Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[H LV]

Demonstrate the "toy" to a small number of friends and trusted colleagues.
Provide snacks and drinks.

Harry


On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 6:00 PM Jonathan Berry 
wrote:

> Interesting idea.
>
> And while I don't think there are many things that could be introduced as
> a toy (Otis T. Carr's patent aside) ...
> Or maybe a perpetual motion toy, albeit if that was cheap enough to be for
> kids it would be a toy adults would want even more (executive toys).
>
> I think that images that manifested a tangible energy-like phenomena that
> kids could feel could appeal to at least some parents.
>
> Of course the designs will have to be less controversial that the top
> image which is a swastika (happily not just a Nazi thing and in no way
> resembles the Nazi version).
>
> Of course not all kids can feel the phenomena any more than all adults,
> but perhaps the percentage is higher as kids haven't been so heavily
> indoctrinated against such ideas yet.
>
> Maybe at any rate a book for kids and one for adults could be a way to go.
>
> Maybe a colouring book.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 09:08, Robin 
> wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:11:30 +1200:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >What would it take for a breakthrough in science?
>>
>> Most people are instinctively afraid of what they don't understand, so
>> they ignore it, and hope it will just go away.
>> This is especially true if acceptance implies upsetting their entire
>> world view.
>> Suggestion: Introduce it as a toy. Toys are something harmless given to
>> children to help them become accustomed to life
>> in the real world, so people automatically accept toys as harmless,
>> because that's what they have experienced all their
>> lives.
>> As long as the toy works, and is novel, everyone will want one, and
>> eventually mainstream science will get around to
>> investigating.
>>
>> >
>> >When I run through the scenarios it is pretty depressing!
>> >
>> >There are people who move manifest "Chi" type energy either with their
>> body
>> >or with technology (pyramids, orgone accumulators, orgonite).
>> >This cannot be discounted by science, but it can be ignored.
>> >My own coils and image designs have been felt by people who have had no
>> >knowledge (not placebo) but no one cares.
>> >And I have found which cup of 10 cups has the coil placed under it, but
>> no
>> >one cares.  Cannot be explained away but most on even this list won't
>> even
>> >give it a moment.
>> >
>> >So demonstration of a sensation that many (but not everyone) will feel
>> >isn't going to cut it, maybe if it was compellingly strong for 99%, but
>> not
>> >much less than that.
>> >
>> >So we also have many people who have demonstrated Free Energy,
>> Antigravity,
>> >"Cold fusion", and in the whole these cannot be fully debunked.
>> >However replication is spott at best (often it seems like winning lottery
>> >odds) and the true mechanisms aren't really understood (these two facts
>> are
>> >related of course).
>> >
>> >So bleeding edge indeed, technology mankind can reach to the stars with
>> is
>> >left to languish.
>> >
>> >These technologies aren't fitting in with the prefered models of science,
>> >they aren't favored by those with the money, they are at odds with
>> politics
>> >and are at odds almost philosophically with much of the world.
>> >
>> >So what will it take?
>> >
>> >If a device that produces an effect is expensive or difficult to
>> reproduce,
>> >too few will, even if those who do reproduce it are successful so what?
>> >And one or two poor effort reproductions that fail will throw cold water
>> on
>> >others who otherwise might.
>> >
>> >If a device provides an anomaly and needs exotic meters or such, again
>> that
>> >is going to lead to too few who verify it.
>> >
>> >Maybe if a device is really cheap and simple to reproduce and provides a
>> >readily observed clearly anomalous effect it could do something...
>> >But to be honest as long as there is neither a mass of interested people
>> >not interested people with money and or the right positions within
>> >physics...
>> >
>> >I am not really sure how humanity is going to advance!
>> >
>> >This doesn't just relate to my research, this relates to every possible
>> >technology Vortex was created to discuss or further.
>> >
>> >I am not trying to push my designs here, but if anyone wants to fight off
>> >incredulity (or is someone who has felt energy from my previous designs)
>> >then:
>> >
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/ty1j4f/latest_poll/
>> >Generally it is about 50% feel something, and again no one has been able
>> to
>> >explain away the multiple events that utterly disprove any conventional
>> >explanation.
>> >
>> >But be it my research or anything else, there is a massive barrier that
>> >except for making something useful obvious and cheap and easy to make. or
>> >some angel investor or lottery win...
>> >I just don't see anything changing!
>> >
>> >I 

Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[Frank Grimer]

This is the kind of toy that is needed. People have made attempts to
emulate but as yet no one has succeeded. They need to try harder.
I believe it worked.


> "Bruce Welsh is an electronics engineer with* the o*pen spirit which has
> been devoted to alternative energies for twenty years. It is convinced that
> one can build machines with on-unit.

He had an uncle who liked to arrange, to invent. One day, old Bruce of
seven or eight years, returned visit to the uncle who showed to the
grandfather the new play that it had made for his children (it had six of
them).

The play made in the sixty centimetres height for a base of thirty
centimetres square. It consisted of a slope in spiral of three turns and
half. At the bottom of the slope a paddle wheel, connected by some gears to
an elevator was placed going up to the top of the play where a hopper
furnished with ten balls was. An opening to rocker in the hopper made it
possible to let pass, one by one the balls which went down the slope into
three to five seconds.

The ball touched the paddle wheel what gave a small upswing which released
another ball whereas the first was on the elevator and went towards the
hopper. And so on.

There were five balls at the same time on the elevator and the once
launched play did not stop any more. To begin, all the balls were to be in
the hopper and Bruce remembers to be thundered by the uncle because it had
touched the paddle wheel, thus stopping the play started again soon by the
uncle. And, several hours after, the play always functioned.

Did the uncle know that it had violated the laws of physics?

Its descendants do not know any more what became this play, it is probable
that the uncle in recovered the parts as it was its practice to rebuild
another thing, unless it does not sleep yet in an old farm, in dust… They
do not remember either to have seen other apparatuses functioning in an
autonomous way, nor of engine on the play, but know that the play had
stopped afterwards weeks and simply set out again after being cleaned.

Foot-note: the slope in spiral is indeed a vortex and it seems that in a
certain way the vortices add energy, one unceasingly finds them in many
ideas related to on-unit.

(KeelyNet source of the 14/12/97)"

On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 23:00, Jonathan Berry 
wrote:

> Interesting idea.
>
> And while I don't think there are many things that could be introduced as
> a toy (Otis T. Carr's patent aside) ...
> Or maybe a perpetual motion toy, albeit if that was cheap enough to be for
> kids it would be a toy adults would want even more (executive toys).
>
> I think that images that manifested a tangible energy-like phenomena that
> kids could feel could appeal to at least some parents.
>
> Of course the designs will have to be less controversial that the top
> image which is a swastika (happily not just a Nazi thing and in no way
> resembles the Nazi version).
>
> Of course not all kids can feel the phenomena any more than all adults,
> but perhaps the percentage is higher as kids haven't been so heavily
> indoctrinated against such ideas yet.
>
> Maybe at any rate a book for kids and one for adults could be a way to go.
>
> Maybe a colouring book.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 09:08, Robin 
> wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:11:30 +1200:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >What would it take for a breakthrough in science?
>>
>> Most people are instinctively afraid of what they don't understand, so
>> they ignore it, and hope it will just go away.
>> This is especially true if acceptance implies upsetting their entire
>> world view.
>> Suggestion: Introduce it as a toy. Toys are something harmless given to
>> children to help them become accustomed to life
>> in the real world, so people automatically accept toys as harmless,
>> because that's what they have experienced all their
>> lives.
>> As long as the toy works, and is novel, everyone will want one, and
>> eventually mainstream science will get around to
>> investigating.
>>
>> >
>> >When I run through the scenarios it is pretty depressing!
>> >
>> >There are people who move manifest "Chi" type energy either with their
>> body
>> >or with technology (pyramids, orgone accumulators, orgonite).
>> >This cannot be discounted by science, but it can be ignored.
>> >My own coils and image designs have been felt by people who have had no
>> >knowledge (not placebo) but no one cares.
>> >And I have found which cup of 10 cups has the coil placed under it, but
>> no
>> >one cares.  Cannot be explained away but most on even this list won't
>> even
>> >give it a moment.
>> >
>> >So demonstration of a sensation that many (but not everyone) will feel
>> >isn't going to cut it, maybe if it was compellingly strong for 99%, but
>> not
>> >much less than that.
>> >
>> >So we also have many people who have demonstrated Free Energy,
>> Antigravity,
>> >"Cold fusion", and in the whole these cannot be fully debunked.
>> >However replication is 

Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[Frank Grimer]

A Bessler Wheel in the form of a toy.
Interestingly, Laithwaite came close to solving this with his gyro
demonstration at the RI.
May the strain be with you.

On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 23:00, Jonathan Berry 
wrote:

> Interesting idea.
>
> And while I don't think there are many things that could be introduced as
> a toy (Otis T. Carr's patent aside) ...
> Or maybe a perpetual motion toy, albeit if that was cheap enough to be for
> kids it would be a toy adults would want even more (executive toys).
>
> I think that images that manifested a tangible energy-like phenomena that
> kids could feel could appeal to at least some parents.
>
> Of course the designs will have to be less controversial that the top
> image which is a swastika (happily not just a Nazi thing and in no way
> resembles the Nazi version).
>
> Of course not all kids can feel the phenomena any more than all adults,
> but perhaps the percentage is higher as kids haven't been so heavily
> indoctrinated against such ideas yet.
>
> Maybe at any rate a book for kids and one for adults could be a way to go.
>
> Maybe a colouring book.
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 09:08, Robin 
> wrote:
>
>> In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:11:30 +1200:
>> Hi,
>> [snip]
>> >What would it take for a breakthrough in science?
>>
>> Most people are instinctively afraid of what they don't understand, so
>> they ignore it, and hope it will just go away.
>> This is especially true if acceptance implies upsetting their entire
>> world view.
>> Suggestion: Introduce it as a toy. Toys are something harmless given to
>> children to help them become accustomed to life
>> in the real world, so people automatically accept toys as harmless,
>> because that's what they have experienced all their
>> lives.
>> As long as the toy works, and is novel, everyone will want one, and
>> eventually mainstream science will get around to
>> investigating.
>>
>> >
>> >When I run through the scenarios it is pretty depressing!
>> >
>> >There are people who move manifest "Chi" type energy either with their
>> body
>> >or with technology (pyramids, orgone accumulators, orgonite).
>> >This cannot be discounted by science, but it can be ignored.
>> >My own coils and image designs have been felt by people who have had no
>> >knowledge (not placebo) but no one cares.
>> >And I have found which cup of 10 cups has the coil placed under it, but
>> no
>> >one cares.  Cannot be explained away but most on even this list won't
>> even
>> >give it a moment.
>> >
>> >So demonstration of a sensation that many (but not everyone) will feel
>> >isn't going to cut it, maybe if it was compellingly strong for 99%, but
>> not
>> >much less than that.
>> >
>> >So we also have many people who have demonstrated Free Energy,
>> Antigravity,
>> >"Cold fusion", and in the whole these cannot be fully debunked.
>> >However replication is spott at best (often it seems like winning lottery
>> >odds) and the true mechanisms aren't really understood (these two facts
>> are
>> >related of course).
>> >
>> >So bleeding edge indeed, technology mankind can reach to the stars with
>> is
>> >left to languish.
>> >
>> >These technologies aren't fitting in with the prefered models of science,
>> >they aren't favored by those with the money, they are at odds with
>> politics
>> >and are at odds almost philosophically with much of the world.
>> >
>> >So what will it take?
>> >
>> >If a device that produces an effect is expensive or difficult to
>> reproduce,
>> >too few will, even if those who do reproduce it are successful so what?
>> >And one or two poor effort reproductions that fail will throw cold water
>> on
>> >others who otherwise might.
>> >
>> >If a device provides an anomaly and needs exotic meters or such, again
>> that
>> >is going to lead to too few who verify it.
>> >
>> >Maybe if a device is really cheap and simple to reproduce and provides a
>> >readily observed clearly anomalous effect it could do something...
>> >But to be honest as long as there is neither a mass of interested people
>> >not interested people with money and or the right positions within
>> >physics...
>> >
>> >I am not really sure how humanity is going to advance!
>> >
>> >This doesn't just relate to my research, this relates to every possible
>> >technology Vortex was created to discuss or further.
>> >
>> >I am not trying to push my designs here, but if anyone wants to fight off
>> >incredulity (or is someone who has felt energy from my previous designs)
>> >then:
>> >
>> https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/ty1j4f/latest_poll/
>> >Generally it is about 50% feel something, and again no one has been able
>> to
>> >explain away the multiple events that utterly disprove any conventional
>> >explanation.
>> >
>> >But be it my research or anything else, there is a massive barrier that
>> >except for making something useful obvious and cheap and easy to make. or
>> >some angel investor or lottery win...
>> >I 

Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[Jones Beene]

Jonathan Berry wrote: 
> Interesting idea And while I don't think there are many things that could 
> be introduced as a toy (Otis T. Carr's patent aside) ...Or maybe a perpetual 
> motion toy, albeit if that was cheap enough to be for kids it would be a toy 
> adults would want even more (executive toys)...
... well. yes  if you can attract a cult-like following -- then who knows where 
it will go ?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSdkyrJ3ipY


  

Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[Jonathan Berry]

Interesting idea.

And while I don't think there are many things that could be introduced as a
toy (Otis T. Carr's patent aside) ...
Or maybe a perpetual motion toy, albeit if that was cheap enough to be for
kids it would be a toy adults would want even more (executive toys).

I think that images that manifested a tangible energy-like phenomena that
kids could feel could appeal to at least some parents.

Of course the designs will have to be less controversial that the top image
which is a swastika (happily not just a Nazi thing and in no way resembles
the Nazi version).

Of course not all kids can feel the phenomena any more than all adults, but
perhaps the percentage is higher as kids haven't been so heavily
indoctrinated against such ideas yet.

Maybe at any rate a book for kids and one for adults could be a way to go.

Maybe a colouring book.




On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 at 09:08, Robin 
wrote:

> In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:11:30 +1200:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >What would it take for a breakthrough in science?
>
> Most people are instinctively afraid of what they don't understand, so
> they ignore it, and hope it will just go away.
> This is especially true if acceptance implies upsetting their entire world
> view.
> Suggestion: Introduce it as a toy. Toys are something harmless given to
> children to help them become accustomed to life
> in the real world, so people automatically accept toys as harmless,
> because that's what they have experienced all their
> lives.
> As long as the toy works, and is novel, everyone will want one, and
> eventually mainstream science will get around to
> investigating.
>
> >
> >When I run through the scenarios it is pretty depressing!
> >
> >There are people who move manifest "Chi" type energy either with their
> body
> >or with technology (pyramids, orgone accumulators, orgonite).
> >This cannot be discounted by science, but it can be ignored.
> >My own coils and image designs have been felt by people who have had no
> >knowledge (not placebo) but no one cares.
> >And I have found which cup of 10 cups has the coil placed under it, but no
> >one cares.  Cannot be explained away but most on even this list won't even
> >give it a moment.
> >
> >So demonstration of a sensation that many (but not everyone) will feel
> >isn't going to cut it, maybe if it was compellingly strong for 99%, but
> not
> >much less than that.
> >
> >So we also have many people who have demonstrated Free Energy,
> Antigravity,
> >"Cold fusion", and in the whole these cannot be fully debunked.
> >However replication is spott at best (often it seems like winning lottery
> >odds) and the true mechanisms aren't really understood (these two facts
> are
> >related of course).
> >
> >So bleeding edge indeed, technology mankind can reach to the stars with is
> >left to languish.
> >
> >These technologies aren't fitting in with the prefered models of science,
> >they aren't favored by those with the money, they are at odds with
> politics
> >and are at odds almost philosophically with much of the world.
> >
> >So what will it take?
> >
> >If a device that produces an effect is expensive or difficult to
> reproduce,
> >too few will, even if those who do reproduce it are successful so what?
> >And one or two poor effort reproductions that fail will throw cold water
> on
> >others who otherwise might.
> >
> >If a device provides an anomaly and needs exotic meters or such, again
> that
> >is going to lead to too few who verify it.
> >
> >Maybe if a device is really cheap and simple to reproduce and provides a
> >readily observed clearly anomalous effect it could do something...
> >But to be honest as long as there is neither a mass of interested people
> >not interested people with money and or the right positions within
> >physics...
> >
> >I am not really sure how humanity is going to advance!
> >
> >This doesn't just relate to my research, this relates to every possible
> >technology Vortex was created to discuss or further.
> >
> >I am not trying to push my designs here, but if anyone wants to fight off
> >incredulity (or is someone who has felt energy from my previous designs)
> >then:
> >
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/ty1j4f/latest_poll/
> >Generally it is about 50% feel something, and again no one has been able
> to
> >explain away the multiple events that utterly disprove any conventional
> >explanation.
> >
> >But be it my research or anything else, there is a massive barrier that
> >except for making something useful obvious and cheap and easy to make. or
> >some angel investor or lottery win...
> >I just don't see anything changing!
> >
> >I get it when things aren't provable, but when they are how do so many
> >ignore results?
> >Then again, I see the same occurring with natural/alternative medicine
> even
> >when the success rates are high.
> >Or indeed reasons to avoid vaccines that were rushed experimental novel
> and
> >based on the toxic part 

Re: [Vo]:What would it take?

