Electrons have significant mass - and mass traveling near the speed of light delivers lots of energy - that goes without saying. If the authors are correct in this paper "Relativity and the lead-acid battery" by Ahuja, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. v.106, p.018301 (2011) we have to consider several troubling possibilities and implications.
http://physics.aps.org/story/v27/st2 ... an interesting speculation relates to some electrical circuits which have been derided by the "experts" in the past... which a few of us remember, going back many years to the infamous Joseph Newman. These devices have claimed to be gainful - but only with batteries. Joe has long since stopped posting here, but still has his messianic website up: http://www.josephnewman.com/ and yes, it still contains his direct messages from you-know-who. But despite the fact Joe is "touched" as they say, in light of this Ahuja paper above in the context of Sweet, Bedini and many other claimants for gainful electrical circuits that "only work" with large capacity batteries - but do not work with an ultra-capacitor substituting for the battery ... we may have to reconsider the possibility... no matter how remote, that there is something valid here: relativistic electrons deriving energy from heavy metal nuclear excursions due to bemf. Given that some, or even most of the energy of a Lead-acid battery comes not from redox chemistry per se - but from relativistic electrons even if an inventor's circuit or large coil is itself lossy, but still manages to increase the effect of these fast electrons, what does this mean when the inventor gets everything right? If the standard voltage is 2.13 V for a lead acid battery - and 1.75 V of this arises from relativistic effects mainly from electron mobility in PbO2, then you have to ask: what if a lossy circuit doubles the number of these fast electrons ? can real net gain be shown - even though ALL of the gain is in the battery? Isn't this another form of LENR ? Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
