RE: [Vo]:Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature

[hellokevin]

Looks like Y.E. Kim's BEC theory for LENR just got a leg up. Criticisms of his 
theory were that BECs couldn't form at higher temperatures. 
[PDF] Bose-Einstein Condensate Theory of Deuteron Fusion in Metal 
http://www.physics.purdue.edu/people/faculty/yekim/YEKim-AIP-PNMBTG.pdf 
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View by YE Kim - Cited by 14 - Related 
articles where ψBEC is the Bose-Einstein condensate ground state (a coherent 
quantum . Third International Conference on Cold Fusion., October 21-25 
Nagoya ...

--- On Thu, 2/7/13, Jones Beene  wrote:


From: Jones Beene 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Bose-Einstein condensate created at room temperature
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thursday, February 7, 2013, 11:12 AM









Yes they can. In fact this could be important for LENR, should it be broad 
enough to include other boson quasiparticles, such as the magnon

Re: [Vo]:New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global Warming ....

[hellokevin]

Sounds reasonable enough.  What do you think of this article:
 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100194166/man-made-global-warming-even-the-ipcc-admits-the-jig-is-up/
 
 
Man-made global warming: even the IPCC admits the jig is up 



By James DelingpoleEnvironmentLast updated: December 13th, 2012
3839 CommentsComment on this article


Could this mysterious glowing orb have something to do with climate change? 
Surely not!
Breaking news from the US – h/t Watts Up With That? – where a leaked draft of 
the IPCC's latest report AR5 admits what some of us have suspected for a very 
long time: that the case for man-made global warming is looking weaker by the 
day and that the sun plays a much more significant role in "climate change" 
than the scientific "consensus" has previously been prepared to concede.
Here's the killer admission:

Many empirical relationships have been reported between GCR or cosmogenic 
isotope archives and some aspects of the climate system (e.g., Bond et al., 
2001; Dengel et al., 2009; Ram and Stolz, 1999). The forcing from changes in 
total solar irradiance alone does not seem to account for these observations, 
implying the existence of an amplifying mechanism such as the hypothesized 
GCR-cloud link. We focus here on observed relationships between GCR and aerosol 
and cloud properties.
As the leaker explains, this is a game-changer:

The admission of strong evidence for enhanced solar forcing changes everything. 
The climate alarmists can’t continue to claim that warming was almost entirely 
due to human activity over a period when solar warming effects, now 
acknowledged to be important, were at a maximum. The final draft of AR5 WG1 is 
not scheduled to be released for another year but the public needs to know now 
how the main premises and conclusions of the IPCC story line have been undercut 
by the IPCC itself.

--- On Mon, 12/17/12, Jojo Jaro  wrote:


From: Jojo Jaro 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Data "Worrying" 2000 climatologists about Global Warming 

To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, December 17, 2012, 4:33 PM


Harry,

I will be honest with my limitations.  I neither have the knowledge or the 
requisite background to make sense of raw data, as I am not a climatologists.  
Neither are you, unless you can correct me.  In fact, I don't believe there are 
any climatologists in this list.

But like I said.  If people would do the suggestion I've outlined, it will go a 
long ways in minimizing controversy and "settle" the science.

First, Don't fudge the data.  (At least, don't get caught fudging the data. 
LOL...)
Second,  Open up the discussion.  Don't stifle research into contrary views by 
unilaterally declaring it "settled science".  This is the best way to bomb your 
credibility.  By refusing to discuss as if you have the last word on the 
subject.  That is what Bob Parks, et al,  do with cold fusion, and don't you 
think it is "so" annoying.
Third, Open up the raw data to other experts.  Open up your models.  Discuss 
your data gathering techniques.  Don't hide these things and only put out your 
"conclusions", which is just your opinion.


What is wrong with what I am asking.  You will convince me and people like me 
if people would simply implement these suggestions.  The more you hide behind 
your "settled science" position, the more people like me become more 
recalcitrant and stubborn.  People instinctly know you are trying to pull a 
wool over their eyes; and this AGW propaganda smells of that.


Jojo

 

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: FW: Heavily invest in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) for energy independence, clean energy, and to stimulate economy has been published!

[hellokevin]

Not very many signatures.  I'm #15.  
 
Signatures needed by December 15, 2012 to reach goal of 25,000
24,985


--- On Thu, 11/15/12, Jed Rothwell  wrote:


From: Jed Rothwell 
Subject: [Vo]:Fwd: FW: Heavily invest in Low Energy Nuclear Reactions (LENR) 
for energy independence, clean energy, and to stimulate economy has been 
published!
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Thursday, November 15, 2012, 12:14 PM


My guess is this petition will attract a few hundred signatures at most. But 
what harm? I signed it.
 

Re: [Vo]:A little more positive article on Cold Fusion from Gibbs

[hellokevin]

Mark:
 
This appears to be your second article on LENR, at least as far as I am aware.  
For the third article, why don't you correspond with Jed Rothwell and 
incorporate some of his excellent advice?  
 
Kevmo

--- On Sun, 10/21/12, Mark Gibbs  wrote:


From: Mark Gibbs 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:A little more positive article on Cold Fusion from Gibbs
To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" 
Date: Sunday, October 21, 2012, 10:37 AM


If you go back and re-read my previous columns on cold fusion you'll see that 
my interest has always been in useful cold fusion ... The cold 
fusion phenomena, while scientifically intriguing, amounts to to nothing of 
practical interest if you can't do something useful with it ... rather like 
muon catalyzed fusion ... Interesting but not practically useful.


[mg]


On Sunday, October 21, 2012, Terry Blanton wrote:

Gibbs:

"I know that there will be a handful of people (the “believers” I
wrote about some time ago)  who read that statement and cry “lies” but
the fact is that no one has yet demonstrated, definitively, that cold
fusion or LENR exists in a form that is actually useful."

Now the argument is being useful.  LOL!

Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR

[hellokevin]

Axil:
 
Hasn't the existence of this attractive force been disproven?  
 
