fact > form spirals, the same number of field lines will > still enter and leave a closed surface (except in > the > rare case of a surface which contains the field > producing conductor within it) > > The whole point is that a magnetic field can also be > visualized as a 3d surface, whose elevation (z axis) > represents field strength. Any closed loop on this > surface would have the same number of elevation > lines > (field lines) entering and exiting, which is to say > that if you walked around the loop you would end up > at > the same elevation as you started. > > Merlyn > > --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > There are certain advantages is being a quasi modo > > in the > > cathedral of EM. > > > > One can rush in and utter terrible heresies in all > > innocence. > > > > I have been recently going through a rather > > comprehensive > > site on EM, to wit:- > > > > > http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/lectures.html > > > > and I find that my recognition on general grounds > > that the field > > lines around a conductor form a tight spiral and > not > > a series of > > closed loops is anathema as far as "Gauss' law for > > magnetic fields" > > is concerned since, > > > > > > > > > An immediate corollary of the above law > > [i.e.Gauss' Law] > > is that the number of magnetic field lines > which > > enter > > a closed surface is always equal to the number > > of field > > lines which leave the surface. In other words: > > > > > Magnetic field lines form closed loops which > > never begin > > or end. Thus, magnetic field lines behave in a > > quite > > different manner to electric field lines, > which > > begin on > > positive charges, end on negative charges, and > > never form > > closed loops. > > > > > > > > > I suppose being a heretic would be more fun if I > had > > ever been > > baptised in the EM church - but then perhaps I > would > > have never > > seen the looniness of loops. > > > > I now realise why the hierarchical identity > between > > a coil and > > a capacitor has never been recognised in physical > > terms. > > > > I shall have to try and reconstruct the diagram I > > drew many years > > ago but never actually incorporated into any > > Internal Note. > > > > Cheers > > > > Frank Grimer > > > > > > > > > > > > > __ > Yahoo! Mail > Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the > tour: > http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
RE: Chernitski (was Re: MAHG update & hypothesis) Chernetski
Nope, except for the fact that they experience force in opposite directions because of opposite charge. Merlyn --- Terry Blanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: Merlyn > > > Well, technically any electron passing through a > > magnetic field is accelerated, whether the field > is > > static or not. > > Do electrons and positrons behave differently in > static magnetic *or* electric fields? > > __ Discover Yahoo! Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html
Re: Loopy field lines
An interesting insight certainly, but does it matter? Magnetic Field Lines are an artificial visualization tool akin to the lines on a topographical map, the actual magnetic field is seamless. Even if you are correct and the field lines do in fact form spirals, the same number of field lines will still enter and leave a closed surface (except in the rare case of a surface which contains the field producing conductor within it) The whole point is that a magnetic field can also be visualized as a 3d surface, whose elevation (z axis) represents field strength. Any closed loop on this surface would have the same number of elevation lines (field lines) entering and exiting, which is to say that if you walked around the loop you would end up at the same elevation as you started. Merlyn --- Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are certain advantages is being a quasi modo > in the > cathedral of EM. > > One can rush in and utter terrible heresies in all > innocence. > > I have been recently going through a rather > comprehensive > site on EM, to wit:- > > http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/302l/lectures/lectures.html > > and I find that my recognition on general grounds > that the field > lines around a conductor form a tight spiral and not > a series of > closed loops is anathema as far as "Gauss' law for > magnetic fields" > is concerned since, > > > > An immediate corollary of the above law > [i.e.Gauss' Law] > is that the number of magnetic field lines which > enter > a closed surface is always equal to the number > of field > lines which leave the surface. In other words: > > Magnetic field lines form closed loops which > never begin > or end. Thus, magnetic field lines behave in a > quite > different manner to electric field lines, which > begin on > positive charges, end on negative charges, and > never form > closed loops. > > > > I suppose being a heretic would be more fun if I had > ever been > baptised in the EM church - but then perhaps I would > have never > seen the looniness of loops. > > I now realise why the hierarchical identity between > a coil and > a capacitor has never been recognised in physical > terms. > > I shall have to try and reconstruct the diagram I > drew many years > ago but never actually incorporated into any > Internal Note. > > Cheers > > Frank Grimer > > > > __ Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
RE: Chernitski (was Re: MAHG update & hypothesis) Chernetski
Well, technically any electron passing through a magnetic field is accelerated, whether the field is static or not. A dynamic magnetic field is required to accelerate a static electron, but if the electron is already moving, then a static field will induce a force on the electron and thus an acceleration. --- "Zell, Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Exactly. I was afraid that there was a problem > reported with real vs > apparent power ( power factor) . > >On the other hand, I've wondered if the dictum > that 'a static > magnetic field cannot accelerate an electron' is > really true. > > Suppose the electron travels in a spiral thru an > intensifying > magnetic field? The field is static but the > electron experiences it as > growing as it spirals towards the target. ( as > in the Spence > patent). If a Betatron can work, why not this? > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [OT] Nessie Identified from Dental Records