[Robin]

In reply to  Jonathan Berry's message of Wed, 13 Apr 2022 01:11:30 +1200:
Hi,
[snip]
>What would it take for a breakthrough in science?

Most people are instinctively afraid of what they don't understand, so they 
ignore it, and hope it will just go away.
This is especially true if acceptance implies upsetting their entire world view.
Suggestion: Introduce it as a toy. Toys are something harmless given to 
children to help them become accustomed to life
in the real world, so people automatically accept toys as harmless, because 
that's what they have experienced all their
lives.
As long as the toy works, and is novel, everyone will want one, and eventually 
mainstream science will get around to
investigating.

>
>When I run through the scenarios it is pretty depressing!
>
>There are people who move manifest "Chi" type energy either with their body
>or with technology (pyramids, orgone accumulators, orgonite).
>This cannot be discounted by science, but it can be ignored.
>My own coils and image designs have been felt by people who have had no
>knowledge (not placebo) but no one cares.
>And I have found which cup of 10 cups has the coil placed under it, but no
>one cares.  Cannot be explained away but most on even this list won't even
>give it a moment.
>
>So demonstration of a sensation that many (but not everyone) will feel
>isn't going to cut it, maybe if it was compellingly strong for 99%, but not
>much less than that.
>
>So we also have many people who have demonstrated Free Energy, Antigravity,
>"Cold fusion", and in the whole these cannot be fully debunked.
>However replication is spott at best (often it seems like winning lottery
>odds) and the true mechanisms aren't really understood (these two facts are
>related of course).
>
>So bleeding edge indeed, technology mankind can reach to the stars with is
>left to languish.
>
>These technologies aren't fitting in with the prefered models of science,
>they aren't favored by those with the money, they are at odds with politics
>and are at odds almost philosophically with much of the world.
>
>So what will it take?
>
>If a device that produces an effect is expensive or difficult to reproduce,
>too few will, even if those who do reproduce it are successful so what?
>And one or two poor effort reproductions that fail will throw cold water on
>others who otherwise might.
>
>If a device provides an anomaly and needs exotic meters or such, again that
>is going to lead to too few who verify it.
>
>Maybe if a device is really cheap and simple to reproduce and provides a
>readily observed clearly anomalous effect it could do something...
>But to be honest as long as there is neither a mass of interested people
>not interested people with money and or the right positions within
>physics...
>
>I am not really sure how humanity is going to advance!
>
>This doesn't just relate to my research, this relates to every possible
>technology Vortex was created to discuss or further.
>
>I am not trying to push my designs here, but if anyone wants to fight off
>incredulity (or is someone who has felt energy from my previous designs)
>then:
>https://www.reddit.com/r/Aetheric_Engineering/comments/ty1j4f/latest_poll/
>Generally it is about 50% feel something, and again no one has been able to
>explain away the multiple events that utterly disprove any conventional
>explanation.
>
>But be it my research or anything else, there is a massive barrier that
>except for making something useful obvious and cheap and easy to make. or
>some angel investor or lottery win...
>I just don't see anything changing!
>
>I get it when things aren't provable, but when they are how do so many
>ignore results?
>Then again, I see the same occurring with natural/alternative medicine even
>when the success rates are high.
>Or indeed reasons to avoid vaccines that were rushed experimental novel and
>based on the toxic part of the virus and has details they wanted secret for
>75 years...  That still many took
>Or reasons to question how a building could fall at free fall
>speeds through still standing structure as though it offered the same
>structural resistance as air.
>
>And while there is no obvious solution to the alien/ufo subject that makes
>coherent sense, when respected scientists consider the Fermi Paradox they
>generally utterly deny the absolute masses of evidence we have for aliens
>as though it doesn't even deserve a few seconds to discount.
>
>We have a seriously strange world if you choose to look at it objectively.
>
>
>Jonathan
If no one clicked on ads companies would stop paying for them. :)

RE: [Vo]:What Goes On In a Proton? Reason to give up on high energy experiments--

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—

Although I did indicate the subject thread, the quote you say is mine did NOT 
come from me..

I cannot identify the source of the quote attributed to me with a review of the 
Vortex-l
Mail Archive web page of February 19, 2022.

IT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN MODIFIED FROM THE TEXT I WROTE IN MY EMAI TO THE vortex 
LISTCOPIED HEREAFTER:


From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2022 9:58 AM
To: Vortex List<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: What Goes On In a Proton? Reason to give up on high energy 
experiments--



To answer the subject question the  paper linked below  summarizes as follows:

“One such Hail Mary pass in the theoretical world is a tool called the 
holographic principle. The general 
strategy<https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/AdS-QCD+correspondence> is to translate 
the problem into an abstract mathematical space where some hologram of quarks 
can be separated from each other, allowing an analysis in terms of Feynman 
diagrams.”

https://www.quantamagazine.org/what-goes-on-in-a-proton-quark-math-still-conflicts-with-experiments-20200506/?mc_cid=291b7484b8_eid=1c22739553


I would summarize the paper as concluding that  that the physics community of 
the establishment wants to get away from high energy accelerator testing  e.g., 
CERN,  since it is revealing data that does not support the Standard Model 
theory.

OTHER OBSERVATIONS

The trashing of the conceptual “strong force” and Feyman diagrams is telling.  
The smoke and mirrors used to validate the Standard Model is revealed.

The new super computer modeling I hope  will handle
Particle magnetic moments and related angular momentum, the spatial extent of 
an entangled QM system, the action of the Second Law of Thermodynamics in  a 
closed entangled  system and the function of neutrinos in solid state matter, 
including their magnetic moment and angular momentum.

Bob Cook





From: Jones Beene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Sunday, February 20, 2022 8:27 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:What Goes On In a Proton? Reason to give up on high energy 
experiments--

bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote:

> “One such Hail Mary pass in the theoretical world is a tool called the 
> holographic principle...

There could be much more to this story, Bob.

Although it may sound ridiculous at first - the hologram or rather a 
holographic projection made by a laser offers the best explanation for the 
recent reports of UAP (UFO) sightings most of which was happening around 
military (Naval) exercises and aircraft carriers. The ultimate motivation is 
not clear but thankfully China is probably not involved in this. At least not 
yet.

This laser hologram tech is too complicated to summarize in a few paragraphs 
but here is video that covers some of it. BTW - No reason that subatomic 
particles could not be simulated using gamma lasers so this is not that far off 
from your original post,

https://youtu.be/MDSVJfuyJlk

The curious detail most of us don't comprehend is why we seem to have one 
dark/secret Pentagon program trying to fool another less secret program? Or 
maybe they figured out that this is the best way to ultimately fool/frighten 
our enemies.

Anyway in what might be a lapse of judgement - the Navy did apply for a patent 
on one aspect of the laser hologram tech a few years ago - while at the same 
time not informing their own cadre that it is now being deployed and tested on 
themselves. Go figure.

Here is the Patent -

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200041236A1/

"Reality" once again seems to be stranger than fiction.

Or in the vernacular:  "who's zoomin' who?" with the latest round of UAP/UFO 
disclosure

Re: [Vo]:What Goes On In a Proton? Reason to give up on high energy experiments--

[Jones Beene]

bobcook39...@hotmail.com wrote: 
> “One such Hail Mary pass in the theoretical world is a tool called the 
> holographic principle...

There could be much more to this story, Bob.

Although it may sound ridiculous at first - the hologram or rather a 
holographic projection made by a laser offers the best explanation for the 
recent reports of UAP (UFO) sightings most of which was happening around 
military (Naval) exercises and aircraft carriers. The ultimate motivation is 
not clear but thankfully China is probably not involved in this. At least not 
yet.

This laser hologram tech is too complicated to summarize in a few paragraphs 
but here is video that covers some of it. BTW - No reason that subatomic 
particles could not be simulated using gamma lasers so this is not that far off 
from your original post,

https://youtu.be/MDSVJfuyJlk
The curious detail most of us don't comprehend is why we seem to have one 
dark/secret Pentagon program trying to fool another less secret program? Or 
maybe they figured out that this is the best way to ultimately fool/frighten 
our enemies.

Anyway in what might be a lapse of judgement - the Navy did apply for a patent 
on one aspect of the laser hologram tech a few years ago - while at the same 
time not informing their own cadre that it is now being deployed and tested on 
themselves. Go figure.
Here is the Patent -

https://patents.google.com/patent/US20200041236A1/
"Reality" once again seems to be stranger than fiction. 

Or in the vernacular:  "who's zoomin' who?" with the latest round of UAP/UFO 
disclosure

  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

 Frank
Are you saying that Steorn was not a scam ?


Frank Grimer wrote:  
 
 By removing the oscillation he removed the very thing that was causing the 
Steorn effect I seem to remember.
Terry Blanton wrote:

We called it the "Little Effect".  Devices never worked around Scott Little (or 
his daughter?)
Kinda the opposite of the "Hutchison Effect".  :)
  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Frank Grimer]

By removing the oscillation he removed the very thing
that was causing the Steorn effect I seem to remember.

On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 19:52, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> We called it the "Little Effect".  Devices never worked around Scott
> Little (or his daughter?)
>
> Kinda the opposite of the "Hutchison Effect".  :)
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

Bob Higgins wrote: 
[snip] The trick is finding the (plus) in Storms' Ni(plus) material.  Anything 
I find that is interesting will also be tested in MOAC.
I will ask Brian Ahern if he has available any left-over nano-nickel (plus Pd) 
to donate to the cause. 

This is the same spin-cast  material that showed good gain in tests done for 
EPRI many years ago. I think the alloy with 5% Pd performed better than higher 
levels, which was an important finding on its own...
Jones












5

Jones



| 
 |  |

  
  
  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Terry Blanton]

We called it the "Little Effect".  Devices never worked around Scott Little
(or his daughter?)

Kinda the opposite of the "Hutchison Effect".  :)

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Bob Higgins]

Actually, as far as I know, Hal Puthoff was not involved in the
measurement.  The Griggs test was done by well-grounded engineers.  This
was the same team responsible for development of the MOAC calorimeter.
When I heard how they measured the actual mechanical power going into the
pump, I was impressed by the sound basis of their measurement.  Many other
Griggs tests were based on motor electrical input power measurement with
estimates for the motor electrical-to-mechanical conversion efficiency.  I
think it was a reasonable presumption that it was the hydrosonic pump
itself that was potentially overunity, not the big electric motor.  So,
Earthtech measured the pump.

MOAC itself is well grounded in basics.  One of the core difficulties in a
flow calorimeter is accurately measuring the flow.  Most researchers try to
use volumetric flow measurement - which is a mistake.  The heat capacity of
a milliliter of water varies with temperature, dissolved air, and entrained
bubbles.  MOAC measures the mass of the water flowing because the heat
capacity per gram is nearly constant.  Mass flow measurement is hard to
implement, but they went the extra mile to make that kind of measurement.
That is also the way the calorimetry was done at SRI as I understand it.


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:50 AM Frank Grimer <88.fr...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wouldn't worry too much about Puthoff
>
> Puthoff took an interest in the Church of Scientology
>  in the late 1960s
> and reached what was then the top OT VII
>  level by 1971.[3]
>  Puthoff
> wrote up his "wins" for a Scientology publication, claiming to have
> achieved "remote viewing "
> abilities.[4]
>  In 1974,
> Puthoff also wrote a piece for Scientology's *Celebrity* magazine,
> stating that Scientology had given him "a feeling of absolute fearlessness".
> [5]  Puthoff
> severed all connection with Scientology in the late 1970s.[6]
> 
>
> On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 16:30, Bob Higgins  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jones,
>>
>> I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
>> and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
>> their building.
>>
>> The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter.  I spoke with
>> the engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device.  They
>> measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they
>> measured the mechanical input power).  I didn't ask how they measured the
>> heat output.  Their conclusion was no excess heat.  That's about all I know
>> about the experiment.
>>
>>
>> 
>>  Virus-free.
>> www.avg.com
>> 
>> <#m_4416185370211067280_m_5220694793293478513_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> Bob Higgins wrote:
>>>
>>> BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
>>> excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really
>>> meaningful?
>>>
>>> Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small
>>> cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs
>>> machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga
>>> Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those
>>> results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it
>>> looks like an open issue.
>>>
>>> I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and
>>> have the courage to defend positive results if found.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Bob Higgins]

Sorry, Jones;  I only got the MOAC.  Earthtech's facilities were in the
final stages of being cleared out when I got it (and it was a whole trailer
full of stuff).  I was sad to learn that Earthtech had closed.  I can ask
what happened to the Mills gas phase experiment.

The MOAC was configured to examine electrolysis based LENR claims.  I will
be somewhat reconfiguring MOAC to examine gas phase claims similar to those
of Ed Storms - a simple apparatus/experiment.  While I am working on MOAC,
I can still start my gas phase experiments.  Storms-like gas phase
experiments are not complicated - make the pellets, put them in a closed
cell (in this case the cell is just a valve and a 3/8" closed-one-end
tube), add 1 atmosphere of D2 gas, and heat.  Storms showed 0.5W of XH on
1g of a Ni(plus) pellet at 300C.  I will put 3x1g pellets in each cell to
test.  My little insulated oven for this tube cell has a sensitivity of
40C/watt.  If I get 0.5W of heat from each 1g pellet, the temperature rise
of the cell would be 60C - a pretty easy isoperibolic measurement.  The
trick is finding the (plus) in Storms' Ni(plus) material.  Anything I find
that is interesting will also be tested in MOAC.


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 10:56 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hi Bob
>
> This is great news. Did you by any chance also get hold of the reactor
> apparatus that they built to replicate the Randell Mills gas phase
> experiment? That was a long time ago and it may have disappeared.
>
> As I recall this kind of experiment could have changed the entire
> landscape of LENR had they done it correctly. However, I have forgotten
> most of the details of how they blew it. They did see a few glimpses of
> gain but failed to pursue obvious ways to improve the results - that much
> was clear. And now with the added input of Holmlid, it could be possible to
> see proven gain from the simple gas phase plus catalyst setup.
>
> It is/was a very simple experimental design but the 'devil is in the
> details' as they say.
>
>
> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> Hi Jones,
>
> I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
> and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
> their building.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

 Hi Bob
This is great news. Did you by any chance also get hold of the reactor 
apparatus that they built to replicate the Randell Mills gas phase experiment? 
That was a long time ago and it may have disappeared.

As I recall this kind of experiment could have changed the entire landscape of 
LENR had they done it correctly. However, I have forgotten most of the details 
of how they blew it. They did see a few glimpses of gain but failed to pursue 
obvious ways to improve the results - that much was clear. And now with the 
added input of Holmlid, it could be possible to see proven gain from the simple 
gas phase plus catalyst setup.

It is/was a very simple experimental design but the 'devil is in the details' 
as they say.