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012arXiv1205.4922B
 
On "Novel attractive forces" between ions in quantum plasmas -- failure of 
linearized quantum hydrodynamics
Bonitz, M.; Pehlke, E.; Schoof, T.
eprint arXiv:1205.4922
In a recent letter [P.K. Shukla and B. Eliasson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 165007 
(2012)] the discovery of a new attractive force between protons in a hydrogen 
plasma was reported that would be responsible for the formation of molecules 
and of a proton lattice. Here we show, based on ab initio density functional 
theory calculations, that these predictions are wrong and caused by using 
linearized quantum hydrodynamics beyond the limits of its applicability.
Keywords: Physics - Plasma Physics, Condensed Matter - Statistical Mechanics
 
 
-Kevmo


--- On Wed, 9/12/12, Axil Axil  wrote:


From: Axil Axil 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:New Lattice Energy on Hi-Temp Superconductivity LENR
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2012, 11:10 AM



This increase in conductivity is casued by the formation of cooper pairs of 
protons through the action of thr Shukla-Eliasson Attractive Force. See my last 
post - Friedel oscillations
 
Cheers:   Axil

 

RE: [Vo]:OT: UFO Fleet Starship Filmed on telescope

[hellokevin]

--- On Fri, 9/7/12, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
 wrote:





 
I'm puzzled by the fact that many "Aliens" are strikingly humanoid in 
appearance - possessing two legs, arms, eyes, a nose and mouth, placed in 
pretty much the same locations as we possess. I don't think such a structural 
layout is a coincidence.  
 
Neither do I.  But Occham's Razor suggests a far simpler explanation than 
aliens crossing thousands of light years to come to this obscure planet and use 
humans in genetic experiments or whatever the latest fad explanation is.  The 
simplest explanation is that most flying saucer landings are secret projects 
and when the guys inside see a possibility that there are going to be folks 
from the general public nearby, they simply don an alien head costume.  This 
also accounts for their heads being bigger in proportion to their bodies.  

RE: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1)

[hellokevin]

One thing your theory does not seem to cover is why the original Proton + 
Proton fusion happened in the first place.  On the sun, it's because there's so 
much gravity holding the protons together.  In a lattice, presumably it's due 
to the metallic atoms caging the protons close enough together to experience a 
probability of a Coulomb barrier depletion.  
 


--- On Mon, 9/3/12, Jones Beene  wrote:


From: Jones Beene 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1)
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, September 3, 2012, 6:39 PM









Well – yes – the theory is falsifiable in exactly this way, but of course - you 
only do mass spectrometry on the hydrogen fill not the entire device.
 
And yes – at least I have heard that SRI has an instrument sensitive enough to  
do this kind of measurement on hydrogen – but for whatever reason, it is not in 
use as of this date. It would indeed take a very sophisticated piece of 
equipment - as the proton mass on average will not go down by more than a 
fractional percent following a long gainful run, like the 50 hours of Celani.
 
 
From: helloke...@sbcglobal.net 
 




Energy comes from proton mass depletion

So... the way to test this theory is to weigh the thing before & after the 
experiment? Does any LENR researcher have equipment sensitive enough to detect 
the difference in proton mass depletion? 
 

Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1)

[hellokevin]

Energy comes from proton mass depletion

So... the way to test this theory is to weigh the thing before & after the 
experiment? Does any LENR researcher have equipment sensitive enough to detect 
the difference in proton mass depletion? 

Re: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1)

[hellokevin]

This is by far the simplest looking theory I've seen for LENR.   It would seem 
Occham's Razor is in play here, especially when the theory is contrasted with 
Widom-Larson.  
 
 How do you test it?  

--- On Mon, 9/3/12, Jones Beene  wrote:


From: Jones Beene 
Subject: [Vo]:Nanomagnetism, QCD & Goldstone bosons (part 1)
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, September 3, 2012, 8:26 AM


An arcane concept - the Goldstone boson, could be one key to understanding
the emergent nanomagnetism hypothesis for energy gain in Ni-H. The energy
transfer originates from strong force and QCD color change dynamics, and
therefore from the nuclear pion (via slight depletion of proton mass) then
ending up as magnons, then heat.

This is in stark contrast to W&L theory, and others which depend on the weak
force (plus an imaginary ultracold neutron, which has not been shown to
exist in physical reality).

Pion (gluon) -> magnon. This is looking more and more like the key concept
for energy exchange in nanomagnetism and the quasi-nuclear QNF powerhouse
behind it. It is a route to convert tiny packets of nuclear mass (derived
from color change variations) into magnetic waves, then into heat. This is
similar to heating an iron core by magnetic induction, but it happens from
the inside-out.

Energy comes from proton mass depletion but there is no change in the
identity of the active particle (the proton). Thus the name QNF
"quasi-nuclear fusion" instead of "nuclear fusion" or "cold fusion". The
fusion is short-lived, sequential, reversible and happens for less than
10^-20 seconds with almost no gain, but during this time, the strong force
is disrupted (broken symmetry). This is by far the most common nuclear
reaction in the Universe, and it happens for almost no gain. The reaction
can be designated as P+P ->2He->P+P. One earth, it occurs in Casimir
cavities, and possibly only in such a cavity - and that is what makes it
uniquely different from the solar variety of proton fusion. An "extended
lifetime effect" is courtesy of Casimir time dilation - which is a correlate
of the Reifenschweiler effect. It is a relativistic effect of cavity
confinement.

A following post will sum this up the cavity connection and tie it to proton
mass variations - but for now, the emphasis is on two Goldstone bosons which
are involved in energy transfer.

The strong force (color force) is mediated by the gluon which involves pions
and the color changes. If you want to get more specific, gluons hold quarks
together to form hadrons and pions hold hadrons together to form atomic
nuclei. It gets very colorful, with red quarks emitting a red-anti-green
gluons, and green quarks changing into a red quark, and so on, but this
color change has been the way QCD chooses to describe the residual forces
holding nuclear quarks together.

As mentioned in past posts on this topic, the magnon is a quasiparticle,
with mass-equivalence, which can be viewed as a quantized spin wave. As a
quasiparticle, a magnon carries a fixed but small amount of energy and
lattice momentum- which energy it must obtain from somewhere. It possesses a
spin energy equal to the Dirac constant (reduced Planck constant) so we can
estimate energy transfer. It is similar to an excited phonon, which is a
collective excitation of the crystal lattice atoms or ions. What
nanomagnetism suggests is that color change dynamics, in the decay of
transient fusion diprotons (from 2He fusion and immediate decay) actually
creates magnons, which transfer a bit of nuclear mass to lattice in the same
way that the windings of an electromagnet would do to a core. The end result
is thermal gain. 

It requires more than 10^16 of these 2He reactions to transfer every eV, but
not to worry - the complete transaction to provide one eV can potentially
happen sequentially thousands of times per second per Casimir cavity. In
prior speculation, this has been referred to as a "ZPE pump", since before,
the source of energy could not be pinpointed, so the catch-all of ZPE was
designated as the source. Now we have a nuclear candidate. in place of ZPE.

