Here’s a link to an image of one very special use of the right metamaterial
https://twitter.com/memcculloch/status/972582613809618944 From: Russ <russ.geo...@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 9:15 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]:Metamaterials ??? I’d love to read a list of candidates for ‘metamaterials’ that might have practical utility as in easy to make and deposit. Any suggestions posted here would be a start on such a list. Thanks From: JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net <mailto:jone...@pacbell.net> > Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2018 7:06 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com <mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com> Subject: [Vo]:Evidence of UDH interaction with neutrino (was 1/f squared) Re: the possibility that new discoveries will turn up a metamaterial which can reacts with neutrinos to a much greater extent than expected could be bolstered by evidence from cosmology presented below. There are many lose ends, however. Could UDH be used in two ways – both as the target for laser pulses (Holmlid Effect) and secondarily an absorber of the resultant muon -> neutrino bursts? Neutrinos carry away over 99% of the energy of the Holmlid Effect but are poorly absorbed by all elements. What a waste. Even if it were possible, protons are being disintegrated into pions then muons – with a mass/energy of 106 MeV each and then converted into much lower level x-rays if they do interact. OTOH this energy level is still thousands of time more favorable than burning hydrogen – so who cares about the low overall efficiency? Anyway this post proposes a novel way to use UDH as both fuel for laser irradiation– which converts into massive levels of muons which then decays into neutrinos…which neutrinos are then absorbed in a secondary system using UDH to capture some of the energy which is otherwise lost. UDH is far denser than U or any heavy element. One of the most interesting findings in recent cosmology has been the discovery of a universal emission line at 3.56 keV which is associated with Dark Matter. This emission line has turned up in the core of every galaxy which has been studied - and there is an intuitive explanation. Any number of theorist have associated a dense form of hydrogen with Dark Matter. Yet the inherent conflict is that if Dark Matter is really dark it should not emit at 3.56 keV … unless of course, it is actually being irradiated as a target by an external source of energy and that source, by default, would be the neutrino flux. Conclusion of somewhat circular argument: If we should find that indeed Dark Matter can be identified as UDH or one of the other similar conceptions such as DDL, then a likely reason we see the characteristic x-ray is not from decay but from an interaction with neutrinos – which interaction then inflates the dark matter back to hydrogen. In short, Dark Matter may have a cross section for neutrino absorption which makes it useful as a way to convert the mass/energy of neutrinos into x-rays which can then be downshifted into usable energy. This could be implemented with the Holmlid setup or a variant. The fact that Holmlid sees a small level of muon production from UDH at ambient conditions (which has NOT been irradiated with the laser) is thereby explained. The ambient case is indicative of the rate of interaction with Earth’s background neutrino flux (from cosmic rays). As a practical matter, this conversion rate of UDH is too low to be useful without the laser – where Holmlid is getting massively more neutrinos compared to the background rate – 100 trillion times more per unit area. This rambling proposal would all fit together nicely except for the lack of independent verification which may be forthcoming from Taggett/TERN. There is no recent news from them: http://ternresearch.com/news-and-papers