I saw something on this not that long ago which points out that this is a hoax engineered to sell McDonald's book. The tooth is apparently a deer antler. --- Terry Blanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/6/emw246595.htm > > "Phoenix, AZ (PRWEB) June 6, 2005 -- Forensics > Investigator William McDonald has been researching > the Loch Ness Monster for 12 years. The former U.S. > Marine is now on the threshold of breaking new > evidence that, for the first time, reveals what the > creature is, proves its existence, and explains why > the animal is only seen on blurry photos. McDonald > is also prepared to reveal why the Scottish Highland > Government is covering up information about the > monster's true identity." > > > > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Discover Yahoo! Stay in touch with email, IM, photo sharing and more. Check it out! http://discover.yahoo.com/stayintouch.html
Re: OT: The will of God
I apologize for not hearing the sarcasm, which is now obvious to me. I live and work with fundametalists every day and so sometimes I am inclined to take people at their word when they say such things. I must admit it has been a fun conversation though. --- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > And now I really will shut up :-) > > Cheers... > > Cheers... Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: OT: The will of God
Of course I'm being nit-picky Stephen, I believe the bible to be a good book, and to have some excellent lessons for our society, but I do not believe it to be the revealed word of God as you obviously do. The main point is that the bible you and I read is not only a translation of a translation, but the original written text had been passed by oral tradition for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. Fundamentalists always cite that God influenced those keepers of knowledge so that the translation is just as accurate as the original, but I have problems believing that. History abounds with examples of men misinterpreting scripture to justify heinous acts. --- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Merlyn wrote: > >As for prophecy, that's all in the interpretation, > > > > > Oh, dear, you're being much too nit-picky here. > > Check out the book of Isaiah, which, one could > argue, is the most > important OT book (that's Old Testament, not > Off-Topic) for most > liturgical Christians. > > But first, note well that scholars and Christians > agree that Isaiah > lived and died a number of decades _before_ the > Exile. OK so far? > > Now let's look at Isaiah 45:1 (NRSV): > > "Thus says the Lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, > whose right hand I have > grasped to subdue nations before him and strip kings > of their robes, to > open doors before him -- " > > This verse NAMES CYRUS, specifically, and designates > him the instrument > to be used in ending the Exile. Cyrus was born > perhaps 150 years after > Isaiah died. No way this was just a lucky guess!! > And it's not open to > much "interpretation". > > So, if we accept that the book of Isaiah was written > by Isaiah (which, > surely, all those who accept the entire Bible as > being 100% divinely > inspired and accurately transmitted and properly > attributed must agree > is the case), this seems to prove, in one easy step, > the miraculous > nature of Biblical prophecy. And whatever it is, > it's certainly not > just a matter of interpretation! > > Of course, the more skeptical among us might feel > this example could be > taken to indicate that parts of Isaiah were not > correctly attributed, > but such an absurd and heretical viewpoint can > surely be safely > dismissed. After all, if we accept that parts of > Isaiah were > mis-attributed and anachronistic, then we might have > to consider that > some other parts of the Bible could have been > similarly mis-dated, which > could affect the interpretation of other examples of > highly inspired > prophecy, perhaps even some in the New Testament > itself... > > If I didn't think the Bible was a truly fine text I > would not have read > it a second time. But I make no attempt to "explain > away" the > anachronisms, peculiarities (e.g., the incident of > Melchizedek), > 4-legged insects, or strange fate(s) of Judas. > Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
RE: OT: The will of God
Not to interrupt, thomas malloy wrote: > > Steven Johnson posted; > > > > > >So, you know for an absolute fact that Allah isn't > God? > > Different name; yod hay vav hay as opposed to Allah, > different legal > system; Sharia verses Torah, different treatment of > women; no need to > comment further on that, eh? different outcomes, the > nations whose > legal systems are based on British Common Law are > first and second > world economies and democracies, the Islamist > nations are, with the > exception of Turkey, all third world dictatorships. > Same God, different interpretation. The Jewish/christian god has NO name, this is why He/She is referred to as God. Allah is arabic for god, so the translation is the same. Brief (and simplified) History Judaism was first. Some jews believed that the messiah came and became Christians, other jews continued to wait for his arrival. Some Jews followed a new prophet and became Muslims, others retained their original belief structure. The government is unrelated to religion, rather it has to do with how religious rule was enforced. You could base similar arguments on the differences between Christian and Jewish countries or even between different Christian denominations. As for prophecy, that's all in the interpretation, which never seems to happen until after the event has occured. If you want to convince me, you are going to have to find a very specific prophecy, something that says "on this day this will happen to these people" and you are going to have to find it before that date and have it witnessed in some fashion. Merlyn Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
Re: Limitless hydrogen?