  Bob Higgins wrote: 
 Hi Jones,
I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing and 
re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying their 
building.

| 
 |  |

  
  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Frank Grimer]

I wouldn't worry too much about Puthoff

Puthoff took an interest in the Church of Scientology
 in the late 1960s and
reached what was then the top OT VII
 level by 1971.[3]
 Puthoff
wrote up his "wins" for a Scientology publication, claiming to have
achieved "remote viewing "
abilities.[4]  In
1974, Puthoff also wrote a piece for Scientology's *Celebrity* magazine,
stating that Scientology had given him "a feeling of absolute fearlessness".
[5]  Puthoff
severed all connection with Scientology in the late 1970s.[6]


On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 16:30, Bob Higgins  wrote:

> Hi Jones,
>
> I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
> and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
> their building.
>
> The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter.  I spoke with
> the engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device.  They
> measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they
> measured the mechanical input power).  I didn't ask how they measured the
> heat output.  Their conclusion was no excess heat.  That's about all I know
> about the experiment.
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avg.com
> 
> <#m_5220694793293478513_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> Bob Higgins wrote:
>>
>> BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
>> excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.
>>
>>
>> Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really
>> meaningful?
>>
>> Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small
>> cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs
>> machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga
>> Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those
>> results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it
>> looks like an open issue.
>>
>> I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and
>> have the courage to defend positive results if found.
>>
>>
>>
>>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Frank Grimer]

I believe it does. See the following article in
Infinite Energy magazine.
Grimer, Frank J. Aether Vacua and Cold Fusion, 2002, 8, 46, 28

I also think that Cold Fusion and the Griggs effect are connected
as will be clear from the article.

Mind you. I can well understand poor Griggs not wanting to venture
so far away from the engineering scale.
To do that you have to be as insane as I am. :-)

On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 13:54, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hi Frank,
>
> I had not seen your Russian reference about the Potapov device. (which
> needs a bit of editing, probably due to poor translation)
>
> This brings ti mind one curious detail in the Griggs/Potapov results - as
> well as some Casimir force, magnetic motor, Maxwell's demon, and even a few
> LENR experiments - is that the upper range of thermal gain (output over
> input) seems to be limited to something like 1.25 or so.
>
> Which is to say that there is some real gain (overunity) - but not much.
>
> Does you beta atmosphere theory address this point?
>
> Jones
>
>
> Frank Grimer wrote:
>
>
> https://remontideas.ru/en/warm-floor/vechnyi-dvigatel-potapova-generator-svobodnoi-energii-s-samozapitkoi.html
>
> A bit of history.
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Bob Higgins]

Hi Jones,

I now have Earthtech's MOAC (calorimeter) in my lab and I am refurbishing
and re-commissioning it.  Earthtech is now closed and they are emptying
their building.

The Griggs device was not tested in the MOAC calorimeter.  I spoke with the
engineers who built MOAC and who also tested the Griggs device.  They
measured the actual torque and RPM going into the cavitator (hence they
measured the mechanical input power).  I didn't ask how they measured the
heat output.  Their conclusion was no excess heat.  That's about all I know
about the experiment.


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 7:41 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Bob Higgins wrote:
>
> BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
> excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.
>
>
> Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really
> meaningful?
>
> Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small
> cavitation devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs
> machine is about 1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga
> Tech did test the device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those
> results are not to be found on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it
> looks like an open issue.
>
> I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and
> have the courage to defend positive results if found.
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

 Bob Higgins wrote:  
 BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show 
excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.

Hey Bob - that null result does not surprise me but is it really meaningful?

Earthtech has a precision calorimeter which can accommodate small cavitation 
devices but as Rothwell has stated in the past, the Griggs machine is about 
1000 times too large to be tested by them. He says that Ga Tech did test the 
device and found net thermal gain but, sadly, those results are not to be found 
on the WWW for unknown reasons ... so... it looks like an open issue. 

I wish someone would do the definitive testing of the large machine and have 
the courage to defend positive results if found.


| 
 | 
 |

  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Bob Higgins]

BTW, I was told that Earthtech testing of the Griggs device did NOT show
excess heat.  The testing process was described to me.


Virus-free.
www.avg.com

<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 6:54 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> Hi Frank,
>
> I had not seen your Russian reference about the Potapov device. (which
> needs a bit of editing, probably due to poor translation)
>
> This brings ti mind one curious detail in the Griggs/Potapov results - as
> well as some Casimir force, magnetic motor, Maxwell's demon, and even a few
> LENR experiments - is that the upper range of thermal gain (output over
> input) seems to be limited to something like 1.25 or so.
>
> Which is to say that there is some real gain (overunity) - but not much.
>
> Does you beta atmosphere theory address this point?
>
> Jones
>
>
> Frank Grimer wrote:
>
>
> https://remontideas.ru/en/warm-floor/vechnyi-dvigatel-potapova-generator-svobodnoi-energii-s-samozapitkoi.html
>
> A bit of history.
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

 Hi Frank,
I had not seen your Russian reference about the Potapov device. (which needs a 
bit of editing, probably due to poor translation)
This brings ti mind one curious detail in the Griggs/Potapov results - as well 
as some Casimir force, magnetic motor, Maxwell's demon, and even a few LENR 
experiments - is that the upper range of thermal gain (output over input) seems 
to be limited to something like 1.25 or so. 

Which is to say that there is some real gain (overunity) - but not much.
Does you beta atmosphere theory address this point?
Jones


Frank Grimer wrote:  
 
https://remontideas.ru/en/warm-floor/vechnyi-dvigatel-potapova-generator-svobodnoi-energii-s-samozapitkoi.html

A bit of history.  

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Frank Grimer]

https://remontideas.ru/en/warm-floor/vechnyi-dvigatel-potapova-generator-svobodnoi-energii-s-samozapitkoi.html

A bit of history.

On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 14:16, Jones Beene  wrote:

> David Jonsson wrote:
>
>
> Hi
>
> The concept vortex seems to be used in different ways.
>
> How is it used on this list?
>
>
> > As Bill B sez: Vortex-L was created for discussions of research into
> vortex or cavitation devices like that of Griggs which exhibit apparent
> anomalous energy it evolved into a discussion into all kinds of "taboo"
> physics like cold fusion.
>
> For instance, I joined out of interest in the Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube
> which still may harbor a few mysteries despite not being efficient as a
> cooling device ...
>
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Frank Grimer]

A good example of getting energy from the Beta-atmosphere.
Beene knows what I'm talking about.

https://assets.markallengroup.com//article-images/1085/f-hydro.htm

"Hydro Sonic’s unit has been the subject of three tests by a leading US
technical university. The university apparently demonstrated a coefficient
of performance of 1.28:1 meaning there was a case for over unity. Kelly
Hudson, of Hydro Sonics, says, *"Unfortunately Einstein has more
credibility than me." *Which is why the company are actively pursuing its
commercial potential before the over unity question comes into play."

And shed loads more than me. :-)


On Thu, 5 Aug 2021 at 14:16, Jones Beene  wrote:

> David Jonsson wrote:
>
>
> Hi
>
> The concept vortex seems to be used in different ways.
>
> How is it used on this list?
>
>
> > As Bill B sez: Vortex-L was created for discussions of research into
> vortex or cavitation devices like that of Griggs which exhibit apparent
> anomalous energy it evolved into a discussion into all kinds of "taboo"
> physics like cold fusion.
>
> For instance, I joined out of interest in the Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube
> which still may harbor a few mysteries despite not being efficient as a
> cooling device ...
>
>

Re: [Vo]:What is meant by vortex here?

[Jones Beene]

 David Jonsson wrote: 
 
 Hi
The concept vortex seems to be used in different ways.
How is it used on this list?

> As Bill B sez: Vortex-L was created for discussions of research into vortex 
> or cavitation devices like that of Griggs which exhibit apparent 
> anomalousenergy it evolved into a discussion into all kinds of"taboo" 
> physics like cold fusion.

For instance, I joined out of interest in the Ranque-Hilsch vortex tube which 
still may harbor a few mysteries despite not being efficient as a cooling 
device ... 

  

Re: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[Jones Beene]

Ron Kita wrote:
> Electrets my specialty. 

Hey Ron, 

Let me throw this idea out for you. Have you considered the implications of 
dense hydrogen as it might apply to being integrated into the structure of an 
electret ? 

IOW - if and when someone invents the process to make dense hydrogen very 
cheaply (and why not?) then imagine this species being impregnated into say a 
polymer film in such a way that many of the electrons presented in a far more 
compact state than normal and yet stable,,, such a material would most likely 
make a very special electret. This assumes (using theory via either Mills or 
Holmlid et al) the charge properties of the dense state are modified or 
enhanced by inverse square and so on 

- well, such am electret film should have amazing electrical and magnetic 
properties. This idea may have been tossed around before ...?

Re: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[Ron Kita]

Electrets my specialty. I was a friend of the late Boyd Bushman ,
dec...ex-Senior Scientist at LockMart DFW. His
Energy Source patent was an electret. I used to phone Boyd until he moved
to Arizona...where he died a few years
later. I asked Boyd did you ever weigh your electrets...his reply..NO! and
we laughed.  Respectfully, Ron Kita, Chiralex, Doylestown PA
http://www.chiralex.com


On Sat, Jul 18, 2020 at 8:32 PM JonesBeene  wrote:

> *From: *Vibrator ! 
>
>
> JG = James Glimm?  Sorry lost me there..
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Goodenough
>
>
>
> looks like it will be his birthday next week.  Think about that – 98 and
> still on the cutting edge of battery technology.
>
>
>
> Maybe another big prize … who knows?.
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[Vibrator !]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Goodenough

Doh!  Miles away..  (besides, could've had Josiah Gibbs)..

RE: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[JonesBeene]

From: Vibrator !

JG = James Glimm?  Sorry lost me there.. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Goodenough

looks like it will be his birthday next week.  Think about that – 98 and still 
on the cutting edge of battery technology.

Maybe another big prize … who knows?.

RE: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[Vibrator !]

'Electret' - that was the word - but yep, something a bit different here..
 albeit still amenable to calorimetry i should think.

"Quote: A subthreshold swing is demonstrated below the thermal limit in an
electrochemical cell that mimics a gate-to-channel circuit cell in a FeFET,
surpassing the limit imposed by dissipation energy, often designated as
“Boltzmann tyranny.”"

..implying that the energy distribution of the source electrons is somewhat
passive, lacking the high-energy tail / hot electron leakage limiting FET
efficiency, ie. more circumvention than violation..

JG = James Glimm?  Sorry lost me there..

Re: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[Terry Blanton]

Personally, I don't think it's good enough.

Really, I think it's a long way from producibility.

>
>

RE: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

If the charge is drained off does the system  recharge?  I could mot see that 
clearly stated.  It seemed as if there was a swapping of potential energy 
between two phases of the system.

The entropy of the two phases would have the same minimum value in their 
respective charged phases, if the 2nd Law of TH held.

To make up any lost potential energy in the phase changes, the system may have 
gained energy from the earth’s magnetic field during realignment of magnetic 
dipoles that change direction during the phase change,  releasing electrons to 
change their quasi-stable locations in the system’s respective  materials.

As Vibrator notes, there must be a undefined source of energy—maybe ZPE or the 
Earth’s magnetic field.

Bob Cook




From: Frank Znidarsic
Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2020 9:04 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

https://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.5132841

RE: [Vo]:what do you think of Goodenouh's self charging batterY?

[JonesBeene]

Ah … another almost useless violation - it appears… but maybe not completely 
useless.

There does appear to be a nominal violation – somewhat reminiscent of  an 
electret. I’m surprised they do not go there. 

Because the self-cycling takes place at extremely low frequencies and does not 
produce any effect when discharges are fast, as would be needed in a working 
capacitor or transistor - the actual applications for it seem to be small – 
other than there is the implication of very high efficiency - but not a real 
demonstration of it.

There could be a useful temperature drop with the self-oscillation as well, 
which may explain the net energy balance.

Quote: A subthreshold swing is demonstrated below the thermal limit in an 
electrochemical cell that mimics a gate-to-channel circuit cell in a FeFET, 
surpassing the limit imposed by dissipation energy,
often designated as “Boltzmann tyranny.”

Poor Boltzmann … he gets no respect …

Amazing that JG is approaching 100 years. In fact he is the anomaly if there is 
one.


From: Vibrator !

If self-oscillation is phonon-driven - and also forms the source gradient - 
then it's an effective 2LoT violation.

Doesn't rule out an EM / ZPE source of course, but Occam would suggest that's 
redundant..

So, unlike Steorn's ferro-electric caps or whatever it was they were doing 
(foggy now)..

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:37 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> How *are* things in the e-cat world?
>>
>
> No idea. I have looked in months.
>

Okaaay.  Well, Happy Juneteenth and have a great weekend!

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Jed Rothwell]

Terry Blanton  wrote:


> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:13 PM Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
>
> > Yup . . . So says Mr. Google. So said I!
> >
> >
> https://e-catworld.com/2020/01/11/us-congress-charges-national-science-foundation-to-evaluate-lenr-research-and-make-recommendations/
>
>
> You posted that in e-catworld and not here?  Shame on you, Jed.  :)
>

Wasn't me. Someone copied the message. (Which is fine with me.)



> How *are* things in the e-cat world?
>

No idea. I have looked in months.

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:13 PM Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Yup . . . So says Mr. Google. So said I!
>
>
https://e-catworld.com/2020/01/11/us-congress-charges-national-science-foundation-to-evaluate-lenr-research-and-make-recommendations/


You posted that in e-catworld and not here?  Shame on you, Jed.  :)

How *are* things in the e-cat world?

Cheers!

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Jed Rothwell]

Terry Blanton  wrote:


> Hi, Mr. Xook:  I'm not Frank; but, you can look here:
>>
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg01635.html
>>
>
> For some reason, the hard links don't seem to work today; so, here it is
> on Jed's site:
>
> https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DOEreportofth.pdf
>
> Thanks for keeping the site up, Jed.
>

That is the 2004 report. There is a whole page devoted to that:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=455

Last year someone recommended to the Congress look at this again. I think
that is where the quote above came from:

*Low-energy nuclear reactions.* The House report encourages NSF to
“evaluate the various theories, experiments, and scientific literature
surrounding the field of LENR,”

Yup . . . So says Mr. Google. So said I!

https://e-catworld.com/2020/01/11/us-congress-charges-national-science-foundation-to-evaluate-lenr-research-and-make-recommendations/


https://www.aip.org/fyi/2020/final-fy20-appropriations-national-science-foundation
>
>

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 12:38 PM Terry Blanton  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:40 AM bobxook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobxook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Frank—
>>
>>
>>
>> Is ther a link to the House Report you note?
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Xook
>>
>
> Hi, Mr. Xook:  I'm not Frank; but, you can look here:
>
> https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg01635.html
>

For some reason, the hard links don't seem to work today; so, here it is on
Jed's site:

https://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DOEreportofth.pdf

Thanks for keeping the site up, Jed.

Cheers!

Re: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 10:40 AM bobxook39...@hotmail.com <
bobxook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Frank—
>
>
>
> Is ther a link to the House Report you note?
>
>
>
> Bob Xook
>

Hi, Mr. Xook:  I'm not Frank; but, you can look here:

https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg01635.html

RE: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Frank—

Is ther a link to the House Report you note?

Bob Xook

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Frank Znidarsic
Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2020 6:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:what ever happened with this?

Low-energy nuclear reactions. The House report encourages NSF to “evaluate the 
various theories, experiments, and scientific literature surrounding the field 
of LENR,” which is most associated with the pursuit of cold 
fusion. It also 
directs NSF to “provide a set of recommendations as to whether future federal 
investment into LENR research would be prudent, and if so, a plan for how that 
investment would be best utilized.”

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

It looks like international patents are a thing of the past with all the 
nationalists, etal. that could care less about a civilized planet of the 
future.  Good marketing is where the money (or whatever replaces it) lies—not 
in known intellectual property.

As Jones hints, the real question is: What is the source of potential energy 
that is changed to phonic or thermal energy by the shielding functions of the 
reactor for EM radiation, if it is produced during the reaction?

Bob Cook

From: JonesBeene<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2019 6:32 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?


From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>


  *   The gain might not be thermal, but ultraviolet light.


Technically , if the main mechanism for  gain is photonic in the 630 eV range – 
that mass-energy level  is categorized as  a soft x-ray which  is stronger than 
EUV.

