From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 04:47:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA06136;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 04:44:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 04:44:32 -0800
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 12:43:54 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: vortex-l rules
Message-ID: <20020301124354.GB30031 genius.tao.org.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>,
	vortex-l eskimo.com
References: <v01530500b8a2e6c0afda [12.110.74.112]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="BwCQnh7xodEAoBMC"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <v01530500b8a2e6c0afda [12.110.74.112]>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Resent-Message-ID: <"mrXHp2.0.dV1.lUtVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46372
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--BwCQnh7xodEAoBMC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 10:43:19AM -0900, Horace Heffner wrote:
> **************************************************************************
> Vortex-L Rules:
>=20
> 1. If VORTEX-L proves very useful or interesting to you, please consider
>    making a $10US/yr donation to help cover operating expenses.  If you
>    cannot afford this, please feel free to participate anyway.  If you
>    would like to give more, please do!  Direct your check to the
>    moderator, address above.  Any help you can give is sincerely
>    appreciated.

If it's costing too much to run, I'm happy to support it for free.

Joe

--BwCQnh7xodEAoBMC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjx/d4kACgkQXVIcjOaxUBZYJgCfZz0PQHHqwmfrpVzedLVZF5Rb
QWUAn2mo1Crtz5vXwjvVnCs5vxHYE4q6
=BGzG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--BwCQnh7xodEAoBMC--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:27:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16155;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:27:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:27:04 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8a53d3827e5 [12.110.74.2]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:30:43 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Fractal methane storage
Resent-Message-ID: <"NiCRr1.0.Ly3.t-uVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46373
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The following work may have a bearing on the future of hydrogen and methane
storage, as well as well as ramifications to Les Case's work.  Perhaps
activation of olive pits is (or is not) similar to the activation of
cocoanut shells!

Begin quote:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News
Number 578  February 27, 2002   by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein,
and James Riordon

FRACTAL CARBON NANOPORE NETWORK.  Activated
carbon, porous materials not unlike the charcoal used for
barbecuing, performs important industrial functions such as
filtering air, removing toxic vapors, and purifying our food and
beverages (e.g., sugar, molasses, vodka).  For that reason, a far-
flung collaboration of scientists (the Universities of Missouri and
New Mexico, the CNRS lab in France, the Universidad de Alicante
in Spain, the Air Force Research Lab, and Los Alamos) set out to
learn more about the internal structure of the material.  To their
surprise they discovered a fractal network of uniform channels,
what is perhaps the first documented pore fractal.
    The researchers (contact Peter Pfeifer, pfeiferp missouri.edu,
573-882-2335) take simple olive pits, "char" them (burn them into
charcoal), and then treat them in steam at 750 C.  How ironic that
in this case water, normally used to put out fire, here sustains
combustion by providing oxygen to burn with surface carbon.
What happens is not the removal of layer after layer or the carving
of holes of various sizes but instead the local etching and collapse
of pore walls to form channels of uniform size, about 2 nm wide.
This oxidation process will then abruptly branch in a new
direction.  When it's all over the solid is riddled with a maze
governed by a fractal geometry.  Scattering x rays from the
material establishes a "fractal dimension" of nearly 3, meaning that
surface of the internal pore network practically fills all the inside
space.
    The fractal nature of solid shapes has been measured many
times, but this might be the first time a fractal mapping has been
performed for the empty space inside a void, namely the nanopore
network.  (For comparison of pore, surface, and solid fractals, see
the figure at www.aip.org/mgr/png.)  The surface area of this great
inland realm works out to about 1000 square meters (or one
football field) per gram.  The researchers expect that methane and
other fuels could be stored in this kind of structure (the molecules
are readily taken up into the branching alleyways by the weak
attraction of induced electric dipole "van der Waals" forces), and at
pressures much less than the 200 atm needed to store methane in
steel cylinders.  Gas separation can also be accomplished because
the narrow channels are negotiated more easily by some molecular
species than others.   Electricity storage might be accomplished by
building capacitors enhanced by intermediate layers of activated
carbon networks filled with an ionic conducting fluid.  (Pfeifer et
al., Physical Review Letters, 18 March 2002)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:29:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16187;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:27:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:27:06 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502b8a53ff0cb56 [12.110.74.2]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:30:46 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
Resent-Message-ID: <"HXbZD3.0.ny3.v-uVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46374
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:02 PM 2/28/2, Edmund Storms wrote:

>
>I suggest the lack of publications exploring the use of U in
>a P-F cell is because
>U is unstable in a P-F cell.  While at LANL. we tried U and
>found that it was
>converted to U3O8 which deposited on the anode.


What is U308?   Do you mean U238?



Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:34:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19364;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:34:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:34:09 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503b8a542585c2e [12.21.208.227]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 05:37:51 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
Resent-Message-ID: <"dBF5z.0.Uk4.X5vVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46375
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:02 PM 2/28/2, Edmund Storms wrote:

>
>I suggest the lack of publications exploring the use of U in
>a P-F cell is because
>U is unstable in a P-F cell.  While at LANL. we tried U and
>found that it was
>converted to U3O8 which deposited on the anode.


What is U308?   Do you mean U238?

Ohhh!  (Slaps Forehead.)  Now that I have typed it, I see the difference
between an "O" and a "0".  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:36:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19845;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:35:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:35:26 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 06:27:42 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <002001c1c12d$3fd81760$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530500b8a476cda027 [12.21.209.4]>
 <013f01c1c0b9$e1534ca0$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F0892.E42EB378@ix.netcom.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"o24yh2.0.yr4.k6vVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46376
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>

> The issue here is to use uranium in a CF environment, not in H2 at 2000°.
None of  the configurations used in the ROVER engine have any bearing on the
subject.

Given that the research that I originally quoted from was the use of U as a
cathode in a D2 gas environment, how did the issue suddenly switch to U in a wet
CF environment?

But even so, you seem to be saying that the use of U cathodes in CF is
prohibited because of hydriding. Is that what you are saying? I believe
hydriding can be prevented with the proper alloying, whether it be with W, Nb,
Z, Pt, Pd or whatever.

Are you saying that this preventative approach is not accurate, and that
hydriding can't be prevented with proper alloying?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, Ed, but if you agree that hydriding can be
prevented with proper alloying, why wasn't that pursued at LANL in the earlier
testing? Is U not a good candidate material for other reasons?

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:39:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20955;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:37:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:37:37 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 06:29:52 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <002601c1c12d$8d80c480$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530502b8a53ff0cb56 [12.110.74.2]>
Resent-Message-ID: <"__sRz.0.L75.m8vVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46377
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>

> What is U308?   Do you mean U238?

You've heard of "Yellowcake" ? The "O" is for oxygen. It is not an isotope
number.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 06:55:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA25581;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:50:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 06:50:35 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 06:42:51 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Fractal methane storage
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <004101c1c12f$5d5ec480$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530500b8a53d3827e5 [12.110.74.2]>
Resent-Message-ID: <"khXej3.0.YF6.wKvVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46378
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>

Is this *2nm* dimension Coincidental? :

> What happens is not the removal of layer after layer or the carving
> of holes of various sizes but instead the local etching and collapse
> of pore walls to form channels of uniform size, about 2 nm wide.

AFAIK - this 2 nm dimension is also the normal diameter of the carbon structure,
C60, commonly known as buckyballs or fullerenes (in honor of Bucky Fuller) and
also about the axial diameter of carbon nanotubes.

Several companies are now entering in to mass production of fullerenes and C
nanotubes and hopefully the price will fall soon - as it is a candidate material
for a CF matrix. They uses a manufacturing process of starved combustion.
Perhaps the technique referred to in the article is similar.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 07:55:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA27875;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 07:52:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 07:52:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3C7F96FD.74F6F94 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 08:58:11 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
References: <v01530500b8a476cda027 [12.21.209.4]>
	 <013f01c1c0b9$e1534ca0$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F0892.E42EB378@ix.netcom.com> <002001c1c12d$3fd81760$8837fea9@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"mBVdA.0.Tp6.HFwVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46379
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jones Beene wrote:

> From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
>
> > The issue here is to use uranium in a CF environment, not in H2 at 2000°.
> None of  the configurations used in the ROVER engine have any bearing on the
> subject.
>
> Given that the research that I originally quoted from was the use of U as a
> cathode in a D2 gas environment, how did the issue suddenly switch to U in a wet
> CF environment?
>
> But even so, you seem to be saying that the use of U cathodes in CF is
> prohibited because of hydriding. Is that what you are saying? I believe
> hydriding can be prevented with the proper alloying, whether it be with W, Nb,
> Z, Pt, Pd or whatever.
>
> Are you saying that this preventative approach is not accurate, and that
> hydriding can't be prevented with proper alloying?
>
> I'm not trying to be argumentative, Ed, but if you agree that hydriding can be
> prevented with proper alloying, why wasn't that pursued at LANL in the earlier
> testing? Is U not a good candidate material for other reasons?

Well, Jones, let me restate the problem.  Uranium was proposed to fission when
exposed to a CF environment.  A CF environment is created when deuterium is caused
to saturate the lattice of a metal, especially Pd.  This saturation process can be
done using various methods including electrolysis, gas loading, ion bombardment and
others.  The problem is to expose U to a CF environment.  First of all, pure U can
not be exposed to water or to hydrogen gas.  Consequently, if U is be employed, it
must be alloyed with Pd.  The problem then becomes, can a Pd-U alloy be made
nuclear-active by saturation with D2?

Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 08:01:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA02088;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:01:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:01:16 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 07:53:33 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <009201c1c139$3dee2b40$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530500b8a476cda027 [12.21.209.4]>
 <013f01c1c0b9$e1534ca0$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F0892.E42EB378@ix.netcom.com>
 <002001c1c12d$3fd81760$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F96FD.74F6F94@ix.netcom.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"ip_fB2.0.YW.CNwVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46380
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>

> Well, Jones, let me restate the problem.  Uranium was proposed to fission when
exposed to a CF environment.

OK. Now I understand where you were starting from.

In the older Japanes research that was on the web in short abstract form, they
were apparanetly not looking for, nor suspecting, actual fission. They found the
kind of transmutation (if you believe them)  that was somewhat like that
"thorium remediation" thing of several years back.

I guess it went nowhere in Japan either. I would be instructive to know why it
went nowhere, but I guess there were some lawsuits here with the "Cincinattai"
group or whatever they called it, and unhappy investors, so we may never know
why

> The problem then becomes, can a Pd-U alloy be made
> nuclear-active by saturation with D2?

Do you have any thoughts on that issue?

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 08:03:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA03213;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:03:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:03:16 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301105322.00a74008 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 11:01:25 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Miles comments on reproducibility
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"z5P2Q.0.vn.2PwVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46381
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I asked Mel Miles whether he agrees with me that his research made cold 
fusion reproducible. Attached is his response, with my message to him at 
the end. He says that reproducibility improved toward the end of his study, 
and he's confident high reproducibility could be achieved today if funding 
were available. This is similar to the tritium results achieved by Fritz 
Will and his team at the NCFI. Reproducibility was poor at the beginning of 
the project, but in the final phases it was very good. That is progress, 
and it is the whole point of research. Some skeptics point to results at 
the beginning of a research project, or they point to overall statistics 
from the entire project, the way James Beene cited "28 out of 94" 
experiments, to make the results look inconclusive or irreproducible. In 
this case, the 28 successful results were clustered at the end of the 
project, and they were achieved almost exclusively with specific types of 
cathode material, which worked 100% of the time, or 88% of the time. These 
numbers "28 out of 94," taken in isolation out of context, are deceptive.

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

From: "Melvin H. Miles" <melmiles bellsouth.net>
To: "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What was your final conclusion regarding reproducibility?
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 22:16:47 -0600

Jed,

Regarding my Navy report, reproducibility was a major problem during this 
program. The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the Pd-B was 
given to me towards the end of the program. Today I think I know which 
materials to use in order to get much better reproducibility. I showed this 
in Japan where nearly every experiment gave excess heat. If I had funding 
today and selected the proper materials, I think I could get excess heat in 
a high percentage of experiments. I think a lot has been learned in the 
past 13 years regarding which materials to select for these experiments.

Also, the co-deposition experiments give good reproducibility. If research 
funding were available, I think good progress could be made today.

Thanks for your interest.

Mel Miles

----- Original Message -----
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
To: <melmiles bellsouth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2002 2:31 PM
Subject: What was your final conclusion regarding reproducibility?

 > Hello Mel.
 >
 > I'm having a debate with some fellow about your book, NAWCWPNS TP 8302. In
 > the introduction you write: "Reproducibility continues to be the major
 > problem in this controversial research area. Based on our experiments,
this
 > lack of reproducibility stems from unknown variables in the palladium
metal."
 >
 > It seems to me, however, that your final conclusion is that
reproducibility
 > is difficult but achievable. The statistics in Table 10 prove that with
the
 > right cathode materials and careful electrochemistry, excess heat from
cold
 > fusion will be observed in every test, albeit at different power levels.
 >
 > In other words, reproducibility does continue to be a major problem, but
it
 > would not be if researchers mastered electrochemistry, and if
 > Johnson-Matthey would fabricate more of their old "Type A" hydrogen filter
 > palladium, or if Imam were to make more supplies of the Pd-B material that
 > worked in seven out of eight tests listed in Table 10. I would say the
 > problems are more political than technical.
 >
 > What do you think? Do you consider you results 100% reproducible -- with
 > the caveats I list here?
 >
 > - Jed
 >

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 08:45:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30134;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:43:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:43:09 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:42:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
In-Reply-To: <3C7F96FD.74F6F94 ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020301084051.29574A-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"6SytB3.0.dM7.S-wVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46382
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Edmund Storms wrote:

> Well, Jones, let me restate the problem.  Uranium was proposed to fission when
> exposed to a CF environment.  A CF environment is created when deuterium is caused
> to saturate the lattice of a metal, especially Pd.  This saturation process can be
> done using various methods including electrolysis, gas loading, ion bombardment and
> others.  The problem is to expose U to a CF environment.  First of all, pure U can
> not be exposed to water or to hydrogen gas.  Consequently, if U is be employed, it
> must be alloyed with Pd.  The problem then becomes, can a Pd-U alloy be made
> nuclear-active by saturation with D2?

I thought that they did experiments in the late 60's to see if they could
use deuterium as a moderator for uranium fission reactions. There's
something in "Metal Hydrides" editied by Muller on this. 



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 09:38:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA05337;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 09:35:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 09:35:35 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505b8a56c9b4a14 [12.21.208.227]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 08:39:16 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
Resent-Message-ID: <"OUHkL1.0.IJ1.dlxVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46383
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:29 AM 3/1/2, Jones Beene wrote:
>From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>
>
>> What is U308?   Do you mean U238?
>
>You've heard of "Yellowcake" ? The "O" is for oxygen. It is not an isotope
>number.

Yes, I have already posted the mistake.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 10:09:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA08627;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:02:57 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 10:02:57 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 09:52:45 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Miles comments on reproducibility
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <00ae01c1c149$e5303640$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301105322.00a74008 pop.mindspring.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"khyqB1.0.h62.F9yVy" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46384
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Old notions die hard.

And ah, the ghost of Bill Clinton lives on: " I didn't know anything about it
until I read it in the paper . . . I did not have sex with that woman . . . It
depends on the meaning of 'is.' "

> I asked Mel Miles whether he agrees with me that his research made cold
> fusion reproducible.

Miles response:
> Regarding my Navy report, reproducibility was a major problem during this
> program. The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the Pd-B was
> given to me towards the end of the program.

Note: The material Miles refers to is Pd-B, not Johnson-Matthey type A, which is
the material falsely reputed to give perfect results.

BTW I have been in touch with Johnson Matthey and am preparing an interesting
posting that contains some devasting information for any individual still
wallowing in the delusion of "100% reproducibility." This company is out to sell
palladium, plain and simple, there is no conspiracy, no coverup no unusual
verified results. Merely "sound and fury and nothing else..."


> they point to overall statistics  from the entire project, the way James Beene
cited "28 out of 94"  experiments

And at least I will have the decency to get your name right.

Jones Beene

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 11:22:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01641;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:19:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:19:58 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301141517.00b09128 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 14:20:20 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Miles comments on reproducibility
In-Reply-To: <00ae01c1c149$e5303640$8837fea9 computer>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301105322.00a74008 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"pkSHV3.0.TP.THzVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46385
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Miles response:
> > Regarding my Navy report, reproducibility was a major problem during this
> > program. The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the Pd-B was
> > given to me towards the end of the program.
>
>Note: The material Miles refers to is Pd-B, not Johnson-Matthey type A, 
>which is the material falsely reputed to give perfect results.

