Re: [Vo]:Oh-My-God particle
In reply to Jürg Wyttenbach's message of Wed, 29 Nov 2023 08:13:10 +0100: Hi, The problem with a remote origin is that friction will slow it down. Interstellar space is not empty, just scarcely populated. >Plasma jets from black holes are ejected up to 60c relative to our >motion. Thus I would be modest and concede that we humans still lack the >knowledge to fully understand what can happen with matter. > > >J.W. > > >On 28.11.2023 20:11, Robin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Given that it can't have come from deep space, it must have been created >> locally. Since nothing local is capable of >> generating such high energy fundamental particles, a small piece of plasma >> from the Sun, rather than a single particle, >> seems probable. >> >> Cosmic rays are detected with multiple detectors all being triggered at the >> same time, and the assumption is made that >> the concurrent arrival of multiple lower energy particles is too unlikely. >> However the Sun emits bits of plasma >> frequently, so it's not inconceivable that a tiny plasma cloud arrives all >> at the same time. >> >> In short the high energy is due to multiple particles arriving concurrently, >> not due to a single high energy particle. >> >> Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. >> Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof.
Re: [Vo]:Oh-My-God particle
Plasma jets from black holes are ejected up to 60c relative to our motion. Thus I would be modest and concede that we humans still lack the knowledge to fully understand what can happen with matter. J.W. On 28.11.2023 20:11, Robin wrote: Hi, Given that it can't have come from deep space, it must have been created locally. Since nothing local is capable of generating such high energy fundamental particles, a small piece of plasma from the Sun, rather than a single particle, seems probable. Cosmic rays are detected with multiple detectors all being triggered at the same time, and the assumption is made that the concurrent arrival of multiple lower energy particles is too unlikely. However the Sun emits bits of plasma frequently, so it's not inconceivable that a tiny plasma cloud arrives all at the same time. In short the high energy is due to multiple particles arriving concurrently, not due to a single high energy particle. Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof. -- Jürg Wyttenbach Bifangstr. 22 8910 Affoltern am Albis +41 44 760 14 18 +41 79 246 36 06
[Vo]:Oh-My-God particle
Hi, Given that it can't have come from deep space, it must have been created locally. Since nothing local is capable of generating such high energy fundamental particles, a small piece of plasma from the Sun, rather than a single particle, seems probable. Cosmic rays are detected with multiple detectors all being triggered at the same time, and the assumption is made that the concurrent arrival of multiple lower energy particles is too unlikely. However the Sun emits bits of plasma frequently, so it's not inconceivable that a tiny plasma cloud arrives all at the same time. In short the high energy is due to multiple particles arriving concurrently, not due to a single high energy particle. Buy electric cars and recharge them from solar panels on your roof.
[Vo]:Oh dear [redacted] Jennider Oullette again
https://plus.google.com/105473622219622697310/posts/P9TFSD2CPDr Jennifer Ouellette Shared publicly - 8:05 AM Oh dear god, Rossi is still pedaling his E-Cat 'cold fusion' device It would be like if I asked you to believe that by putting a dollar bill in a special laundry machine and spinning it for half an hour with some special detergent the dollar turns into a $1000 note. You are allowed to watch the machine as it does its work, but it is me who opens it and extracts the bill when it has finished its magic conversion. I doubt you would buy it. http://www.science20.com/a_quantum_diaries_survivor/cold_fusion_a_better_study_on_the_infamous_ecat-146700#.VDlHNfBwojo.google_plusone_share Larry Rosenthal 9:37 AM its perfect for kickstarter.. totally corrupt, but perfect Alan Fletcher 12:29 PM If I put $1 into a laundry machine, and it gave me a $3.60 wash and printed a blank piece of paper ... sure I'd buy it.