In magnets, the original rotational symmetry (in the absence of an external
magnetic field) is spontaneously broken by magnetization into a specific
vector. The Goldstone bosons then are the magnons, i.e., the quantized spin
waves, in which the local magnetization oscillates (precesses). This becomes
an energy transfer process - mass to energy.

In every proton nucleus there are pions. The pions are also the Goldstone
bosons that result from the spontaneous breakdown of the chiral-flavor
symmetries of QCD, effected by quark condensation due to the strong
interaction. These symmetries are further explicitly broken during the brief
2He fusion and decay event - and some mass will be transferred, in order to
provide magnons. Cross-identity of Goldstone bosons is probably a key and
not coincidental.

If you are not yet confused by all of this colorful word salad, then you
obviously hav

Re: [Vo]:Topology is Key. Carbon Nanostructures are King

[hellokevin]

In essence, what Jojo is proposing is his own version of a "Designer" 
material.  It would prove doubtful that carbon nanotubes would end up being the 
preferred substrate for LENR in the future, due to cost compared to simple 
Nickel or even Palladium.  
 
One of the things that needs to be considered is whether the LENR reaction 
transfers its energy to the substrate in the form of heat.  If it's not set up 
right, it could emit a gamma ray.  
 
Once again, we see that perhaps Steven Chu is the right person to approach at 
this time.  According to Wikipedia, he studied FRET.  
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Chu
In the field of biological physics, he studied enzyme activity and protein and 
RNA folding using techniques such as fluorescence resonance energy transfer, 

 

--- On Tue, 8/28/12, Axil Axil  wrote:


From: Axil Axil 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Topology is Key. Carbon Nanostructures are King
To: "vortex-l" 
Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 4:45 PM



On the face of it, there seems to be an engineering dilemma associated with the 
concept of removing kinetic energy from atoms in designing a mechanism to 
produce power from heat.  
But we can do what we want to do if we take another tack. At the end of the 
day, the formation of an entangled ensemble of particles is a great multiplier 
of LENR subatomic manipulation. But at the most fundamental level, it’s all 
about control of electrons. 
 At the broadest level of explanation, cold fusion is a result of the heavy 
compression of electrons to such a high level that their mutually repulsive 
forces overlap causing the various quantum constituents to disaggregate into 
separated piles of quantum waves: charge, spin, orbit(aka,  angular momentum). 
Electric charge is stripped en mass from the rest and the location and activity 
of these waves are distinct and removed to a distance from their originating 
particles.  
This compression of such an energetic and chaotic electron fluid is not easy to 
do because the electrons are so small and slippery.  In an analogy, both water 
and CO2 can be maintained in a liquid state if it is confined and constrained 
by enough pressure within a pressure vessel with thick steel walls..
Confining electrons together to prohibit the electrons following their usual 
state of free motion requires special materials configured in just the right 
way. When this chaotic electron fluid is tamed in this way, coherent waves of 
charge will form. It is this pressure exerted on electrons that cause their 
charge to disaggregate and dislocate from liked charge particles. And it is the 
concentrated action of these waves of charge that take down the coulomb barrier.
But it's not easy to squeeze the energetic electrons together, because these 
tiny particles can leak away into even the tiniest holes of a lattice of atoms. 
And even under pressure, the electrons must also be able to move. They cannot 
be frozen solid in place as happens in a Mott insulator. To engineer a 
situation where electron movement is strongly restricted in just the right way, 
one must look toward the newly evolving field of materials engineering:  
topological materials. 

The chemical organization of topological materials, their size and shape of 
certain combinations of atoms and their positions relative to each other will 
project electromagnetic force to break apart electrons and protons into their 
most elemental quantum mechanical parts.
Just in the last few years, one and two dimensional materials have been 
discovered and strange new classes of matter are being formed. These designer 
materials can produce factional angular momentum, the magnetic monopole and the 
Majorana particle…A particle that is its own antiparticle and thus capable of 
self – annihilation…but these new creations can only exist in their own very 
special atomic topological neighborhood.
"Designer" materials made of superatoms and long atomic strings could have 
combinations of physical properties that don't exist in nature. We can produce 
an ultra-cold condensate at 700C, As Kit Bowen, a chemical physicist at Johns 
Hopkins University in Baltimore, puts it, it's as if you felt like eating 
something hot and something cold at the same time, and could have it both ways. 
"Like a hot-fudge sundae." 
 
Cheers:   Axil
 

Re: [Vo]:Topology is Key. Carbon Nanostructures are King

[hellokevin]

Yes, removing energy is the key to forming the BEC.  Note that the current 
Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, won his Nobel Prize by using laser cooling to 
form the first "pure" BEC.  
 
There is actually a real upside to this approach, in that we would be playing 
in Chu's back yard and he would have an understanding of what's trying to be 
accomplished, contrary to what has been going on in mainstream scientific 
circles.  
 
 
 
>From Wikipedia: 
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose%E2%80%93Einstein_condensate
The first "pure" Bose–Einstein condensate was created by Eric Cornell, Carl 
Wieman, and co-workers at JILA on June 5, 1995. They did this by cooling a 
dilute vapor consisting of approximately two thousand rubidium-87 atoms to 
below 170 nK using a combination of laser cooling (a technique that won its 
inventors Steven Chu, Claude Cohen-Tannoudji, and William D. Phillips the 1997 
Nobel Prize in Physics)

--- On Tue, 8/28/12, ChemE Stewart  wrote:


From: ChemE Stewart 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Topology is Key. Carbon Nanostructures are King
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Tuesday, August 28, 2012, 12:09 PM


I believe unless you remove energy from the condensate, the energy radiated 
from the collapse of matter will instantly heat the condensate and quench 
further collapse since you reach new thermodynamic stability.  Possibly the 
only way to counteract that (beyond removing heat) is a stronger magnetic field 
or further compression within the lattice.


On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:48 PM,  wrote:






Hello Jojo:
 
One thing to consider is the opposite of high speed kinetic movement.  K. P. 
Sinha induced LENR by using a laser and REMOVING energy from the system.  And 
Kim theorizes that Bose-Einstein Condensates are the primary cause, which 
points again to a REMOVAL of energy from the system.  If you slow those 
Deuterium atoms down enough, they become attracted to each other.  So if you do 
end up with a mat of these carbon nanohorns, you might try a laser operating at 
the frequency KP Sinha published instead of inducing current.  

