On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:52 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
Nothing gets used; but, it gets cold somewhere. :-)
10^500 locations here:
https://www.simonsfoundation.org/features/science-news/is-nature-unnatural/
:-)
Then there's PAM Dirac to consider. Although, it could cause a
That would be me...
I posted it only a few days ago...
Tue 6/18/2013 12:29 AM
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 10:23 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Mark has blazed the path
In reply to David
Robin wrote:
Then the spectral lines of substances close to absolute zero should be
much sharper.
Papers on low temperature spectrometry?
Exactly, and a BEC would probably have the sharpest line...
but you would need some way to measure frequency with 1 in 10^15 accuracy.
Not possible... yet.
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 10:45 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
Typical separation distances within a lattice are on the order of 1
Angstrom. It
takes light 3E-19 seconds to travel this distance.
Typical nuclear reaction times are order 1E-23 seconds. I.e. 3 times
faster.
In short, long
Alan,
I guess I'm not making myself clear. There is no need for a DC bias of the
power input.
The wire trick (simply running a complete second circuit with both conductors
hidden in a single wire), uses only the normal A/C voltage supplied by the
mains.
It isn't the voltage that is rigged,
Jack Cole said:
Jack Cole said:
This is easily disproved. Look at the temperature output graph. How does
you notion of constant power instead of a 33% duty cycle explain the dips
as rises indicative of a 33% duty cycle in the output corresponding with
the measured power on cycles.
I'm not saying anything of
Actually let me improve these instructions.
I decided to test with other body parts (arms felt very little, a foot felt
something after a few seconds and some movement).
But then I retested with my hands trying not to feel, this lessened the
sensation a lot.
I found that the key to NOT feeling
The sequence you suggest is not observed!! Therefore, we must agree,
transmutation CAN NOT be the source of heat from an e-Cat.
Ed
On Jun 22, 2013, at 11:44 PM, Axil Axil wrote:
The transmutation model that I believe that the ash assays of LENR
reactors point to is a quark plasma model in
Your analysis requires fraud. There is no evidence of fraud, at best what you
have proposed is a remote possibility assuming the testers failed to closely
evaluate the wires.
Nothing close to something a reasonable person would conclude as the likely
event.
That's the problem with your
The other option that looks promising is for an entangled effect involving many
protons. These couplings are instantaneous according to what I have seen, in
which case the exact distance to a brother is not quite as important.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker
Eric, some theories, including Ron's, are so filled with arbitrary
ideas without any connection to what is known that even starting a
critique is difficult. The problem is made worse when the description
is second hand. Many statements made in the first paragraph have no
relationship to
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
Everything in LENR seems to begin with ground-state redundancy and end in
QM
tunneling.
Interesting that almost no one attributes the energy to the ZPF.
Roarty does this. And every so often, it is worth dredging up the RPF
hypothesis -
John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com wrote:
The wire trick (simply running a complete second circuit with both
conductors hidden in a single wire), uses only the normal A/C voltage
supplied by the mains.
A wire cannot be hidden. It is not invisible. It is a macroscopic object.
Anyone
Jones,
I believe most of the Sun's energy is expelled as ZPE making up our quantum
gravity field. It is decaying on the way to Earth. I believe Roarty is
correct. These energetic particles are in our jet streams and create our
weather. They pull a vacuum and condense water vapor in our
The freedom let to have access independently to the socket, the entry
cable, and the reactor exterior, let few possibility for fraud.
If a fraud is done, it should not be possible to detect it with the freedom
taht Rossi concede to the testers.
the coaxial hypothesis, is technically hard since
Transmutation has been observed as follows:
http://64.142.106.183/v2/conferences/2012/ICCF17/papers/Dash-Effect%20of%
20Recrystallization-Slides-ICCF-17.pdf
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
The sequence you suggest is not observed!! Therefore, we
From: John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com
Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:50:21 AM
Alan,
I guess I'm not making myself clear. There is no need for a DC bias
of the power input.
[ etc etc ]
In my simulation I refer to DC as a constant source of Spice CURRENT,
(representing thermal
Also see tables II and III in this reference:
John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com wrote:
*PLEASE FIX YOUR REPLY-TO ADDRESS **
(Last warning --- I'm not going to reply to anything you send which doesn't go
straight back to vortex )
From: John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com
Sent:
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 10:45 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In short, in order to make a difference, the helping-hand already needs
to be
at hand before the reaction begins.
(unless momentum can be tunneled, and the tunneling process itself is
inherently FTL).
Thinking about this a little
The graphs in that paper are certainly consistent with the broad spread of
products I saw back in the 90s.