That is incorrect. Please review Table 10 more carefully. It shows the 
success rate for J-M Type A was 100%, as I stated before. Also please note 
that I said that in my note to Miles, and he did not contradict me.

By the way, you have *read* the report, and Table 10, haven't you? You 
wouldn't be commenting on this based on the Abstract alone, I trust.


>BTW I have been in touch with Johnson Matthey and am preparing an 
>interesting posting that contains some devasting information for any 
>individual still wallowing in the delusion of "100% reproducibility." This 
>company is out to sell palladium, plain and simple . . .

They will not sell this type, ostensibly because it has been discontinued. 
They might sell the replacement type now used in filters.


>. . . there is no conspiracy, no coverup no unusual verified results. 
>Merely "sound and fury and nothing else..."

There is no proof of conspiracy, but many people who dealt with them are 
surprised at how unfriendly they are toward cold fusion.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 11:54:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17133;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:52:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 11:52:03 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 11:44:16 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Miles comments on reproducibility
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <012701c1c159$79173a20$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301105322.00a74008 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020301141517.00b09128 pop.mindspring.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"GVWoD1.0.ZB4.XlzVy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46386
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>

Absolutly amazing!!

The words just don't mean what they obviously purport to, when someone so is
lost in self-delusion that *they will not permit  themself be wrong * no matter
what:

Miles response is clear and unambiguosus:
> Regarding my Navy report, *reproducibility was a major problem* during this
program. The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the *Pd-B* was
given to me towards the end of the program.

Miles said to nothing to Rothwell regarding TypeA, nor Table 10, nor an ancient
report that should have been withdrawn - and please Note: The material Miles
refers to is Pd-B, not Johnson-Matthey type A, which is the material Rothwell
has over and over falsely claimed gives perfect results.

> That is incorrect. Please review Table 10 more carefully.

Forget Table 10 when you have the author Miles' response right in front of your
nose and you wont heed the unambiguous words. He says very clearly and succintly
with no need of parsing "The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the
Pd-B was given to me towards the end of the program."

He does not mince words, he does not refer to Type A nor does he refer to some
Table 10  that he obvioulsly no longer supports.

> success rate for J-M Type A was 100%, as I stated before.

Wrong!! Never was, Never will be except in your imagination !!

> I said that in my note to Miles, and he did not contradict me.

What? You must be on some other planet with you messages being parsed by Bill
Clinton's advisors, where the word "is" only means what you want it to mean! Of
course, he implicitly contradicted you.

Not only that - I think it is clear by now that you also have contacted both
Cravens and McKubre on this very issue and they also refuse to support you.

Enough already. Haven't you been humiliated enough...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 13:47:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10920;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:46:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:46:38 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301161430.00ac6cb8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 16:46:53 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Miles comments on reproducibility
In-Reply-To: <012701c1c159$79173a20$8837fea9 computer>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301105322.00a74008 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020301141517.00b09128 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"L-pWd.0.Dg2.yQ_Vy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46388
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>Miles response is clear and unambiguosus:
> > Regarding my Navy report, *reproducibility was a major problem* during this
>program. The NRL materials did not give excess heat until the *Pd-B* was
>given to me towards the end of the program.
>
>Miles said to nothing to Rothwell regarding TypeA, nor Table 10 . . .

He did not have to say anything about it. Table 10 says the success rate 
for Type A Pd is 100%. That is also clear and unambiguous, and it does not 
contradict what Miles wrote in the letter.


>, nor an ancient report that should have been withdrawn . . .

I do not see why it should have been withdrawn. Beene has not listed any 
reason. Ancient or new, truth is truth. Facts have no expiration date. This 
report will remain true, accurate and important until the end of time, even 
if CF is forgotten.


>- and please Note: The material Miles
>refers to is Pd-B, not Johnson-Matthey type A, which is the material Rothwell
>has over and over falsely claimed gives perfect results.

In this letter, Miles talks about Pd-B. In the report, in Table 10 and 
elsewhere, he also discusses J-M type A.

Why is this controversial? Why does Beene doubt me? He can look at the 
table any time, or if he does not have a copy, I can send him one. I do not 
understand why he is carried away with emotion and writes "Absolutely 
amazing!!" There is nothing amazing or controversial about it, and no way I 
could be making this up. Many people in this forum have the paper, and the 
readers here have never been reticent about correcting my mistakes in the 
past. Someone would set me straight if I am misreading Table 10, or 
misrepresenting it.

I think Beene either misunderstands or he is trolling. Once again, I 
strongly recommend that he re-read the report carefully, in its entirety, 
and contact the author if he has any questions.


>He says very clearly and succintly with no need of parsing "The NRL 
>materials did not give excess heat until the Pd-B was given to me towards 
>the end of the program."

That's right. The other NRL material shown in Table 10 have a very low 
success rate. In contrast, all types of J-M material worked well, and the 
J-M Type A worked perfectly. McKubre's table shows the very same thing, as 
I noted. I believe those Type A samples were also given to Miles by 
Fleischmann toward the end of the program.


> > success rate for J-M Type A was 100%, as I stated before.
>
>Wrong!! Never was, Never will be except in your imagination !!

Mr. Beene, LOOK AT THE TABLE, and tell me what you think it means. If I am 
wrong, explain how and why. These assertions without evidence or reference 
to the published paper add nothing to the discussion.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 13:48:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12144;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:48:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:48:15 -0800
Message-ID: <3C7FEA4B.2891750E ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 14:53:41 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Info. on Pd in catalytic converters
References: <v01530500b8a476cda027 [12.21.209.4]>
	 <013f01c1c0b9$e1534ca0$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F0892.E42EB378@ix.netcom.com>
	 <002001c1c12d$3fd81760$8837fea9 computer> <3C7F96FD.74F6F94@ix.netcom.com> <009201c1c139$3dee2b40$8837fea9@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"YB4YH2.0.fz2.VS_Vy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46389
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jones Beene wrote:

> From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
>
> > Well, Jones, let me restate the problem.  Uranium was proposed to fission when
> exposed to a CF environment.
>
> OK. Now I understand where you were starting from.
>
> In the older Japanes research that was on the web in short abstract form, they
> were apparanetly not looking for, nor suspecting, actual fission. They found the
> kind of transmutation (if you believe them)  that was somewhat like that
> "thorium remediation" thing of several years back.
>
> I guess it went nowhere in Japan either. I would be instructive to know why it
> went nowhere, but I guess there were some lawsuits here with the "Cincinattai"
> group or whatever they called it, and unhappy investors, so we may never know
> why
>
> > The problem then becomes, can a Pd-U alloy be made
> > nuclear-active by saturation with D2?
>
> Do you have any thoughts on that issue?

Pd can dissolve up to 10 at% U without forming another phase.  However, the region
of solubility when the structure is saturated with D is probably much narrower.
Nevertheless, this alloy would be very interesting to study.  I would suggest
starting at the 0.1 at % U level and work up or down in U content, depending on the
sensitivity to crack formation.

Ed

>
>
> Regards,
>
> Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 13:49:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10430;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:46:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 13:46:08 -0800
Message-ID: <3C7FF5C0.B0E01395 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 13:42:24 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"SYyIH.0.iY2.UQ_Vy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46387
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: What's New for Mar 01, 2002
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:07:31 -0500 (EST)
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
To: aki ix.netcom.com

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 1 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
correlated with sonoluminescence.   Any neutron emission was many
orders of magnitude too small to account for the tritium
production reported by the first group.  Although distinguished
physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco 13 years
ago, advised against publication, the editor has apparently
chosen not only to publish the work, but to do so with unusual
fanfare, involving even the cover of Science.  Perhaps Science
magazine covets the vast readership of Infinite Energy magazine. 

2. NUCLEAR TESTING: NUCLEAR WEAPONS DESIGN RESUMES.  Since 1992,
the policy has been to maintain existing weapons under a Science-
Based Stockpile Stewardship Program.  But the Bush Administration
has announced plans to resume design work on new warheads.  This
is expected to undermine nuclear non-proliferation, and lead to a
resumption of testing.  Speaking of testing, last week WN put the
nuclear test range 100 miles from the Yucca Mountain repository. 
Several readers corrected our geography.   Actually, the Nevada
Test Site lies adjacent to Yucca Mountain.  The nearest site,
Buggy, is only 12 miles from Yucca, plenty far enough to rule out
seismic problems, but close enough to arouse public concern.

3. DOOMSDAY CLOCK: IT'S NOW TWO MINUTES CLOSER TO MIDNIGHT.  The
symbolic clock was reset to 11:53, the closest to midnight since
1998, after both India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons (WN 12
Jun 98).  Scientists on the panel that controls the hands said
the 9/11 terrorist attacks were not the major factor in setting
the clock closer to midnight.  Rather, it was the lack of
progress toward nuclear disarmament.  If the U.S. actually
resumes nuclear  testing, the clock will presumably be set much
closer.

4. FALLOUT: "EVERYONE HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO FALLOUT FROM TESTING." 
So what?  A wildly irresponsible study from the Center of Disease
Control estimates that fallout from testing will result in 11,000
cancer deaths.  Would you believe zero?  Atmospheric testing was
dumb, and any testing now is dumber.  But the CDC study assumes a
linear, no-threshold model, which is clearly wrong.  There is no
evidence that low levels cause cancer and some evidence that low
radiation levels may stimulate the body's protective mechanisms.

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 14:24:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA31360;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:21:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:21:52 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301171256.00ae2fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:22:15 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
In-Reply-To: <3C7FF5C0.B0E01395 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hseoM1.0.mf7._x_Vy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46390
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Bob Park wrote:

>1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
>of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
>cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
>the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
>2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
>sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
>huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
>experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
>using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
>equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
>correlated with sonoluminescence.

This is interesting news. I hope the results can be replicated.

One failed attempt at replication does not mean the first experiment was 
wrong. Any scientist should know this.

Perhaps this is obvious, but if all journals follow Park's advice, progress 
would come to a halt. If journals always held back publication of 
experiments that were not replicated after one attempt, or when no attempts 
to replicate have yet been made, new discoveries would never be published. 
No one would hear about a breakthrough, and it would never be replicated. I 
wonder if that has ever occurred to him?


>Perhaps Science
>magazine covets the vast readership of Infinite Energy magazine.

We should be grateful to Park for this free advertising. He should realize 
that in the Internet age, when he mentions are named people can easily look 
us up.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 14:25:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA00959;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:24:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:24:44 -0800
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 14:16:57 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: 100% reproducibility finale
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <013d01c1c16e$cd6b2900$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"64Yuc3.0.uE.i-_Vy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46391
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is note of apology to Vortex for my part in the recent spate of hot air
over the "100% reproducibility issue." You don't need the wasted bandwidth and I
don't need the aggravation of dealing with a troll who absolutely refuses to
read and understand the content of his own postings, much less admit glaring
error.

I would prefer not to be further involved in this kind of pre-dementia, so I
will place Rothwell in my "kill file" and refrain from any further rhetoric on
any issue that doesn't related to creative ideas and alternative energy
experimentation.

In the unlikely event that Rothwell does have another spark of creativity, as he
almost showed us with the Catalytic Converter idea, I hope someone will forward
it to me, as otherwise it is unlikely that he will recognize its importance,
especially if it involves getting one's hand's dirty.

As a matter of fact, I am off to the local junk yard with a couple of smiling
green TJ's and hope to return with a newish CC and plenty of the right sized
connectors to run a modified Les Case experiment using RF heating and a direct
converter of an original design. As the song says "I'll fix your flat tire Merle
/ Don't you get your country-pickin' fingers all covered with erl..."

BTW if you live in any big city you have probably noticed what appear to be
numerous foreign nationals congregating around junk yards. If you take along a
picture of what you want and flash some green, you can probably be outa there
with a new toy faster than you can say "catalytica mas pequeno"

Here is some parting advice for Mr Rothwell,

Get out of denial, get some professional help and read the following:

The "I Need to Be Right" Way of Thinking
by Lynne Namka, Ed. D., © 1997

One of life's biggest set-ups is living with the erroneous belief that your way
is the only way. Some people seem to have taken a life course called, How To Be
Absolutely Sure of Everything! People who feel constantly threatened and angry
when others question their actions live a limited life.

Fear is the major dynamic operating in this condition. People who have the need
to be right usually are very strong and are not usually afraid of the most
common fears of physical pain, heights, snakes, public speaking, etc. Their
hidden fear is feeling vulnerable, emotional and out of control. They have a low
tolerance for emotional pain.  They use the sense of being right as a narcotic
for unruly feelings.

Here is the gist of a question asked on "The Institute for Psychological Health
website:

Q: I am requesting information on "the need to be right." I am in a relationship
where my partner has the need to be right all the time. Even when he is wrong,
he tries to argue it right. What is this behavior? It's very frustrating.

Dr. A.N: Some people do have this trait where they want to be right all the time
and they rationalize their position. It is *not* prudent to argue with them at
that point in time. But probably when they are in the receptive mood they need
to be told that the difference between right and appropriate.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 14:35:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07305;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:35:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:35:07 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301172804.03d33240 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:29:40 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301171256.00ae2fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <3C7FF5C0.B0E01395 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"y2XgM2.0.rn1.Q80Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46392
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>We should be grateful to Park for this free advertising. He should realize 
>that in the Internet age, when he mentions are named people can easily 
>look us up.

Meant: " . . . when he mentions our name . . ." Sorry. Late in the day 
voice input gets squirrely.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 14:35:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07440;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:35:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:35:16 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301173409.03d16050 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:35:29 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: EPA regulator letter of resignation
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"pfmtT.0.wp1.Y80Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46393
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A depressing energy story. See:

http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/muck/muck030102.asp?source=daily

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 14:46:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA12832;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:43:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 14:43:58 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301173816.03cf4130 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:44:22 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: 100% reproducibility finale
In-Reply-To: <013d01c1c16e$cd6b2900$8837fea9 computer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"UgnU43.0.L83.jG0Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46394
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>This is note of apology to Vortex for my part in the recent spate of hot 
>air over the "100% reproducibility issue." You don't need the wasted 
>bandwidth and I don't need the aggravation of dealing with a troll who 
>absolutely refuses to read and understand . . .

I think it is a mistake to personalize the discussion, and make it Beene 
versus Rothwell. I think Beene should read Table 10 carefully, and tell us 
what he thinks it means. It is a very simple table and frankly I cannot 
imagine how anyone could dispute what it means. (Type A Pd is listed as JM 
(F/P) Pd, as explained elsewhere.)

If he disagrees with the paper, or he thinks Table 10 is a 
misrepresentation, he should direct his objections to the author, not me.

As far as I can tell, Beene is the one who has "absolutely refused to read 
and understand" this table. Perhaps his emotional objections are form of 
cognitive dissonance? Or if does understand it, he refuses to share his 
understanding with us, and tell us why the numbers for "JM (F/F) Pd" do not 
mean what they say.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 15:24:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA32496;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:21:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 15:21:21 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301181657.03d16050 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 18:21:42 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Mitsubishi U CF experiments
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"M3i8r2.0.Zx7.lp0Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46395
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ed Storms said that uranium is not a good choice for cathode material, 
because it forms uranium oxide. I mentioned the tests Mitsubishi is 
presently conducting with uranium CF. These are gas loading, not 
electrochemical. Also, I think there is a thin film layer of Pd on top of 
the U.

They are looking for transmutations in U. Members of the audience at JCF3 
urge them to try radioactive species of U. They said management has had 
some safety concerns but they hoped it will allow this.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 16:14:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA30847;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:11:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:11:11 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 11:10:36 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <n6508usflbuqs2pjocli175pirus4gm79b 4ax.com>
References: <3C7FF5C0.B0E01395 ix.netcom.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020301171256.00ae2fa8@pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020301171256.00ae2fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA30802
Resent-Message-ID: <"pa2501.0.sX7.UY1Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46396
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jed Rothwell's message of Fri, 01 Mar 2002 17:22:15 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>Bob Park wrote:
>
>>1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
>>of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
>>cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
>>the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
>>2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
>>sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
>>huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
>>experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
>>using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
>>equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
>>correlated with sonoluminescence.