 


 



 

Re: [Vo]:Topology is Key. Carbon Nanostructures are King

[hellokevin]

Hello Jojo:
 
One thing to consider is the opposite of high speed kinetic movement.  K. P. 
Sinha induced LENR by using a laser and REMOVING energy from the system.  And 
Kim theorizes that Bose-Einstein Condensates are the primary cause, which 
points again to a REMOVAL of energy from the system.  If you slow those 
Deuterium atoms down enough, they become attracted to each other.  So if you do 
end up with a mat of these carbon nanohorns, you might try a laser operating at 
the frequency KP Sinha published instead of inducing current.  
 


--- On Thu, 8/23/12, Jojo Jaro  wrote:




 Now, given that you've just jolted these H+ into high speed kinetic movement 
due to the high temperature you just applied with your spark, add the fact that 
they are screened, meaning they don't have the coulomb repulsion anymore; guess 
what would happen when 2 of these H+ ions collide.
 
Instant p + p fusion.  Success!!!
 

Re: [Vo]:Blather in the mass media makes scientists think we are crazy

[hellokevin]

Jojo:
 
I never thought I'd see 0bama's birth certificate debated here on Vortex.  
You've made it a fascinating place to visit for more than one reason.  
 
Regarding #2, who can blame 0bama for holding back his birth certificate when 
he hasn't been forced to do so?  This begs the question of who forces him to do 
so...
 
Regarding #1, it seems so simple.  It was the responsibility of the Supreme 
Court of the US to determine his eligibility, per the 20th amendment:  
 
 
Section 3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the 
President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall 
become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time 
fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have 
failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a 
President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the 
case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have 
qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which 
one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly 
until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
 
Notice that the order of events is spelled out: if the President elect shall 
have failed to qualify. That means the qualification takes place AFTER the 
General Public votes, and even AFTER the Electoral College. It also shows 
explicitly that the ELECTION RESULTS ARE SUBORDINATE TO QUALIFICATION. 
Further resources and copies of the constitution: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twentieth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
 
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html 
 
It is the US Supreme Court who threw our republic into this constitutional 
tailspin.  0bama did what any selfish politician would do.  But Supreme Court 
members are given lifetime appointments so they can  be free from the political 
ramifications of their decisions.  Their JOB is to uphold the constitution.  
Period.  They didn't do it.  They threw this republic down the drain so that 
they could enjoy warm smiles at Washington DC cocktail parties.  
 
You may enjoy this birth certificate thread I started on Intrade.  It is the 
most-read thread in Intrade's  history.    In particular, I wonder how you 
would answer the hypotheticals I asked about Caesar crossing the Rubicon?  
 
https://bb.intrade.com/intradeForum/posts/list/570/2279.page#37978
 
Kevmo

 

--- On Wed, 8/8/12, Jojo Jaro  wrote:


From: Jojo Jaro 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Blather in the mass media makes scientists think we are crazy
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2012, 3:15 AM


Michele, a Natural Born US citizen must fulfill 2 things:

1.  Must be born to two US citizen parents.
2.  Must be born in US soil.

Surely bambi does not qualify for number 1.  His alleged father was not a US 
citizen

Second, there is significant question as to where he was actually born.  He 
refuses to release his original vault BC.  All we have is a poorly 
photoshopped copy of his BC, which is surely a fake.


Jojo



- Original Message - 
From: "Michele Comitini" 
To: 
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Blather in the mass media makes scientists think we are 
crazy


Jojo,

I know US president must be born on US soil.
I do not know enough about Citizenship law to know if the mother was
eligible to confer Citizenship to her son, she was 18 at the time.
Reading wikipedia seems to say she was eligible in 1961, but as we
know wikipedia is far from complete.

mic



2012/8/8 Jojo Jaro :
> Michele, two things:
>
> First, the Immigration laws were a bit different in 1963.  Stanley Ann
> Dunham was too young to have conferred to Bambi U.S. Citizenship at that
> time.
>
> Second, Mere U.S. Citizenship does not qualify one to be President.  The
> founding fathers specifically included "Natural Born" U.S. citizenship as 
> a
> qualification for being POTUS.  I trust you know the difference between a
> U.S. Citizen and a Natural Born U.S. Citizen.  Even if bambi was a U.S.
> citizen (that fact alone is in doubt); he would still not be qualified
> unless he was Natural Born U.S. Citizen.
>
>
>
>
> Jojo
>
>
>
> - Original Message - From: "Michele Comitini"
> 
> To: 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 4:14 PM
>
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Blather in the mass media makes scientists think we are
> crazy
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law#Birth_abroad_to_one_United_States_citizen
>
>
>
>
> 2012/8/8 MarkI-ZeroPoint :
>>
>> Good debate!  This is what freedom of speech is all about…
>>
>>
>>
>> “His grandparents were not dumb and knew the benefits of US citizenship.
>> No
>> conspiracy to be POTUS has to be invoked, only that they want their
>> grandchild to be a US citizen is good enough a reason.”
>>
>>
>>
>> Agreed.   His mother was Caucasian and from the US (she was born here), 
>> so
>> it certainly is likely that *i

Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides

[hellokevin]

Global Warming 'Skeptic' Never Really Was - Media's portrayal of scientist wrong
Capitol Confidential ^ | 8/4/2012 | Tom Gantert 