If this turned out to be a Mills-type of hydrino reaction, which it partially 
resembles - then yes – the gain would be ultraviolet. Of course, in the end 
either UV or soft x-rays would be downshifted into thermal – as they are in the 
range of ‘universally absorbed’ and none of that kind of radiation escapes a 
steel reactor as anything but heat.

The problem with suggesting Holmlid’s theory  is that one of the main 
mechanisms for gain is proton disintegration into muons – much of which 
radiation would escape without being captured.

We can probably rule out Holmlid’s main hypothesis since Mizuno is still alive 
and in good health. Same for fusion. If his  home furnace was producing 3 
kilowatts of heat from proton annihilation into muons for much of the winter, 
or from nuclear fusion - severe health problems would surely be evident.

At this stage there is nothing wrong with suggesting that the thermal gain 
comes partly from a Millsean mechanism and partly from Holmlid’s but mostly… 
and without a doubt,  the breakthrough is from Mizuno’s “Aladdin effect” 
technique of surface alloying.

One thing we can be sure of -- attribution will be contested on many fronts -  
but it is Mizuno who let the genie out of the lamp – no doubt there and 
secondly, the main beneficiaries are likely to be the Chinese, if this is real. 
They have the perfect market for such a device as the one we are seeing.

The main Mills’ patents have expired but they will negate many of the  later 
attempt by patent trolls to control a fractional hydrogen modality. As everyone 
is aware – a source of kilowatt level clean heat – as is epitomized in the 
fabulous hearth image in the new Mizuno paper – well, that  is a trillion 
dollar invention and every greedy bastard on the planet will be trying to get 
their fingers in the pot. But hey – that is the essence of capitalism. And 
isn’t it ironic that former communists will probably be the main beneficiaries.

Jones

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[JonesBeene]

From: Axil Axil

➢ The gain might not be thermal, but ultraviolet light.


Technically , if the main mechanism for  gain is photonic in the 630 eV range – 
that mass-energy level  is categorized as  a soft x-ray which  is stronger than 
EUV.

If this turned out to be a Mills-type of hydrino reaction, which it partially 
resembles - then yes – the gain would be ultraviolet. Of course, in the end 
either UV or soft x-rays would be downshifted into thermal – as they are in the 
range of ‘universally absorbed’ and none of that kind of radiation escapes a 
steel reactor as anything but heat.

The problem with suggesting Holmlid’s theory  is that one of the main 
mechanisms for gain is proton disintegration into muons – much of which 
radiation would escape without being captured.

We can probably rule out Holmlid’s main hypothesis since Mizuno is still alive 
and in good health. Same for fusion. If his  home furnace was producing 3 
kilowatts of heat from proton annihilation into muons for much of the winter, 
or from nuclear fusion - severe health problems would surely be evident. 

At this stage there is nothing wrong with suggesting that the thermal gain 
comes partly from a Millsean mechanism and partly from Holmlid’s but mostly… 
and without a doubt,  the breakthrough is from Mizuno’s “Aladdin effect” 
technique of surface alloying. 

One thing we can be sure of -- attribution will be contested on many fronts -  
but it is Mizuno who let the genie out of the lamp – no doubt there and 
secondly, the main beneficiaries are likely to be the Chinese, if this is real. 
They have the perfect market for such a device as the one we are seeing.

The main Mills’ patents have expired but they will negate many of the  later 
attempt by patent trolls to control a fractional hydrogen modality. As everyone 
is aware – a source of kilowatt level clean heat – as is epitomized in the 
fabulous hearth image in the new Mizuno paper – well, that  is a trillion 
dollar invention and every greedy bastard on the planet will be trying to get 
their fingers in the pot. But hey – that is the essence of capitalism. And 
isn’t it ironic that former communists will probably be the main beneficiaries.

Jones

Re: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[Axil Axil]

The gain might not be thermal, but ultraviolet light.

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 6:29 PM JonesBeene  wrote:

> Yes.
>
>
>
> Basically I am simply looking for connections which  can explain the
> thermal gain with the fewest conflicts.
>
>
>
> That is not an easy task – but this looks far less like nuclear fusion
> than does P electrolysis.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *mix...@bigpond.com
>
>
>
> In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:02:01 -0700:
>
> Hi,
>
> [snip]
>
> >Robin,
>
> >
>
> >The separation distance of dense deuterium is about 2 picometers in
> Holmlid’s model
>
>
>
> So, when you  were talking about 2 nm, you were talking about the size of
> the
>
> cluster as a whole then rather than the separation distance?
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
>
>
> local asymmetry = temporary success
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[JonesBeene]

Yes.

Basically I am simply looking for connections which  can explain the thermal 
gain with the fewest conflicts.

That is not an easy task – but this looks far less like nuclear fusion than 
does P electrolysis.


From: mix...@bigpond.com

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:02:01 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin,
>
>The separation distance of dense deuterium is about 2 picometers in Holmlid’s 
>model

So, when you  were talking about 2 nm, you were talking about the size of the
cluster as a whole then rather than the separation distance?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 13:02:01 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>Robin,
>
>The separation distance of dense deuterium is about 2 picometers in Holmlid’s 
>model

So, when you  were talking about 2 nm, you were talking about the size of the
cluster as a whole then rather than the separation distance?

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[JonesBeene]

Robin,

The separation distance of dense deuterium is about 2 picometers in Holmlid’s 
model


From: mix...@bigpond.com

… 2 nm = 20 Angstrom ~= 28 times the separation distance of the of the D nuclei
in a Deuterium molecule. If Deuterium molecules are too big to undergo fusion
using the strong force, then I struggle to see how it could be playing a role
when the separation distance is 28 times larger still.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

Re: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[mixent]

In reply to  JonesBeene's message of Thu, 20 Jun 2019 07:00:24 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>The strong force may become involved at this point to provide the binding 
>energy in similar way that gluons bind quarks.  
[snip]
 2 nm = 20 Angstrom ~= 28 times the separation distance of the of the D nuclei
in a Deuterium molecule. If Deuterium molecules are too big to undergo fusion
using the strong force, then I struggle to see how it could be playing a role
when the separation distance is 28 times larger still.

Regards,


Robin van Spaandonk

local asymmetry = temporary success

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[JonesBeene]

Oops,

Should be

“Two nm is the separation geometry for maximum appearance (compressive force) 
of the Casimir force”

Instead of

“Two nm is the maximum separation geometry for the appearance of the Casimir 
force”

IOW - the Casimir force is seen most strongly within a range of 2-12 nm - but 
it reaches its maximum at 2 nm and then drops off sharply below 2 nm. 

RE: [Vo]:What is special about ~630 eV ?

[JonesBeene]

One detail which may figure into the understanding of the new Mizuno work is 
the wavelength of photons at 630 eV. 

Dense deuterium as it is characterized in about two dozen papers will have a 
binding energy of ~630 eV – at least that is the energy signature which has 
been measured. Mizuno mentions this energy level but it is not clear that he 
has actually measured it.

That particular energy level corresponds to a photon wavelength which is very 
close to 2 nanometers.

There are several reasons why 2 nm may be relevant to understanding the 
dynamics of the Mizuno device.

Two nm is the maximum separation geometry for the appearance of the Casimir 
force. Also 2 nm  may relate to the thickness achieved when palladium is 
burnished onto nickel mesh or else to the size of surface pitting after the 
burnishing, or both.

One possible scenario for the energy release  goes something like this. 

The Casimir force which is exerted on the thin palladium coating of nickel mesh 
serves to compress deuterons into a cluster of atoms - in which a large number 
of atoms become bound together. The energy represented by this soft x-ray 
emission at 630 eV  is not coming from the Casimir force itself. After all, it 
is a force not an emitter. 

The strong force may become involved at this point to provide the binding 
energy in similar way that gluons bind quarks.  That binding energy can later 
be released when the cluster is disrupted or more likely when it  
self-destructs  at a critical size level of around 90-95 atoms. That release of 
binding energy is the ultimate derivation of the soft x-ray which is seen. Most 
of the mass of hadrons is actually QCD binding energy, through mass-energy 
equivalence. Some of that can perhaps be shared on a larger geometric scale 
with the cluster – and therefore the energy release is nuclear, but not coming 
directly from a nucleus..

Jones


Of interest – could the heat of the Mizuno device be partly or mostly nuclear… 
but also … NON-fusion and NON-weak force ?

A mass-energy value which keeps turning up in dense hydrogen cluster papers is 
630 eV. It apparently relates to energy released by a cluster of dense hydrogen 
which has become disordered. This is a measured value – not a theory. This 
value  is mentioned many times by Miley and also by Mizuno.

This is an unusually strong  value energetically for chemistry but weak for 
nuclear.  For comparison the chemical bond energy of two deuterons to each 
other is 4.5 eV and the weakest beta emission is in the few keV range. 630 eV 
would be middle ground – a very soft x-ray which few meters can detect.

There is a Rydberg multiple at ~625 eV but it seems crazy to suggest that this 
would be a favored value for Mills’ theory as it doesn’t turn up in any of his 
papers.

The BEC cluster of deuterons which are bound to each other by a poorly 
understood mechanism are said to contain around 100 atoms by Miley’s group and 
less than that  by Holmlid who sees the structure as linear as opposed to 
globular. Apparently both seem to believe the numberof atoms  in a BEC is not 
random.

I am wondering if the common denominator between energies which are  hi-chem 
but  low-nuke has anything to do with Don Hotson’s EPO. 

Why?

The ionization potential of positronium is 6.8 eV. Hotson envisioned a 
universal background “aether” to be composed of EPOs – basically positronium in 
4 space. Presumably it would still have the same characteristic binding energy. 
Thus, In a cluster of around 100 deuterons at 2 pm separation, bound in some 
kind of stable arrangement, if about 93 of them acted as a single unit in 
decay, then possibly the result would be a single photon of this value 630 eV. 
That is a huge stretch as there is absolutely no reason to suspect that there 
could be such a favored number of atoms nor that they would act in unison.

But QM is strange and QCD is stranger. There are no satisfactory explanations 
for now - but the beauty of the recent news from Mizuno is that now - at long 
last there appears to be a justifiable expectation for finding on demand power 
at the kilowatt level without gamma radiation. 

The real clincher of the announcement is the image that has been imprinted on 
physicists everywhere - that fabulous image of the Mizuno reactor taken in from 
of a fireplace, reportedly providing winter time heat in one of the colder 
parts of Japan. An instant classic !!

Jones

RE: [Vo]:What not to do with your amazing invention...

[Frank Znidarsic]

It seems like a good product for coating the Tessla battery compartment.   

RE: [Vo]:What not to do with your amazing invention...

[JonesBeene]

That is a very interesting series of videos. Thanks for posting it.

It is pretty clear that the material was overhyped initially and that it is now 
available from others and also that there are few markets for it.

The inventors widow and daughter have been put against each other, selling 
different versions.

As you observe, this is exactly what NOT to do with your amazing invention…



From: Alberto De Souza

https://www.bbc.com/reel/playlist/searching-for-starlite?vpid=p06llpln=ww.social.link
 

Re: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[Axil Axil]

It is my belief that the spin wave that forms around the positive core of
the metallic hydrogen provides a EMF mirror produced by the meissner effect
that enables the formation of polaritons in that spin wave, From what is
seen on the LION reactor data, a magnon polariton condensate forms on that
spin wave and produces a LENR active circular flux tube that demonstrates a
singular type of  magnetism that is polarized in terms of its handedness or
chirality. This flux tube seems to destabilize matter as claimed by Holmlid.

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:24 PM, bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
bobcook39...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> Axil—
>
>
>
> Does the metallic H help or hinder magnetic field coupling from inside to
> outside the coating?
>
>
>
> Bob Cook
>
>
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for
> Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:57 PM
> *To: *vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRyU2spCCPk
>
>
>
>
>
> Metallic hydogen is impervious to heat and pressure up to 1.44 solar
> masses do to the degeneracy pressure produced by its electron coat.
>
>
>
> Electron degeneracy pressure will halt the gravitational collapse of a
> star if its mass <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass> is below the 
> Chandrasekhar
> limit <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit> (1.44 solar
> masses <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_masses>)
>
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_degeneracy_pressure
>
>
>
> This is why loading of palladium  will produce metallic hydrogen before
> fusion is reached. The creation of metallic hydrogen in high palladium
> loading of deuterium will preclude the fusion reaction do to electron  
> degeneracy
> pressure that old guard LENR theory assumes.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:36 PM, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> Speaking of Winterberg – here is his take on ultradense deuterium from
> arxiv severak years ago…
>
>
>
> Note the last sentence in the context of ICF laser fusion using a tabletop
> laser: “ it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear
> detonation wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc”
>
>
>
> AHA – thin disk? As in a disk of graphene?
>
>
>
> If the ICF people at LLNL have overlooked this – shame on them
>
>
> Ultradense Deuterium
>
> F.Winterberg
> <https://arxiv.org/find/physics/1/au:+Winterberg_F/0/1/0/all/0/1>
> Submitted on 30 Dec 2009
>
> An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of
> ultradense deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a
> high density phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured
> that the transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a
> Cooper pair electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons,
> with the deuterons undergoing Bose-Einstein condensation in the core of the
> vortices. If such a state of deuterium should exist at the reported density
> of about 100,000 g/cm3, it would greatly facility the ignition of a
> thermonuclear detonation wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium
> in a thin disc, to be ignited by a pulsed ultrafast laser or particle beam
> of modest energy.
>
> arXiv:0912.5414 <https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.5414>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *bobcook39...@hotmail.com
>
>
>
> IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma
> of hot fusion being practical in the future.
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> It’s not that simple. Sure, ITER is a long-running brain-dead boondoggle,
> but there are signs of intelligence at other Labs.
>
>
>
> In fact, a hybrid form of hot fusion with targets made of UDD is practical
> and with this kind of ICF target a desktop laser can be used.
>
>
>
> The footprint for hot fusion becomes much smaller and much  less
> expensive. This can happen with the dense form of deuterium. It is a
> paradigm shift.
>
>
>
> Essentially, at least as far as what is publicly available -  Holmlid is
> closer to this goal of small hot/cold hybrid fusion than the billion dollar
> efforts…
>
>
>
> … unless that is, they are working under the radar on it at LLNL, and you
> have to think they are. Friedwardt Winterberg was predicting something like
> this 50 years ago. He is almost 90 but still teaches physics. I hope he is
> around to see the results. But the timing is uncertain, shall we say. The
> great Heisenberg was his doctoral advisor 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Axil—

Does the metallic H help or hinder magnetic field coupling from inside to 
outside the coating?

Bob Cook

Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10

From: Axil Axil<mailto:janap...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 12:57 PM
To: vortex-l<mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRyU2spCCPk


Metallic hydogen is impervious to heat and pressure up to 1.44 solar masses do 
to the degeneracy pressure produced by its electron coat.

Electron degeneracy pressure will halt the gravitational collapse of a star if 
its mass<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass> is below the Chandrasekhar 
limit<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandrasekhar_limit> (1.44 solar 
masses<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_masses>)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_degeneracy_pressure

This is why loading of palladium  will produce metallic hydrogen before fusion 
is reached. The creation of metallic hydrogen in high palladium loading of 
deuterium will preclude the fusion reaction do to electron  degeneracy pressure 
that old guard LENR theory assumes.

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:36 PM, JonesBeene 
<jone...@pacbell.net<mailto:jone...@pacbell.net>> wrote:
Speaking of Winterberg – here is his take on ultradense deuterium from arxiv 
severak years ago…

Note the last sentence in the context of ICF laser fusion using a tabletop 
laser: “ it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear detonation 
wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc”

AHA – thin disk? As in a disk of graphene?

If the ICF people at LLNL have overlooked this – shame on them

Ultradense Deuterium
F.Winterberg<https://arxiv.org/find/physics/1/au:+Winterberg_F/0/1/0/all/0/1>  
Submitted on 30 Dec 2009
An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of ultradense 
deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a high density 
phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured that the 
transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a Cooper pair 
electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons, with the deuterons 
undergoing Bose-Einstein condensation in the core of the vortices. If such a 
state of deuterium should exist at the reported density of about 100,000 g/cm3, 
it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear detonation wave in 
pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc, to be ignited by a 
pulsed ultrafast laser or particle beam of modest energy.
arXiv:0912.5414<https://arxiv.org/abs/0912.5414>



From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com<mailto:bobcook39...@hotmail.com>

IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma of hot 
fusion being practical in the future.