I'm not sure if this has been previously suggested on vortex, but just
in case it hasn't, I'll present it now.
In a sonoluminescence bubble, temperatures do get high enough to break
up molecules, strip some electrons etc. So it wouldn't be too surprising
if the Mills catalysts H, O, and or O++ were formed. These in turn could
produce some hydrinos (deuterinos), and consequently lead to some
fusion, even if the catalysts are not ideal.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 18:52:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA10583;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 18:49:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 18:49:25 -0800
From: "Matthew Rogers" <matt accelnet.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: PD Material Properties
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 18:49:15 -0800
Message-ID: <003301c1c194$d7c24c00$0501a8c0 kitty>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
In-Reply-To: <v01530500b8a2e6c0afda [12.110.74.112]>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"GnVdd1.0.Hb2.rs3Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46397
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

V-
	I have been going over the last few weeks discussions, and a common thread
of thought always comes up.
The properties of a material under test effect the test.

So in response, I ask what are the material properties of PD ?

What is its crystalline lattice structure as a metal ?
What is its malleability ? IE, can it be beaten and folded to produce ultra
thin layers like Gold or soft iron ?

Iron can be beaten, forged and quenched, and a single block can be folded
over 200 times this way to produce molecule thick layers. In the presence of
CO2, it produces a fine carbon steel that is so strong, it can be sharpened
into a blade and cut steel.

Gold and Silver can be beaten into layers so thin, you can see through them.
This is how Gold foil used in artwork works.

Then again gold and silver can be electroplated.

My other question relates to vapor deposition in a vacuum.

Thin film diamond's and semiconductor' industry use a combination of vapor
deposition and chemical etching to produce materials that have completely
different effects'

The current thinking today surmises that the CF is happening at very small
distances inside the crystallaine structure of the material.

So my question is, Is there any work modeling by computer in 3d space the
nature of the materials used ?

Again, maybe I am in left field here, but the thoughts and reported
experiments seem to show that until we can model what is happening at the
atomic level in these circumstances, we cannot reproduce the material.

For instance,
	In crystalline Ice ( H2-0 ) there are several different ways Ice can make
crystals.
In Carbon, we know it can be Cubic ( diamond ), Planar ( Graphite )
Spherical Geodesic (Buckyballs) and Linear Geodesic ( Buckytubes ), and Thin
Film ordered cubic.

With the presence of impurities in Diamond, we get different colors, and
slightly different electrical properties.

With Ceramic high temp super conductive materials, if everyone remembers,
the FIRST report of the material listed one of the rare earths wrong, yet
the people who made the reproduced experiment using a Different material. It
turns out there are lots of different rare earth ceramics become super
conductive at higher temperatures.

Any Ideas along these lines ?

Thanks,
	Matt







-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2002 11:43 AM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: vortex-l rules

**************************************************************************
Vortex-L Rules:

1. If VORTEX-L proves very useful or interesting to you, please consider
   making a $10US/yr donation to help cover operating expenses.  If you
   cannot afford this, please feel free to participate anyway.  If you
   would like to give more, please do!  Direct your check to the
   moderator, address above.  Any help you can give is sincerely
   appreciated.

2. This is not the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup; ridicule, debunkery, and
   namecalling between believers and skeptics are forbidden.  The tone
   should be one of legitimate disagreement and respectful debate.
   Vortex-L is a big nasty nest of 'true believers' (hopefully having
   some tendency to avoid self-deception,) and skeptics may as well leave
   in disgust.  But if your mind is open, hop on board!  Help us test
   "crazy" claims rather than ridiculing them or explaining them away.
   (For a good analysis of the negative aspects of skepticism, see ZEN AND
   THE ART OF DEBUNKERY by D. Drasin, on WEIRD SCIENCE page.)

3. Small email files please.  The limit is set to 40K right now, those
   exceeding the limit will be forwarded to Bill Beaty.  If you wish to
   start extremely off-topic discussions, please feel free to exchange
   initial messages on vortex-L, but MOVE THE DISCUSSION TO PRIVATE MAIL
   IMMEDIATELY.  Some members are on limited service, or have to pay for
   received email.  Diagrams and graphics can be mailed to me or John
   Logajan and posted on our webpages for viewing.

4. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE: when you reply to a message DON'T include the
   ENTIRE message in your reply.  Always edit it a bit and delete
   something.  The more you delete, the less traffic overload.  The entire
   message should really only be included if: (A) you are replying to a
   message that is many days old, or (B) you are doing a point-by-point
   reply to many parts of a message.  Many vortex users must pay by the
   kilobyte for receiving message traffic, and large amounts of redundant
   messages are irritating and expensive.  So, when including a quoted
   message in your reply, ALWAYS DELETE SOMETHING, the more the better.

5. Please do not include any other email list in the TO line or the CC
   line of your messages to vortex-L.  In the past this has caused
   thread leakage between different list and redundant messages as
   replies from subscribers go to both lists.  It's OK to manually forward
   mail from other lists to vortex-L, as long as the TO line and CC line
   has only vortex-L and no other list.

6. "Junkmail" email advertizing will not be tolerated.  While not illegal
   yet, widecasting of junk-email ads to listservers is against the
   Unwritten Rules of the Internet.  Anyone who spams vortex-L with junkmail
   will be referred to the Internet Vigilante Justice team.  ;)
   Occasional on-topic advertizing by long-time vortex-L users is
acceptable.


Regards,

Horace Heffner


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 19:02:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15078;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 19:01:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 19:01:18 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 14:00:45 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <96f08ucic32oo17oqicl4qdb0mc1h2mk8l 4ax.com>
References: <v01530500b89a7cbd8980 [12.21.209.87]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500b89a7cbd8980 [12.21.209.87]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA15048
Resent-Message-ID: <"Lg_T03.0.Rh3.-14Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46398
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Feb 2002 01:43:17
-0900:
Hi,
[snip]
>We have had this discussion before?  I don't think this argument applies to
>stripping reactions in the stellerator, for example.  I don't believe that
>for each free neutron released that He3 is created by stripping.  It is
>also not reasonable that a proton can be absorbed from a low energy
>interaction with a heavy nucleus, i.e. in the stellerator glass walls.  If
>that happens then there is still a big mystery as to how the energy
>exchange happens between the heavy nucleus and the deuteron.
[snip]
I did a web search, but was unable to find any reference to low energy
stripping reactions in stellarators. Could you provide a reference?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  1 23:27:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA00955;
	Fri, 1 Mar 2002 23:25:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 23:25:13 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 18:24:39 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <i2h08uc8c1vkisgnbvf2h9j5jrlbpi9g4o 4ax.com>
References: <v01530501b8999cb8d6bc [12.21.209.87]> <ag887ug31qi3ko4jvema31klog80vvle4o@4ax.com> <01ec01c1ba70$df893820$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <01ec01c1ba70$df893820$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA00924
Resent-Message-ID: <"4l0WI2.0.pE.Pv7Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46399
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Wed, 20 Feb 2002 16:44:08 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Two points. First, depending on the varieity of stripping, one of the
>two nucleons is not always absorbed by the target. In fact, in the
>case of "spallation stripping," where there is an actual photon
>mediated exchange, it is rare that either particle is absorbed. But
>spallation is a higher energy (thermal) form of stripping, and we are
>talking about non-thermal stripping in regard to having much relevance
>for CF.

Once again I could find no reference to low energy stripping, though
plenty of references to stripping involving high energy deuterons. In
the latter case however the particles themselves have more than enough
kinetic energy to provide the 2.2 MeV.

>It the energy were
>borrowed, i.e. QM "time shifting" the transfer would have to be
>instantaneous, and this is sometimes not the case - but you are

Could you provide a URL to an example where it isn't the case?

>correct that at certain D polariztion levels,  "borrowed" energy
>appears to be the major mechanism for breaking the bond.
>
>The really interesting question in terms of maximizing the yield and
>minimizing the threshold input is whether or not the QM stripping
>reaction can be optimized so that there is no immediate absorption,

I would still like to see a good reference for a "QM stripping
reaction".
[snip]
>Stripping has been observed in plasmas of less than I ev, that's
>right, less than one electron volt, and even disappears when the the

This is the reference I would like to see more than all the rest.
[snip]


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 05:34:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA08332;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 05:31:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 05:31:06 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 08:30:47 -0800
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8A63E37.1794%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <3C7FF5C0.B0E01395 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZiRkD2.0.522.QGDWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46400
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 3/1/02 1:42 PM, "Akira Kawasaki" <aki ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Subject: What's New for Mar 01, 2002
> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:07:31 -0500 (EST)
> From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
> To: aki ix.netcom.com
> 
> WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 1 Mar 02   Washington, DC
> 
> 1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
> of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
> cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
> the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
> 2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
> sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
> huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
> experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
> using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
> equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
> correlated with sonoluminescence.   Any neutron emission was many
> orders of magnitude too small to account for the tritium
> production reported by the first group.

This is marvelous news since it mirrors the finding in previous cold fusion
experiments that tritium, when found, is many orders of magnitude greater
than neutron production in similar or the same experiments. I bet dollars to
donuts that the authors of the positive report and any commentary in Science
will make no reference to previous cold fusion work. We shall see.

Park's unscientific pre-emptive attack shows how deeply he fears being wrong
about cold fusion. The elevation of a cold-fusion-like process to the pages
of Science magazine must give him a sinking feeling.


>Although distinguished
> physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco 13 years
> ago, advised against publication,

So, Park is privy to the innermost doing at Science magazine as well as at
the USPTO!  As I said, that tree that took him down -- temporarily (too bad)
-- was unfortunately not big enough.  And, we hear that "PR" consequences of
publication played a role in the "peer review" process.  What a farce!


>the editor has apparently
> chosen not only to publish the work, but to do so with unusual
> fanfare, involving even the cover of Science.  Perhaps Science
> magazine covets the vast readership of Infinite Energy magazine.

Yes, this free advertising is quite welcome. Maybe some bright science
journalists will draw a connection to CF -- and Park will have helped them
do that!  He would not have conducted this What's New tirade unless it was
patently obvious that the process might have something to do with cold
fusion.

If anyone has access to a pre-print of the Science paper and any associated
commentary, Infinite Energy would very much like it to appear on our fax
machine before we get our copy of  March 8 Science:  603-224-5975

--Gene Mallove   www.infinite-energy.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 08:58:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20036;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 08:55:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 08:55:52 -0800
Message-ID: <3C80F746.DA624A45 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 10:01:12 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
References: <B8A63E37.1794%editor infinite-energy.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"oelS31.0.zu4.OGGWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46401
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



"Eugene F. Mallove" wrote:

> On 3/1/02 1:42 PM, "Akira Kawasaki" <aki ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> > Subject: What's New for Mar 01, 2002
> > Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2002 16:07:31 -0500 (EST)
> > From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
> > To: aki ix.netcom.com
> >
> > WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 1 Mar 02   Washington, DC
> >
> > 1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
> > of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
> > cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
> > the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
> > 2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
> > sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
> > huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
> > experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
> > using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
> > equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
> > correlated with sonoluminescence.   Any neutron emission was many
> > orders of magnitude too small to account for the tritium
> > production reported by the first group.
>
> This is marvelous news since it mirrors the finding in previous cold fusion
> experiments that tritium, when found, is many orders of magnitude greater
> than neutron production in similar or the same experiments. I bet dollars to
> donuts that the authors of the positive report and any commentary in Science
> will make no reference to previous cold fusion work. We shall see.
>
> Park's unscientific pre-emptive attack shows how deeply he fears being wrong
> about cold fusion. The elevation of a cold-fusion-like process to the pages
> of Science magazine must give him a sinking feeling.

It remains to be seen whether this observation has anything to do with cold
fusion.  Cold fusion is a nuclear process that occurs in an environment able to
overcome the Coulomb barrier using a process not requiring the application of
high energy.  A collapsing bubble not only has very high energy, but it also
does not have an environment considered by many models to be necessary.  People
doing this work have attributed the results to a variation on hot fusion.   On
the other hand, the CF reaction is proposed to occur within a metal lattice
after a bubble collapses on its surface.  This is a much different environment
then when a bubble collapses within a liquid, as is being done in these
studies.   I think it premature for us in the cold fusion field to assume a
relationship, Robert Park not withstanding.  The question that must be answered
is, "Do these studies have surfaces within the cell on which bubbles are
collapsing, thereby producing a CF reaction which is being overlooked by the
investigators?"

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 10:50:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA00677;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:47:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:47:39 -0800
Message-ID: <008801c1c21a$e0890960$5236a6d8 ronscomputer>
From: "Ron Marshall" <ronstar texas.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <B8A63E37.1794%editor infinite-energy.com> <3C80F746.DA624A45@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 01, 2002]
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 11:53:56 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"4R8-c1.0.RA.AvHWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46402
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

"Edmund Storms"  wrote:

>>
It remains to be seen whether this observation has anything to do with cold
fusion.  Cold fusion is a nuclear process that occurs in an environment able
to
overcome the Coulomb barrier using a process not requiring the application
of
high energy.  A collapsing bubble not only has very high energy, but it also
does not have an environment considered by many models to be necessary.
People
doing this work have attributed the results to a variation on hot fusion.
On
the other hand, the CF reaction is proposed to occur within a metal lattice
after a bubble collapses on its surface.  This is a much different
environment
then when a bubble collapses within a liquid, as is being done in these
studies.   I think it premature for us in the cold fusion field to assume a
relationship, Robert Park not withstanding.  The question that must be
answered
is, "Do these studies have surfaces within the cell on which bubbles are
collapsing, thereby producing a CF reaction which is being overlooked by the
investigators?"
<<

Regardless of the cause it seems like the signature of cold fusion
reactions, high tritium and low neutron count, is there.
I wonder if excess heat was measured.

Ron Marshall

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 13:08:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA25889;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 13:06:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 13:06:08 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8131EE.3838D816 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 14:11:53 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: PD Material Properties
References: <003301c1c194$d7c24c00$0501a8c0 kitty>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"FXWmR2.0.PK6.0xJWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46403
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Matthew Rogers wrote:

> V-
>         I have been going over the last few weeks discussions, and a common thread
> of thought always comes up.
> The properties of a material under test effect the test.
>
> So in response, I ask what are the material properties of PD ?
>
> What is its crystalline lattice structure as a metal ?

face-centered-cubic (fcc)

>
> What is its malleability ?

Soft but will work harden.

> IE, can it be beaten and folded to produce ultra
> thin layers like Gold or soft iron ?

Yes, with difficulty.

>
> Then again gold and silver can be electroplated.

So can Pd.

>
>
> My other question relates to vapor deposition in a vacuum.
>
> Thin film diamond's and semiconductor' industry use a combination of vapor
> deposition and chemical etching to produce materials that have completely
> different effects'
>
> The current thinking today surmises that the CF is happening at very small
> distances inside the crystallaine structure of the material.
>
> So my question is, Is there any work modeling by computer in 3d space the
> nature of the materials used ?

Modeling has not been done.  Besides, the surface composition with respect to D and
impurity contents is unknown, as well as its structure.  It is pointless to model
what is not known.

>
>
> Again, maybe I am in left field here, but the thoughts and reported
> experiments seem to show that until we can model what is happening at the
> atomic level in these circumstances, we cannot reproduce the material.

True

>
>
> For instance,
>         In crystalline Ice ( H2-0 ) there are several different ways Ice can make
> crystals.
> In Carbon, we know it can be Cubic ( diamond ), Planar ( Graphite )
> Spherical Geodesic (Buckyballs) and Linear Geodesic ( Buckytubes ), and Thin
> Film ordered cubic.
>
> With the presence of impurities in Diamond, we get different colors, and
> slightly different electrical properties.
>
> With Ceramic high temp super conductive materials, if everyone remembers,
> the FIRST report of the material listed one of the rare earths wrong, yet
> the people who made the reproduced experiment using a Different material. It
> turns out there are lots of different rare earth ceramics become super
> conductive at higher temperatures.

Until the necessary resources become available, creation of the
nuclear-actice-environment will have to be by trial and error.  The necessary tools
are available, but they are too expensive to be used by people working in CANR.

Ed

>
>
> Any Ideas along these lines ?
>
> Thanks,
>         Matt

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 13:38:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA05214;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 13:35:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 13:35:40 -0800
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 16:43:45 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: BBGB LUTEC  ?  {spelling? }
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020302163838.3111A-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"hGjVD3.0.IH1.iMKWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46404
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear Vo.,


	Can someone please let us know as a useful URL
	Or BBGB  Blow By Grinding Blow ...
	What "LUTEC" is?  
	
	I am not sure of the spelling.

	I am getting a few pointers toward posts on the topic, but they
are almost all "He said-He Said"  Yes-huh/nunh-HUH ...
	
	I am getting the idea it is-was may be a ?motor?  ?generator?