RE: [Vo]:Oh dear [redacted] Jennider Oullette again
Nice shades. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Oh, The Humanity
Hydrogen fueling station explodes: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/hydrogen-refueling-station-explodes/
Re: [Vo]:Oh yes, it's heavy O
thomas malloy wrote: http://www.tunl.duke.edu/nucldata/HTML/A=18/18O_1959.shtml Is that what those formulas prove? I was unable to understand them. This was not intended to be proof, only a starting hypothesis. And admittedly, it could have been explained much better. Actually, I left out what could be the most important point about that relatively low resonance energy required, and its value- of slightly over one MeV. The missing point is that the lowest resonance is close to the energy of electron-positron annihilation, which occurs when an electron and a positron (the electron's anti-particle) collide. Wiki has an entry on this. Quantum physics and Dirac's equations (especially as interpreted by Don Hotson) suggests that all of what we see as reality is based, at the lowest level, on the 'epo' field- which is this pairing of electron-positrons. ZPE can even be identified with this field. Hotson's articles in IE are definitely worth a read. On occasion, the sheer magnitude in the number of pairings of particle/antiparticles results in a random collision, or annihilation event, which is the conversion of the electron and positron mass into 'something else', often gamma rays, and the net energy released is similar to that required for the lowest resonance of carbon transmuting into heavy oxygen, at least when an alpha particle is present. To my knowledge, no one has picked up on this coincidence before now, and perhaps (showing some humility) this is for good reason as the values are not exact ;-) Anyway, alpha particles are always present around certain radioactive elements - and their kinetic energy can supply the small deficit needed to make everything exact -- ERGO - - this environment in nature may be the locus of where heavy oxygen is formed (under this hypotheses). Also we would expect epo annihilations to occur with higher probability in the 'decay-environment' since they can be envisioned as Mother Nature's way of balancing the books on energy conservation. There are only a very limited set of possibilities for the final state of annihilation events. The most likely is the creation of two gamma ray photons, but in an alpha 'decay-environment' around thorium or uranium, there could exist a direct transfer of that net energy. Conservation of energy and linear momentum forbid the creation of only one photon, which would be a 'cleaner' way to accomplish this rare catalytic event (the putative transmutation of carbon into 18O). In the most common case of epo annihilation, two photons are created, each with energy equal to the rest energy of the electron or positron (511 keV) but when that same net 1+ MeV of mass/energy is available at the precise moment of an alpha decay ( for instance of UC -uranium carbide) then 18O may result on rare occasions, which are cummulative over the past 5-6 billion years, and which provide the 'arguably high' abundance of this isotope. To be honest, I have been unable to verify that there is a real anomaly in the abundance of 18O on earth, but there is data to suggest that this is the case. Alternatively, a transitory neutrino may form first. Since neutrinos also have a smaller mass than electrons, then it is possible for the annihilation event to produce neutrinos which serve as an energy transfer medium. The overall probability of this linkage of rare events could itself be enhanced in the 'decay-environment'. QM probability works that way. There is one redeeming feature of all of this. Tentative proof of this hypothesis is possible, but as far as I know, this has never been done or tested. How could it have been? since the hypothesis itself is brand new. At least 'new to me.' However, it is possible that someone else in the wide-wide world of physics (with mainstream credentials) has thought of this before now, and that all of the above has been merely 'rediscovered' from already published information. At any rate - the tentative proof (disproof) would be an analysis of the isotopic ratio of the oxygen which is found in antural minerals and chemically bound to uranium of thorium, especially where carbon is also found. If the 18O/16O ratio should turn out to be enhanced in these circumstance, then that situation would not be solid-proof but would at least make a strong prima facie case for the hypothesis. Jones
[Vo]:Oh yes, it's heavy O
Heavy O is not a new oat cereal. And we're not talking about the infamous I'll have what she's having shtick of 'When Harry met Sally.' As mentioned before on Vo, there appears to the amateur observer, to be somewhat of a 'logical' anomaly in the proportion, and stability of the heavy isotope of oxygen on earth. 18O is rather plentiful, considering the remarkable stability and four-alpha makeup of 16O. That corresponding isotopic ratio of O in space (16O/18O), and in stars, and in rocks of various ages, is such that it might appear (to this casual observer at least) from the available data that 18O is somehow being manufactured over time, compared to its 'natural' proportion following a stellar nova event. There is data, not new but recently found with google's help, suggestive of an explanation- on the 18O formation side, involving carbon. http://www.tunl.duke.edu/nucldata/HTML/A=18/18O_1959.shtml Which may reinforce one notion which is missing from present day reactor design: that there is at least one good additional reason to use a carbide fuel (over and above its high melting point and its having a 'built-in' moderator. Not to mention a possible non-military use for the stockpile of depleted U: that being some kind of a decay reactor for providing heat - where normal alpha decay of a depleted U-carbide is enhanced by a megavolt + electrostatic field. Quien sabe? Jones
[Vo]:Oh!!!???
Dear Vo., I must speak up at my father, a language teacher born in 1899 would have prompted me: [1] there is are no quote and end quote one may open and close a quote but not end a quote... [2] She or he SAID... not SAYS. OK? [3] From JHS: May you all you all PLEASE BBGB PLEASE try even just TRY to think about science... as opposed to she said she said he said they said... sais says said.??? PLESE?? [4] Can anyone [oh come just one on one of you all you all on you lurkers] EVEN Try some kind of thinking real world science: (A) Thanks to John Steck