Bob,

It’s not that simple. Sure, ITER is a long-running brain-dead boondoggle, but 
there are signs of intelligence at other Labs.

In fact, a hybrid form of hot fusion with targets made of UDD is practical and 
with this kind of ICF target a desktop laser can be used.

The footprint for hot fusion becomes much smaller and much  less expensive. 
This can happen with the dense form of deuterium. It is a paradigm shift.

Essentially, at least as far as what is publicly available -  Holmlid is closer 
to this goal of small hot/cold hybrid fusion than the billion dollar efforts…

… unless that is, they are working under the radar on it at LLNL, and you have 
to think they are. Friedwardt Winterberg was predicting something like this 50 
years ago. He is almost 90 but still teaches physics. I hope he is around to 
see the results. But the timing is uncertain, shall we say. The great 
Heisenberg was his doctoral advisor 

Re: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[Axil Axil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRyU2spCCPk


Metallic hydogen is impervious to heat and pressure up to 1.44 solar masses
do to the degeneracy pressure produced by its electron coat.

Electron degeneracy pressure will halt the gravitational collapse of a star
if its mass  is below the Chandrasekhar
limit  (1.44 solar masses
)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_degeneracy_pressure

This is why loading of palladium  will produce metallic hydrogen before
fusion is reached. The creation of metallic hydrogen in high palladium
loading of deuterium will preclude the fusion reaction do to electron
degeneracy
pressure that old guard LENR theory assumes.

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:36 PM, JonesBeene  wrote:

> Speaking of Winterberg – here is his take on ultradense deuterium from
> arxiv severak years ago…
>
>
>
> Note the last sentence in the context of ICF laser fusion using a tabletop
> laser: “ it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear
> detonation wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc”
>
>
>
> AHA – thin disk? As in a disk of graphene?
>
>
>
> If the ICF people at LLNL have overlooked this – shame on them
>
>
> Ultradense Deuterium
>
> F.Winterberg
> 
> Submitted on 30 Dec 2009
>
> An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of
> ultradense deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a
> high density phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured
> that the transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a
> Cooper pair electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons,
> with the deuterons undergoing Bose-Einstein condensation in the core of the
> vortices. If such a state of deuterium should exist at the reported density
> of about 100,000 g/cm3, it would greatly facility the ignition of a
> thermonuclear detonation wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium
> in a thin disc, to be ignited by a pulsed ultrafast laser or particle beam
> of modest energy.
>
> arXiv:0912.5414 
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *bobcook39...@hotmail.com
>
>
>
> IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma
> of hot fusion being practical in the future.
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
>
>
> It’s not that simple. Sure, ITER is a long-running brain-dead boondoggle,
> but there are signs of intelligence at other Labs.
>
>
>
> In fact, a hybrid form of hot fusion with targets made of UDD is practical
> and with this kind of ICF target a desktop laser can be used.
>
>
>
> The footprint for hot fusion becomes much smaller and much  less
> expensive. This can happen with the dense form of deuterium. It is a
> paradigm shift.
>
>
>
> Essentially, at least as far as what is publicly available -  Holmlid is
> closer to this goal of small hot/cold hybrid fusion than the billion dollar
> efforts…
>
>
>
> … unless that is, they are working under the radar on it at LLNL, and you
> have to think they are. Friedwardt Winterberg was predicting something like
> this 50 years ago. He is almost 90 but still teaches physics. I hope he is
> around to see the results. But the timing is uncertain, shall we say. The
> great Heisenberg was his doctoral advisor 
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

RE: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[JonesBeene]

Speaking of Winterberg – here is his take on ultradense deuterium from arxiv 
severak years ago…

Note the last sentence in the context of ICF laser fusion using a tabletop 
laser: “ it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear detonation 
wave in pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc”

AHA – thin disk? As in a disk of graphene?

If the ICF people at LLNL have overlooked this – shame on them

Ultradense Deuterium
F.Winterberg  Submitted on 30 Dec 2009 
An attempt is made to explain the recently reported occurrence of ultradense 
deuterium as an isothermal transition of Rydberg matter into a high density 
phase by quantum mechanical exchange forces. It is conjectured that the 
transition is made possible by the formation of vortices in a Cooper pair 
electron fluid, separating the electrons from the deuterons, with the deuterons 
undergoing Bose-Einstein condensation in the core of the vortices. If such a 
state of deuterium should exist at the reported density of about 100,000 g/cm3, 
it would greatly facility the ignition of a thermonuclear detonation wave in 
pure deuterium, by placing the deuterium in a thin disc, to be ignited by a 
pulsed ultrafast laser or particle beam of modest energy. 
arXiv:0912.5414 

From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com

IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma of hot 
fusion being practical in the future.

Bob,

It’s not that simple. Sure, ITER is a long-running brain-dead boondoggle, but 
there are signs of intelligence at other Labs.

In fact, a hybrid form of hot fusion with targets made of UDD is practical and 
with this kind of ICF target a desktop laser can be used.

The footprint for hot fusion becomes much smaller and much  less expensive. 
This can happen with the dense form of deuterium. It is a paradigm shift.

Essentially, at least as far as what is publicly available -  Holmlid is closer 
to this goal of small hot/cold hybrid fusion than the billion dollar efforts…

… unless that is, they are working under the radar on it at LLNL, and you have 
to think they are. Friedwardt Winterberg was predicting something like this 50 
years ago. He is almost 90 but still teaches physics. I hope he is around to 
see the results. But the timing is uncertain, shall we say. The great 
Heisenberg was his doctoral advisor 

RE: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[JonesBeene]

From: bobcook39...@hotmail.com

IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma of hot 
fusion being practical in the future.

Bob,

It’s not that simple. Sure, ITER is a long-running brain-dead boondoggle, but 
there are signs of intelligence at other Labs.

In fact, a hybrid form of hot fusion with targets made of UDD is practical and 
with this kind of ICF target a desktop laser can be used.

The footprint for hot fusion becomes much smaller and much  less expensive. 
This can happen with the dense form of deuterium. It is a paradigm shift.

Essentially, at least as far as what is publicly available -  Holmlid is closer 
to this goal of small hot/cold hybrid fusion than the billion dollar efforts…

… unless that is, they are working under the radar on it at LLNL, and you have 
to think they are. Friedwardt Winterberg was predicting something like this 50 
years ago. He is almost 90 but still teaches physics. I hope he is around to 
see the results. But the timing is uncertain, shall we say. The great 
Heisenberg was his doctoral advisor 

RE: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

[bobcook39...@hotmail.com]

Jones—

I think that the 2-D characteristic of graphene is a key for generation of 
intense magnetic (B fields) to control resonances necessary for LENR to occur 
without energetic radiation.  The magnetic field couples the nucleons’s 
magnetic moments to the atomic graphene structure of orbital electrons with 
their magnetic moments and their electrons intrinsic magnetic moments with l 
and J quantum numbers..

IMHO some folks, like those you identify at LLNL, are stuck in the dogma of hot 
fusion being practical in the future.

It (hot fusion) is way too impractical considering future R, fast neutron 
production, related activation of apparatus with tough repair and safe 
handling, bad waste management issues, nasty decommission,   no domestic 
opportunity as an energy source,---all entailing large costs and headaches  
compared to comparable LENR issues.

Bob Cook


From: JonesBeene
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:03 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:What the heck is a Dirac electron?

The blog/page below has a good explanation of the Dirac electron… for anyone in 
LENR who might like to put their own spin on things using excellent insight 
from another (seemingly unrelated) field.

Problem is… that this information is coming from a different technological 
background (which is spintronics in graphene). Typically, there would seem to 
be no obvious connection to LENR but there is, or could be.

http://www.spinograph.org/blog/what-heck-dirac-electron

Spinograph.org is itself an interesting story but their focus is only graphene. 
“Graphene” has supplanted “nanotech” as the latest and greatest hot topic in 
science these days.

Not to be left out, the unanswered question on the Dirac electron, from the 
perspective of LENR relates to “dense hydrogen” and the likelihood that the 
experiments and theory  of Holmlid, Mills,. Lawandy, Meulenberg, Mayer, Dufour 
and other high quality theoreticians who have embraced the idea, is whether or 
not all of LENR is simply about dense hydrogen and almost nothing else… It may 
seem that way. Of course the so-called DDL conception of  Meulenberg pops up 
immediately since it incorporates Dirac’s name… as was covered in prior thread 
here
https://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg115809.html

The conclusion of it all of these slightly variant concepts about dense 
hydrogen can in practice relate directly to graphene, which is the natural home 
of such electrons.

This should tell Leif Holmlid and/or anyone who is using his technique to 
produce UDH (including the geniuses at LLNL who are trying to remain 
anoumymous)  that the ideal “storage medium” of this species is graphene. The 
future of LENR my indeed merge with ICF as practiced at LLNL into a viable 
concept for superhot fusion.

There is some irony here – that it required cold fusion to turn hot fusion into 
something useful.

Re: [Vo]:What goes around, comes around

[Terry Blanton]

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> Thus the Improbable twist on the "original sim" is that we can watch the
> inner workings of an artificial reality being created over time by gods...
>

Speaking of...
There's an interesting series on Starz.com called "American Gods" which
resurrected "Lucy" (as in "Lucy, I'm home") in the second episode who gave
away what appears to be an interesting plot.  Ian McShane, Mr. Wednesday,
seems to be Odin seeking to get the band back together to combat...what?
The second episode introduces a crusty (Russian?) who can only be Thor. And
who is the strange (Egyptian?) with a bizarre appetite lending a whole new
meaning to Hall and Oates' "Maneater".

The American Gods they might be fighting seem to be virtual, or Artificial
Intelligence.  Valhalla vs. The Singularity!

Worth watching.so far. Legion!  Oops, that another one.

Re: [Vo]:What happend to the Sept. 23 congressional report

[Leonardo Ramos]

your question might have ended up at the spam folders. try again

On 10/7/16, Frank Znidarsic  wrote:
> It is late or is it classified?
>
>
>
>
> Frank Znidarsic
>

Re: [Vo]:What was not said can be as important as what was said

[Axil Axil]

I don't think it is accurate to state that Mills is promoting a
financial scam on top of a real energy anomaly of the kind Thermacore
showed in 1993. It is just maximizing investment to explore unknown
and esoteric subjects in science.

On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 4:17 PM, a.ashfield  wrote:
> Jones wrote:  "The statement completely contradicts Lewan's assertion of
> Industrial Heat's
> involvement in the test."
> Krivit must be going blind as he wrote; "The statement mentions nothing
> about any test, let alone the test Lewan said Industrial Heat had been
> conducting during the past year."
>
> Also
> "As many of us have been saying from the start - in regard to Rossi, it is
> easily possible to build a financial scam on top of a real energy anomaly of
> the kind Thermacore showed in 1993 and the only surprise is that the
> perpetrator of the quasi-scam did not do a better job with showing the real
> anomaly."
>
> I'm surprised you didn't mention Krivit's link.   "Rossi Promoter Arrested
> on Child Sex-Abuse Charges" while you were at it.
>

Re: [Vo]:what do you think of this

[Jed Rothwell]

Do not open!

This looks like another spam virus.

RE: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

[Jones Beene]

From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe 

 

I looked at the Lugano report, trying to understand the issue with the 
implicate power meter

e.g. why the  power loss in the cable does not follow the power measured.

 

 

 

Where is this issue being raised? 

 

It will likely be impossible to know the answer in retrospect, but it could be 
consistent with altered wiring, such as a version of the circuit of Peter 
Thieberger.

 

Thieberger described (but AFAIK did not test) a circuit that an unscrupulous 
person could use to fool common meters. This is somewhat easier to do with 
3-phase cable. 

 

https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-e-cat-cold-fusion-or-scientific-fraud-624f15676f96

 

Indeed - as this relates to Lugano - it was questioned that the current clamps 
used by Levi could be fooled exactly this way – but there is no evidence of 
this having happened.

 

http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/05/rossi-on-the-clamps-in-the-lugano-e-cat-test/

 

 

 

 

 

Re: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

[Stefan Israelsson Tampe]

 Where is this issue being raised?
People skeptical brings this up, of cause as you say it's possible to sill
be fooled, it needs more data to decide. I just wanted to see if there was
an
alternate explanation, and if it is sound. P(t) = U(t)I(t) does alternate
sign for suitable phase differences. The measured P is the sum over all
 those P(t)., The cable losses is all a summation of R I(t)*I(t). I just
find it strange that it all was a focus on temperature dependent resistance
that didn't add up as a counter argument. I think that the camera
measurements is more critical when it comes to issues atm.

Regards
Stefan

On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

 *From:* Stefan Israelsson Tampe



 I looked at the Lugano report, trying to understand the issue with the
 implicate power meter

 e.g. why the  power loss in the cable does not follow the power measured.







 Where is this issue being raised?



 It will likely be impossible to know the answer in retrospect, but it
 could be consistent with altered wiring, such as a version of the circuit
 of Peter Thieberger.



 Thieberger described (but AFAIK did not test) a circuit that an
 unscrupulous person could use to fool common meters. This is somewhat
 easier to do with 3-phase cable.




 https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-e-cat-cold-fusion-or-scientific-fraud-624f15676f96



 Indeed - as this relates to Lugano - it was questioned that the current
 clamps used by Levi could be fooled exactly this way – but there is no
 evidence of this having happened.




 http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/05/rossi-on-the-clamps-in-the-lugano-e-cat-test/

Re: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report showing

[David Roberson]

Stefan, you appear to be considering the effects of multiple reflections upon 
the input power calculations.  This type of issue comes up when the frequency 
is within the RF range, generally far above what is used during this test.  
Also, with RF engineering you handle the reflections as voltage or current 
reflections instead of multiple power reflections since they combine at the 
drive source as vectors.  Once combined properly the reflections cause a 
modified impedance to be presented to the drive source which it works into.  
 
In my opinion it is extremely unlikely for multiple reflections to be important 
in this case.   And there is ample evidence that no one performed tricks with 
the input cable wiring since the testers were sensitive to that type of 
activity.

It does appear that the camera measurements were questionable within the 
temperature range outside the calibration zone.  To counter that to a 
significant degree is the nuclear transformations seen when the final ash is 
compared to the input fuel.  Some among the skeptics believe that Rossi 
monkeyed with the samples, but that has never been proven.  Besides, any 
attempt by Rossi to do that carries a great risk of discovery.

If you have followed the recent work of Dr. Parkhomov and others you will find 
plenty of evidence supporting the claim of excess heat generation within the 
core material.  It appears that the main question remaining is whether that 
heat is caused by chemical, hydrino(??), or nuclear reactions.   I await 
further long term testing results by replicators before accepting the heat as 
being nuclear in nature.

Dave

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe stefan.ita...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, May 2, 2015 10:58 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:What was the implicit power meeter in the Lugano report 
showing


 
   Where is this issue being raised?  
   People skeptical brings this up, of cause as you say it's possible to sill 
be fooled, it needs more data to decide. I just wanted to see if there was an  
  
   alternate explanation, and if it is sound. P(t) = U(t)I(t) does alternate 
sign for suitable phase differences. The measured P is the sum over all  
  
those P(t)., The cable losses is alla summation of R I(t)*I(t)   . I 
just find it strange that it all was a focuson temperature dependent 
resistance that didn't add up as a counter argument. I think that the camera 
measurements is more critical when it comes to issues atm.  
  
   
  
  
   Regards  
  
   Stefan  
 
 
  
  
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Jones Beenejone...@pacbell.net wrote:   
   

 
  
From: Stefan Israelsson Tampe 
  
 
  
   
 
I looked at the Lugano report, trying to understand the issue with the 
implicate power meter

   

e.g. why the  power loss in the cable does not follow the power measured.
 
 
 

Where is this issue being raised? 

 

It will likely be impossible to know the answer in retrospect, but it could be 
consistent with altered wiring, such as a version of the circuit of Peter 
Thieberger.