Note that this actually IS the "nightmare" scenario whereby a hydrogen economy removes oxygen from the atmosphere. The water is split by the formation of SiO2 underground, leaving the oxygen innacessible and providing hydrogen for our use. Burn the hydrogen and you get more water, but with a net loss of usable oxygen. Probably not a good idea for long-term energy production.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
Working through the backlog.
I got a few weeks behind, so if anyone sent me a specific message, please resend it because I can't wade through that many posts in a reasonable amount of time. If nobody sent me anything specific, then I suppose I should speak up a little more often. Comments on various... Wiki is pretty cool as a source of contemporary knowledge, for fringe things its a little rough. I suggest including various "key" phrases in the text of the entry, as I usually end up at wiki by way of Google. Oz is overrated. MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Trigger from Space
Gravitational force is relative to the masses involved and the distance between the centers of mass. Thus for an appreciable change in the gravitational field, you would require a non-uniform explosion and resulting debris field. Um, wouldn't light slow down by more than 0.2 % traveling through the vast reaches of space? Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Remember, dear vortex reader, you heard it here first, off the record, on the QT, and very Hush-Hush No its not Roy's famous horse, which by the way is still with us... sort of: http://www.roadsideamerica.com/pet/trigger.html Nor is it Fred's 'snowball from hell' ;-) One Dec. 26, 2004 a powerful undersea earthquake in the Indian Ocean that triggered a devastating tsunami. The earthquake has been upgraded to magnitude 9.0 and is reported to be the strongest the past 40 years. The tragedy is almost beyond comprehension. It is part of the "human predicament" to always want to assign cause-and-effect, especially to major catastrophes. http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/Ryuei/depen-orig.html Consequently, much finger-pointing has already taken place about the putative cause of this devastating quake, assuming that no deity would have allowed it, so it must have a sinister cause - some of that speculation serious, some ludicrous. Exxon has even been blamed for taking out too much oil from the region. Go figure... even this anti-oil cynic would scarcely blame big-oil for this kind of thing. This speculation in no way intends to make light of the immensity of this awful tragedy, but sometimes... if one cannot cry enough, a sardonic kind of levity is the only consolation ... as the Irish know well. Not sure where this cause-and-effect observation, now to be added to the growing list, stands on the ludicrosity-scale, but consider this: A once-in-a-lifetime cosmological event occurred at *about* the same time as the tsunami, a gigantic' star-quake' which rocked the entire Milky Way galaxy. It was probably the biggest explosion observed by human on our planet since Kepler saw a supernova in 1604. Actually the event itself occurred much earlier, but at light-speed the evidence arrived here at a remarkably coincidental time. Astronomers have been stunned by the amount of energy released in this star explosion on the far side of our galaxy, 50,000 light-years away, which has just now been calculated. The flash of radiation seen on 27 December was so powerful that it bounced off the Moon and lit up the Earth's atmosphere. But the gravity wave would have hit here slightly earlier, as the radiation would have been slowed by intergalactic dust and relic-hydrogen. The blast occurred on the surface of an exotic star - a super-magnetic neutron star called SGR 1806-20. If the explosion had been just 10,000 light-years away, Earth could easily have suffered a mass extinction. There is such a threat within that distance, by the way. More on that later. One calculation has the giant flare on SGR 1806-20 unleashing about 10,000 trillion trillion trillion watts. http://i-newswire.com/pr7466.html Not to mention... the "gravity wave" which could have gotten here first. JonesMerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
[OT]God's Solution
I love this kind of argument. Let's see how obnoxious I can get with the answer. Free Will God works in mysterious ways The argument that a god (does not have to be the christian God whose name is not known) would save us from our own folly is laughable. The last time God chose to save the world from the folly of man, he flooded the world. The theory that we should not concern ourselves with the environment because God will save us reminds me of a joke... (which I will tell poorly) There was a flood down south, and as the rescue workers were evacuating those stranded by the flood they cam across a particularly pious man sitting calmly on his roof. He refused assistance saying, "The good Lord will provide." Later a second boat came along to try and rescue the man, but again he refused saying, "The good Lord will provide." As the water reached the man's neck, a helicopter flew over and offered him a rope ladder, but again he refused. The man finally drowned and went to heaven, where he asked God, "Why did you not save me Lord?" God replied, "I provided you with two fine boats and a helicopter, what more did you want?" Just because we expect a miracle does not mean we would recognize it when it comes. FWIW I'm probably a deist, I haven't checked lately. MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: understanding Laser Propulsion