http://www.michigancapitolconfidential.com/17305 
 
The mainstream media is celebrating a physicist who allegedly did a U-turn on 
his global warming views and now says humans are the cause. 
Except Richard Muller had already said in 2008 that man was a cause of global 
warming. 
Nonetheless, the San Francisco Chronicle, for example, reported July 31: “The 
hot issue of global warming got hotter Monday when a UC Berkeley physicist, 
once a loud skeptic of human-caused climate change, agreed not only that the 
Earth is heating up, but also that people are the cause of it all.” 
Never mind that in an interview almost four years ago with the environmental 
magazine Grist, Muller said man was a cause of global warming. 
Grist: What should a President McCain or Obama know about global warming? 
Muller: The bottom line is that there is a consensus — the [Intergovernmental 
Panel on Climate Change] — and the president needs to know what the IPCC says. 
Second, they say that most of the warming of the last 50 years is probably due 
to humans. You need to know that this is from carbon dioxide, and you need to 
understand which technologies can reduce this and which can’t. Roughly 1 degree 
Fahrenheit of global warming has taken place; we’re responsible for one quarter 
of it. If we cut back so we don’t cause any more, global warming will be 
delayed by three years and keep on going up. And now the developing world is 
producing most of the carbon dioxide. 
Even Muller appears to have forgotten what he said in 2008. 
In his July 28 New York Times op-ed, Muller says he came to this conclusion in 
2011. “Last year, following an intensive research effort involving a dozen 
scientists, I concluded that global warming was real and that the prior 
estimates of the rate of warming were correct. I’m now going a step further: 
Humans are almost entirely the cause.” 
Muller didn’t respond to a question in an email about the discrepancy 
concerning when he came to believe in human-induced global warming, but 
responded to another question about his credentials. 
Muller co-founded Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature (BEST), which released a 
study this month. Muller is not a climatologist. Many who support global 
warming have attacked the credentials of critics who were not climatologists. 
For example, in 2009, Bill Chameides, the dean of Duke’s Nicholas School of the 
Environment, wrote an op-ed for The Huffington Post saying those who doubted 
global warming were “non-experts” because they were not climatologists. 
Chameides wrote: “Have you noticed that a new kind of scientific expert has 
been born? It is the non-climate scientist ‘climate scientist,’ better known in 
the trade as the NCSCS. ... What is a[n] NCSCS? It is someone who is not a 
climate scientist but is nevertheless happy to speak authoritatively about the 
alleged scientific errors being made by the real climate scientists. A dead 
ringer for a[n] NCSCS is one who begins with words to the effect of: ‘I am not 
a climatologist, but. ...’ ” 
Chameides didn’t respond to an email asking how Muller’s testimony should be 
viewed since Muller is not a climatologist. 
Muller defended his credentials when asked about not being a climatologist: “I 
don't know what the definition is. It is unfortunate that this field seems to 
emphasize credentials rather than science.” Muller also forwarded citations of 
his published works on climate that “have appeared in some of the most 
prestigious peer-reviewed journals.” 
John Christy, a climatologist and a professor at The University of 
Alabama-Huntsville, said Muller has been on record in the past “promoting 
human-induced global warming.” 
“I sat next to Muller at a (U.S.) House hearing last year,” Christy said in an 
email. “Nothing he said gave me the feeling he was a ‘skeptic.’ I also find his 
result that greenhouse emissions, to him, are the only thing that can cause 
slow warming in global temperature when such changes have occurred down through 
the centuries, i.e. before the BEST record begins. Climate variations have been 
around long before the mere 250 years of the BEST dataset.”

Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides

[hellokevin]

Jed:
 
I consider you to be one of the reliable experts on Cold Fusion, primarily 
because of the website you put together, lenr-canr.org.  
 
Have you put together anything similar when it comes to Evolution or Global 
Warming?  I'm not aware of it if you have.   
 
I regularly recommend your lenr-canr website for CF.  Do you have such a 
one-stop shop recommendation for Global Warming?   
 
Do you have evidence behind your claim "it is obvious to me that no cheating of 
any sort occurred. This whole story was ginned up by people opposed to 
climatology"? 
 
My interest in evolution is primarily on the abiogenesis focus.  Do you have 
such a one-stop shop recommendation for  looking into abiogenesis?  
 
 
 
 
 
Kevmo

--- On Mon, 7/30/12, Jed Rothwell  wrote:


From: Jed Rothwell 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Monday, July 30, 2012, 6:36 PM



Jojo Jaro  wrote:




I do not believe in any of your so called "Experts".  Especially when these so 
called "Experts" have been caught red-handed manipulating data.


I have heard people say that about cold fusion hundreds of times. They claim 
that F&P cheated, that the data was fake, that no one replicated, etc., etc. It 
is not true of cold fusion and it is not true of climatology. I have read the 
memos and looked at the data you refer to. I am no expert in climatology but it 
is obvious to me that no cheating of any sort occurred. This whole story was 
ginned up by people opposed to climatology, just as the anti-cold fusion 
propaganda was invented by people opposed to that subject for political reasons.


Ditto every argument in the mass media opposed to evolution. It is all ignorant 
horseshit. It is anti-science, anti-intellectual, repackaged premodern 
superstitious NONSENSE. I have heard it all before. (Almost all -- you are the 
first person I have ever seen claim that Darwinism is socialistic. Many others 
claim it is capitalistic. As I said, both claims make about as much sense as 
saying that Ohm's law is erotic and trigonometry is tragic.)


You are gullible. You jump to conclusions. You buy into lies and propaganda 
spread by people with an agenda. You think you know more about complex 
scientific subjects than distinguished experts do, but you are mistaken. God 
knows I have encountered HUNDREDS of people like you who imagine they know 
something about cold fusion when they know nothing. I am sick to death of such 
people.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides

[hellokevin]

How would carbon nanotubes be off topic?  
 
 
 
http://www.eskimo.com/~billb/weird/wvort.html#rules
 
The Vortex-L list was originally created for discussions of professional 
research into fluid vortex/cavitation devices which exhibit anomalous energy 
effects (ie: the inventions of Schaeffer, Huffman, Griggs, and Potapov among 
others.) Currently it has evolved into a discussion on "taboo" physics reports 
and research. SKEPTICS BEWARE, the topics wander from Cold Fusion, to reports 
of excess energy in Free Energy devices, gravity generation and detection, 
reports of theoretically impossible phenomena, and all sorts of supposedly 
crackpot claims.  
 
BTW, can I get in on that $100 bet?  I doubt you'll get banned.  
 
Kevmo
 
--- On Sun, 7/29/12, Jojo Jaro  wrote:


From: Jojo Jaro 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Sunday, July 29, 2012, 4:19 PM



  
PS. Quite frankly, I have a lot of things that I would like to post about 
Carbon Nanotubes.  But since, I find that topic to be slightly off-topic, I 
refrain from doing so.
 
 
  

Re: [Vo]:Koch founded climate skeptic changes sides

[hellokevin]

Didn't Adolf Hitler apply social Darwinism to economics as well as politics on 
a massive scale?  
 
Fiofrst few of 86,000 Google hits on "social darwinism" and "adolf hitler" 
 
 
 


Social Darwinism

www.mrdowling.com/706-socialdarwinism.htmlCached - Similar
 Adolf Hitler's racial theories were based on social Darwinism. “The stronger 
has to rule and must not mate with the weaker,” Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf. 
“Only the ...



Adolf Hitler




www.angelfire.com/ia/totalwar/Hitler.htmlCached - Similar
You +1'd this publicly. UndoHitler also discussed Social Darwinism, saying that 
the German people were superior in all aspects to those of other nations. Adolf 
Hitler was released from ...