 

Thieberger described (but AFAIK did not test) a circuit that an unscrupulous 
person could use to fool common meters. This is somewhat easier to do with 
3-phase cable. 

 

https://medium.com/starts-with-a-bang/the-e-cat-cold-fusion-or-scientific-fraud-624f15676f96

 

Indeed - as this relates to Lugano - it was questioned that the current clamps 
used by Levi could be fooled exactly this way – but there is no evidence of 
this having happened.

 

http://www.e-catworld.com/2014/11/05/rossi-on-the-clamps-in-the-lugano-e-cat-test/

 

 
   
   

 
   
   

 

 
   
  
 

   
  
  
 
 

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Bob Higgins]

From analysis of the remains of the MFMP Bang! experiment, it is clear that
the carbonyl Ni particles sinter into a finely porous 3D web of particles
(probably happening by 400C).  By 1000C, the evidence shows that this web
of hydrogen cleaned Ni particles are completely covered in a molten Li-Al.
By analysis of the Li-Al on the alumina tube ID, it is clear that this
molten Li-Al has dissolved Ni from the web into the molten metal to 3-4%
molar fraction (not counting the Li).  The fine features on the carbonyl Ni
particles are what is dissolving into the molten Li-Al-Ni metal.

This also happened to the HotCat.  Based on the MFMP SEM images, it is easy
to identify particle 1 (TPR2 page 43, Figure 2 left) as having come from
the sintered Ni 3D web in the core of the reactor.  Be sure to pay
attention to the scale in this image - the 2 micron bar in the picture is
small.  The features are as big as the whole Ni particles that comprised
the fuel, now sintered into a web (these are not tiny tubercles on top of
a particle - tubercles are an alleged part of Rossi's low temperature
fuel).  The sintered Ni particle web is cleanly coated with about 200 nm
thickness of the solidified metal.

All of the nanoscale features of the carbonyl Ni particles have dissolved
into the molten Li-Al metal - there are no tubercles.

At reaction temperatures (800C) this metal film was liquid and wetted to
the hydrogen cleaned Ni.  Also, at this pressure of H2, it is likely that
much of the Li in the molten metal was melted LiH, an ionic hydride - the
molten metal was probably saturated with hydrogen in the form of H- anions
as part of the ionic hydride of Li.  This appears to be a [liquid metal
ionic hydride - Ni] reaction, not a gas phase reaction.

Bob Higgins

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Roarty, Francis X 
francis.x.roa...@lmco.com wrote:

  [snip] But maybe these tubercles serve a function at relatively low
 temperatures, then as the reaction takes hold, the tubercles are mostly
 distorted and destroyed. But the function that these tubercles are meant to
 serve have been put in place and are independent once established and self
 reinforcing. [snip]



 And here we come all the way back to whether a fractional molecule can
 persist once formed outside of the environment that produced it. Such that
 after sufficient heat the environment is gone but fractional molecules
 remain. Heat after death reports would suggest it does persist for a time
 and the questions regarding restart of hot cats in the fall begs the
 question if the sealed reactor is allowing these fractional molecules to
 hibernate in the reflowed lattice without run away reactions.





 *From:* Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
 *Sent:* Saturday, March 14, 2015 6:08 PM
 *To:* vortex-l
 *Subject:* EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?



 More...



 We were all amazed that the fine nano surface features on the nickel
 particles could ever be preserved at reactor operating temperatures above
 the temperature that these nano features were expected to deteriorate.



 But maybe these tubercles serve a function at relatively low temperatures,
 then as the reaction takes hold, the tubercles are mostly distorted and
 destroyed. But the function that these tubercles are meant to serve have
 been put in place and are independent once established and self
 reinforcing.



 On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel
 micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at
 startup just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.

 But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of
 the nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction
 was gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were
 being degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to
 rethink his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the
 nickel particles showed limited transmutation.

 The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical
 preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly
 without a BANG.

 Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by
 maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.

 No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel
 particles can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these
 particles become ineffective?

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Roarty, Francis X]

[snip] But maybe these tubercles serve a function at relatively low 
temperatures, then as the reaction takes hold, the tubercles are mostly 
distorted and destroyed. But the function that these tubercles are meant to 
serve have been put in place and are independent once established and self 
reinforcing. [snip]

And here we come all the way back to whether a fractional molecule can persist 
once formed outside of the environment that produced it. Such that after 
sufficient heat the environment is gone but fractional molecules remain. Heat 
after death reports would suggest it does persist for a time and the questions 
regarding restart of hot cats in the fall begs the question if the sealed 
reactor is allowing these fractional molecules to hibernate in the reflowed 
lattice without run away reactions.


From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 6:08 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

More...

We were all amazed that the fine nano surface features on the nickel particles 
could ever be preserved at reactor operating temperatures above the temperature 
that these nano features were expected to deteriorate.

But maybe these tubercles serve a function at relatively low temperatures, then 
as the reaction takes hold, the tubercles are mostly distorted and destroyed. 
But the function that these tubercles are meant to serve have been put in place 
and are independent once established and self reinforcing.

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Axil Axil 
janap...@gmail.commailto:janap...@gmail.com wrote:

The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel 
micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at startup 
just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.

But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of the 
nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction was 
gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were being 
degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to rethink 
his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the nickel particles 
showed limited transmutation.

The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical 
preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly 
without a BANG.

Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by 
maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.

No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel particles 
can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these particles 
become ineffective?

[Vo]:Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[hohlr...@gmail.com]

Hence the likelihood that the excess energy results from f/H.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Fartphone

- Reply message -
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?
Date: Sun, Mar 15, 2015 1:36 PM

I expect that sodium or potassium will produce the LENR reaction at lower 
temperatures.

Re: [Vo]:Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Axil Axil]

For your convenience, I repeat the post I submitted to Peter's Blog as
follows:

I have always thought that R. Mills has succumbed to a simplified
imaginative misinterpretation of his experimental data. When it comes to
understanding what is going on with electrons, imagination at these small
dimensions is oftentimes used to construct a model of reality that is not
correct. Because of the limitations of our senses we have no other
alternative: our minds eye must suffice.

At nano dimensions, things that look like atoms are not really atoms, Free
electrons confined in a small volume look and behave like electrons in
orbit around atoms, but these electrons are really only artificial atoms
with no nucleus what so ever.

The quantum dot is an example. A number of electrons confined in a quantum
well look and behave like they were orbiting a nucleus, but inside that
well there is only electrons. The compounds that produce quantum dots exert
force on the collection of electrons to keep them confined that mimic the
fores that the nucleus uses to confine electrons in their orbits.

Certain chemical compounds can readily form nano particles. The structure
of these quantum particle aggregates and there reflective surfaces of their
internal structures can both constrain electrons and light as well as form
an irregular reflecting plane where light and electrons are bent
alternatively by interference and amplification to form a circular path
where interference exactly counteracts non linear amplification to force
the electrons and light to follow a circular path inside a small volume of
space. These electrons form vortexes and their orbits around the vortex are
quantized. A energy is pumped into these electrons their orbits around the
vortex shrink in size. The electrons that orbit around the vortex tend to
take on the same energy and annular momentum and a soliton is thus formed.

This strange form of EMF is a boson and is not constrained by the Pauli
exclusion principle. The annular momentum of this light and electron hybrid
or SPP is an exact fraction of the wavelength of the SPP. As energy is
pumped into this nano volume, the annular momentum of the SPP goes up in
quantum steps. 2, 3, 4... When this vortex of pure EMF finally fails, it
gives off its accumulated power as photons of black light in the extreme
ultraviolet.

The intense ultraviolet light of sonoluminescence is formed in this way
when nanoparticles of water form a vortex.

I believe that the experimental evidence of this quantum well type of
mechanism is what R. Mills is misinterpreting as a hydrino. But the
artificial atom so formed has no nucleus to produce the EMF annular
momentum that Mills sees in his experiments.

The big difference between the hydrino and the SPP is that the SPP is
accepted and studied by science. I also believe that this water based nano
particle behavior is what Joe Papp used in his first 1966 version of the
Papp engine.

From this misinterpretation of these goings on in subatomic reality, R,
Mills has created his own world that exists only in his imagination.

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 2:13 PM, hohlr...@gmail.com hohlr...@gmail.com
wrote:

  Hence the likelihood that the excess energy results from f/H.

 Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Fartphone

 - Reply message -
 From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?
 Date: Sun, Mar 15, 2015 1:36 PM

 I expect that sodium or potassium will produce the LENR reaction at lower
 temperatures.

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[David Roberson]

Observations associates with the Hotcat will likely not be the same as seen in 
the normal ECAT.  We are spending far too much energy with Hotcat concerns when 
the other system is the one that has the most promise and the one Rossi is 
working on mainly.  He is happy that everyone is diverted leaving him the lower 
temperature devices to his self.

It is too bad that we do not have a clue as to how to get one of these systems 
to work at the lower temperature where it would be much easier to measure and 
less stressful on materials.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Mar 14, 2015 5:56 pm
Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?


 
  
The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel 
micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at startup 
just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.
  
But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of the 
nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction was 
gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were being 
degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to rethink 
his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the nickel particles 
showed limited transmutation.
  
The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical 
preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly 
without a BANG.
  
Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by 
maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.
  
No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel particles 
can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these particles 
become ineffective?
 
 

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[David Roberson]

I certainly hope that is true Axil.  We need to operate these devices at an 
intermediate temperature between the boiling point of water and the Hotcat 
temperatures that we are currently seeing.

Just imagine how much easier it would be on the fuel and mechanical structure 
when operation is achieved at a lower temperature.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Mar 15, 2015 1:36 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?


 
I expect that sodium or potassium will produce the LENR reaction at lower 
temperatures. The B. Ahern test being run today will show that the reaction 
will start at a lower temperature as opposed to lithium.  
 
  
  
On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:30 PM, David Robersondlrober...@aol.com wrote:  
 
   
Observations associates with the Hotcat will likely not be the same as seen 
in the normal ECAT.  We are spending far too much energy with Hotcat concerns 
when the other system is the one that has the most promise and the one Rossi is 
working on mainly.  He is happy that everyone is diverted leaving him the lower 
temperature devices to his self.
 
 It is too bad that we do not have a clue as to how to get one of these systems 
to work at the lower temperature where it would be much easier to measure and 
less stressful on materials.
 
 Dave
  
  

 


 


 


-Original Message-
 From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sat, Mar 14, 2015 5:56 pm
 Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?
 
 
  
   
The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel 
micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at startup 
just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.  
   
But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of the 
nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction was 
gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were being 
degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to rethink 
his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the nickel particles 
showed limited transmutation.  
   
The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical 
preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly 
without a BANG.  
   
Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by 
maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.  
   
No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel particles 
can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these particles 
become ineffective?  
  
 

   
 
   
  
  
 
 

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Axil Axil]

I expect that sodium or potassium will produce the LENR reaction at lower
temperatures. The B. Ahern test being run today will show that the reaction
will start at a lower temperature as opposed to lithium.

On Sun, Mar 15, 2015 at 1:30 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:

 Observations associates with the Hotcat will likely not be the same as
 seen in the normal ECAT.  We are spending far too much energy with Hotcat
 concerns when the other system is the one that has the most promise and the
 one Rossi is working on mainly.  He is happy that everyone is diverted
 leaving him the lower temperature devices to his self.

 It is too bad that we do not have a clue as to how to get one of these
 systems to work at the lower temperature where it would be much easier to
 measure and less stressful on materials.

 Dave



  -Original Message-
 From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
 To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Sent: Sat, Mar 14, 2015 5:56 pm
 Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

  The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the
 nickel micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required
 at startup just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.
 But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of
 the nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction
 was gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were
 being degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to
 rethink his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the
 nickel particles showed limited transmutation.
 The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical
 preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly
 without a BANG.
 Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by
 maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.
 No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel
 particles can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these
 particles become ineffective?

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Axil Axil]

Hank Mills
October 8th, 2014 at 4:32 PM
There are individuals saying that after the test the fuel had been melted –
according to the electron microscope images – and the reactor would not
have been capable of being restarted because the reaction sites would have
been destroyed. Would the reactor have been capable of being restarted?

Andrea Rossi
YES

Levi Strauss
February 7th, 2012 at 5:28 PM
If using the Ecat for a heat source, can the Ecat be turned off for summer
and then restarted in the fall, or once shut down, will a new cartridge
have to be installed?

Andrea Rossi
Can shut off and restart when you want, no substitution is necessary

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel
 micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at
 startup just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.

 But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of
 the nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction
 was gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were
 being degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to
 rethink his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the
 nickel particles showed limited transmutation.

 The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical
 preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly
 without a BANG.

 Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by
 maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.

 No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel
 particles can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these
 particles become ineffective?

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Axil Axil]

More...

We were all amazed that the fine nano surface features on the nickel
particles could ever be preserved at reactor operating temperatures above
the temperature that these nano features were expected to deteriorate.

But maybe these tubercles serve a function at relatively low temperatures,
then as the reaction takes hold, the tubercles are mostly distorted and
destroyed. But the function that these tubercles are meant to serve have
been put in place and are independent once established and self
reinforcing.

On Sat, Mar 14, 2015 at 5:55 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel
 micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at
 startup just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.

 But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of
 the nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction
 was gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were
 being degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to
 rethink his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the
 nickel particles showed limited transmutation.

 The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical
 preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly
 without a BANG.

 Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by
 maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.

 No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel
 particles can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these
 particles become ineffective?

Re: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?

[Bob Cook]

One of the test run by Focardi indicated that the Ni unloads its H as the 
system cools.  It may be do to phase changes that force the H out of the nickel 
lattice as cooling occurs. Eliminating such changes may allow the reaction to 
continue with H remaining in the lattice and without a second loading 
necessary.  The phase changes may also be controlled by magnetic fields, and 
maintaining the necessary field may be important for a reliable, continuous 
operation.  The magnetic field may be a way of controlling the H available for 
the LENR to take place, as well as, keeping it concentration low enough to 
prevent a bang. 

Bob
  - Original Message - 
  From: Axil Axil 
  To: vortex-l 
  Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2015 2:55 PM
  Subject: [Vo]:What did Rossi learn from the Lagano test?


  The Lagano test may have revealed to Rossi that the function of the nickel 
micro-particles are transitory. These particles may only be required at startup 
just to get the LENR reaction going without producing the BANG.

  But the Lagano testers ran the reactor very hot, and many if not most of the 
nickel particles melted. But after 32 days of operation, the reaction was 
gaining in effectiveness and vigor even as the nickel particles were being 
degraded by the high heat. This revelation may have allowed Rossi to rethink 
his fuel mix strategy. Rossi may have been surprised that the nickel particles 
showed limited transmutation.

  The nickel particles may only be required to setup a quantum mechanical 
preconditions that allows the LENR reaction to begin gradually and smoothly 
without a BANG.

  Once startup is achieved, the LENR reaction precedes as a fire would by 
maintaining the conditions necessary for its continuing progression.

  No LENR reaction has yet to be restarted. Could it be that the nickel 
particles can only be used once at the initial startup. And once used these 
particles become ineffective?

RE: [Vo]:What every happened to these guys?

[Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson]

 It should generate power based on the sheer beauty alone.

It does, it does. The power of imagination.

Unfortunately, such power cannot be metered through transmission lines.

Perhaps that's a good thing.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
svjart.orionworks.com
zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:What every happened to these guys?

[Blaze Spinnaker]

It should generate power based on the sheer beauty alone.

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 5:26 PM, MJ feli...@gmail.com wrote:


 http://www.rarenergia.com.br/

 Mark



 On 18-Feb-15 22:46, Blaze Spinnaker wrote:

 https://hackadaycom.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/gravgenrorf.jpg?w=800

 It was so big and fancy.  I thought it had to be real.

Re: [Vo]:What every happened to these guys?

[MJ]

http://www.rarenergia.com.br/

Mark


On 18-Feb-15 22:46, Blaze Spinnaker wrote:

https://hackadaycom.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/gravgenrorf.jpg?w=800

It was so big and fancy.  I thought it had to be real.

RE: [Vo]:what is needed to give rise to visible Cherenkov radiation?