	Thanks,

					J


	POSTSCRIPTS:

 (...and YES... I CAN borrow time on a browser based system to see URLs!) 
	(not always, but sometimes)

					J


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  2 17:19:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA16289;
	Sat, 2 Mar 2002 15:15:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 15:15:45 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [209.249.70.92]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BBGB LUTEC ? {spelling? }
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2002 15:14:55 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F339tDkLWwoID1hiyrK0000e690 hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Mar 2002 23:14:55.0641 (UTC) FILETIME=[10AAD090:01C1C240]
Resent-Message-ID: <"E1_Gy3.0.K-3.XqLWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46405
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

John,

I believe this was a motor/generator patented internationally by a couple of 
Australians.  It was supposedly over unity.  Walter Rosenthal went to visit, 
and determined it was another case of inventor's delusion.  They were 
measuring incorrectly.  They had a web site briefly, but quickly pulled it.

Mark


>From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
>Subject: BBGB LUTEC  ?  {spelling? }
>Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 16:43:45 -0500 (EST)
>
>
>	Dear Vo.,
>
>
>	Can someone please let us know as a useful URL
>	Or BBGB  Blow By Grinding Blow ...
>	What "LUTEC" is?
>
>	I am not sure of the spelling.
>
>	I am getting a few pointers toward posts on the topic, but they
>are almost all "He said-He Said"  Yes-huh/nunh-HUH ...
>
>	I am getting the idea it is-was may be a ?motor?  ?generator?
>
>
>	Thanks,
>
>					J
>
>
>	POSTSCRIPTS:
>
>  (...and YES... I CAN borrow time on a browser based system to see URLs!)
>	(not always, but sometimes)
>
>					J
>
>




_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 04:58:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA05420
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 04:58:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 04:58:07 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 04:58:07 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 04:58:06 2002
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 12:57:37 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: vortex-l rules
Message-ID: <20020303125737.GC80125 genius.tao.org.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>,
	vortex-l eskimo.com
References: <v01530500b8a2e6c0afda [12.110.74.112]> <20020301124354.GB30031@genius.tao.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CblX+4bnyfN0pR09"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020301124354.GB30031 genius.tao.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i
Resent-Message-ID: <"xUkHB2.0.GK1.UtXWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46406
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--CblX+4bnyfN0pR09
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Mar 01, 2002 at 12:43:54PM +0000, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 10:43:19AM -0900, Horace Heffner wrote:
> > ***********************************************************************=
***
> > Vortex-L Rules:
> >=20
> > 1. If VORTEX-L proves very useful or interesting to you, please consider
> >    making a $10US/yr donation to help cover operating expenses.  If you
> >    cannot afford this, please feel free to participate anyway.  If you
> >    would like to give more, please do!  Direct your check to the
> >    moderator, address above.  Any help you can give is sincerely
> >    appreciated.
>=20
> If it's costing too much to run, I'm happy to support it for free.
>=20

Of course I'm not suggesting that people don't donate if they can afford
it :).

Joe

--CblX+4bnyfN0pR09
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAjyCHcEACgkQXVIcjOaxUBYvhgCeIfu0e3IezgMCgud/2nMSf/yR
NBsAoLI3g7+DeuCzgdF/H/FHk3iotSZ4
=sfiY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--CblX+4bnyfN0pR09--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 14:48:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03729;
	Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:04:18 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:04:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BBGB LUTEC  ?  {spelling? }
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 08:58:55 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <m3758ug1enu0s4up5gqg5glbuc9asvjdlg 4ax.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020302163838.3111A-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020302163838.3111A-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id OAA03510
Resent-Message-ID: <"8krQY3.0.Aw.TtfWy" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46407
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  John Schnurer's message of Sat, 2 Mar 2002 16:43:45 -0500:
Hi John,
[snip]

>	Can someone please let us know as a useful URL
>	Or BBGB  Blow By Grinding Blow ...
>	What "LUTEC" is?  
[snip]
You may wish to check out
http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf .


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 14:59:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA24397
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:59:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:59:47 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 14:59:47 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 14:59:47 2002
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a0510030ab8a4c8dbb106 [209.23.136.19]>
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 16:57:54 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: William Thomas Interview
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ku2Kg3.0.vy5.ZhgWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46408
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: O
X-Status: 

Last night Art interviewed a very interesting man. He was in bio 
hazards during the Gulf War, and his first book is Bringing the War 
Home. I assume that this talks about Gulf War Vets bringing some kind 
of contagion home and infecting their families.

Most of last night's show was on Chem Trails. He was talking about 
the use of barium stearite which can be used as a lens. He thinks 
that they are using it to focus the energy from the HAARP device.


Another mixture involves aluminium powder, quartz and carbon black. 
They have been spraying tanker plane loads of this stuff in an effort 
to modify the weather. He had interviewed a man in air traffic 
control who noticed that there was a degrading in his radar. He 
called other ATC centers and they told him that during these periods 
they had been told that the military was doing exercises.

He also mentioned that Nicola Tesla's papers were taken to Wright 
Patterson Air Force Base. The official story is that they lost them. 
He says that the plan is to develop weapons based on this technology.

Mr. Thomas's website is at http://www3.bc.sympatico.ca/Willthomas/homepage.html
-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 15:48:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12290
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 15:48:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 15:48:58 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 15:48:58 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 15:48:58 2002
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 18:57:04 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: URL does not load........ BBGB LUTEC  ?  {spelling? }
In-Reply-To: <m3758ug1enu0s4up5gqg5glbuc9asvjdlg 4ax.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020303185601.175S-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qZTYI2.0.p_2.gPhWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46409
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Dear Robin,

	This URL is not loading........

	More ideas, plea-as-?
	

On Mon, 4 Mar 2002, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> In reply to  John Schnurer's message of Sat, 2 Mar 2002 16:43:45 -0500:
> Hi John,
> [snip]
> 
> >	Can someone please let us know as a useful URL
> >	Or BBGB  Blow By Grinding Blow ...
> >	What "LUTEC" is?  
> [snip]
> You may wish to check out
> http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/orthogonal/skep/lutec1.pdf .
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robin van Spaandonk
> 
> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
> 
> ....Put the "bottom line" at the top!
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 16:09:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA19469
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 16:09:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 16:09:49 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 16:09:49 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 16:09:49 2002
Message-Id: <v01530501b8a8439c86be [12.21.208.234]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 12:53:39 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: National Compact Stellerator Facility
Resent-Message-ID: <"9VFgQ2.0._l4.DjhWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46410
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: O
X-Status: 

Old fashion returns: a princeton tokamak is being replaced with a stellerator.

<http://www.jlab.org/news/internet/2002/fyi02-12.html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 17:44:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20683
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:26 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:26 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 17:44:25 2002
Message-Id: <v01530502b8a84490bffe [12.21.208.234]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 12:53:42 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Resent-Message-ID: <"F7Fbt1.0.w25.v5jWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46411
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:00 PM 3/2/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Feb 2002 01:43:17
>-0900:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>We have had this discussion before?  I don't think this argument applies to
>>stripping reactions in the stellerator, for example.  I don't believe that
>>for each free neutron released that He3 is created by stripping.  It is
>>also not reasonable that a proton can be absorbed from a low energy
>>interaction with a heavy nucleus, i.e. in the stellerator glass walls.  If
>>that happens then there is still a big mystery as to how the energy
>>exchange happens between the heavy nucleus and the deuteron.
>[snip]
>I did a web search, but was unable to find any reference to low energy
>stripping reactions in stellarators. Could you provide a reference?

I have looked around a bit and can not find one either.  I may have read
about it in Scientific American many years ago, but I just don't remember
for sure now.  I think "Project Sherwood" (which included the stellerator
at Princeton's Forrestal labs I think) is the thing to research for
relevant information.  It may in fact have been the Project Sherwood Pinch
studies, along with Britain's ZETA etc., that actually dashed the hopes
that the neutrons from the stellerator were from fusion.  There ARE ref's
to pinch studies showing anomalous amounts of neutrons, I think.  A good
ref. on Project Sherwood is: Bishop, A.S. 1958. Project Sherwood: The U.S.
Program in Controlled Fusion, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, available for a
few US bucks plus shipping on Abe's Books web site.

About the stellerator, in that day, around 1958, it was mainly an issue of
whether fusion was happening at all and not whether stripping was happening
at low energies.  However, the temperature the stellerator was operating at
was in fact less than that required for fusion in significant quatities,
which is about a mere 20 keV, far from the 2.22 MeV required to break the
P-N bond in D.  If I recall, this is why stripping was a such big surprise
in the first place, but, at the moment I can't find an article to prove
that.  Certainly it SHOULD be a surprise that 20 keV collisons can free
neutrons from D.  Similarly, the fusor doesn not produce much out in the
fusion range, and certainly does not produce an observable number of 2.22
MeV deuterons, yet it produces copius neutrons.  There are lots of fusor
refs on the web.

Back to the main subject, but for a less mainstream ref. see:

<http://www.mv.com/ipusers/zeropoint/IEHTML/FEATURE/FEATR/threedec.html>

which is: "Three Decades of Cold Fusion Prior to Pons and Fleischmann
by Peter Graneau and Neal Graneau"  (Originally Published September-October,
1999 In Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #27)

Of some interest is the statement by Graneau and Graneau about selected Project
Sherwood results: "... neutron production was quenched by the application of
a weak axial magnetic field (50 - 100 gauss), implying that collisions were
dominated by electromagnetic rather than thermal forces."   Quoting Bishop:
"The deuterons, therefore, did not have random velocities, as required for
true thermonuclear conditions. Instead, they had somehow acquired axial
velocities greater than they would have achieved by being accelerated the
entire length of the tube! For example, with only 20 kV applied across the
tube, the deuterons responsible for producing the neutrons were found to
have an average energy of the order of 50 kV."

Of other note in the this article is of Haines and Robson investigation of
current pulses through about 10 cm-long "frozen deuterium wires."  Haines
and Robson estimated that "the temperature might have been of the order of
one million degrees whereas hot fusion requires at least 100 million
degrees."  A million degrees corresponds to about 86 volts, though there
would of course be a very very small number of atoms out in the tail of the
thermal distribution at 20 keV.  There is no reason to believe an
observable number of 2.22 MeV or even 1.11 MeV deuterons were produced.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 17:44:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA20724
	for billb eskimo.com; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:28 -0800
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 17:44:28 -0800
X-Envelope-From: vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar  3 17:44:28 2002
Message-Id: <v01530500b8a882a1551a [12.110.74.98]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Old-Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 16:48:12 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Resent-Message-ID: <"Lt2bv2.0.W35.y5jWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46412
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
X-Diagnostic: /usr/lib/sendmail vortex-l-dist eskimo.com failed
X-Diagnostic: Mail coming from a daemon, ignored
X-Diagnostic: Possible loopback problem
X-Envelope-To: vortex-l
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:00 PM 3/2/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Feb 2002 01:43:17
>-0900:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>We have had this discussion before?  I don't think this argument applies to
>>stripping reactions in the stellerator, for example.  I don't believe that
>>for each free neutron released that He3 is created by stripping.  It is
>>also not reasonable that a proton can be absorbed from a low energy
>>interaction with a heavy nucleus, i.e. in the stellerator glass walls.  If
>>that happens then there is still a big mystery as to how the energy
>>exchange happens between the heavy nucleus and the deuteron.
>[snip]
>I did a web search, but was unable to find any reference to low energy
>stripping reactions in stellarators. Could you provide a reference?

I have looked around a bit and can not find one either.  I may have read
about it in Scientific American many years ago, but I just don't remember
for sure now.  I think "Project Sherwood" (which included the stellerator
at Princeton's Forrestal labs I think) is the thing to research for
relevant information.  It may in fact have been the Project Sherwood Pinch
studies, along with Britain's ZETA etc., that actually dashed the hopes
that the neutrons from the stellerator were from fusion.  There ARE ref's
to pinch studies showing anomalous amounts of neutrons, I think.  A good
ref. on Project Sherwood is: Bishop, A.S. 1958. Project Sherwood: The U.S.
Program in Controlled Fusion, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, available for a
few US bucks plus shipping on Abe's Books web site.

About the stellerator, in that day, around 1958, it was mainly an issue of
whether fusion was happening at all and not whether stripping was happening
at low energies.  However, the temperature the stellerator was operating at
was in fact less than that required for fusion in significant quatities,
which is about a mere 20 keV, far from the 2.22 MeV required to break the
P-N bond in D.  If I recall, this is why stripping was a such big surprise
in the first place, but, at the moment I can't find an article to prove
that.  Certainly it SHOULD be a surprise that 20 keV collisons can free
neutrons from D.  Similarly, the fusor doesn not produce much out in the
fusion range, and certainly does not produce an observable number of 2.22
MeV deuterons, yet it produces copius neutrons.  There are lots of fusor
refs on the web.

Back to the main subject, but for a less mainstream ref. see:

<http://www.mv.com/ipusers/zeropoint/IEHTML/FEATURE/FEATR/threedec.html>

which is: "Three Decades of Cold Fusion Prior to Pons and Fleischmann
by Peter Graneau and Neal Graneau"  (Originally Published September-October,
1999 In Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #27)

Of some interest is the statement by Graneau and Graneau about selected Project
Sherwood results: "... neutron production was quenched by the application of
a weak axial magnetic field (50 - 100 gauss), implying that collisions were
dominated by electromagnetic rather than thermal forces."   Quoting Bishop:
"The deuterons, therefore, did not have random velocities, as required for
true thermonuclear conditions. Instead, they had somehow acquired axial
velocities greater than they would have achieved by being accelerated the
entire length of the tube! For example, with only 20 kV applied across the
tube, the deuterons responsible for producing the neutrons were found to
have an average energy of the order of 50 kV."

Of other note in the this article is of Haines and Robson investigation of
current pulses through about 10 cm-long "frozen deuterium wires."  Haines
and Robson estimated that "the temperature might have been of the order of
one million degrees whereas hot fusion requires at least 100 million
degrees."  A million degrees corresponds to about 86 volts, though there
would of course be a very very small number of atoms out in the tail of the
thermal distribution at 20 keV.  There is no reason to believe an
observable number of 2.22 MeV or even 1.11 MeV deuterons were produced.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 04:13:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA08188;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 04:10:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 04:10:40 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 07:10:59 -0800
Subject: Sunday Times coverage of ORNL cold fusion-related process
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8A8CE83.17CC%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id EAA08156
Resent-Message-ID: <"qVedO3.0.s_1.0HsWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46413
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Cold fusion 'breakthrough' heralds clean nuclear power
By Jonathan Leake, Science Editor
The Sunday Times, UK
Sunday, March 3, 2002

Nuclear scientists will this week announce they may have
achieved a controlled form of cold fusion, a technology
that potentially offers humanity a limitless source of
clean energy.

The researchers are to publish evidence suggesting they
have successfully fused the nuclei of hydrogen atoms, so
recreating the processes that take place within the sun.

Until now the only way to achieve fusion has been through
nuclear weapons or in vast experimental machines that
cost billions of pounds. Both depend on generating
extremely high temperatures.

However, the latest research, by scientists at the
American government's Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
the University of Michigan, was done on a laboratory
bench using relatively simple and cheap equipment at room
temperature.

The study echoes the work of Professor Martin Fleischmann
and Stanley Pons who, in 1989, announced they had
achieved cold fusion at Southampton University but were
ridiculed when no one could repeat their work.

Fleischmann and Pons made what many now see as a fatal
mistake when they released their results at a press
conference rather than having them scrutinised by other
scientists before publication in an academic journal.

It is understood that Rusi Taleyarkhan from Oak Ridge,
Fred Becchetti from the University of Michigan and their
collaborator, Robert Nigmatulin, of the Russian Academy
of Sciences, have repeated their work and subjected it to
extensive peer review.

If confirmed, the discovery could rank among the most
important since the dawn of the nuclear age. The
scientists are, however, extremely cautious at this
stage, saying only that they have detected all the signs
of fusion rather than categorically confirming it.

Their technique uses pressure waves to generate tiny
bubbles in a solution of acetone that has been infused
with deuterium, a ''heavy'' form of hydrogen extracted
from sea water.

At the heart of most hydrogen atoms is a nucleus
comprising a single proton. Deuterium atoms, however,
have an additional particle, a neutron. This makes them
roughly twice as heavy and slightly unstable.

Physicists have long known that smashing two deuterium
atoms together can fuse them into tritium, a third form
of hydrogen with a proton and two neutrons. This fusion
releases vast amounts of energy. This was the principle
used to create the hydrogen bomb in 1945, but ever since
then scientists have been struggling to find a way to
control the process.