True, the traditional doppler shift is a change in frequency, brought about by the retardation of the signal due to travel time. Thus I apply the same basic terminology to the change in field gradient caused by the retardation of the signal due to travel time. I have never been able to agree with relativity, there is no physical mechanism which would cause the speed of light to be constant in all directions in all inertial reference frames. Of course, I don't believe in photons either. I think the quantization of light is more an artifact of the measuring system than an actual quality of light.Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At 10:08 AM 2/2/5, Merlyn wrote:>I think the discussion between Horace and I on the mechanics behind>magnetism has an application here. As Horace pointed out to me, Jefimenko>has shown how the magnetic field of a moving charge is due to the>retardation of the electric field do to signal speed (electrical>dopplering).Magnetism is not really due to dopplering, which is a frequency shift.Retardation and doppler shift are two different things, though both arerelated to velocity. Doppler shift can only affect frequency, which in thecase of photons does indeed affect the momentum transfer itself. However,retardation also affects the *direction* of the applied force.>This would imply that there is no way to manifest a magnetic monopole>because a stationary magnetic field does not exist.This does! not necessarily follow. Jefimenko demonstrates that, applyingrelativity, the electric field can be derived from a magnetic field. Hefeels therefore, when examined from the perspective of relativity, they areco-fields. If monopoles exist, then they can generate "apparent" electricfields just like charged particles can generate "apparent" magnetic fields.Symmetry, if it actually means anything in this case, indicates monopolesshould or at least might actually exist.Regards,Horace Heffner MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: understanding Laser Propulsion
I think the discussion between Horace and I on the mechanics behind magnetism has an application here. As Horace pointed out to me, Jefimenko has shown how the magnetic field of a moving charge is due to the retardation of the electric field do to signal speed (electrical dopplering). This would imply that there is no way to manifest a magnetic monopole because a stationary magnetic field does not exist. As for time reversal, the time-reversed component is the same as the time-forward component. Observing a time-reversed photon is simply looking at the time forward photon in reverse (like running a video backwards). You are not following a photon traveling backwards in time, you are backtracking the photon that has already passed. thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I read the book Laser Propulsion,LP, by Unitel-areospace. While I read the words, much of what the author says makes no sense to me. So I've decided to go through it one page at a time and see what comments I get.I've heard about magnetic monopoles for some time. They make a great theory, but I've yet to understand to get one to manifest itself The book says that a proton sets up an electric field when it is motionless, does that ever occur? and that when it is in motion it sets up a magnetic field in three dimensions. A monopole, OTOH, creates a magnetic field when stationary and an electric field when in motion.Then there is the matter of time reversal. The drawing show two loops of wire above one another. A + charged particle is shown moving in between them. When moving between the two loops, the path of the p! article is reversed with the reversal of the current direction. The second drawing shows four monopoles above and below. When the + charged particle moves through them it's path is a mirror image.If I could move waves or particles in reverse time, then I could transmit information. Tomorrow's winning lottery numbers for instance.In a telephone conversation with the author, he said that photons have two components, one time forward, the other time reversed. I suppose the problem is separating them.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: Mechanics of magnetism
Thanks Horace, I'll certainly look into thatHorace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I wrote: "Jefimenko also produces the complete quantitative results you arelooking for."That should have read, "Jefimenko also produces complete quantitativeresults, but as with the relativistic results of Purcell, Shadowitz, andothers, they deny the effect you hope to see, namely an increase inmagnetic field with an increase in drift speed."One EM effect of possible interest that does increase with drift speed,i.e. reduced charge carrier density, is the Hall voltage.Regards,Horace Heffner MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: Mechanics of magnetism
OK, I've done some more pondering on the whole thing, and I think I may have an answer. Assuming the electric field propagates at c, as the magnetic field is proven to do, then there would be a notable "dopplering" of the field gradient surrounding a moving charged particle. This Doppler effect would decrease the force on a charged particle ahead of the moving one and increase the force on a particle behind it. A particle at rest WRT the aether would experience a lesser force, and then a greater force, which would average to be no effect at all. A particle moving relative to the aether however would experience a different force, as the effective field gradients would be modified by the momentum of the moving particle. Identicle charged particles moving in the same direction are not "attracted" to each other, they are simply repelled less strongly than if they were stationary. Surrounding electrostatic pressure takes care of the rest. When the particles pass each other moving in opposite directions, the repulsion is enhanced. Perhaps by doing the math related to this idea, one could determine a difference in magnetic field strength between 2 systems with identical amperages, but widely different drift speeds. MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Mechanics of magnetism
OK, I've been trying to get my head around the mechanism behind magnetism. I see a magnetic field as a disturbance in the aether caused by a moving charge. Where I bog down is trying to understand how this disturbance overcomes the natural repulsion between like charges. The mental experiment I'm working with is that of 2 parallel beams of electrons. At what velocity would the electrical repulsion of these beams be overcome by the magnetic field? This experiment would be quite simple to conduct, simply fire 2 parallel electron beams into a target, and graph actual beam seperation at target vs electron velocity. I think magnetic attraction may be due to the dopplering of the electric field around a moving charge. (Although, if the "velocity" of the field is the speed of light, there would be very little dopplering in most electrical systems where the electron drift velocity can be measured in cm/sec) Although if this is the way it works, then the "shockwave" of a charge surpassing the speed of light (in the medium in which it travels) may account for cherenkov radiation. Man do I ramble sometimes... I can't be senile yet, I'm only 26!MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Sonic Induced Fusion