Darwinism and the Nazi Race Holocaust




www.trueorigin.org/holocaust.aspCached - Similar
You +1'd this publicly. UndoPhoto: Adolf Hitler and Heinrich Himmler review SS 
troops during Reich Party Day ... straightforward German social Darwinism of a 
type widely known and ...



Social Darwinism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_DarwinismCached - Similar
You +1'd this publicly. UndoSocial Darwinism is an ideology of society that 
seeks to apply biological concepts . of the Völkisch movement and, 
ultimately, of the Nazi Party of Adolf Hitler.
 
 
--- On Mon, 7/30/12, Jed Rothwell  wrote:





 

Actually, as far as I know, the only time Darwinian evolution was applied to 
economics was in the late 19th century so-called social Darwinism. That was the 
opposite of socialism. It was Ayn Rand style capitalism. In my opinion it was a 
silly abuse of the theory. An oversimplification. 

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Free Republic thread about cold fusion seems more positive

[hellokevin]

By all means, Abd, I'm asking -- on list.  Please show the list what you mean.
 
Is this the kind of treatment one can expect from Vortex-L?  I don't see anyone 
else getting such disrespect, not even Mary Yugo when she was directly 
operating against the list's rules.  
 
So, yes, please explain what you mean, in detail.  
 
Kevin O  

--- On Wed, 8/1/12, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax  wrote:


From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax 
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Free Republic thread about cold fusion seems more positive
To: helloke...@sbcglobal.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Wednesday, August 1, 2012, 9:08 PM


Mmmm looking at your posts, Kevin, I predict a site ban is coming. Not 
because of "cold fusion," but because of your own lack of restraint. You really 
describe the problem in your comment here.

Kevin, if you want to effectively represent cold fusion to the world,

please

grow

up.

If you don't understand what I'm talking about, you are welcome to ask, on or 
off-list.

By the way, you are indeed dealing with pseudoskeptics. So? What else would you 
expect?

At 03:52 PM 8/1/2012, helloke...@sbcglobal.net wrote:



> Hello Jed:
> Yes, that was me. I posted a lot of Cold Fusion articles over the last 3 
> years, starting from before Rossi arriving on the scene.
> 
> http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles
> 
> I put up with a lot of abuse from the skeptopath crowd, especially due to 
> Rossi pulling his showmanship shenanigans.
> 
>     I was operating with my hands behind my back, because I would call the 
>skeptopaths "seagulls".  It was an effective countermeasure to their constant 
>derision.  It was also an accurate representation of the scientific value of 
>their 'contributions'.   The admin moderator told me to stop calling them 
>that.  I gather I hurt their feelings.  But the admin moderator continued to 
>allow all kinds of stalking, disrupting, personal attacks and distortions from 
>the anti-LENR crowd.  Lately it's gotten worse. The moderator has started 
>pulling threads entirely.
> 
> Kevmo
> 
> p.s. I missed a chance to meet KP Sinha when he was in town.  He looked me up 
> and called me.  Unfortunately, that was the day that my car decided to go 
> kablooey.
> 
> 
> 
> Jed Rothwell
> Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:20:07 -0700
> 
> Hold it. This was the 2009 thread:
> 
> 
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2265914/posts
> 
> Here is the recent one:
> 
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2732072/posts
> 
> 
> This is the Sinha ICCF-14 paper.
> 
> What I mean by "positive" is, for example, where someone said "this article 
> is bunk" someone else responded:
> 
> "This guy is a world class scientist with several articles published in peer 
> reviewed journals, and it pulls only from classical physics. Explain how it 
> is bunk."
> - Jed

Re: [Vo]:Free Republic thread about cold fusion seems more positive

[hellokevin]

Hello Jed: 
Yes, that was me. I posted a lot of Cold Fusion articles over the last 3 years, 
starting from before Rossi arriving on the scene. 
 
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/coldfusion/index?tab=articles
 
I put up with a lot of abuse from the skeptopath crowd, especially due to Rossi 
pulling his showmanship shenanigans.  
 
    I was operating with my hands behind my back, because I would call the 
skeptopaths "seagulls".  It was an effective countermeasure to their constant 
derision.  It was also an accurate representation of the scientific value 
of their 'contributions'.   The admin moderator told me to stop calling them 
that.  I gather I hurt their feelings.  But the admin moderator continued to 
allow all kinds of stalking, disrupting, personal attacks and distortions from 
the anti-LENR crowd.  Lately it's gotten worse. The moderator has started 
pulling threads entirely.
 
Kevmo
 
p.s. I missed a chance to meet KP Sinha when he was in town.  He looked me up 
and called me.  Unfortunately, that was the day that my car decided to go 
kablooey.  
 
 
 




Jed Rothwell
Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:20:07 -0700
Hold it. This was the 2009 thread:


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2265914/posts
Here is the recent one:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2732072/posts


This is the Sinha ICCF-14 paper.

What I mean by "positive" is, for example, where someone said "this article is 
bunk" someone else responded:"This guy is a world class scientist with several 
articles published in peer reviewed journals, and it pulls only from classical 
physics. Explain how it is bunk."- Jed

[Vo]:Athanor 2.0: The Hydrotron

[hellokevin]

 









Athanor 2.0: The Hydrotron 
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/07/athanor-2-0-the-hydrotron/
[Update: Video Posted]


July 28, 2012

It has not been very easy to find out what has been happening with the Pirelli 
High School’s cold fusion reactor (named the Athanor) which was introduced 
earlier this year — at least English language sources discussing it have been 
hard to find. A comment today from Ugo Abundo, the professor who leads the 
research, on pass22.blogspot.com indicates that there has been considerable 
work going on with the project, and it’s now to the point where the second 
generation reactor — the Hydrotron — has been launched. Abundo writes:

Today we assembled and turned on for the first time “Hydrotron”, the post 
school heir of Athanor, faithfully replicating its predecessors’ inspiring 
principles, but reinterpreting them towards a simplification of both design and 
operation in order to make measurements easier, main purpose around which it’s 
been built. It will therefore become easier for us to validate the principles 
on which the Anathor design was based on, over which there are ongoing 
“efforts” toward difficult measurements according to the common protocol [we've 
agreed to, as you know].
As soon as we’ll have some free time we’ll send Daniele (who will be able to 
publish it if he will find it interesting) a photo comparison between Athanor 
and Hydrotron, and the “live” file of today’s first ignition. The new reactor 
kept working continuously for about an hour. The reason for turning it off? It 
was boringly stable and we wanted to go back home. Have we taken measurements? 
Not yet, we expect to make some experience with Athanor’s [testing] protocol 
first, which will obviously be transferable to Hydrotron. But do we already 
have first impressions? The same you’ll have yourself after watching the video 
(so that nobody will hammer at us… ).
All the best.
Ugo Abundo
>From what Abundo wrote it seems that he has sent photographs comparing the 
>Anathor and Hydrotron which may be published soon. They are not recording or 
>reporting any measurements — the reason being, it seems, is that they want 
>replicators to do that work. The whole idea behind the Pirelli project is that 
>the plans of the reactor are made public so anyone with an interest can build 
>a reactor and test it themselves. 
 