In the latest technique, the sound waves create bubbles
that expand with explosive force. As the wave passes, the
bubbles implode, generating extremely high temperatures.
This process is known as sono-luminescence after the
flashes of light emitted.

Until recently scientists could generate only
temperatures of tens of thousands of degrees, far short
of the sun's 10m Celsius. This appears to have been
solved by ''hitting'' the bubbles with another sound wave
that compresses them so rapidly that temperatures soar
and the deuterium fuses.

An insider said the researchers had detected ''promising
signs of fusion'' including the creation of tritium and,
crucially, the emission of neutrons. The researchers
believe the neutrons have energy levels consistent with
those that would be emitted by deuterium fusion.

This would enable them to escape the fate of Fleischmann
and Pons, whose readings of neutrons enabled them to
claim they had achieved fusion. It later emerged that
these neutrons could have been the results of
contamination.

Neil Turok, professor of theoretical physics at Cambridge
University, said the results, if confirmed, were
extremely exciting: ''Cold fusion has a bad history but
these laboratories are among the best in the world and
they will have taken every precaution to get it right.''

The research has major implications for other fusion
projects. Britain already hosts the Jet project at Culham
in Oxford, where a machine has been built to research
sustainable nuclear fusion reactions.

This weekend it emerged that Culham had scrapped its own
research into sono-luminescence and other low-tech forms
of fusion after a report from Thornton Greenland, a
former senior scientist, suggesting it was unlikely ever
to work.

Greenland said: ''I thought there was too little evidence
to show it would work, but this suggests I was wrong.''

Recently, Lord Sainsbury, the science minister, committed
Britain to joining an international project to build a £2
billion fusion machine called Iter, Latin for ''the
Way''.

Even this, however, will be able to sustain fusion
reactions for only 16 minutes. A proper fusion reactor
capable of producing power is thought to be 30-50 years
away.

Fleischmann, who now lives near Salisbury, still believes
his results were correct although he regrets allowing
colleagues to press him into publicising them before he
was ready.

He said: ''I hope they have achieved it. If they have, I
hope people are ready for it this time.''

***********************************************************
Dr. Rusi Taleyarkhan   (423)576-4735   zrt ornl.gov
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
1 Bear Creek Road
P.O. Box 2009
Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8045

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2000/n01032000_20001011.html
‘Soldier, Set Your Weapon on Stun’
By Jim Garamone   American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON -- There comes a time in many "Star Trek"
episodes when the captain tells armed crewmen, "Set your
phasers on stun." Don't you wish you could do that?

U.S. service members may be able to dial in the stopping
power of their weapons if a promising technology at the Oak
Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee proves effective.
Rusi Taleyarkhan leads the Oak Ridge team that's examining
the technology for the Department of Energy. DoD's Joint
Nonlethal Weapons Directorate at Quantico, Va., is
following the project.

The Oak Ridge project centers on high-energy cartridges
that contain water and aluminum as propellants. Taleyarkhan
and his crew demonstrated the technology using a modified
shotgun. Taleyarkhan’s background is in fusion technology
and the variable speed bullet was an outgrowth of his
research. That’s why the Energy Department is in charge of
the program.

The weapon works by electrically triggering the cartridge.
The aluminum liquefies and vaporizes the water, generating
the pressure that forces the round out the barrel. The
projectile could be made of lead, steel or even a fluid.

Unlike gunpowder, researchers say, the vapor "pulse" is
scaleable, meaning shooters can precisely vary the force
they want. They could set their weapons to "stun,"
"disable" or "destroy." The weapon would have a laser
rangefinder/aiming system to compute the force needed for
the projectile to have the desired effect whether the
target is point-blank or hundreds of yards away.

This would solve a problem law enforcement personnel and
military peacekeepers have using today's rubber bullets.
They're not effective at long ranges, but they can wound or
kill at close ranges if they hit a person in the wrong
place.

The Energy Department has been working on the concept for
about four years, said project manager Carl Pocratsky. It
has cost about $800,000. Researchers have known about the
vapor explosion phenomena for years, but scientists have
only recently developed an electrical firing mechanism
small enough to fit on a shotgun. The fist-sized electrical
pulse generator works with a 1.5-volt battery.

Pocratsky said a weapon should be ready for testing in
about two years.
***************************************************

http://www.physics.lsa.umich.edu/department/directory/bio.asp?ID=25
Physics Department Directory (photo)
Fred Becchetti        Professor
Office: 2241 Randall
University of Michigan   Department of Physics
500 East University     Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1120
Email: fdb umich.edu       becchetti@miphys.physics.lsa.umich.edu
Phone: 313-764-1598
http://www.physics.lsa.umich.edu/twinsol/
Additional Information:   Cell Phone: (734) 730-0664  Fax: 764-6843
Graduated from University of Minnesota in 1969.
Research Field: Nuclear, Experiment  Research Focus:
radioactive ion beams, heavy ion collisions,   nuclear instrumentation,
medical physics
Professor Becchetti and his group produce and study nuclear reactions
with short-lived unstable nuclei, such as 6He, 8Li and 7Be.
Studies of nuclear reactions involving these nuclei provide
new, detailed information on the creation of the elements in the Big
Bang and the present density and distribution of matter in the Universe.

The latter is one of the critical questions in physics, as most of the
matter in the Universe is not visible by normal observational methods.
This work includes the development of large superconducting magnetic
ion lens devices for unstable beam production, including a new 6 Tesla
dual-magnetic system presently in use at the University of Notre Dame.
The group's existing apparatus was one of the first to permit reliable
scattering measurements using unstable nuclear beams. Such
reactions have been proposed for development of gamma-ray lasers.
Recently, Professor Becchetti's group has been developing  techniques
to provide magnetic confinement of the dose from ion and photon beams
used in cancer therapy. Preliminary experiments  have been encouraging
and future experiments are planned in collaboration with the
Radiation Oncology group at the UM Hospital.
Randall Laboratory    500 E. University Ave.    Ann Arbor, Michigan
48109-1120      (734) 764-4437 -- Fax: (734) 763-9694

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 06:30:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30154;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 06:27:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 06:27:46 -0800
Message-ID: <20020304142745.69370.qmail web11206.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 06:27:45 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Sunday Times coverage of ORNL cold fusion-related process
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <B8A8CE83.17CC%editor infinite-energy.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wjqz13.0.yM7.YHuWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46414
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--- "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com> wrote:
> Cold fusion 'breakthrough' heralds clean nuclear power
> By Jonathan Leake, Science Editor
> The Sunday Times, UK
> Sunday, March 3, 2002
> 

Verry cool!  (no pun intended)
> ***********************************************************
> Dr. Rusi Taleyarkhan   (423)576-4735   zrt ornl.gov
> Oak Ridge National Laboratory
> 1 Bear Creek Road
> P.O. Box 2009
> Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8045
> 
>
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jan2000/n01032000_20001011.html
> ‘Soldier, Set Your Weapon on Stun’
> By Jim Garamone   American Forces Press Service
> WASHINGTON -- There comes a time in many "Star Trek"
> episodes when the captain tells armed crewmen, "Set your
> phasers on stun." Don't you wish you could do that?
> 
> U.S. service members may be able to dial in the stopping
> power of their weapons if a promising technology at the Oak
> Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee proves effective.
> Rusi Taleyarkhan leads the Oak Ridge team that's examining
> the technology for the Department of Energy. DoD's Joint
> Nonlethal Weapons Directorate at Quantico, Va., is
> following the project.
> 

Also very cool!


Articles like this is wht we all want to see!



=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball
http://sports.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 07:11:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA20084;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 07:09:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 07:09:00 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304100604.00adb478 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 10:08:59 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Sunday Times coverage of ORNL cold fusion-related process
In-Reply-To: <20020304142745.69370.qmail web11206.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <B8A8CE83.17CC%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-hFIl.0.kv4.CuuWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46415
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Charles Ford wrote:

>Articles like this is what we all want to see!

Except for the part about, "Professor Martin Fleischmann
and Stanley Pons . . . were ridiculed when no one could repeat their work." 
They were ridiculed despite the fact that hundreds repeated their work. I 
shall have to send the Sunday Times my standard protest letter . . . not 
that it will do any good.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 09:02:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17725;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 09:02:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 09:02:09 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8a959dae615 [12.21.208.69]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 08:05:57 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: National Compact Stellerator Facility
Resent-Message-ID: <"4vspx.0.tK4.GYwWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46416
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Old fashion returns: a princeton tokamak is being replaced with a stellerator.

<http://www.jlab.org/news/internet/2002/fyi02-12.html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 09:04:37 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17765;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 09:02:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 09:02:13 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501b8a959e6e911 [12.21.208.69]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 08:06:00 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Resent-Message-ID: <"X0TM_2.0.VL4.LYwWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46417
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:00 PM 3/2/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Thu, 21 Feb 2002 01:43:17
>-0900:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>We have had this discussion before?  I don't think this argument applies to
>>stripping reactions in the stellerator, for example.  I don't believe that
>>for each free neutron released that He3 is created by stripping.  It is
>>also not reasonable that a proton can be absorbed from a low energy
>>interaction with a heavy nucleus, i.e. in the stellerator glass walls.  If
>>that happens then there is still a big mystery as to how the energy
>>exchange happens between the heavy nucleus and the deuteron.
>[snip]
>I did a web search, but was unable to find any reference to low energy
>stripping reactions in stellarators. Could you provide a reference?

I have looked around a bit and can not find one either.  I may have read
about it in Scientific American many years ago, but I just don't remember
for sure now.  I think "Project Sherwood" (which included the stellerator
at Princeton's Forrestal labs I think) is the thing to research for
relevant information.  It may in fact have been the Project Sherwood Pinch
studies, along with Britain's ZETA etc., that actually dashed the hopes
that the neutrons from the stellerator were from fusion.  There ARE ref's
to pinch studies showing anomalous amounts of neutrons, I think.  A good
ref. on Project Sherwood is: Bishop, A.S. 1958. Project Sherwood: The U.S.
Program in Controlled Fusion, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, available for a
few US bucks plus shipping on Abe's Books web site.

About the stellerator, in that day, around 1958, it was mainly an issue of
whether fusion was happening at all and not whether stripping was happening
at low energies.  However, the temperature the stellerator was operating at
was in fact less than that required for fusion in significant quatities,
which is about a mere 20 keV, far from the 2.22 MeV required to break the
P-N bond in D.  If I recall, this is why stripping was a such big surprise
in the first place, but, at the moment I can't find an article to prove
that.  Certainly it SHOULD be a surprise that 20 keV collisons can free
neutrons from D.  Similarly, the fusor doesn not produce much out in the
fusion range, and certainly does not produce an observable number of 2.22
MeV deuterons, yet it produces copius neutrons.  There are lots of fusor
refs on the web.

Back to the main subject, but for a less mainstream ref. see:

<http://www.mv.com/ipusers/zeropoint/IEHTML/FEATURE/FEATR/threedec.html>

which is: "Three Decades of Cold Fusion Prior to Pons and Fleischmann
by Peter Graneau and Neal Graneau"  (Originally Published September-October,
1999 In Infinite Energy Magazine Issue #27)

Of some interest is the statement by Graneau and Graneau about selected Project
Sherwood results: "... neutron production was quenched by the application of
a weak axial magnetic field (50 - 100 gauss), implying that collisions were
dominated by electromagnetic rather than thermal forces."   Quoting Bishop:
"The deuterons, therefore, did not have random velocities, as required for
true thermonuclear conditions. Instead, they had somehow acquired axial
velocities greater than they would have achieved by being accelerated the
entire length of the tube! For example, with only 20 kV applied across the
tube, the deuterons responsible for producing the neutrons were found to
have an average energy of the order of 50 kV."

Of other note in the this article is of Haines and Robson investigation of
current pulses through about 10 cm-long "frozen deuterium wires."  Haines
and Robson estimated that "the temperature might have been of the order of
one million degrees whereas hot fusion requires at least 100 million
degrees."  A million degrees corresponds to about 86 volts, though there
would of course be a very very small number of atoms out in the tail of the
thermal distribution at 20 keV.  There is no reason to believe an
observable number of 2.22 MeV or even 1.11 MeV deuterons were produced.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 11:09:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA23548;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 11:06:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 11:06:06 -0800
Message-ID: <3C83C4C6.2EF80504 attbi.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 11:02:30 -0800
From: Bob Horst <bhorst attbi.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony}  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Case tested catalytic converters
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"MDxI7.0.ol5.UMyWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46418
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The thread about catalytic converters reminded me of a talk given by Les

Case at ICCF-7 in April 1998.  Some of the information from the talk may

not have made it into his published papers, so I doug out my notes of
the talk.

Case did exactly what Jed suggested.  He tried lots of different
commercial catalysts, including those intended for auto catalytic
converters.  He tested Pt, Pd, and Rh on carbon in a D2 atmosphere and
said they all "worked."  He defined "worked" to mean that the there was
a higher temperature rise for D compared to H.  The best was PMC from
United Catalyst.

Other notes from the talk:

If trying to replicate:
  Run at 150 deg C, do not exceed 250C.
  Pressure must be above 1 ATM.

Case used a 1.6 L chamber., 0-50 PSI
Rises to 60-70 PSI at temperature.
Got 5-10W excess power (around 50% excess)

I have not followed Case's work since.  Does anyone have an update?

-- Bob Horst



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 11:26:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01166;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 11:25:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 11:25:49 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304141937.00b1bcc0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 14:25:47 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Case tested catalytic converters
In-Reply-To: <3C83C4C6.2EF80504 attbi.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ynsk4.0.sH.xeyWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46419
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horst wrote:

>Case at ICCF-7 in April 1998.  Some of the information from the talk may
>
>not have made it into his published papers, so I doug out my notes of
>the talk.
>
>Case did exactly what Jed suggested.  He tried lots of different
>commercial catalysts, including those intended for auto catalytic
>converters.

Did he say that? I wish I had a recording. Are you sure he was talking 
about Pd, Ru and/or Pt on metal or ceramic substrates? I know he has done a 
great deal of work with a variety of metal on carbon substrates. Ed Storms 
has found this material is dirty and requires extensive cleaning before it 
can be used.

Others who have tried palladium thin film on various substrates have said 
the biggest problem is that it peels off, or "delaminates." I suppose the 
catalytic converters are well engineered, because the palladium sticks even 
an high temperatures with high velocity hot gas streaming past.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 12:16:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31334;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:13:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:13:57 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 15:25:01 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEAPDCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304141937.00b1bcc0 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Resent-Message-ID: <"Pga6U3.0.Pf7.4MzWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46420
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi.

I agree, delamination is a big problem with deposited metal
films and CF type experiments. I was under the impression
that Ed's techniques use VERY small amounts of Pd and would
not suffer too much from this effect. I've done work with
electroplating nickle alloys for catalytic purposes and
had endless problems with delamination, the electrolytic
process is a CLEANING process for some applications which
is a good example of how to make lemonade out of lemons...

I was under the impression that Case couldn't be replicated,
what's he been up to recently?????

K.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothwell infinite-energy.com]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 2:26 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com; vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Case tested catalytic converters


Horst wrote:

>Case at ICCF-7 in April 1998.  Some of the information from the talk may
>
>not have made it into his published papers, so I doug out my notes of
>the talk.
>
>Case did exactly what Jed suggested.  He tried lots of different
>commercial catalysts, including those intended for auto catalytic
>converters.

Did he say that? I wish I had a recording. Are you sure he was talking
about Pd, Ru and/or Pt on metal or ceramic substrates? I know he has done a
great deal of work with a variety of metal on carbon substrates. Ed Storms
has found this material is dirty and requires extensive cleaning before it
can be used.

Others who have tried palladium thin film on various substrates have said
the biggest problem is that it peels off, or "delaminates." I suppose the
catalytic converters are well engineered, because the palladium sticks even
an high temperatures with high velocity hot gas streaming past.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 12:36:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA09248;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:34:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:34:50 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304153228.00b1be28 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 15:34:48 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEAPDCAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304141937.00b1bcc0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"y68NI2.0.QG2.ffzWy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46421
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>I was under the impression that Case couldn't be replicated,
>what's he been up to recently?????