OK, here are the numbers I ran on fusion in a collapsing spherical compression wave. Pressure, being simply force applied divided by area of application increases by 1/r^2 as the wave collapses. The ratio of specific heats can be used to determine the ratio of heating to compression of an ideal gas when pressure is increased. For a monatomic gas (like hydrogen above 3200K) gamma is 1.6667 The formulas using this are (T2/T1)=(p2/p1)^(gamma-1/gamma) (V2/V1)=(p2/p1)^(-1/gamma) T1, V1, p1 = starting temperature, volume, and pressure. Fusion of hydrogen requires 10KeV or 1.602*10^-15J average KE in an ideal gas = 3/2 kT Temperature for a required energy = 2J/3k Temperature of fusion = 80 MK a 1m diameter spherical chamber at 1 atm with a compression amplitude of 10 atm starting at 576 degrees K would achieve the 80 MK fusion temperature at a radius of 2.5*10^-6m Density at that point would be 3 Mg/cc, and the total volume of fusion would contain approx. 1.5g I'm asking for some feedback here, as I develop ideas best when trying to explain them.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Sonic powered fusion
http://www.rpi.edu/web/News/press_releases/2004/lahey.htm#cool Researchers Report Bubble Fusion Results ReplicatedPhysical Review E publishes paper on fusion experiment conducted with upgraded measurement systemTROY, N.Y. Physical Review E has announced the publication of an article by a team of researchers from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI), Purdue University, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the Russian Academy of Science (RAS) stating that they have replicated and extended previous experimental results that indicated the occurrence of nuclear fusion using a novel approach for plasma confinement.This approach, called bubble fusion, and the new experimental results are being published in an extensively peer-reviewed article titled Additional Evidence of Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, which is scheduled to be posted on Physical Review Es Web site and published in its journal this month.The research team used a standing ultras! onic wave to help form and then implode the cavitation bubbles of deuterated acetone vapor. The oscillating sound waves caused the bubbles to expand and then violently collapse, creating strong compression shock waves around and inside the bubbles. Moving at about the speed of sound, the internal shock waves impacted at the center of the bubbles causing very high compression and accompanying temperatures of about 100 million Kelvin. --- Sonofusion, great stuff. This reminds me of why I found vortex in the first place... 6? years ago. I had (and still have) a concept for sonic induced fusion which is based on sonofusion, but differs greatly. I propose a spherical resonance chamber filled with gaseous fuel (Probably start with Deuterium gas) the inner surface of this chamber is composed of actuated plates which move in sync to produce a spherical compression wave, collapsing towards the center. This should duplicate on a larger scale the collapsing bubble of sonofusion, creating a controlled fusion reaction at the center. I ran numbers on this, but I can't find them right now, I'll post them later. The first time I posted this concept to vortex, the consensus seemed to be that it simply was not possible for a gas to compress that much, but I'd say that sonofusion provides a convincing counterargument.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: ionizing radiation
I was always told that cosmic rays were primarily alpha particles ejected from the sun, but when I looked up the EM spectrum there was a notation at the high end for cosmic rays. I'm going to guess that "cosmic rays" represents general background space radiation, and therefore contains both.thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Actually the longer the wavelength, the greater the penetrating power. Cosmic rays penetrate because the are particles, not EM radiation. The shorter wavelengths have a stronger effect because they carry more energy. Mike Carrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Are you sure that they are particles? I've always assumed that they were photons which behaved as both particles and waves, but you know what happens when you assume, Once I determine what frequencies I'm dealing with, I can get the Tempest protocols and read them.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
Re: ionizing radiation
I'm sorry Baron, but what!?! The EM spectrum is as follows: 3 - 30 Hz ELF 30 - 300 Hz ULF 3 - 30 kHz VLF 30 kHz - 30 GHz Radio This is a wavelength of 10km - 1cm Above Radio frequencies it is typically listed by wavelength rather than frequency. 30 - .76 micrometers Infrared and Heat .76 - .39 micrometers Visible Light .39 - .032 micrometers Ultra Violet 320 - .1 Angstroms X-Rays .01 - .006 Angstroms Gamma Rays shielding of a cable from frequencies higher than ULF is easily accomplished by a metal conduit. Yes, they have engineered materials which have an effective index of refraction which is negative. What this has to do with shielding of fiber-optic cables is beyond me. Of course, I don't believe in Scalar waves either, so you can just consider me to be a hidebound reactionary and a more or less "conventional" physicist who refuses to admit the validity of your position. