What do you mean by the Earth's relative charge? Does it have net positive or negative charge relative to deep space?
Harry On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 9:50 AM Chris Zell <chrisz...@wetmtv.com> wrote: > Could there be a way to generate energy by ‘transmitting away’ the earth’s > relative charge into neutral space? Using something similar to this method? > > > > *From:* H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> > *Sent:* Saturday, April 23, 2022 12:33 PM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:A simpler test > > > > Update... > > I haven't done any experiments yet, but I have refined my thinking about > the nature of cooling or frigorific radiation. > > Instead of striving for extremely low temperatures, I recently realised it > should be possible to look for cooling radiation between bodies which have > a large relative temperature difference. > > Also I was worried that if frigorific radiation were real then we should > readily detect a cooling effect on our eyes or instruments every time > a telescope is aimed into the cold depths of space. Does the fact that no > one has reported such a cooling effect mean frigorific radiation doesn't > exist. Not necessarily. Such a conclusion is based on the assumption that > when a concentrator of a given size focuses cooling radiation from a colder > body the effective cooling power increases as the temperature of the colder > body decreases in the same way as the effective heating power of a hotter > body increases as the temperature of the hotter body increases. > > However, if cooling power does not scale like heating power, then using a > thermometer to detect cooling from radiation from deep space at 3 degree > Kelvin will probably require a concentrator (i.e. a telescope) that is > much larger than any current or planned telescope. > > Harry > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 9:18 PM H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Some telescopes by virtue of their design should already be capable of > revealing cooling radiation if it existed. > > eg. This telescope consists of a primary parabolic reflector and three > secondary mirrors which direct the collected light into an instrument > room several meters away from the primary reflector. See the first few > two photos on this page: > > http://www.vikdhillon.staff.shef.ac.uk/teaching/phy217/telescopes/phy217_tel_coude.html > <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vikdhillon.staff.shef.ac.uk%2Fteaching%2Fphy217%2Ftelescopes%2Fphy217_tel_coude.html&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C6c40de11cfcc42272b5308da2546fc60%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C637863284070654675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Sx9LB61KIIrzYTh0HTFHENF3vzd6vQPnM%2BCbe11lLh4%3D&reserved=0> > > This telescope should be capable of focusing enough frigorific > radiation it could be sensed by a hand crossing the path of the beam > in the instrument room. It seems unlikely that such an odd cooling > sensation would go unreported. Therefore it is likely frigorific > radiation is not real. > > > Harry > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 4:43 PM MSF <foster...@protonmail.com> wrote: > > > > Don't forget to give us the result of your experiment if you do it. > > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > > > On Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 9:06 PM, MSF <foster...@protonmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Now that we have learned about all there is to learn about the > acquisition and preservation of dry ice, I think you're right about this > test. The double parabola test you initially proposed would not have proved > or disproved cooling radiation. The dry ice at the focus would have been a > radiative heat sink and would have lowered the temperature at the other > focus. At least that's my opinion of it. > > > > > > The simpler test you propose really demonstrates the idea of cooling > radiation as its own wave phenomenon, if it exists. > > > > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > > > > > > On Monday, January 24th, 2022 at 5:35 PM, H LV hveeder...@gmail.com > wrote: > > > > > > > From a fabrication standpoint here is an even simpler test for > cooling > > > > > > > > radiation. > > > > > > > > It consists of a truncated cone lined with reflective mylar on the > > > > > > > > inside. The wide end is open to the sky and a thermometer is located > > > > > > > > at the vertex of the cone. > > > > > > > > See diagram: > > > > > > > > > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1p7coRgUqwzMGw40DhUQzJACCyHrd8EL5/view?usp=sharing > <https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F1p7coRgUqwzMGw40DhUQzJACCyHrd8EL5%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=05%7C01%7CChrisZell%40wetmtv.com%7C6c40de11cfcc42272b5308da2546fc60%7C9e5488e2e83844f6886cc7608242767e%7C0%7C0%7C637863284070654675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=AP9LegjrYacrBpvIuK6SBYCpTP1NJifWdbYK%2BGIZ9Ug%3D&reserved=0> > > > > > > > > If cooling radiation does not exist then the temperature of the > > > > > > > > thermometer should be about the same or perhaps slightly warmer when > > > > > > > > the cone is above it. > > > > > > > > However, if cooling radiation is real and has wave-like properties > > > > > > > > then the cone should focus the cooling radiation from the sky onto > the > > > > > > > > thermometer and lower its temperature. > > > > > > > > Harry > > > > > > *CAUTION:* This message was sent from outside the Nexstar organization. > Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the > sender. >