He was replicated by McKubre, who carefully measured the healing production 
and showed that it correlated to the heat in the same ratio as bulk 
palladium CF and conventional D-D hot fusion. McKubre used much better 
calorimetry that Case did, and measured much less heat, but what he did 
measure is pretty solid I think.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 13:43:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA14834;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 13:40:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 13:40:31 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503b8a997a26a27 [12.21.208.101]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 12:43:01 -0900
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters
Resent-Message-ID: <"BGEnw2.0.ad3.Ed-Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46422
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:25 PM 3/4/2, Keith Nagel wrote:
[snip]
>I was under the impression that Case couldn't be replicated,
>what's he been up to recently?????
[snip]

Last I head Les Case gave some help to Russ George of E-Quest who then
successfully replicated Case and was moving forward with the research.  If
I recall, George wrote an article that seemed, at least to me at the time,
a bit lacking in credit to Case.  That work was also done with Miley's
help?  I don't know for sure where either Case of George went from there.
Case was working with Mallove et al back in New England?  Russ George was
starting a private for-profit style (gagged) email list, which I declined
to join.  He was very put out by the vortex information sharing style as I
recall.  He wrote: "Stuff it Jed. E-Quest has been working full time non
stop with  major scientific organizations for the past year replicating
it's work  with oversight by the finest sicentists in the nation. Is just
doesn't give the results of hundreds of thousands of dollars of work  to
you for free so get off my back."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 13:56:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA22841;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 13:55:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 13:55:46 -0800
Message-ID: <3C83EC72.AF92DE4B attbi.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 13:51:46 -0800
From: Bob Horst <bhorst attbi.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony}  (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Case tested catalytic converters
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304141937.00b1bcc0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"KgJ0k1.0.na5.Xr-Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46423
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Horst wrote:
>
> >Case at ICCF-7 in April 1998.  Some of the information from the talk may
> >
> >not have made it into his published papers, so I doug out my notes of
> >the talk.
> >
> >Case did exactly what Jed suggested.  He tried lots of different
> >commercial catalysts, including those intended for auto catalytic
> >converters.

Jed wrote:

> Did he say that? I wish I had a recording. Are you sure he was talking
> about Pd, Ru and/or Pt on metal or ceramic substrates? I know he has done a
> great deal of work with a variety of metal on carbon substrates. Ed Storms
> has found this material is dirty and requires extensive cleaning before it
> can be used.
>
>

It is pretty hard to remember much about a talk from four years ago, but my
notes definitely said that he tried all three and all were found to have some
degree of success.  I think all were on carbon substrates, but cannot be sure.

The main thing I remember from the talk is that I was not very convinced by his
tests that just measured delta T between H and D.  He did not have any real
calorimetry.

-- Bob




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 14:05:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26252;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:03:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:03:04 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 17:14:09 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEBADCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <v01530503b8a997a26a27 [12.21.208.101]>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Resent-Message-ID: <"hsvQ51.0.pP6.My-Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46424
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Horace.

Thanks. If I remember correctly, Scott Little tried
to replicate this here on vortex and failed, hence
my comment. I can fully understand Russ Georges comment
about sharing info, but it would be nice if he
provided some critique of Scotts null experiment.
It was done pretty cleanly, as I remember. I think
the major issue was thermal distribution in the
volume of the carbon mass, Scott determined that
this was not uniform and when he used improved
calorimetry the effect vanished (ugh!). 

Hi Jed.

Perhaps you can dig up the experimental data concerning
McKubre's replication, it sounds like Scott work
except for the residue of unexplained heat. The whole
"improve calorimetry and reduce excess heat" thing is
something we are all too painfully familiar with, yes??? (smile).

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2002 4:43 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters


At 3:25 PM 3/4/2, Keith Nagel wrote:
[snip]
>I was under the impression that Case couldn't be replicated,
>what's he been up to recently?????
[snip]

Last I head Les Case gave some help to Russ George of E-Quest who then
successfully replicated Case and was moving forward with the research.  If
I recall, George wrote an article that seemed, at least to me at the time,
a bit lacking in credit to Case.  That work was also done with Miley's
help?  I don't know for sure where either Case of George went from there.
Case was working with Mallove et al back in New England?  Russ George was
starting a private for-profit style (gagged) email list, which I declined
to join.  He was very put out by the vortex information sharing style as I
recall.  He wrote: "Stuff it Jed. E-Quest has been working full time non
stop with  major scientific organizations for the past year replicating
it's work  with oversight by the finest sicentists in the nation. Is just
doesn't give the results of hundreds of thousands of dollars of work  to
you for free so get off my back."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 14:24:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06658;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:24:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 14:24:10 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020304165435.00b1be28 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 17:23:59 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: RE: Case tested catalytic converters
In-Reply-To: <v01530503b8a997a26a27 [12.21.208.101]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"fMNOP.0.Yd1.4G_Wy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46425
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>I recall, George wrote an article that seemed, at least to me at the time,
>a bit lacking in credit to Case.  That work was also done with Miley's
>help?

McKubre's. Depending on who you ask, it was done by McKubre with some help 
from George, or George with some help from McKubre.


>Case was working with Mallove et al back in New England?

Yes indeed. He demonstrated the effect with very crude calorimetry.


>He was very put out by the vortex information sharing style as I
>recall.  He wrote: "Stuff it Jed. E-Quest has been working full time non
>stop with  major scientific organizations for the past year replicating
>it's work  with oversight by the finest sicentists in the nation. Is just
>doesn't give the results of hundreds of thousands of dollars of work  to
>you for free so get off my back."

He has a charming way of expressing himself. He misunderstood my point of 
view, and my purpose.

When he wrote that, he was anxious to attract funding. (He may still be.) 
As I explained to him, the only way to attract funding is to tell people 
what you are doing, and explain what you hope to accomplish. You must 
advertise your accomplishments. You cannot charge people to read your 
advertisements. Academic scientists don't call this advertising but the 
principle and the effect is the same. They try to publish in journals that 
other scientists have free access to, in university library subscriptions, 
and nowadays on Internet publications. In the academic tradition, it is 
considered ethical and proper to give away information. Perhaps it is 
partly altruistic, but mainly this is how these people make a living, oddly 
enough.

Russ George did not understand that corporations selling in the high tech 
business-to-business market must give away remarkably detailed technical 
information. They always have, and they do this even more nowadays on the 
Internet, because the cost of distributing information is so low. This is 
not a favor to the public. It is certainly not altruism! It is a 
time-tested, effective marketing technique. It attracts customers by 
demonstrating expertise and describing the superior quality of the product. 
A company like Hewlett-Packard or IBM knows that its customers are 
sophisticated and will shop around and decide based on technical merit, so 
they must describe this merit in detail. They have to walk a fine line 
between giving away information that might help their competitors, and 
holding back information that might attract customers.

I have often suggested this technique to would-be entrepreneurs trying to 
sell cold fusion and other anomalous energy, such as Mitch Swartz, R. Mills 
and the late James Reding. They have always misunderstood me, misread my 
intention and accused me of scheming to steal their information. I conclude 
that these people do not understand the principles of managing and 
marketing high-tech products.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 19:44:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA12804;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:41:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:41:20 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2002 22:40:54 -0800
Subject: Infinite Energy Statement on Science Sonofusion Article in March
	8 Issue
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8A9A876.1832%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"N0Lbq.0.z73.Vv3Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46426
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Infinite Energy Magazine's Statement on the Science Sonofusion Article

       by Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
         www.infinite-energy.com   March 4, 2002

As an AAAS member, I am delighted that Science magazine will be publishing
an article and a commentary about table-top sonofusion in its March 8, 2002
issue -- it is said to be highlighted as a high-profile cover story.  We
congratulate Science and the authors.  I learned earlier today that because
the New York Times has decided to publish an article about the Science paper
in its March 5th edition, Science has lifted the March 7th embargo to other
journalists. I have now read the technical paper and its associated
commentary and will remarking briefly about it in general terms below.

Sonofusion (and sonoluminescence) is an area in which Infinite Energy has
published since its inception in 1995. In fact, our first issue, March/April
1995, had Roger Stringham (now of First Gate Energies, Inc.) on the cover
cradling his sonofusion reactor. The cover story, "A 'Micro-Fusion' Reactor:
Nuclear Reactions 'In the cold' by Ultrasonic Cavitation," was  by Tom
Benson, Vol.1, No.1, pp.33-37.  There have been many other pieces, notably:

* "Cavitation in D2O with Metal Targets Produces Predictable Excess Heat,"
by Roger Stringham, John Chandler, Russ George, Tom Passell, and Dick
Raymond, Infinite Energy, Vol. 4, No.19, April-May 1998,pp.41-44

* "A Progress Report: Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence,"
by Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger (Reprint of his Nov. 11, 1991 lecture at
MIT), Infinite Energy, Vol. 4, No. 24, March-April 1999, pp.81-83.

In more recent issues of Infinite Energy since November 2000 (Nos. 35-41),
New Energy Research Laboratory's Manager, Kenneth Rauen and I have
chronicled our experience in experimenting with Roger Stringham's sonofusion
reactor, and our smaller modified reactor derived from it. The primary
purpose of this work has been to identify the primary and most desirable
signature of cold fusion/low energy nuclear reactions: excess heat.  This
work, furthermore, has been aimed at producing a commercially viable
demonstration device for excess heat, a still elusive goal for reasons
mentioned in our Device and Process Testing Update articles.  Since we are
aware that Roger Stringham and others have found nuclear products, as well
as excess heat in cavitation devices, we have been driven to examine the
evidence for excess heat in his and our design reactor. At this point, our
evidence is not strong enough to promote a commercial demonstration device,
but the quest to understand the mechanical and electrical interactions that
could manifest reliable excess heat, as well as nuclear products, continues.
Another laboratory is now working with us to examine the possible helium
production in this sonofusion reactor. Roger Stringhamn et al have already
found helium and other nuclear evidence in their sonofusion devices, in
addition to observing melting under heavy water of normally high melting
point metals.

**** Comments on the Science Articles:

The articles are:

"Evidence for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, " R.P.
Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey, Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin, and R.C.
Block, Science, Vol. 295, March 2002, pp.1868-1873.
  
and

Commentary: "Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Imploding Bubbles," F.D.
Becchetti, Science, Vol. 295, March 2002, p.1850.
 

The matter to celebrate the most in these Science articles is the apparent
discovery of yet another particular system for producing fusion reactions --
other than with the large and expensive, and so far unproductive, magnetic
confinement tokamak  and large laser inertial confinement fusion devices of
the DOE. And we certainly celebrate that the experiments are, indeed,
"table-top" -- just like most cold fusion experiments. Of course, the work
reported in Science needs to be reproduced in its particular form, just as
cold fusion experiments had to be and WERE reproduced, repeatedly.  But on
first examination today, the work reported in Science appears to have been
done very thoroughly.  It is also immediately apparent that sonofusion work
carried out in the cold fusion/low energy nuclear reaction (LENR) field,
although not referenced by these authors, can provide significant support in
both experimental and theoretical aspects. (I imagine that the authors were
not aware of much of this work.)

Perhaps the appearance of the Science articles will cause scientists,
technologists, and officials to reconsider their previous impression of
other fusion technologies, including the much maligned cold fusion science
and its emerging technology.  Cold fusion/LENR has been under research and
development for some years, since being prematurely dismissed by a
egregiously flawed and rush-to-judgment DOE report in 1989.

We note with some dismay that Dr. Robert Park of the American Physical
Society chose last Friday to pre-empt the Science articles' appearance with
an attack on the articles, which  he published on his "What's New" web site
run by the American Physical Society, but which allegedly does not endorse
his opinions:

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 1 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkan et al. observe
2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
correlated with sonoluminescence.   Any neutron emission was many
orders of magnitude too small to account for the tritium
production reported by the first group.  Although distinguished
physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco 13 years
ago, advised against publication, the editor has apparently
chosen not only to publish the work, but to do so with unusual
fanfare, involving even the cover of Science.  Perhaps Science
magazine covets the vast readership of Infinite Energy magazine.
... 

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

*******

Park's assessment is quite faulty, not unusual for his uninformed and often
malicious commentary over the past 13 years, but it is nice that he gave
publicity to the forthcoming Science articles (and to our magazine!-- which
he evidently dislikes for its bold examination of cold fusion science). In
contrast to Science magazine's general abdication of responsibility for over
a decade in covering cold fusion and properly reviewing technical
submissions, Infinite Energy has been in the vanguard of publishing and
discussing this science.

We did, however, enjoy the appearance today of the London Sunday Times piece
concerning the forthcoming Science articles:

*****
Cold fusion 'breakthrough' heralds clean nuclear power
By Jonathan Leake, Science Editor
The Sunday Times, UK
Sunday, March 3, 2002

Nuclear scientists will this week announce they may have
achieved a controlled form of cold fusion, a technology
that potentially offers humanity a limitless source of
clean energy....the latest research, by scientists at the
American government's Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
the University of Michigan, was done on a laboratory
bench using relatively simple and cheap equipment at room
temperature.

The study echoes the work of Professor Martin Fleischmann
and Stanley Pons who, in 1989, announced they had
achieved cold fusion at Southampton University but were
ridiculed when no one could repeat their work.
... 
******

Unfortunately, this latter comment,  "no one could repeat their work," is
entirely in error, but it is good that the Sunday Times  referred to the
sonofusion work in terms of "cold fusion," which it may well be, at least in
part. It may, in fact, be exhibiting both hot fusion and cold fusion
characteristics.  More needs to be known. More testing needs to be done --
calorimetry and helium measurments, in particular, which were not made by
these authors. But as Park himself highlights, the anomalous ratio of
tritium to neutron production reported in the article -- which he dismisses
outright as indicating an experiment flaw - has long been a known
characteristic of cold fusion systems.

The critique by Bechetti was well done and will likely anger the hot
fusioneers, because it puts this work too much into the same context as
energy generation via tokamaks and big lasers, something they do not want to
hear.  As usual, they want all DOE resources concentrated on THEIR
well-funded projects.  And, I noticed that Becchetti did refer to a paper in
1990 of a supposedly failed "table top" experiment (likely one of the
"failed" cold fusion replication attempts, but I do not have the specific
paper referred to) in which he said he participated.  He and Science are to
be roundly criticized for referring to an early cold fusion era experiment,
while not properly mentioning that numerous other highly positive
experiments with repeatable results -- especially at tritium generation
(e.g. by Dr. Tom Claytor at Los Alamos National Laboratory), but also
neutron generation -- have been done in cold fusion.   It must be recalled
that in June 1990, Science magazine produced a virtually slanderous attack
by Gary Taubes against the work of cold fusion researchers at Texas A&M
University, suggesting that fraud was the likely explanation of the tritium
findings in cold fusion experiments.  That this past poor journalism and
continuing tritium findings in cold fusion continue to be ignored at Science
-- except when an alleged HOT fusion explanation is given -- is
intellectually dishonest.

There is an effort throughout the March 8 technical paper (but of course!)
to put the observed reactions into the context exclusively of HOT fusion.
However, I do note that the experimenters were still unable to get the gap
between neutron counts and tritium measured to fall below a single order of
magnitude difference! I had hoped that the measured/inferred gap would be
greater, but it is there nonetheless. Tritium is higher than neutron
production. The authors do much hand-waving to say that this might be
"explained" by various measurement errors and inefficiencies.  Indeed, cold
fusion experiments show many times a factor of 10 -- up to a 100-million
ratio of tritium to neutrons when tritium is found. And, cold fusion
experiments have proved that the birth of the tritium can be COLD, not HOT.
If it had been hot (energetic), as in tritium formed by the D + D hot fusion
reaction, 14 MeV hot fusion neutrons (from T + D collision reaction) would
have been seen and they are not seen, e.g. what Claytor et al at LANL have
found. 

Because of the uncertainties in this Science paper data, it is not exactly
possible to determine whether this is fully  mini-hot fusion, or some
mixture of cold fusion and hot fusion. That will come later. The most
important matter is that this article will get more people thinking again
about alternative ways to do fusion. This inevitably will bring up the huge
body of cold fusion literature that has been ignored by these authors and
Science. It is too bad that it has to happen this way. It would have been
better if proper coverage by Science had been occurring all along. Many cold
fusion people long ago gave up even submitting to Science.  They publish in
the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Physics Letters A, and Fusion
Technology, among other journals, including Infinite Energy magazine.   I
predict that the hot fusion people will do their best to trash this new
table-top work, especially because it is in the context of on-going work
that they well know is occurring world-wide on cavitation-induced fusion.
They helped kill off more widespread interest in electrolytic fusion, but it
will be much harder for them to kill off these kinds of sonofusion
experiments, especially now that they are documented in a very visible
publication.