UPDATE: Here is the video of the Hydrotron:
 

If anyone reading here is involved in replication it would be nice to hear how 
things are going

[Vo]:Athanor 2.0: The Hydrotron

[hellokevin]

Athanor 2.0: The Hydrotron 
http://www.e-catworld.com/2012/07/athanor-2-0-the-hydrotron/
[Update: Video Posted]
 

July 28, 2012

It has not been very easy to find out what has been happening with the Pirelli 
High School’s cold fusion reactor (named the Athanor) which was introduced 
earlier this year — at least English language sources discussing it have been 
hard to find. A comment today from Ugo Abundo, the professor who leads the 
research, on pass22.blogspot.com indicates that there has been considerable 
work going on with the project, and it’s now to the point where the second 
generation reactor — the Hydrotron — has been launched. Abundo writes:

Today we assembled and turned on for the first time “Hydrotron”, the post 
school heir of Athanor, faithfully replicating its predecessors’ inspiring 
principles, but reinterpreting them towards a simplification of both design and 
operation in order to make measurements easier, main purpose around which it’s 
been built. It will therefore become easier for us to validate the principles 
on which the Anathor design was based on, over which there are ongoing 
“efforts” toward difficult measurements according to the common protocol [we've 
agreed to, as you know].
As soon as we’ll have some free time we’ll send Daniele (who will be able to 
publish it if he will find it interesting) a photo comparison between Athanor 
and Hydrotron, and the “live” file of today’s first ignition. The new reactor 
kept working continuously for about an hour. The reason for turning it off? It 
was boringly stable and we wanted to go back home. Have we taken measurements? 
Not yet, we expect to make some experience with Athanor’s [testing] protocol 
first, which will obviously be transferable to Hydrotron. But do we already 
have first impressions? The same you’ll have yourself after watching the video 
(so that nobody will hammer at us… ).
All the best.
Ugo Abundo
>From what Abundo wrote it seems that he has sent photographs comparing the 
>Anathor and Hydrotron which may be published soon. They are not recording or 
>reporting any measurements — the reason being, it seems, is that they want 
>replicators to do that work. The whole idea behind the Pirelli project is that 
>the plans of the reactor are made public so anyone with an interest can build 
>a reactor and test it themselves. 
UPDATE: Here is the video of the Hydrotron:

If anyone reading here is involved in replication it would be nice to hear how 
things are going

Re: [Vo]:San Fransisco Bay Area LENR meetup

[hellokevin]

Count me in.  
 
I missed meeting up with K.P. Sinha when he was in town, due to car problems.  
 
Kevmo

--- On Wed, 7/11/12, Bastiaan Bergman  wrote:


From: Bastiaan Bergman 
Subject: [Vo]:San Fransisco Bay Area LENR meetup
To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" 
Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2012, 5:34 PM


Anyone interested in a local meetup to discuss LENR science, business,
advancements and gossip?

RE: EXTERNAL: RE: [Vo]:FYI: ZPF-inertia work applied to subatomic particles; spatial harmonic resonances

[hellokevin]

Do electons have mass or do they not?    
 
 
 Numerical simulations of this effect demonstrate the manner in which a 
MASSless fundamental particle, e.g. an electron, acquires inertial properties; 
this also shows the apparent origin of particle spin along lines originally 
proposed by Schrodinger.  Finally, we suggest that the heavier leptons (muon 
and tau) may be explainable as spatial-harmonic resonances of the (fundamental) 
electron.  They would carry the same overall charge, but with the charge now 
having spatially lobed structure, each lobe of which would respond to higher 
frequency components of the electromagnetic quantum vacuum,
 
 
 thereby increasing the inertia and thus manifesting a heavier MASS. 
 
 
***A MASSless particle won't manifest a heavier MASS.  Either way, the theory 
postulates that electrons would acquire intertia.  That means the electrons are 
manipulable, and if they have inertia, they can be pushed away from Protons in 
the Hydrogen nuclei and thus the Coulomb barrier is easier to overcome.    I 
postulate this in the thread where I suggest the Poynting Asymmetrical 
Capacitor Thrust vector is discussed
 
  http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg66755.html

[Vo]:[Vo] Casimir Effect: Egyptian Teenager Invents New Space Propulsion System

[hellokevin]

 
 







Egyptian Teenager Invents New Space Propulsion System Based On Quantum Physics
 

Gizmodo ^ | May 29, 2012 |  

 
Precocious young physicist Aisha Mustafa just patented a new system that could 
propel spacecrafts to the final frontier without using a drop of fuel. 
In short her system taps one of the odder facets of quantum theory, which 
posits that space isn't really a vacuum. It's really filled with particles and 
anti-particles that exist for infinitesimally small periods of time before 
destroying each other. Mustafa thinks she can harness them to create 
propulsion, resulting in space craft that need little-to-no fuel to maneuver 
around in space. Fast Company reports: 
Mustafa invented a way of tapping this quantum effect via what's known as the 
dynamic Casimir effect. This uses a "moving mirror" cavity, where two very 
reflective very flat plates are held close together, and then moved slightly to 
interact with the quantum particle sea. It's horribly technical, but the end 
result is that Mustafa's use of shaped silicon plates similar to those used in 
solar power cells results in a net force being delivered. A force, of course, 
means a push or a pull and in space this equates to a drive or engine. 
Propulsion in space is incredibly easy to achieve because there aren't any 
particles to get in the way, but until now we've been completely reliant on 
engines to do the work. Engines create propulsion by burning chemical 
fuels—these fuels are heavy and expensive, making some of the crazy exploration 
we'd like to do impossible. Mustafa's system could let the laws physics do the 
heavy-lifting instead. 
Of course, Mustafa needs to work on the design much more and figure out how to 
get funding for the ambitious adventure. We hope some organization with deep 
pockets steps up because the science is remarkable.

