Hello Robin, I am not good at magnetic forces and spin effect it is way above my paygrade. However, when reading your latest comment I saw your link and followed it.
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html I think this is a concept worthy as a starting point. I have no idea about where you are in this project but it would amaze me if you have been able to get funding with that approach. That is not because it is anything wrong with the synopsis. However, you lack all sorts of incentive to invest. 1. You need to quantify the possibilities and the obstacles. 2. You need time frames and 'waypoints' when you evaluate next step. 3. You need to show you have leadership / management involved that will measure with the $$ eyes of an investor. 'For the good of mankind' or for a possible Nobel prize is not an incentive for an investor. In addition you need to compare your idea and how it will come to fruition better, faster, cheaper etc. than the competition. The team must include all functions. A few years ago I had an operations manager who said that he was the the only person of any importance in the company as our revenue was directly proportional to his performance. At the first glance it is easy to agree with his findings. However, in a good organization that is true about all functions. The effort of the person sending out the invoices is also 100% proportional to the revenue.:) . . . Notice that I am positive to your thinking but if you want result you need to include the whole picture. I do think that you could organize this company very loosely and at low cost and then funding will come. 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 Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 1:25 PM, <mix...@bigpond.com> wrote: > In reply to Bob Cook's message of Tue, 25 Mar 2014 10:49:12 -0700: > Hi Bob, > > When a fast electron interacts with other electrons it does so through a > repulsive force, and imparts energy to them through collisions, knocking > them > away from their host atoms, and leaving them with some kinetic energy. > > A positron should also tear electrons away from their host atoms and leave > them > with excess kinetic energy. The only difference being that the force will > be a > mixture of attractive (and repulsive?) forces. Attractive at a distance > (and > repulsive in a head on collision ?). A near miss would be attractive > forces and > a "whip around" (conservation of angular momentum). Perhaps a head on > collision > results in annihilation? > > AFAIK stands for "As Far As I Know". > > >Robin-- > > > >The positron leaves the Ni-59 nucleus after an electron capture with > about 1 > >Mev of energy--the disintegration energy is a little more than 1 Mev. > >However, I have not seen a cross section for the reaction we are talking > >about. I would agree, if the positron acts like an electron in a > >population of electrons, that it would slow down, but being a positive > >charge I not sure how that effects the slowing down. (I think you suggest > >its positive charge does not change the slowing down process?) The fact > that > >the > >resulting photons total energy equal 2 x the electron mass probably means > >there is no excess energy and momentum that needs to be handled in the > >reaction. I am not sure whether neutrinos in the annihilation reaction > have > >been ruled out by experiment. Probably ruled out only by theory. > > > >By the way what does AFAIK stand for? > > > >Bob > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: <mix...@bigpond.com> > >To: <vortex-l@eskimo.com> > >Sent: Monday, March 24, 2014 1:32 PM > >Subject: Re: [Vo]:My current views on the 'Rossi's process' > > > > > >In reply to Bob Cook's message of Sun, 23 Mar 2014 15:19:14 -0700: > >Hi, > >[snip] > >>Your description is exactly as I understand it. The random walk is not > >>very long however, since it probably occurs at the first electron it > >>attracts and that is pretty quick after the nucleus gives it up. > > > >AFAIK annihilation usually only happens after the positron has slowed > down. > > > >Regards, > > > >Robin van Spaandonk > > > >http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html > >