As more is learned from the Science papers, I may post further commentary.
Note that the Ninth International Conference on Cold Fusion (ICCF-9) will be
held May 19-24, 2002 in Beijing.  Sonofusion and the articles in Science are
certain to be a topic of discussion there.
        (http://iccf9.global.tsinghua.edu.cn)

Sincerely,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar  4 19:50:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA17769;
	Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:49:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 19:49:53 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8a9df884e8c [12.21.208.101]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2002 18:53:41 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: MAGNETIC ORBITAL IONIZATION
Resent-Message-ID: <"-JLto2.0.ZL4.X14Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46427
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

It has dawned on me that it may not be clear to all exactly what I have
suggested constitutes a stripping reaction, and why I think it explains
thermal neutrons out vs the 2.45 MeV or 3.02 MeV neutrons characteristic of
fusion.  The fusion reaction branches are:

   D + D -> T (1.01 MeV) + p (3.02 MeV) (50%)
         -> He3 (0.82 MeV) + n (2.45 MeV) (50%)
         -> He4 + about 20 MeV of gamma rays (about 0.0001%)

and clearly all these branches have one or more high energy signatures.
What I am suggesting as a stripping reaction is:

  D + D -> D + p + n + very small energy

which is merely the inverse of the fusion reaction:

  p + n -> D + 2.22 MeV gamma

with the obvious problem of conservation of energy.  In the stripping
reaction the second D plays only a catalytic role, remains unchanged.

I have suggested that the excess energy comes is borrowed from the zero
point energy (ZPE) sea by the n-p pair confined to the magnetic orbital
with range delta x, giving a Heisenberg energy uncertainty:

   delta KE = h^2 /[(8 Pi^2 m) (delta x)^2]

where delta x might be deduced to be about 3.07 fm, or 3.07x10^-15 m, so as
to make:

   delta KE =  2.20 MeV

thus needing only a small push over the hump to separation.  This is pretty
close for intuitive estimating related to what is actually a very complex
system, the deuteron.  The n-p pair are about 4 fm apart, but oscillate and
also rotate about a central point about 2 fm from each other. The mass
locus is a probability distribution, as is the charge locus of the
deuteron.   The result  shows that the nucleus is the ideal size for
building a Maxwell's demon, for extracting energy from the ZPE sea.
However, from the stripping reaction mechanism suggested here, you can
clearly see that you would not expect any high energy radiation, only near
thermal by-products.   You would not see any fusion signatures.  Such
radiation would later be obtained from the p + n -> D recombination, not
from the stripping reaction itself.  The check is written on the ZPE bank
at the time of the stripping, and it is cashed when n-p fusion occurs.

What I am proposing is NOT a borrowing mechanism that results in a
transaction whereby nucleons are exchanged between two nucleii.  The second
nucleus merely acts as an anvil on which the stripped deuteron is broken.
The energy borrowing that takes place is permanent, it is actually a
withdrawal from the ZPE bank, just as the mass-enegry of the universe is
such a withdrawal.

It is of interest that if such withdrawals and deposits can easily be made
by merely bashing deuterons together, that the much more sophisticated
lattice, with electron shielding and magnetic catalysis and other
possibilities, might be used to pull off the trick in much more subtle and
controllable ways.

Various devices in Project Sherwood produced neutrons, but without the
characteristic fusion energy signatures.  This was disappointing, in that
the goal was fusion energy.  The joke of the time was: "sher wood be nice
if it worked."  However, the unexpected results may have been a key to a
much longer lasting supply of power than provided by mere fusion, and one
far more useful for space travel.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 03:41:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA05400;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 03:38:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 03:38:18 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 06:38:46 -0800
Subject: Retaliation -- already --on sonofusion
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AA1876.185E%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <41.195113ea.29b58e81 aol.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"D5kSc2.0.9K1.fuAXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46428
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The evil empire (hot fusion) strikes back...  Already..

Gene

http://space.com/scienceastronomy/generalscience/nuclear_fusion_020304.html



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 03:44:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA06729;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 03:43:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 03:43:42 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 06:44:08 -0800
Subject: Science Magazine editor, Kennedy, speaks out on publication
	process
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AA19B8.185E%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id DAA06711
Resent-Message-ID: <"0smYg3.0.3f1.jzAXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46429
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

2) To Publish or Not to Publish: Publication is the right option.    by
Donald Kennedy, Editor
http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1793.pdf
Every once in a while, we at Science receive a paper that causes us to
exercise particular care in handling, because it may be controversial or
because it is important‹or both. The paper by Taleyarkhan et al. on p. 1868
of this issue is a case in point. It qualified for careful, responsible
treatment on both counts. And its history with us has exposed some of the
more unusual challenges that can arise in the publication process.
 
The paper reports experiments in which sonoluminescence is induced in
solutions of deuterated acetone subjected to sound waves and neutron
irradiation. These conditions cause bubbles to grow and then implode,
locally generating high pressures and temperatures and the emission of
sonoluminescent light. The authors present evidence for the production of
tritium in the solution, and for neutron emission coincident with the light
emission. They cautiously interpret these observations as evidence that
deuterium-deuterium fusion occurred in the imploding bubbles. That prospect
naturally encouraged us to treat the paper with care.
 
After the external review process had been completed, we scheduled the paper
for publication. Then we were contacted by senior science managers at Oak
Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), who said that certain reservations had
developed
about the findings and their interpretation. In a series of telephone and
e-mail contacts, they urged that we delay the scheduled publication of the
paper. The authors participated in a series of meetings to discuss
objections raised by the ORNL managers, including some findings made by a
second group of scientists who had been asked to perform additional tests,
using the same apparatus but a different detector.
 
After some negotiation, a compromise was reached in which the authors
responded to criticisms and subsequently made some modifications in the text
to accommodate them. They also agreed to cite a short non­peer-reviewed
communication in which the second group present measurements that disagree
in some respects with theirs, along with their own response to it. While
these agreements were being reached, Science received communications from
two distinguished scientists in this field, raising objections to the paper
and urging that we reconsider our plans to publish it. And the matter became
even more public on 1 March when Robert Park issued an airy, premature
dismissal from the American Physical Society. By this time, it had become
clear that a number of people didn¹t want us to publish this paper.
 
I have been asked, "Why are you going forward with a paper attached to so
much controversy?" Well, that¹s what we do; our mission is to put
interesting, potentially important science into public view after ensuring
its quality as best as we possibly can. After that, efforts at repetition
and reinterpretation can take place out in the open. That¹s where it
belongs, not in an alternative universe in which anonymity prevails, rumor
leaks out, and facts stay inside. It goes without saying that we cannot
publish papers with a guarantee that every result is right. We¹re not that
smart. That is why we are prepared for occasional disappointment when our
internal judgments and our processes of external review turn out to be
wrong, and a provocative
result is not fully confirmed. What we ARE very sure of is that publication
is the right option, even‹and perhaps especially‹
when there is some controversy.
 
A reporter also asked me whether this was the only time pressure has been
put on Science not to publish a paper. Although this case is exceptional, it
is not unique; we have been there before. The motivations for urging us not
to publish have varied from one case to another. Often they rest on serious
legitimate scientific differences of opinion, although sometimes that is not
so clear. In this instance, we see no good reason for abandoning our plans
to publish the paper, and we can see no merit whatsoever in the efforts to
discredit it in advance. Both the premature critics and those who believe in
the result would do well to wait for the scientific process to do its work.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 06:24:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA02235;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 06:21:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 06:21:06 -0800
Message-ID: <3C84D424.81118773 bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 09:20:20 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Shrimp Fusion
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"cyk5x2.0.rY.IHDXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46430
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here's another article about how a certain species of shrimp
produce sonoluminescence:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/09/000922072104.htm

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 07:15:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26063;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:12:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:12:52 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:13:16 -0800
Subject: WP  (AP) "Take" on Sonofusion
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AA4ABC.1879%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA26018
Resent-Message-ID: <"IvLjY3.0.0N6.o1EXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46431
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Nuke Fusion Made in Tabletop Test

By Paul Recer
AP Science Writer
Monday, March 4, 2002; 8:41 PM

WASHINGTON ­­ In a tabletop experiment, researchers created a reaction like
nuclear fusion ­ the energy source of the sun.

Using a device described as the size of three stacked coffee cups, they
zapped tiny dissolved bubbles with sound waves, triggering a flash of light
and super-high temperatures.

Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute say the phenomenon was like nuclear fusion in a bottle, but they
are uncertain if it could be used as a source of energy.

The study appears this week in the journal Science and was released for
publication by the journal on Monday.

Researchers said that the experiment, which they called "bubble fusion,"
created two signs of nuclear fusion: a burst of subatomic particles called
neutrons and the production of tritium, an isotope of hydrogen.

In an unusual comment on the work, other scientists at Oak Ridge posted a
review on the Internet that disputed the findings. It said their repeat of
the experiment failed to detect sufficient neutrons to prove the claimed
results.

Harnessing nuclear fusion, the power that lights the sun, has long been a
goal of researchers who view it as the ultimate energy source. Most
researchers have concentrated on huge machines that mimic the sun by
compressing hydrogen plasma and heating it to millions of degrees to force
atoms to fuse. This reaction gives off heat and an isotope of helium, along
with some subatomic particles.

But in the experiment reported in Science, researchers used the simple
equipment to create and analyze a brief flash and burst of heat that may be
fusion.

R. P. Taleyarkhan of Oak Ridge, the first author of the study, said in
Science that the experiment is true "tabletop physics," using an apparatus
"the size of three coffee cups stacked on top of the other."

Richard T. Lahey Jr., a Rensselaer professor and a co-author of the study,
said it was not clear if the technique could be used as an energy source,
but it could be valuable in fundamental studies of nuclear fusion.

In the study, researchers used a beaker of a chemical called deuterated
acetone. Normal acetone is a colorless, volatile liquid often used as a
paint remover or chemical solvent. In deuterated acetone, the chemical's
normal hydrogen atoms have been replaced with deuterium, a hydrogen isotope
that is heavier than ordinary hydrogen and is capable fusion reactions. When
combined with oxygen, deuterium is sometimes called "heavy water."

The researchers introduced tiny bubbles, no bigger than the period at the
end of a sentence, into the beaker. They then zapped the bubbles with sound
waves. The bubbles rapidly expanded and then collapsed.

It's believed that the bubble collapse causes a momentary shock wave that
creates high pressures, high temperatures and a flash of light, called
sonoluminescence.

In a discussion of the experiment, F. D. Becchetti, a physicist at the
University of Michigan, said the study by Taleyarkhan needs to be confirmed
by other researchers.

"If the results are confirmed, this new compact apparatus will be a unique
tool for studying nuclear fusion reactions," said Becchetti. He said the
experiments appear to have been carefully done and analyzed by reviewers.

"The results are credible until proven otherwise," said Becchetti.

However, in a repeat of the experiment that used slightly different
equipment, D. Shapira and M. J. Saltmarsh of Oak Ridge contended the neutron
emission they detected was too small to explain the tritium production
reported by Taleyarkhan.

In a response, Taleyarkhan and his colleagues said Shapira and Saltmarsh
misinterpreted their results, and the level of neutron emission they
detected was consistent with the original experiment.

The announcement of the Taleyarkhan tabletop fusion experiment is in sharp
contrast to the tabletop fusion experiment announced at a news conference in
1989 by researchers at the University of Utah.

The Utah experiment used electrodes placed inside a vat of heavy water, or
deuterium. The Utah conclusions were quickly rejected by many other
physicists.

Taleyarkhan's experiment, however, was reviewed by a committee of experts,
selected by Science, before the study was accepted for publication.

­­­­­­

Science: www.sciencemag.org

© 2002 The Associated Press



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 07:21:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30257;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:20:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:20:37 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 10:21:06 -0800
Subject: Taubes and Park try to screw the world again... the bastards!
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AA4C92.187B%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <OF8CB3CD60.023A42E2-ON85256B73.0050EEEB arl.army.mil>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gGNxq.0.cO7.49EXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46432
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Fusion in beaker report leaves some physicists cold

By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY

A physics team Monday reported evidence that it had created high-temperature
fusion in a laboratory beaker.

Nuclear fusion, the same force that powers the sun, has been a longtime goal
of scientists because it promises abundant energy with no radioactive
waste.

But the finding triggered intense skepticism from some scientists, burned by
memories of "cold fusion," the 1989 claim by Utah researchers to have
produced fusion at room temperatures, a highly criticized result that no one
else could ever reproduce.

In the experiment, details of which were released ahead of schedule by the
journal Science, researchers led by Rusi Taleyarkhan of Oak Ridge (Tenn.)
National Laboratory imploded small bubbles in acetone, best known as an
ingredient in nail polish remover, by shooting neutrons into the liquid.
Neutrons are uncharged physics particles in the center of atoms.

When the researchers imploded the bubbles, the bursts gave off a flash of
light and thousands of neutrons, a sign of nuclear fusion.

"We tried a different approach that seemed promising and it works. We were
lucky," says team member Richard Lahey Jr. of the Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute in Troy, N.Y.

In their approach, the bubbles grew 10,000 times larger than their starting
size, to about eight hundredths of an inch across, before they imploded.
Past efforts grew bubbles only 10 times larger than their starting size.
Essentially, for every neutron the researchers shot into the solution, they
received thousands out of it.

A computer model suggests that temperatures reached around 18 million
degrees inside the implosions ? fusion temperatures ? the authors report.

However, some experts tried to burst the "bubble fusion" result. Last week
in an American Physical Society newsletter, physicist Robert Park wrote
that "distinguished physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco
13 years ago, advised against publication."

Park and others cited a critique by separate Oak Ridge physicists who tried
to duplicate the experiment. They failed to see enough neutrons, using the
 same apparatus, to justify fusion claims. Citing the disagreement, Science
released the original paper, the critique and a response by Taleyarkhan's
group. They say their critics misinterpreted the duplicate effort and did in
fact produce fusion neutrons.

"Nature loves to delude us on these things," says physicist Lawrence Crum of
the University of Washington-Seattle. "There has to be a great deal of
skepticism."

"If history is any indication, just the existence of this kind of brouhaha
and the criticism from very competent experts is good evidence that the
results are just dead wrong. And if it's dead wrong, then Science probably
shouldn't have decided to publish it," says science writer Gary Taubes, a
correspondent for Science and author of Bad Science: The Short Life and
Weird Times of Cold Fusion.







------ End of Forwarded Message

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 07:24:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31484;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:23:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 07:23:20 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <61.1bf16207.29b63cc1 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:22:41 EST
Subject: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"g98mQ1.0.mh7.dBEXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46433
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This ran yesterday:

http://villagevoice.com/issues/0210/baard.php

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 08:44:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA08895;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:43:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:43:42 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <2f.235e9122.29b64f9a aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 11:43:06 EST
Subject: Re: WP  (AP) "Take" on Sonofusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"iY5Aa1.0.vA2.zMFXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46435
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

http://partners.nytimes.com/2002/03/05/science/05BUBB.html?Partner=AOL&
RefId=3eEFnnFnNJl

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 08:44:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA07678;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:41:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 08:41:34 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020305113607.03d224c0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 11:41:37 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
In-Reply-To: <61.1bf16207.29b63cc1 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"OS61f2.0.ot1.zKFXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46434
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Erikbaard aol.com wrote:

>This ran yesterday:
>
>http://villagevoice.com/issues/0210/baard.php

And Erik Baard is the author. Good job!

However, I wish you would add a few lines representing our side of the 
story. Naturally, you should report that Robert Park "blasts" the 
development as cold fusion reincarnated, and that he thinks cold fusion was 
a fiasco. That is newsworthy. However, I think he would be fair to also 
include a sentence or two in rebuttal from Fleischmann, Storms or McKubre 
saying that cold fusion was *not* a fiasco, and this may actually be a form 
of cold fusion. It seems to me McKubre and Storms speak with as much 
authority on the subject as Park does, and their views are as newsworthy as 
his.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 09:55:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16956;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:54:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:54:30 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <8c.14de28bc.29b6602e aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:53:50 EST
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"LaE-X.0.k84.LPGXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46437
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi - 

Thanks for the kind words.  As you can see, the story was a bare bones piece 
for the web edition -- really a wired story in a sense.  I hope to flesh it 
out for a broader feature later.

My goal was to beat CNN, CNBC, etc. and to provide an angle unlike there's:  
that a code of ethics was breached by Park et al.  I think those small goals 
were achieved.

Your justified complaints over how Park and company behaved back in 1989 and 
since would be a great part of another story.  Hopefully the current upheaval 
will open the door to new discussions on how his ilk have suppressed debate 
in the past. 

About a year or so ago I pitched a story about the "whores of science."  My 
editor at the Voice says she is ready now.