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 1/18/05 10:45:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I was talking to a physicist about photons. Fiber optic cables, which carry photons, may be shielded from high energy smaller than light wavelengths such as emf's, by using negative refractive nano materials which have been energized to create randomly oscillating from smaller than light wave to larger than light wave force field filters wrapped around the fiber optic cables. Some classified telephone lines that use fiber optics, have such wires wrapped around them from what I have been told to not only receive information that is smaller than light wave but to also ! jam it. [PDF] Optical Negative-Refraction Metamaterials, Nano-Layers and Nano ... File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML "In the past few years, investigating various properties of left-handed (LH) or double-negative(DNG) media, in which both permittivity and permeability possess negative real parts in acertain frequency range, has become the subject of interest for many research groups worldwide.The first experimental demonstration of anomalous negative refraction in these engineeredmedia was conducted in the microwave regime [1]. In the near-infrared (IR) and visible regimes,however, constructing such negative-index materials encounters some challenges, mainly dueto the fact that in these frequency regimes the magnetic permeability due to the molecularcurrents in a material approaches to that of the free space, and therefore the simple scaling of! the metallic split-ring resonator SRR (which was used in the microwave regime) down to theoptical wavelength may face some related issues. Several ideas have been suggested by othersto overcome some of these challenges [2-5]." [PDF] Plasmon modes and negative refraction in metal nanowire composites File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat Your browser may not have a PDF reader Baron Von Volsung, www.rhfweb.com\baron, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html President Thomas D. Clark, Email: www.rhfweb.com\emailform.html, Personal Web Page: www.rhfweb.com\personal New Age Production's Inc., www.rhfweb.com\newage Star Haven Community Services, at www.rhfweb.com\sh. Radiation Health Foundation Trust at www.rhfweb.com Making a difference one person at a time Get informed. Inform others. MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - now with 250MB free storage. Learn more.
Re: ionizing radiation
Actually the longer the wavelength, the greater the penetrating power. Cosmic rays penetrate because the are particles, not EM radiation. The shorter wavelengths have a stronger effect because they carry more energy.Mike Carrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Tom wrote again:>> >Tom wrote:>> and Mike Carrel replied>> >> >> >> I did a remodeling project on what once was a medical clinic. When we> >> cut into the walls, there were sheets of lead in them.> >> >Lead would be used to stop Xrays, nothing more.>> It was a thin layer of lead, would such a layer stop short X rays too?In general the shorter the wavelength, the greater the penetrating power.Cosmic rays go through everything. Electromagneitc radiation is a continuousspectrum from radio to cosmic rays. Attenuation is a matter of thickness andspecific properties; light will travel through miles of fiber optics, but bestopped by a sheet of aluminum.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: ionizing radiation
This link sums up cell phone safety issues fairly well, the results are inconclusive. http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/publicfeature/aug00/prad.html Spectrum is the magazine of IEEE, which is the professional association of electrical and electronics engineers.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
Re: ionizing radiation
Note that the strength of EM radiation from a cell phone is highest when it connects to the tower, at the start of a call, incoming or outgoing. I don't recall the precise numbers, but I saw the experiment on 'Mythbusters' when they were dealing with the cell phone / gas station myth. So the highest level of radiation is produced when the phone rings, or when you hit call after dialing the number. In either case the phone is typically nowhere near your head. The reason your head may feel hot after continued cell use is due to the waste heat from the phone. Apples and oranges certainly, but you are comparing 2 apples to about 2000 oranges. AM towers transmit at a much higher power. The EM radiation from the cell transmitter shouldn't travel up the wires for your earpiece. As for cases of brain cancer, maybe you should look to your CRT monitor as the culprit?thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Tom wrote:and Mike Carrel replied I did a remodeling project on what once was a medical clinic. When we>> cut into the walls, there were sheets of lead in them.>>Lead would be used to stop Xrays, nothing more.It was a thin layer of lead, would such a layer stop short X rays too?> >>> I am interested in stopping EMF, in particular short wave X rays and>> possibly shorter wave EMF.>>Check your numbers. The only thing shorter than Xrays are gamma rays emitted>by radioactive substances and accelerators.I've seen a chart like that, I'll have to visit the library and look at one.>> If I put it into a grounded metal, or>>As a first rule of thumb, YES. But EM radiation will leak out of a box like>water or! a gas weakly. There is a whole discipline that goes under the code>name TEMPESTThanks for that name.> >What if I>> had electrical conductors, coming out of the Faraday Cage, would the>> short wave EMF be conducted with them? Would a transformer stop them?>>You bet. They are antennas, as are any gaps in the shielding of the box.>Transformers only stop DC and can be transparent to everything else.Is there some way to make a transformer that is opaque to them?> >>> There was a man who was interviewed on C to C AM last week. He talked> > about cell phones.>>The man is misguided. A cell phone when on and in stanby will listen to the>nearest cell phoone tower, comparing its address with the last address>received. When you turn it on, it will transmit a burst, reporting in, so>the system knows where your phone is. Your phone then goes passive, just>listening until you take it to another tower's cell; it will transmit>another burst, reporting in, etc. Think logically. Your phone will not waste>battery power transmitting all the time, nor do the towers want hundreds of>phones all yacking at it needlessly.You don't seem to be concerned about these occasional bursts of radiation, Mike, he disagrees with you>>>Then there are the towers, he said that>> you don't want to be within 500 feet of one.