At the time I had been using a notional working hypothesis of resonant protons
using quantum tunneling to fuse with heavier nuclei - pushing then into the
unstable positron emitter /
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:29 AM, John Milstone
john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.comwrote:
Please provide the page and/or diagram from the report which supports your
claim that they measured input power in between the controller and the tube
furnace.
I recall them specifically stating that they were
Eric, that is an interesting way to consider the interaction. I think that
your ghost friend could emit a magnetic or electric field that interacts at
the location of the two D's in their local time. Any movement of a charged
particle would be effected in that time frame and there would be no
[Accidentally sent to John Milstone's personal email address.]
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:42 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:29 AM, John Milstone
john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com wrote:
Please provide the page and/or diagram from the report which supports
John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com wrote:
Please provide the page and/or diagram from the report which supports your
claim that they measured input power in between the controller and the tube
furnace.
They did not. You misunderstand. Not to put words in Jones Beene's mouth, I
think he
I got word that the site was down for at least one of you, well it works
for me (5 hours after your email), but if it still isn't working for others:
http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/3314/rg.png
Thanks,
John
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 6:59 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
The other option that looks promising is for an entangled effect involving
many protons. These couplings are instantaneous according to what I have
seen, in which case the exact distance to a brother is not quite as
[Accidentally sent directly to John Milstone . . .]
John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.comwrote:
Please provide the page and/or diagram from the report which supports your
claim that they measured input power in between the controller and the tube
furnace.
They did not. You misunderstand.
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 12:09:38 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Thinking about this a little more, I want to argue that the influence of
nearby nuclei on a nuclear reaction that is underway is inherently faster
than light in a sense. Consider a point in time t, at which a
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:59:23 -0400 (EDT):
Hi,
[snip]
The other option that looks promising is for an entangled effect involving
many protons. These couplings are instantaneous according to what I have
seen, in which case the exact distance to a brother is
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
Sent: Saturday, June 22, 2013 10:35:07 AM
_
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint
Look at the layered materials on this page:
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 00:25:43 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Very interesting. Maimon proposes that the two d's encounter one another
at 100 fermis (0.001 angstroms) from the palladium nucleus. Something
tells me that is not close enough given this ratio; perhaps there's a
Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I recall them specifically stating that they were not permitted to measure
anything coming out of the controller, although I do not have a reference
for this.
There has been some talk about that, but they did not mention restrictions
in the paper.
OK Einstein. Sorry, I mean Robin. ;) I am on the fence about this one as
well, but there are many claims that it has been shown true. I guess
everything boils down to trust.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: mixent mix...@bigpond.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, Jun
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Eric, some theories, including Ron's, are so filled with arbitrary ideas
without any connection to what is known that even starting a critique is
difficult. The problem is made worse when the description is second hand.
Robin,
I do not see a problem with what Eric is suggesting. Regardless of how many
charges and moving charges reside in the universe, only the net vector fields
due to all of them is present at the location of the D reactions. The
superposition of all of the individual fields results in one
If it can be agreed that the IR measurements were, to within some
reasonable margin of error, accurately measuring output power then the only
issue in dispute is how much input power was provided. If, and this
obviously may not happen, Rossi were to allow another test and the only
point at which
On Jun 23, 2013, at 3:25 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Eric, some theories, including Ron's, are so filled with arbitrary
ideas without any connection to what is known that even starting a
critique is difficult. The
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:15:27 -0400 (EDT):
Hi,
[snip]
OK Einstein. Sorry, I mean Robin. ;) I am on the fence about this one as
well, but there are many claims that it has been shown true. I guess
everything boils down to trust.
Dave
I have yet to see a
I try to react to experimental evidence when formulating LENR theory.
Others gain solace by choosing to understand experimental evidence to suit
their theory(s) and political stances. They say that certain observations
are due to contamination or error in measurements and so on and even the
In reply to David Roberson's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 17:37:39 -0400 (EDT):
Hi,
The problem I have with this is that it would allow any energy liberating
mechanism (even chemical reactions) to result in a particle simply taking off
with the momentum later to be passed to some other particle
Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote:
If, and this obviously may not happen, Rossi were to allow another test and
the only point at which electrical measurements were allowed to be
taken (as before) was on the input side at 'X' in the diagram below . . .
He has agreed to another test. They are
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
If this is the idea, then it is useless out of the box. First of all,
X-rays are not normally applied, yet LENR occurs.
There is at least one other pathway by which the reaction can get started
-- since Ron's mechanism
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:03:00 -0600:
Hi,
The sequence you suggest is not observed!! Therefore, we must agree,
transmutation CAN NOT be the source of heat from an e-Cat.