[Jones Beene]

 

The holding tank for the fuel rods is filled with borated water. The 
neutron-boron reaction produces fast ions, which thermalize by knocking 
electrons free from water molecules – as does the other isotope decay reactions 
from the rods. Electrons of about 200-300 keV cause the glow – when they 
further thermalize.

 

This can happen in air - as well as water – and with the same eerie blue glow. 
We know the mechanism fairly well, since Cherenkov-like radiation will be 
generated in an electron microscope, or cyclotron, or other beam line in air. 
Here is a photo of the blue glow.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/Cyclotron_with_glowing_beam.jpg/300px-Cyclotron_with_glowing_beam.jpg

  

 

From: Bob Cook 

 

The Cherenkov radiation I have seen is primarily blue.   It is associated with 
the high energy particles emitted from spent fuel in a water storage pool and I 
think is associated with the slowing down of the particles in water, as you 
suggest.  I also think it is associated with the neutrons that come from the 
decay of fission products.  The charged particles are slowed down in a short 
distance.  The neutrons cause the bluish glow at a distance from the source.  
This may also be due to scattering of the  blue light which is not absorbed 
like red in the water.   

 

I would agree that the EM radiation that is caused by either charged particles 
or neutrons is broad band as you suggest.

 

Bob

 

Sent from Windows Mail

 

From: Eric Walker mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com 
Sent: ‎Saturday‎, ‎February‎ ‎7‎, ‎2015 ‎9‎:‎20‎ ‎PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com

 

On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:49 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

 

I have a different question altogether. How does one distinguish between
Cherenkov radiation and light emitted by recombining ion - electron pairs?
(Where fast particles are responsible for creating the pairs.)

 

I believe Cherenkov radiation is broadband.  I read today that it is 
distinguishable, nonetheless, from bremsstrahlung.  In the case of 
bremsstrahlung you need noticeable acceleration (e.g., a bending motion or a 
collision), whereas Cherenkov radiation arises from constructive interference 
when a charged particle exceeds the phase velocity of light in a medium.  So 
you can distinguish the two in the case of a relativistic heavy ion.  In that 
case the trajectory of the ion will be straight (so no bremsstrahlung) but it 
will give rise to Cherenkov radiation.

 

My understanding is that Cherenkov radiation is broadband because the fast 
particle slowly decelerates, leading the frequency at which constructive 
interference to change over time.

 

Please carefully vet anything I have said here.

 

Eric

 

Re: [Vo]:what is needed to give rise to visible Cherenkov radiation?

[Bob Cook]

Eric--


The Cherenkov radiation I have seen is primarily blue.   It is associated with 
the high energy particles emitted from spent fuel in a water storage pool and I 
think is associated with the slowing down of the particles in water, as you 
suggest.  I also think it is associated with the neutrons that come from the 
decay of fission products.  The charged particles are slowed down in a short 
distance.  The neutrons cause the bluish glow at a distance from the source.  
This may also be due to scattering of the  blue light which is not absorbed 
like red in the water.   


I would agree that the EM radiation that is caused by either charged particles 
or neutrons is broad band as you suggest.


Bob






Sent from Windows Mail





From: Eric Walker
Sent: ‎Saturday‎, ‎February‎ ‎7‎, ‎2015 ‎9‎:‎20‎ ‎PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com







On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:49 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:



I have a different question altogether. How does one distinguish between
Cherenkov radiation and light emitted by recombining ion - electron pairs?
(Where fast particles are responsible for creating the pairs.)




I believe Cherenkov radiation is broadband.  I read today that it is 
distinguishable, nonetheless, from bremsstrahlung.  In the case of 
bremsstrahlung you need noticeable acceleration (e.g., a bending motion or a 
collision), whereas Cherenkov radiation arises from constructive interference 
when a charged particle exceeds the phase velocity of light in a medium.  So 
you can distinguish the two in the case of a relativistic heavy ion.  In that 
case the trajectory of the ion will be straight (so no bremsstrahlung) but it 
will give rise to Cherenkov radiation.




My understanding is that Cherenkov radiation is broadband because the fast 
particle slowly decelerates, leading the frequency at which constructive 
interference to change over time.




Please carefully vet anything I have said here.




Eric

Re: [Vo]:what is needed to give rise to visible Cherenkov radiation?

[Eric Walker]

On Sat, Feb 7, 2015 at 1:49 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:

I have a different question altogether. How does one distinguish between
 Cherenkov radiation and light emitted by recombining ion - electron pairs?
 (Where fast particles are responsible for creating the pairs.)


I believe Cherenkov radiation is broadband.  I read today that it is
distinguishable, nonetheless, from bremsstrahlung.  In the case
of bremsstrahlung you need noticeable acceleration (e.g., a bending motion
or a collision), whereas Cherenkov radiation arises from constructive
interference when a charged particle exceeds the phase velocity of light in
a medium.  So you can distinguish the two in the case of a relativistic
heavy ion.  In that case the trajectory of the ion will be straight (so no
bremsstrahlung) but it will give rise to Cherenkov radiation.

My understanding is that Cherenkov radiation is broadband because the fast
particle slowly decelerates, leading the frequency at which constructive
interference to change over time.

Please carefully vet anything I have said here.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:what is needed to give rise to visible Cherenkov radiation?

[mixent]

In reply to  Eric Walker's message of Sat, 7 Feb 2015 10:12:40 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

I have a different question altogether. How does one distinguish between
Cherenkov radiation and light emitted by recombining ion - electron pairs?
(Where fast particles are responsible for creating the pairs.)

Hi,

What is the flux of fast electrons needed to create the kind of visible
Cherenkov radiation seen in pool-type fission reactors?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f2/Advanced_Test_Reactor.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6b/Cerenkov_Effect.jpg

Is it a relatively small amount of activity that will accomplish what is
seen in these images, or is a large amount of activity required?   I assume
it is possible to characterize the flux that will lead to visible Cherenkov
radiation in terms along the lines of 10e9 electrons per cm^2 per second.

What is the typical energy of the beta particles observed in these images?
My understanding is that the betas go back to the decay of fission
intermediate products.  Is it in the MeV range, or the keV range, or
possibly even lower?

Eric
Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html

Re: [Vo]:what is bluestar?

[Terry Blanton]

The mysterious partner:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/23/us-japan-panasonic-idUSBREA4M0DS20140523

On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
 http://www.cnet.com/news/teslas-bluestar-to-be-all-electric-family-car/

 On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:58 PM,  fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
 http://pro.moneymappress.com/NVXTESLAMMP60NEW/PNVXQ520/?iris=218598h=true

Re: [Vo]:what is bluestar?

[fznidarsic]

Thanks Terry.



-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Jul 5, 2014 3:34 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:what is bluestar?


The mysterious partner:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/23/us-japan-panasonic-idUSBREA4M0DS20140523

On Sat, Jul 5, 2014 at 12:24 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
 http://www.cnet.com/news/teslas-bluestar-to-be-all-electric-family-car/

 On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:58 PM,  fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
 http://pro.moneymappress.com/NVXTESLAMMP60NEW/PNVXQ520/?iris=218598h=true


 

Re: [Vo]:what is bluestar?

[Terry Blanton]

http://www.cnet.com/news/teslas-bluestar-to-be-all-electric-family-car/

On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 10:58 PM,  fznidar...@aol.com wrote:
 http://pro.moneymappress.com/NVXTESLAMMP60NEW/PNVXQ520/?iris=218598h=true

Re: [Vo]:what would our much regretted friends say about CF today?

[Peter Gluck]

My essay is basically about problem solving.It is too pragmatical
to call the attention of the judges but it fullfills many of the
requirements
of the contest and parts of its were already cited on the Web.
Peter


On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:


 I think Jed's essay is better written.  Mine was basically one paragraph,
 very simple, very practical, with followup q  a.  So if I've done any
 increasing of chances in the last few days, it was increasing chances for
 Jed to win it.


 If you await for facts and certainties, making predictions becomes easy,
 doesn't it?




 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear Kevin,

 I am speaking about some of my very best CF friends whom I met
 in real life too, not only on the Net and who had died young.
 How would they judge the situation today?

 I am making my own  predictions, however I am waiting for facts and
 certainties

 I think your chances to win a prize with your Essay at FQXI have increased
 during the last days

 Peter




 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Peter:

 I do not understand what you are asking.  What is a much regretted
 friend?  If it's predictions you're after, look at these 2 threads:

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93935.html

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg93531.html

 How does  hope... only come from outside classic CF.



 Please elaborate with an emphasis on clarity.






 On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 This is an appeal to my readers- can you help me in analyzing
 and predicting what will happen to/in/with our Field. Just now, hope
 comes only from outside classic CF.
 This time I hope to have many answers from you, I dare to think that
 you still CARE.

 Peter

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





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





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

Re: [Vo]:what would our much regretted friends say about CF today?

[Kevin O'Malley]

My essay was about solving problems as well, and it was extremely
pragmatical.


On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 My essay is basically about problem solving.It is too pragmatical
 to call the attention of the judges but it fullfills many of the
 requirements
 of the contest and parts of its were already cited on the Web.
 Peter


 On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
 wrote:


 I think Jed's essay is better written.  Mine was basically one paragraph,
 very simple, very practical, with followup q  a.  So if I've done any
 increasing of chances in the last few days, it was increasing chances for
 Jed to win it.


 If you await for facts and certainties, making predictions becomes easy,
 doesn't it?




 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Dear Kevin,

 I am speaking about some of my very best CF friends whom I met
 in real life too, not only on the Net and who had died young.
 How would they judge the situation today?

 I am making my own  predictions, however I am waiting for facts and
 certainties

 I think your chances to win a prize with your Essay at FQXI have
 increased
 during the last days

 Peter




 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Peter:

 I do not understand what you are asking.  What is a much regretted
 friend?  If it's predictions you're after, look at these 2 threads:

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93935.html

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg93531.html

 How does  hope... only come from outside classic CF.




 Please elaborate with an emphasis on clarity.






 On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 This is an appeal to my readers- can you help me in analyzing
 and predicting what will happen to/in/with our Field. Just now, hope
 comes only from outside classic CF.
 This time I hope to have many answers from you, I dare to think that
 you still CARE.

 Peter

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





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





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

Re: [Vo]:what would our much regretted friends say about CF today?

[Peter Gluck]

Dear Kevin,

I am speaking about some of my very best CF friends whom I met
in real life too, not only on the Net and who had died young.
How would they judge the situation today?

I am making my own  predictions, however I am waiting for facts and
certainties

I think your chances to win a prize with your Essay at FQXI have increased
during the last days

Peter




On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com wrote:

 Peter:

 I do not understand what you are asking.  What is a much regretted
 friend?  If it's predictions you're after, look at these 2 threads:

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93935.html

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg93531.html

 How does  hope... only come from outside classic CF.

 Please elaborate with an emphasis on clarity.






 On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 This is an appeal to my readers- can you help me in analyzing
 and predicting what will happen to/in/with our Field. Just now, hope
 comes only from outside classic CF.
 This time I hope to have many answers from you, I dare to think that you
 still CARE.

 Peter

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





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

Re: [Vo]:what would our much regretted friends say about CF today?

[Kevin O'Malley]

I think Jed's essay is better written.  Mine was basically one paragraph,
very simple, very practical, with followup q  a.  So if I've done any
increasing of chances in the last few days, it was increasing chances for
Jed to win it.


If you await for facts and certainties, making predictions becomes easy,
doesn't it?




On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear Kevin,

 I am speaking about some of my very best CF friends whom I met
 in real life too, not only on the Net and who had died young.
 How would they judge the situation today?

 I am making my own  predictions, however I am waiting for facts and
 certainties

 I think your chances to win a prize with your Essay at FQXI have increased
 during the last days

 Peter




 On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Kevin O'Malley kevmol...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Peter:

 I do not understand what you are asking.  What is a much regretted
 friend?  If it's predictions you're after, look at these 2 threads:

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93935.html

 http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg93531.html

 How does  hope... only come from outside classic CF.


 Please elaborate with an emphasis on clarity.






 On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 This is an appeal to my readers- can you help me in analyzing
 and predicting what will happen to/in/with our Field. Just now, hope
 comes only from outside classic CF.
 This time I hope to have many answers from you, I dare to think that you
 still CARE.

 Peter

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





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

Re: [Vo]:what would our much regretted friends say about CF today?

[Kevin O'Malley]

Peter:

I do not understand what you are asking.  What is a much regretted
friend?  If it's predictions you're after, look at these 2 threads:

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg93935.html

http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/msg93531.html

How does  hope... only come from outside classic CF.

Please elaborate with an emphasis on clarity.






On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 3:08 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote:

 This is an appeal to my readers- can you help me in analyzing
 and predicting what will happen to/in/with our Field. Just now, hope
 comes only from outside classic CF.
 This time I hope to have many answers from you, I dare to think that you
 still CARE.

 Peter

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

Re: [Vo]:What Dr. Mills has been doing lately.

[Lennart Thornros]

I looked on the videos. Does not say much except the last one where BLP
accept an award for being a potentially explosive company. The sparks seems
fun but the award is impressive. They are doing / having contact with the
real world.

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros

www.StrategicLeadershipSac.com
lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899
6140 Horseshoe Bar Road Suite G, Loomis CA 95650

“Productivity is never an accident. It is always the result of a commitment
to excellence, intelligent planning, and focused effort.” PJM


On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

  Lately, that irascible mad scientist we know as Dr. Mills, over at BLP,
 has been plugging his company's latest RD achievements which, of course,
 any inventor worth his CIHT should do. See:



 http://www.blacklightpower.com/whats-new/



 In regards to the latest demonstration where we see (behind a protective
 shield) a lot of impressive spark-like explosions being generated from a
 set-up consisting of an auger dropping small pellets of Dr. Mill's magic
 energy potion between two metal wheels which compresses the mixture,
 resulting in a series of ignitions, Mills claimed what we are witnessing
 is:



  H2O to H2(1/4) + 1/2O2 is more energetic than a high explosive.

  It is hard to imagine, but so many transformational technologies, now
 taken for granted,

   were unexpected.




 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/messages/2194



 Dr. Mills also stated:



  Thanks!  This is an open-air system.  We have run closed systems under
 argon

  and performed regeneration on the bench multiple times by re-hydration
 only.

  The fuel actually gets better since the explosion forms a very fine
 nano-powder

  that is more reactive on repeat detonation.  We are expanding the
 engineering

  team and will kick off an engineering program for automated regeneration
 next

  week.  We are working with photovoltaic manufacturers on delivery a
 concentrating

  PV converter package.




 https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SocietyforClassicalPhysics/conversations/messages/2190





 Comments?



 Regards,

 Steven Vincent Johnson

 svjart.orionworks.com

Re: [Vo]:What if we live in a simulated reality?

[Blaze Spinnaker]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/20/does-the-big-bang-breakthrough-offer-proof-of-god/?hpt=hp_t4

It's sort of like minecraft and the simulator was seeded with the random
number 42.


On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:

  *From:* Blaze Spinnaker




 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/is-the-universe-a-simulation.html?_r=0



 This is a shallow rehash analysis in a way, at least for those of us who
 want to see further developments and insight in the Sim field, and
 considering the pedigree of Frenkel. He could have dug a bit deeper IMO.



 Forget a Universal sim and look at the more probable case. For instance,
 one twist which came up recently is the possibility that some, or many,
 individuals, can be living lives which are caught in their own personal
 neural simulation, but within the framework of a normal reality. This
 could be a natural thing - like karma, not requiring AI and so on. Or there
 could be minimal supervision. Think about the Bruce Willis character in the
 Shyamalan film Sixth Sense... you remember... the kick in the gut when the
 kid sez I see dead people and you realize he's talking about you.



 Another twist in the Sim vs Real dichotomy is highlighted in the
 neglected cult TV series Doll house (episode 10) where Echo, the Active
 (which is a euphemism for occasional psychic-prostitute, and more), becomes
 the vehicle for the potential immortality of a recently deceased, very
 wealthy client. This happenstance is fiction for now but actually a
 near-term technological reality - and it brings into focus the issue of
 wealth and mortality-morality in a most unusual way.