>>Utter nonsense. The individual transmitters have a power of about 7.5 watts,>equal to a christmas tree light bulb. The are up high so they can be 'seen'>froma distance and the antennas are designed to emit most of their energy as>a narrow horizontal fan so as to reach as far as possible. Nearby at ground>level you get only the feeble leakage from the antennas. They are so safe>that the FCC does not require s! ite surveys or licensing in setting up cell>towers.Hum, again the two of you are at variance over this matter. He claims that the side of your head will feel hot from continued cell phone use. IMHO, this not a good sign. He says that the number of brain cancers in the vicinity of the antenna continues to increase.>>I used the ear jack when>> I made phone calls, but apparently the EMF follows the wires into the>> ear jack. If his story is correct, over population will not be a>> problem for much longer.>>His story is not correct, it is grossly exaggerated and misleading. There>are some allegations that holding a cell phone to your ear places the>antenna next to your brain and its radiation may affect brain tissue. Years>ago there was a suit by a man (or his widow) alleging that the cell phone>initiated a brain cancer at that spot. If this were generally true, there>would be a worldwide epidemic of brain cancer by now.He says that the aforementioned epidemic is here, or rather that we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg.>Think logically.>People may choose to go hands-free, with a ear bud, and tiny microphone pod,>and the cell phone in their pocket, and walk around talking to the air. The>cell phone antenna can then irradiate your leg instead of your brain.Hum, good point.>>With the above caveats, long term use of a transmitter next to your head is>probably not a great idea, but any bad effects are very hard to quantify.>There were similar concerns about living near high voltage transmission>lines. There were some stories about clusters of disease, including cancers,>near high voltage lines. The clusters were
Re: serious chewing and eotvos
A body undergoing a constant acceleration at 90 deg to its direction of travel will travel in a circle. Radius of the circular path is determined by a combination of the bodies velocity and the magnitude of the force. (Sorry Horace, I can't take the time to quantify all this with numbers at this time) Thus a body in orbit must have sufficient velocity to counteract the effects of gravity at that orbital radius. We call this free-fall because the body accelerates (falls) freely with gravity. Due to Newton's second law, the body in circular motion must exert an equal force upon the source of it's acceleration. In the case of a centrifuge, the body presses against the outside of the chamber. In the case of gravitational orbit, the mass of the body exerts a small gravitational pull upon the mass it is orbiting. The human body feels aceleration by means of the strain placed on its tissues by inertia. In freefall every cell is accelerating at the same rate, and so there is no strain, thus the body feels no weight. Weight is the force a body exerts on some supporting structure to counter the force of gravity. In free-fall there is no weight, because there is no need (nor mechanism) to counter the action of gravity upon the body. Orbit is the balance between gravity (acceleration) and velocity, not between 2 opposing forces. Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: All this flows from _your_ force analysis of orbital motion. I think it is amistaken analysis because it is based on an analogy between orbital motionand a body in a centrifuge. A body orbits the earth because it is infree fall. There is simply no outward force associated with that sort ofmotion. The bottom line is mechanical systems do not accurately modelgravitational systems. HarryMerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Coherent wave interaction
It's a common misperception. If you diagram 2 waveforms of different frequency from a single source, or sources close to each other, then there will be a spherical area of constructive interference which in a 2-d representation could be interpreted as a torus. However, the waveforms are not static as the diagram is, and the area of constructive interference is actually a seperate waveform traveling from the joint source which has a frequency equal to the difference between the 2 original frequencies. As far as the Fibonacci series, a series of waveforms with frequencies corresponding to the series interferes in such a way as to create a square wave from sine waves. I personally believe in a level of energy capable of being manipulated by the human nervous system, which is undetectable by most people, but the aura of such energy is often more eaasily seen around the head, thus producing a halo. And no, I have no idea how this works, I try to keep science and mysticism seperate in my life.thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm listening to Dr. Hart being interviewed on C to C AM. He says that he can train people to induce various brain waves, which leads to an experience similar to drugs or meditation. He claims that studying this technology would give you all sorts of abilities.At one point the subject of halos came up. He said something to the effect that any engineer would understand that two coherent waves which interacted in a certain way, would form a torus. He went on to mention the Fibonaci series. This is the first I've heard about using wave forms to form a torus. Any of you engineers know anything about this? He continued by saying that coherent brain waves could form a halo over the person's head.MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist__Do Y! ou Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: star wars rides again
Actually, I think the shortest distance is for them to shoot over England. Merlyn Horace Heffner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: At 5:04 PM 12/15/4, leaking pen wrote:>...that said, its a waste of time and money, and there is no>need for it.You might have a different perspective on this if you lived where I do, inAlaska. We're right in the line of fire from N. Korea. I'm glad themissle system went in here, but also glad there are other tiers to missiledefense, because things aren't looking so reliable yet. 8^)Regards,Horace Heffner MerlynMagickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist Do you Yahoo!? The all-new My Yahoo! Get yours free!