Re: [Vo]:Ed Storms' new Theory/Model

[hellokevin]

 Here’s my theory.    
On either side of a crack in the substrate material, you’ve got electrons 
moving at different speeds, creating a microscopically small differential 
capacitor.  The vibrations push the differential charge “upward”, which is to 
say from the smallest separation of the crack to the largest.  When the charge 
differential gets to a certain point, a spark is generated.  This spark is what 
creates the Nuclear Active Environment.  But it is not due to plasma physics, 
it is due to a force generated by a spark that goes across the anode & cathode 
of a capacitor.  In the  below Quantum Potential article, a propulsive force 
was found that matches these conditions (except that we’re seeing it on a 
microscopic level).  
 
Asymmetric
Capacitor
Thruster
http://www.quantum-potential.com/ACT%20NASA.pdf
  An earlier SBIR study commissioned by the Air Force reported a propulsive 
force caused by a spark between ACT electrodes [3]. The study [3] also focused 
on ACT thrust in high vacuum (10−5 to 10−7 Torr) and reports small (on the 
order of 10 nN) thrust in vacuum under pulsed DC voltage conditions. 
Furthermore, the study [3] reports observation of thrust when a piezoelectric 
dielectric material such as lead titanate or lead zirconate (high relative 
dielectric constants of k = 1750) was used between the ACT electrodes. The 
thrust was apparently produced by slow pulsing spark-­‐initiated breakdown of 
the dielectric. The magnitude of the propulsive force increases with the 
intensity of sparking across the dielectric. The study [3] recommended further 
exploration of sparking across dielectrics as a source of propulsive forces in 
ACTs. Unfortunately, no such follow-­‐up study was conducted. 
I believe this Asymmetric Capacitor force has been previously described as the 
Poynting Vector.  I think it is enhanced by the advent of a spark across the 
electrodes.    But I might be mistaken.  
 
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/pft01.htm
During a charging process of a flat capacitor, the Poynting vector ( S=ExH ) 
comes from outside the capacitor towards the wire connections, parallel to the 
surface of the armatures inside the dielectric medium. There is an energy flow 
directly proportional to ExB. This energy is not provided by the wires but 
comes from the surrounding space around the capacitor. ( ref: "The Feynman 
Lectures on Physics : Electromagnetism vol2, Chap: 27-5, fig 27-3" by 
Addison-Wesley Publishing company. )
 
So, this Poynting Asymmetrical Capacitor Vector generates a unidirectional 
force.  Any protons within its path would be propelled into a nearby Hydrogen 
atom which is trapped inside a Palladium matrix.  This force is enough to 
overcome the Coulomb Barrier.  
 
A couple of guesses: 
1)  There would have to be hundreds of thousands of these sparks every 
second, constantly spitting matter or protons or electrons in one direction 
similar to a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) particle accelerator, where only 1 in 100k 
particles actually collides with a nucleus of a hydrogen atom and fuses.  
2)  This force is proportional to the distance between electrodes, so the 
effect would happen closer to the small vertex of the crack rather than the 
large ends of the crack.  
3)  The transfer of energy of fused atoms is mostly heat because the 
collision is unidirectional, and the gamma rays that are emitted only come out 
in certain geometrical probabilities, and most of those probabilities are 
directly in line with host atoms on the palladium (or nickel) matrix.  I look 
at it similar to a pellet gun hitting balloons -- most of the time the air 
escapes the balloon in almost the same regions each time.  These reactions only 
occur one atom at a time, so the geometrically restricted release of gamma rays 
is similarly restricted.  The released energy is absorbed by the matrix one 
atom-release at a time.  
 

Re: [Vo]:Ed Storms' new Theory/Model

[hellokevin]

I'd like to post the gist of my own little theory but my responses have not 
been getting through lately, so this is a preliminary test.
 
Kevmo

RE: [Vo]:Open-Source-LENR-project

[hellokevin]

The problem with your 6-point list is that anyone who meets such a criteria 
would already have a project of their own set in motion.  
 
I would love to see an Open Source LENR project that doesn't depend upon being 
an expert.  Something along the lines of replicating the recent Hight School 
Cold Fusion project at Pirelli.  
 
Kevmo

--- On Fri, 5/18/12, Jones Beene  wrote:


From: Jones Beene 
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Open-Source-LENR-project
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Date: Friday, May 18, 2012, 8:44 AM


I should add that there are several qualified open-source advocates who post
here regularly - Brad Lowe and Jaro are two of them. They are smart,
qualified and not hiding anything to arouse suspicions.

If Gary is in that category, my apologies. He should make his abilities
known. Maybe he is a dream-weaver extraordinaire who merely has his public
priorities reversed. 

It is a not really a fine line, yet as of now he appears to be well over
onto the Aussie-Guy (Greg Watson) side of that line ...

        _
        From: Jones Beene 

        Hello Kevin - You ask why there has been no discussion here
... on what has the hallmarks of a Dennis Lee/ Carl Tilley/ Mike Brady, etc
type of derivative scam - with no apparent redeeming qualities ... 

        (Please feel free to list the redeeming qualities, if there
are any - and do not take this the wrong way, if the claimant is indeed a
hero inventor who has somehow hidden his true identity carefully; and yet
managed to present his venture exactly like Dennis Lee would do)

1)    No papers, publications, or even prior postings in LENR
2)    No known associates in the field 
3)    No known qualifications, CV, or related expertise to perform this
kind of work
4)    No lab, no prototype, no PoC, not theory
5)    Las Vegas is the scam capital of the Universe (with Calgary in 2nd
place)
6)    Tin cup featured prominently - couching the venture as a "trust" is
a new twist, apparently to inspire confidence. "Open-source" is almost
laughable, when you are asking for donations but have no skills to perform
the work.
                
                They're coming out of woodwork these days,
encouraged that Rossi has gotten so much publicity with so little
scientifically documented results... not to mention the current unemployment
rate. Look at the dozens of sites with "E-Cat" in their name. Many are
honest efforts, sure - but most are "me-too" with a PayPal account.

                It's almost a gold rush, or should we say
"nickel-hydrogen rush"...
        
                From: helloke...@sbcglobal.net 
        
I haven't seen any discussions on this project in Vortex-L

http://www.opensourcelenr.com/index.html
  
Kevmo

    

[Vo]:Open-Source-LENR-project

[hellokevin]

I haven't seen any discussions on this project in Vortex-L
 

 http://www.opensourcelenr.com/index.html
 
 
Kevmo