It is not logical to state that because the results of a particular
transmutation theory
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 3:30 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
The problem I have with this is that it would allow any energy liberating
mechanism (even chemical reactions) to result in a particle simply taking
off
with the momentum later to be passed to some other particle somewhere else
In reply to Eric Walker's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 15:36:17 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 3:30 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
The problem I have with this is that it would allow any energy liberating
mechanism (even chemical reactions) to result in a particle simply taking
off
On Jun 23, 2013, at 4:37 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:03:00
-0600:
Hi,
The sequence you suggest is not observed!! Therefore, we must agree,
transmutation CAN NOT be the source of heat from an e-Cat.
It is not logical to state
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 3:50 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
...so what is the boundary condition? I.e. when does it happen, and when
not?
How strong does the force have to be?
I think it would be analogous to the pull of gravity by the sun on the
earth, except in the opposite direction (a
The NAE is a topological construction. It appears whenever the required
shape comes into existence.
Once created, the NAE can be static, or it can come into existence and then
disappear in a variable timeframe; I call this a dynamic NAE.
The energy produced by a dynamic NAE is proportional to
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 3:34:27 PM
He has agreed to another test. They are getting ready to do it. I
believe the seven researchers prefer to measure between the wall and
the controller box. I would, if I were doing it. Also, the skeptics
would
Proton21 transmutation results:
http://www.proton21.com.ua/publ/Proton21_Energy_EN.pdf
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
The NAE is a topological construction. It appears whenever the required
shape comes into existence.
Once created, the NAE can be
If you take an extreme example it makes the process clear. Suppose there
exists a large current loop located a mile away from an electron source. The
point where the electron exits the gun has a magnetic field that is measurable
arising from this source and at right angles to the path it
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
3. Use two thermocouples for the entire test (also logged) -- eCat
cylinder (test point chosen by use of IR camera) and ambient.
I believe the IR camera has an on-board thermocouple for ambient.
Another would not hurt.
Nobody's pointed it out, but the
From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 5:25:47 PM
Been there. Done that. I don't recommend it. Just ignore convection
if you don't believe the textbooks. You get significant excess even if you
leave it out.
Agreed. Quite a big component for the March COP=3
At 11:03 AM 6/23/2013, Alan Fletcher wrote:
John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com wrote:
*PLEASE FIX YOUR REPLY-TO ADDRESS
**
(Last warning --- I'm not going to reply to anything you send which
doesn't go straight back to vortex )
I guess the
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
I guess the headers say it IS going to vortex, despite the name (which is
all that shows up in Zimbra web, which tries to be TOO clever with email
addresses)
From: John Milstone john_sw_orlan...@yahoo.com
Reply-To: John Milstone vortex-l@eskimo.com
What puts the curl in a curling stone?
This is a question that has interested me for about 10 years.
Since Uppsala university is now involved in both cold fusion and curling
the first tenuous link has been made between the two fields. ;-)
As the article points out many explanations have been
If CF/LENR technology finally manages to get off the ground in the
commercial sense it may still face a very difficult uphill political battle.
It's possible obscure organizations, like ALEC, American Legislative
Exchange Council, may try their best to destroy cold fusion's commercial
potential
Electrostrong Nuclear Disintegration in Condensed Matter
ABSTRACT:
Photo- and electro-disintegration techniques have been traditionally used
for studying giant dipole resonances and through them nuclear structure.
Over a long period, detailed theoretical models for the giant dipole
resonances
I just realised my criticism is invalid. An asymmetric force will not arise
from the action of carving since the stone is simultaneously carving the
ice all around the ring of contact rather than just at the leading
edge. This means the scratches left behind in the ice will be enough to
cause the
Reading that page I came across: In peril is the notion of “naturalness,”
Albert Einstein’s dream that the laws of nature are sublimely beautiful,
inevitable and self-contained. Without it, physicists face the harsh
prospect that those laws are just an arbitrary, messy outcome of random
I believe the nature of quantum gravity makes certain that there will
always be uncertainty. If we want more certainty in our lives we need to
go to an area of spacetime with a lower energy gravity field with less
energetic quantum particles. It might be boring though, as our lives
currently
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 16:51:45 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
On Jun 23, 2013, at 4:37 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
In reply to Edmund Storms's message of Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:03:00
-0600:
Hi,
The sequence you suggest is not observed!! Therefore, we must agree,
Unlike many old school LENR theorists, let’s give WL some credit, they are
moving away from ultra-low energy neutrons to high EMF field transmutation.
But they still have some ground to make up. This new theory does not
address why even numbered nucleon elements react in LENR and odd ones do
not
It seems their paper even won an award, so perhaps after decades
of controversy the question as to what makes a curling stone curl has
finally be answered?
http://www.wearofmaterialsconference.com/
harry
On Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 10:45 PM, H Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote:
I just
66 matches
Mail list logo