 Can we buy immortality - even if it is a Sim? In fact, isn't the
 sequential Sim preferable in many ways? Heck, we get tired of one beautiful
 body and the next one costs only a few hundred million more, no problem.
 Everyone is happy. Wealth is redistributed. What's wrong with this picture?

RE: [Vo]:What do . . .

[Jones Beene]

-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton 

BLP and Tesla Motors have in common?


Hmmm... I was looking for a Board member in common. Does not seem to be the
case. What I found was that three of BLP's prestigious former Board members,
including Michael Jordan, former CEO of Westinghouse, seem to have jumped
ship... haven't checked to see if their departure was of a more permanent
nature, so to speak...

Re: [Vo]:What do . . .

[Terry Blanton]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
 Hmmm... I was looking for a Board member in common.

A Tesla has a great grid leveling device on board.  A power source,
constant or transient, could make for a autonomous vehicle.

Of course, it's a fruity idea, eh?

Re: [Vo]:What do . . .

[Terry Blanton]

On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
 Hmmm... I was looking for a Board member in common.

 A Tesla has a great grid leveling device on board.  A power source,
 constant or transient, could make for a autonomous vehicle.

 Of course, it's a fruity idea, eh?

Don't need no driver, don't need no plugs, jes get in an go.

Re: [Vo]:What if we live in a simulated reality?

[Blaze Spinnaker]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/is-the-universe-a-simulation.html?_r=0

Our good friends bostrom, beane and savage are referenced.


On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 1:56 AM, Blaze Spinnaker
blazespinna...@gmail.comwrote:


 http://metaversetribune.com/2011/08/22/rosedale-makes-case-for-holographic-universe/

 Rosedale was the founder of SecondLife.  I frequently worked with the
 physics engine in SL and I can confirm the marble / cup QM tunneling
 analogy.

 Some choice quotes:

- Basically if you leave a marble in a cup in Second Life, and you
leave all night and you come back, what happens? The marble is gone.
- If there was a hidden dimension [Holographic Principle - universe
as 2 dimensions] wrapped around our universe that contained all the data
for the atoms in our world, quantum entanglement starts to make more 
 sense.
- The general agreement in quantum mechanics is that subatomic
particles like photons behave like waves until looked at by a conscious
observer .. Second Life, too, does not render until looked at by a
conscious observer, but the data always remains in that hidden dimension
outside the 3D virtual space. Just something to think about.




 On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 2:08 PM, Blaze Spinnaker blazespinna...@gmail.com
  wrote:


 http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/geekquinox/weird-science-weekly-may-living-holographic-projection-010534111.html

 Cool video -  the idea that reality is just a projected hologram from a 2
 dimensional surface at the boundaries of space.


 On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 11:18 AM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.comwrote:

 It is also possible the universe is just a dream, or a shared
 hallucination.

 Maybe all our memories are manufactured and we have not been on this
 earth and list for x number of years, we may only have implanted memories
 and started 'fresh' this morning.

 Many far out and improbable things can be argued as possible, this sim
 argument is no different.

 I am not going to take any of these ideas seriously since none of them
 agree with the incredible detail and broadness of the world.

 It only distracts from understanding the world we are in.

 Now we could ask if consciousness comes from dis dimension, at least we
 perceive consciousness to exist.  As far as existential questions go that
 one makes sense.

 John


 On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 4:34 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.netwrote:


 From: Eric Walker

 Of course, the gamers are risking exposure now that
 A.I.
 is becoming
 closer to reality. A.I. may have developed a life
 (reality)
 of its own which
 clears up everything, and possibly within a few decades.

 I think whether the universe is a simulation is
 epistemologically inaccessible, unless things were to start to get
 really
 weird.

 The weirdness could easily be that there is both a real universe and
 many
 ongoing simulations, and especially simulations within simulations.
 Even if
 you find the tell at one level, you may only advance to the next Sim !

 Whether the individual (us, for instance) can ever figure out multiple
 layering depends on many factors but could easily be impossible, as you
 say
 - since any the Sim can have a automatic mechanism for the untimely
 demise
 of a player who is digging too deep. Think Philip K. Dick.

 OTOH a few Sims, and maybe our own, could be structured as some kind of
 test
 the aim of which is to see how long it takes the subjects of the
 experiment
 (i.e. the meat) to figure out that they are locked into a Sim.

 The untimely demise mechanism of a Sim is one reason why a large group
 effort would be preferable :-)

 At least the tell would then be the improbability of the disaster -
 such
 as that most of the Vortex News Group did not survive Thanksgiving due...
 due
 to... err... tainted turkey?

 Remember: the red pill is in the cranberries!

 Actually the Matrix films are an example of early house-of-mirrors
 layering
 since any movie is already a Sim on one level.

RE: [Vo]:What if we live in a simulated reality?

[Jones Beene]

From: Blaze Spinnaker 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/is-the-universe-a-simulatio
n.html?_r=0

 

This is a shallow rehash analysis in a way, at least for those of us who
want to see further developments and insight in the Sim field, and
considering the pedigree of Frenkel. He could have dug a bit deeper IMO.

 

Forget a Universal sim and look at the more probable case. For instance,
one twist which came up recently is the possibility that some, or many,
individuals, can be living lives which are caught in their own personal
neural simulation, but within the framework of a normal reality. This
could be a natural thing - like karma, not requiring AI and so on. Or there
could be minimal supervision. Think about the Bruce Willis character in the
Shyamalan film Sixth Sense. you remember. the kick in the gut when the kid
sez I see dead people and you realize he's talking about you.

 

Another twist in the Sim vs Real dichotomy is highlighted in the neglected
cult TV series Doll house (episode 10) where Echo, the Active (which is
a euphemism for occasional psychic-prostitute, and more), becomes the
vehicle for the potential immortality of a recently deceased, very wealthy
client. This happenstance is fiction for now but actually a near-term
technological reality - and it brings into focus the issue of wealth and
mortality-morality in a most unusual way.

 

Can we buy immortality - even if it is a Sim? In fact, isn't the sequential
Sim preferable in many ways? Heck, we get tired of one beautiful body and
the next one costs only a few hundred million more, no problem. Everyone is
happy. Wealth is redistributed. What's wrong with this picture?

 

Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.

[Foks0904 .]

Wasn't this sort of speculation answered by David Nagel at ICCF-18? Pretty
sure his opinion was that large-scale transmutation plants/projects were
impractical and unlikely based on what we know about transmutation rates at
this time. Not saying your wrong, just saying this idea is still in the
realm of hyper speculative thought.

Regards,
John

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  In the intermediate term, when the nuclear mechanisms of cold fusion are
 discovered and eventually mastered, the precision transmutation of elements
 on demand will be as valuable as or more valuable than the production of
 energy from cold fusion.



 The common elements on the earth surface can be converted into the rarest:
 oxygen and silicon could be transmuted into gold, ruthenium, palladium,
 rhenium, iridium, rhodium, and osmium.



 However in densely populated cities, recycling of waste streams may make
 it advantageous to convert those waste streams into new products.



 Cool fusion technology will enable other allied technologies which will
 result in a major impact on society.  When a cold fusion transmutation
 system is integrated with computer driven 3D printer product production,
 customized products can be manufactured on a one off basis using any manor
 of element input as a feedstock.



 Without regard for energy cost or consumption, the cold fusion
 transmutation system will convert each atom of the input feedstock element
 into the elements that supports the production of the product to be
 produced by the 3D printer.



 Such product production technology will have far reaching impact on the
 society that will evolve around it. Employment may go the way of the
 medieval serfdom feudalism society during the Middle Ages as a way of
 organizing society.



 The motivation to develop this 3D technology will be irresistible since it
 will be the most efficient means of product production yet devised and
 highly efficient at capital utilization; it will be the ultimate and an end
 point in robotic product production as well as waste recycling.

Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.

[Axil Axil]

If matter can be transmuted under the control of electromagnetic
manipulation; this is highly likely, then ways to produce that EMF and
properly direct it will eventually be formulated to affect the nucleus.
When we know how a physical mechanism works in detail, it can be engineers
to provide a desired result.


On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Wasn't this sort of speculation answered by David Nagel at ICCF-18? Pretty
 sure his opinion was that large-scale transmutation plants/projects were
 impractical and unlikely based on what we know about transmutation rates at
 this time. Not saying your wrong, just saying this idea is still in the
 realm of hyper speculative thought.

 Regards,
 John

 On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  In the intermediate term, when the nuclear mechanisms of cold fusion
 are discovered and eventually mastered, the precision transmutation of
 elements on demand will be as valuable as or more valuable than the
 production of energy from cold fusion.



 The common elements on the earth surface can be converted into the
 rarest: oxygen and silicon could be transmuted into gold, ruthenium,
 palladium, rhenium, iridium, rhodium, and osmium.



 However in densely populated cities, recycling of waste streams may make
 it advantageous to convert those waste streams into new products.



 Cool fusion technology will enable other allied technologies which will
 result in a major impact on society.  When a cold fusion transmutation
 system is integrated with computer driven 3D printer product production,
 customized products can be manufactured on a one off basis using any manor
 of element input as a feedstock.



 Without regard for energy cost or consumption, the cold fusion
 transmutation system will convert each atom of the input feedstock element
 into the elements that supports the production of the product to be
 produced by the 3D printer.



 Such product production technology will have far reaching impact on the
 society that will evolve around it. Employment may go the way of the
 medieval serfdom feudalism society during the Middle Ages as a way of
 organizing society.



 The motivation to develop this 3D technology will be irresistible since
 it will be the most efficient means of product production yet devised and
 highly efficient at capital utilization; it will be the ultimate and an end
 point in robotic product production as well as waste recycling.

Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.

[Foks0904 .]

If and only if the reaction rates are commensurate with such an
undertaking. Nagel's guess is currently No. Time will tell however.

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 If matter can be transmuted under the control of electromagnetic
 manipulation; this is highly likely, then ways to produce that EMF and
 properly direct it will eventually be formulated to affect the nucleus.
 When we know how a physical mechanism works in detail, it can be engineers
 to provide a desired result.


 On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Wasn't this sort of speculation answered by David Nagel at ICCF-18?
 Pretty sure his opinion was that large-scale transmutation plants/projects
 were impractical and unlikely based on what we know about transmutation
 rates at this time. Not saying your wrong, just saying this idea is still
 in the realm of hyper speculative thought.

 Regards,
 John

  On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  In the intermediate term, when the nuclear mechanisms of cold fusion
 are discovered and eventually mastered, the precision transmutation of
 elements on demand will be as valuable as or more valuable than the
 production of energy from cold fusion.



 The common elements on the earth surface can be converted into the
 rarest: oxygen and silicon could be transmuted into gold, ruthenium,
 palladium, rhenium, iridium, rhodium, and osmium.



 However in densely populated cities, recycling of waste streams may make
 it advantageous to convert those waste streams into new products.



 Cool fusion technology will enable other allied technologies which will
 result in a major impact on society.  When a cold fusion transmutation
 system is integrated with computer driven 3D printer product production,
 customized products can be manufactured on a one off basis using any manor
 of element input as a feedstock.



 Without regard for energy cost or consumption, the cold fusion
 transmutation system will convert each atom of the input feedstock element
 into the elements that supports the production of the product to be
 produced by the 3D printer.



 Such product production technology will have far reaching impact on the
 society that will evolve around it. Employment may go the way of the
 medieval serfdom feudalism society during the Middle Ages as a way of
 organizing society.



 The motivation to develop this 3D technology will be irresistible since
 it will be the most efficient means of product production yet devised and
 highly efficient at capital utilization; it will be the ultimate and an end
 point in robotic product production as well as waste recycling.

Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.

[Axil Axil]

The transmutation rates associated with LeClair's cavitation system is very
high. He plans to use cavitation to produce rare elements.

It all depends on the engineering and the system design. When there is the
will, there will always  be a way.


On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 If and only if the reaction rates are commensurate with such an
 undertaking. Nagel's guess is currently No. Time will tell however.


 On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

 If matter can be transmuted under the control of electromagnetic
 manipulation; this is highly likely, then ways to produce that EMF and
 properly direct it will eventually be formulated to affect the nucleus.
 When we know how a physical mechanism works in detail, it can be engineers
 to provide a desired result.


 On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

 Wasn't this sort of speculation answered by David Nagel at ICCF-18?
 Pretty sure his opinion was that large-scale transmutation plants/projects
 were impractical and unlikely based on what we know about transmutation
 rates at this time. Not saying your wrong, just saying this idea is still
 in the realm of hyper speculative thought.

 Regards,
 John

  On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

  In the intermediate term, when the nuclear mechanisms of cold fusion
 are discovered and eventually mastered, the precision transmutation of
 elements on demand will be as valuable as or more valuable than the
 production of energy from cold fusion.



 The common elements on the earth surface can be converted into the
 rarest: oxygen and silicon could be transmuted into gold, ruthenium,
 palladium, rhenium, iridium, rhodium, and osmium.



 However in densely populated cities, recycling of waste streams may
 make it advantageous to convert those waste streams into new products.



 Cool fusion technology will enable other allied technologies which will
 result in a major impact on society.  When a cold fusion transmutation
 system is integrated with computer driven 3D printer product production,
 customized products can be manufactured on a one off basis using any manor
 of element input as a feedstock.



 Without regard for energy cost or consumption, the cold fusion
 transmutation system will convert each atom of the input feedstock element
 into the elements that supports the production of the product to be
 produced by the 3D printer.



 Such product production technology will have far reaching impact on the
 society that will evolve around it. Employment may go the way of the
 medieval serfdom feudalism society during the Middle Ages as a way of
 organizing society.



 The motivation to develop this 3D technology will be irresistible since
 it will be the most efficient means of product production yet devised and
 highly efficient at capital utilization; it will be the ultimate and an end
 point in robotic product production as well as waste recycling.

Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.

[David Roberson]

What you say seems to be according to past experience.  Sometimes there is no 
good way, but it is too early to make a call on this one.

Dave

 

 

 

-Original Message-
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Jan 9, 2014 4:22 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:What the future will bring.



The transmutation rates associated with LeClair's cavitation system is very 
high. He plans to use cavitation to produce rare elements. 


It all depends on the engineering and the system design. When there is the 
will, there will always  be a way.




On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

If and only if the reaction rates are commensurate with such an undertaking. 
Nagel's guess is currently No. Time will tell however.



On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:

If matter can be transmuted under the control of electromagnetic manipulation; 
this is highly likely, then ways to produce that EMF and properly direct it 
will eventually be formulated to affect the nucleus. When we know how a 
physical mechanism works in detail, it can be engineers to provide a desired 
result.



On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Foks0904 . foks0...@gmail.com wrote:

Wasn't this sort of speculation answered by David Nagel at ICCF-18? Pretty sure 
his opinion was that large-scale transmutation plants/projects were impractical 
and unlikely based on what we know about transmutation rates at this time. Not 
saying your wrong, just saying this idea is still in the realm of hyper 
speculative thought.
 
Regards,
John



On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:


In the intermediate term, when the nuclear mechanisms of cold fusion are 
discovered and eventually mastered, the precision transmutation of elements on 
demand will be as valuable as or more valuable than the production of energy 
from cold fusion.
 
The common elements on the earth surface can be converted into the rarest: 
oxygen and silicon could be transmuted into gold, ruthenium, palladium, 
rhenium, iridium, rhodium, and osmium.
 
However in densely populated cities, recycling of waste streams may make it 
advantageous to convert those waste streams into new products. 
 
Cool fusion technology will enable other allied technologies which will result 
in a major impact on society.  When a cold fusion transmutation system is 
integrated with computer driven 3D printer product production, customized 
products can be manufactured on a one off basis using any manor of element 
input as a feedstock.
 
Without regard for energy cost or consumption, the cold fusion transmutation 
system will convert each atom of the input feedstock element into the elements 
that supports the production of the product to be produced by the 3D printer.
 
Such product production technology will have far reaching impact on the society 
that will evolve around it. Employment may go the way of the medieval serfdom 
feudalism society during the Middle Ages as a way of organizing society.
 
The motivation to develop this 3D technology will be irresistible since it will 
be the most efficient means of product production yet devised and highly 
efficient at capital utilization; it will be the ultimate and an end point in 
robotic product production as well as waste recycling.