Re: Capacitors
I would say that is a very good argument for the presence of an aether. Whether composed of materons or of something else entirely. I have designed an experiment (which I do not have the equipment to complete) which could prove the existance of an aether. 2 beams of charged particles projected through a vacuum should repel each other if the particles are the same polarity and the velocity is low. the behavior at higher velocities is dependant upon the nature of magnetism. If magnetism is the result of a charged particle moving through the aether, then as the particle velocity increases with respect to the aether then the particle beams will gradually cease to repel and start to attract each other as magnetic forces overcome electric repulsion. Of course, if there is no aether, then the behavior of the particle beams would be unchanged and the nature of magnetism is not what I believe it is.Grimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have here an excerpt from a play I was sent where the main character, Peter, meets James Clerk Maxwell in a dream. Maxwell is not allowed to discuss any knowledge he has gained after his death. I have changed the script slightly by changing the maincharacter's name and replacing protons and electrons with materons (positronium ash).Since most, if not all, Vortexians know vastly more about capacitors and stuff than I do, I would be interested in any Vortexian critique on the argument Peter presents to Maxwell.Peter: Now, let us attach a wire from one electrode of a fresh battery to a metal plate and a second wire from the other electrode to a parallel metal plate. Electrons will build up on the plate attached to the negative elec! trode and be removed from the other plate, until the voltage across the plates is 1.5 volts. The parallel plates are a form of capacitor. A capacitor stores electricity. If we fill the space between the plates with a material, we will find that the capacitor will store more electricity, at the same voltage.The relative dielectric constant of a material is defined as the ratio of the amount of electricity (or number of electrons) stored by a capacitor when filled with the material to the amount stored when it is filled with vacuum. A capacitor is believed to work by the following mechanism: The extra electrons on the negative plate of the capacitor repel negative charges in the material, while the net positive charges in the other plate of the capacitor attract negative charges in the material. This results in an electrical distortion in the material that tends to reduce the voltage across the capa! citor and permit more electrons to flow from the negative electrode of the battery to the capacitor and from the positive plate of the capacitor to the positive electrode of the battery. For this reason, a capacitor filled with a material with a relative dielectric constant of two will store twice as much electricity as a capacitor filled with vacuum, which, by definition, has a relative dielectric constant of one. That vacuum is capable of storing electricity suggests, to me, that vacuum contains positive and negative charges. This is expected if the space between the plates of the capacitor is filled with a matrix of incipient positrons and electrons (materons - having neutral charge and neutral mass).James: Why shouldn't void be able to store electricity?Peter: Because void contains no charged particles. Wouldn't you expect air, which contains particles made up of protons and electrons,! to have an infinitely greater dielectric constant than void? But the dielectric constants of vacuum and air are practically the same.I have been talking about relative dielectric constant because it is a simpler concept than dielectric constant itself. Your equations require that vacuum have definite values of dielectric constant and permeability . How can void have such properties?James: I must plead the Fifth Amendment. [A gentleman enters at the back of the stage. He stacks some of the cards to form the base of a pyramid.] Peter: That is what I expected. Let's discuss the effects of alternating current on relative dielectric constant. With normal line current, where the direction of the current reverses 50 times per second, the dielectric constant of most materials is the same as with direct current, where the direction of the current does not change. This is true even at freq! uencies as high as a billion cycles per second. As the frequency is increased further, many of the effects that contribute to dielectric constant (for example the movement of atoms or ions) are too slow to respond, due to inertia. This causes the dielectric constants of materials to decrease dramatically . At the much higher light frequencies, only electrons/positrons have low enough inertia to respond. I consider the observation that the dielectric constant of vacuum does not change with frequency as further evidence of the pr