Warm regards,

Erik

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 09:56:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15940;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:53:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:53:27 -0800
Message-ID: <20020305175325.94670.qmail web11206.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:53:25 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Shrimp Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <3C84D424.81118773 bellsouth.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"ywaZb3.0.yu3.MOGXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46436
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

But the subject sounds like a good name for a seafood
restaurant.  :-) 

--- Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net> wrote:
> Here's another article about how a certain species of shrimp
> produce sonoluminescence:
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/09/000922072104.htm
> 


=====
Charles Ford
KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 09:58:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19225;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:57:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 09:57:26 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <1e.242b184e.29b660de aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 12:56:46 EST
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"Glp5V.0.Bi4.6SGXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46438
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Whoops -- that was meant to be a private letter to Jed.  If it can be held 
from the group, great.  I didn't realize the "reply to" was completely 
different from the sender.  But if this forum has no administrator overseeing 
such things, I'll live with my error.  The letter is true and I stand by it.  
I'll let you know if anything progresses on the Village Voice story front but 
I can't reveal anything until publication.

All the best to you.

Erik

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 10:09:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA26445;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:08:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 10:08:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020305130048.00b17140 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 13:06:41 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
In-Reply-To: <8c.14de28bc.29b6602e aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"rnKhl1.0.6T6.gcGXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46439
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Erikbaard aol.com -- intending to make this private -- wrote:

>Thanks for the kind words.  As you can see, the story was a bare bones 
>piece  for the web edition -- really a wired story in a sense.  I hope to 
>flesh it out for a broader feature later.

No doubt the editors had a hand in it as well. It isn't fair to assume that 
newspaper and magazine stories reflect the views of the author precisely.

Come to think of it, left wing journals like the V. Voice or The Nation 
should be digging into this story. It is about establishment oppression of 
new ideas. I hope you and other reporters can "sell" this aspect of the 
story to the editor.

I fired off a copy of my canned "polite objection" letter to the editor. 
Not the Tinsley version! I sent the letter to Jonathan Leake at the Sunday 
Times, as well. He responded: "thanks for the e-mail. Did any of these 
other researchers detect neutron emissions too?" I send him a paragraph 
outlining some neutron results. It is nice to see reporters responding and 
following up on comments about cold fusion.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 11:11:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA24994;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 11:08:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 11:08:30 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <137.a620bfc.29b67181 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:07:45 EST
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"lUmzx1.0.S66.jUHXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46440
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi All -

Just to clear the air, in this case I take responsibility for the contents of 
the article in nearly its entirety, including any omission for which it might 
be faulted.  My editors wanted something even shorter but ran what I sent.  
It was simply a quick turnaround in a competitive environment.  A wire story 
more than a feature.

I truly hope to publish more later.  Dr. Mallove gave me some insights from 
the cold fusion perspective that simply required too much background at that 
moment, but they are valuable and will be used later.  

Letters -- positive or negative -- and lots of clicks on the Village Voice 
website (as opposed to copying and pasting text) will encourage my editors to 
keep on the story, even though it is a little outside the usual mission of 
the paper.

As for: "Come to think of it, left wing journals like the V. Voice or The 
Nation 
should be digging into this story. It is about establishment oppression of 
new ideas. I hope you and other reporters can "sell" this aspect of the 
story to the editor."  I think I have done so time and again regarding Dr. 
Mills and other stories, one or two of which are linked to my article about 
bubble fusion.  And my story proposal mentioned earlier is clearly in that 
vein.

Thanks again.

Erik


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 13:58:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA08572;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:55:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 13:55:47 -0800
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2002 13:47:51 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"CdSMk2.0.s52.ZxJXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46441
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Greetings,

The following essay is the most speculative component of a more complicated
hypothesis, in what has become nearly a decade-long struggle of trying to
reconcile as many as possible of the loose ends of the field known of LENR, Low
Energy Nuclear Reactions.

There are likely to be many gaps, inaccuracies and oversights here and all
comments and corrections are welcome. They can be sent directly to me or to the
forum in the event that you wish to take strong issue with a point, but it is
unlikely that I will have the time or inclination to defend the hypothesis, at
least in the short term, because of other commitments.

Resorting as much to desperation as to logic, the careful observer can scarcely
come to any other conclusion in characterizing the whole field of LENR except to
say that there *must* exist several different overlapping reactions in the
reported experiments. There is no single thread of recurring truth. Furthermore,
at least three of these intermingled reactions may be QM related and of low
probability. But when conditions are right and several low probability reactions
can be optimized together, then perhaps they can act in concert to trigger
actual nuclear reactions of the more traditional kind, which are far more
vigorous and tend to mask the underlying mechanism.

The QM related interactions which may be implicated in LENR are
Oppenheimer-Phillips stripping, QM tunneling, and the Mossbauer effect, or its
superset, IPE. The Mossbauer effect itself may be a subset of a larger class of
reactions that can be called IPE or Induced Photon Emissions. IPE technology may
be a most notable new addition to the lexicon of LENR: To the extent that when
carefully controlled, IPE permits a new type of meta-phenomenon to appear and
self-perpetuate - a *photon chain reaction*.

A photon chain reaction, as here defined, is a correlate of the nuclear chain
reaction, but limited to induced photon emission from electron orbitals at a
particular wavelength or multiple thereof. Such a phenomenon has reputedly been
discovered and documented by Dr. Randell Mills, although he describes it
differently. A similar mechanism may be implicated in other forms of "cold
fusion" as well, and in fact there is ample reason to believe that Mills'
techniques might be better implemented with deuterium than with hydrogen from
the standpoint of energy return.

Several aspects of the Mossbauer Effect in relation to triggering IPE chain
reactions is the speculative subject of this essay.


The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect

Dr. Randell Mills and his company, Blacklight Power, BLP, have made the
fantastic claim that a new form of energy can be released from hydrogen by
catalytically forcing it "below ground state." The catalytic process will
continue in a step-wise fashion, shedding invisible EUV photons (blacklight)
along the way, until the so-called hydrino gives up hundreds of times more
energy than can ordinary hydrogen in chemical reactions such as combustion,
according to Mills.

Although a great deal of theoretical material has been made public by BLP, there
is no truly independent verification from a recognized laboratory - except those
that have signed very strong non-disclosure agreements. Why Randell Mills has
stubbornly resisted truly independent verification of his amazing hydrino claims
is still a bit of a mystery since he now has significant patent protection.
Nevertheless, some of the complex body of related information is now beginning
to fall into a logical context to offer an answer.

I believe that there could exist a previously undisclosed key to understanding
the BLP results. This is speculative, of course, but most everything relevant is
in the public domain, albeit in many disparate locations, so it can be
cross-checked. Not that there has been a deliberate or intentional effort to
mislead on the part of BLP, but at some level, it is probably naive to expect
any businessman to disclose every detail in a complex process - at least until
the prospects for competition have been minimized.

Even with the seemingly straightforward and detailed information on the hydrino
process from the numerous BLP patents (the foreign patents are somewhat more
forthcoming), a skilled practitioner would probably have difficulty in
replication of a clear OU effect in the Mills' cell, as has been the case with
Earthtech and others. Plus, Mills seems remarkably unconcerned about this in the
face of repeated pleas for independent verification. These circumstances present
the likelihood that BLP has an undisclosed "trade secret" or facilitating
technique.

However, even without the trade secret that I will suggest below, the patent
disclosure material should be enough to allow for replication of an anomaly in
the EUV output of a catalyzed plasma - and perhaps even a modest OU. This is a
very important little point - and Mills must believe that it is possible for
anyone to replicate some degree of the anomaly, as indeed that necessity would
be at the core of his risky decision to withhold an important but not critical
trade secret (if that is the case).

Mills most likely intends to justify any lack of complete disclosure at some
later date when he amends the patents with the trade secret, which really is not
all that well disguised - after all, if you look carefully at his web site you
will find the latest of his many medical Mossbauer patents spanning the last
dozen years. And if you read between the lines you will also see how clearly
this particular technology, which is not mentioned in the energy patents, neatly
dovetails into those patents (in a limited way as a "trigger") and how Mills
could argue, if discovered, that the trade secret was at best just a "subset" of
the basic technology, not a "sine qua non."

What Mills most likely does not know or appreciate is that there is a claimed
mechanism for "Cold Fusion" technology by Dr. Nelson Ying that asserts that a
source of external gamma radiation of negligible caloric energy will actually
change the QM wave function probability for certain nuclear reactions (This
appears to be somewhat of an expanded version of the Aharonov-Bohm Effect
related to quantum tunneling). If Ying is correct and Mills does use an
undisclosed gamma trigger, then his entire patent base (which is already shaky
in the USA, but is extensive overseas) is in jeopardy.

But it appears most likely at this writing that Mills himself has been more
accurate in his experiments and his CQM theory than Ying in finding and
explaining, at least partially, the precise mechanism that triggers and sustains
an IPE chain reaction. Mills does not use this exact terminology, so some of his
ideas have been recast to reflect the mechanics as seen by someone who has no
stake in the details of his broader theoretical TOE (Theory of Everything). In
other words, the broader theory may end up being a tour-de-force and may likely
be flawed in some details, but that alone should not necessarily distract from
understanding a valid and less inclusive discovery.

I will touch on all of the following points that relate to the likelihood that
Mills uses "Mossbauer effect technology" (hereafter, MET) as a trigger for
starting the hydrino reaction (after which it becomes auto-catalytic in the
sense of a photon chain reaction propagating at multiples of 27.2 eV, a
frequency in the Extreme Ultraviolet, or EUV spectrum):

1) The time connection, 1989 and beyond, between the Mills' medical MET patents,
P&F cold fusion, and the wet cell hydrino work is identical.

2) Mills was using potassium electrolytes in both the MET work and in his early
wet electrolytic cells in 1989.

3) All the reputed successful outside replications of the hydrino work have been
the result of "sweetheart" arrangements, accompanied by strong NDAs, so they are
not independent, and all of these labs are ones that can be expected to have NRC
licenses for the use of radioactive materials.

4) The MET fits into Mills' CQM theory - even better than does the hydrino!

5) The "Auger cascade" that follows MET irradiation is about the only conceivabl
e way to initially accomplish significant higher level ionization of a catalyst
(>+2) without also ionizing the reactant - and the reactant must be in atomic,
not ionic form, according to Mills.

6) The unexplained delays in getting the process to market are easier to justify
if one assumes that radioactivity has been part of the problem.

7) All of the "Mills catalysts" have nuclear features that suggest that they may
contain either previously unreported Mossbauer-type isotopes or some IPE analog
to them.

8) The MET "tracer" 57Fe is an almost perfect Mills catalyst but is not
prominently mentioned in the disclosures.

9) In a few of his older papers Mills makes oblique reference: that is, never
fully defined reference, to something like "an additional small source of added
EM irradiation."

I don't think that it is any coincidence that in 1989 Shortly after P&F
introduced
to the world their cold fusion cell, Mills had his first "wet" nickel/ light
water/ potassium electrolytic cell in operation. This is like the one that
Earthtech tried to replicate, and at the very same time Mills was also actively
filing, promoting, demonstrating and receiving numerous patents for medical
treatments related to his therapeutic implementation of the Mossbauer technique
for cancer treatment.

It should be made clear that Dr. Mills, as a medical researcher, was widely
recognized as one of the *leading experts* in the world on implementing the
Mossbauer effect, and that his later identification with only BLP or the hydrino
by those outside of medicine may have caused them to overlook  this early focus.

The Mossbauer effect is intuitively explained by Dr. Mills in terms of his
orbitsphere concept - and MET very well could have been the instigator of his
whole CQM theory. If a nucleon can resonantly absorb a photon (one of higher
energy - as a gamma ray) and be excited to a higher level just like an electron
then the photon is trapped inside the nucleon resonator cavity in a metastable
state, and we have the perfect analog to what Mills sees in the electron's
orbit. Mills believes that every orbiting electron at ground state traps a
photon of an exact energy quanta within its orbit. In the case of hydrogen, that
photon is of the 13.6 eV variety, and when hydrogen "shrinks" non-radiatively,
that energy - indeed the photon itself, goes into the catalytic"hole" of the
catalyst which contains the energy deficit, before showing up later in the
process as a photon re-emitted by the catalyst. Once the initial "shrinkage"
occurs, then the stage is set for further steps and indeed a chain reaction at
multiples of 26.2 eV, or more precisely 13.6 eV.

More than a decade ago, Mills made the connection that iron is highly
concentrated in cancer cells, as opposed to healthy cells, and that by adding
Mossbauer tracers (57Fe) to compounds that were absorbed preferentially by
cancer cells he could irradiate them with the focused doses of the
characteristic 14.4 keV gamma photon from a radioactive isotope of cobalt, 57Co,
and then selectively kill the cancer by proximity to the "Auger cascade" of
electrons that follows a resonant photon absorption/re-emission by the iron
tracer. The actually dosage employed in this therapy is still *orders of
magnitude* less than the dosage of radiation that traditional cancer radiation
therapy requires and that is because of the selectivity of the MET tracer, the
iron target.

It should be noted that a chemical used to get iron into biological uptake is a
*potassium* iron cyanate and this chemical has a somewhat broader absorption and
emission spectra than does the elemental isotope, which normally must be held in
a crystal or in a cryogenic state in order to show the characteristic Mossbauer
recoilless absorption. Mills, of course, used a potassium electrolyte in his
first cold fusion cells - before he chose to sever ties to the broader CF field.

Just do a little "role playing" and ask yourself this question: If, back in
1989, within days of promoting you MET cancer therapy, you had just read about
the Pons and Fleischmann anomalous energy work, and you had already been using
electrolytic cells to confirm certain new ideas that were emerging from you
ongoing MET investigations, and you had at your workbench both a potassium iron
electrolyte and a source of 14.4 eV gammas, then isn't it obvious: why wouldn't
you try to see if the theory you were working on explained the P&F results
better than their own theories?

Later on, you might wish that you had distanced yourself from the other field at
the start, as their results were harshly rebuked by the scientific
establishment, but doesn't it seem logical that, early on in this scenario
described above, everything mentioned is consistent with what a creative
experimenter would be doing in 1989? To take the role reversal thing a step
further, isn't it kind of absurd to think that Mills could separate these two
types of rather similar experiments that he was performing simultaneously and in
the same lab?

I suspect that the problem with the wet cell replication of Earthtech and others
operating without Mills' blessing (and the proper license for 57Co) is that,
unlike the later plasma cell, there is very little auto-catalytic behavior in
the wet cell because so much of the excess EUV (which the hydrino catalyst
requires to stay ionized) is instead absorbed by the water in the cell. That is
to say, these older wet cells probably never showed much actual OU without the
continuous input of gammas.

Later when gas phase and plasmas were tried by BLP and it was discovered that
the presently-favored plasma work turned out to be robustly auto-catalytic
because of self-absorbed EUV (and consequently, the external gamma input is only
needed as the *trigger* to the IPE chain reaction) then this is where BLP as a
company really took off, and the former electrolytic work was dropped and hardly
mentioned any more.

For any of the Mills catalysts to function, we are talking about either a higher
level ionization, like Rb+ to Rb+2, or a "three-body" combination- as there is
no perfect fit for 27.2 eV at +1 ionization. But at the same time, you can't let
the reactant, hydrogen,  become ionized at all !! On the surface, it would seem
like an impossible to task to ionize a Rb atom from +1 to +2 at the modest
voltage 300 volts without also ionizing enough H to quench the process.
Certainly it is not easy to pull off in a cold plasma!

And you will undoubtedly have noticed that Mills is able to form intense plasmas
at seemingly impossible input parameters. I believe that this is where the
Mossbauer "trigger" or its surrogate comes into play. Later on in his process,
once a hydrino plasma has reached a certain intensity level and becomes fully
autocatalytic from EUV self-absorption, the trigger can be removed. I believe
that this is why all of Mills early plasma cells were quartz, as most metal
reactors, and certainly all steel reactors would absorb most of the externally
produced gamma radiation before it could have any triggering effect.
Furthermore, there is probably a good reason why accomplishing startup in the
plasma cells using higher voltage alone is tricky if not impossible, and this
probably has to do with absorption resonance and Q values that must be held
within a narrow range.

But even a tiny bit of added Mossbauer radiation along with some 57Fe would
create the Auger cascade and the necessary EUV to start things rolling. Just
using higher voltage to do the same thing possibly ionizes too much reactant and
quenches the process. A rather telling clue here is that 57Fe itself is an
almost perfect Mills catalyst at higher ionization, YET he doesn't mention it
prominently in the reported experiments. The present suggestion also assumes
that the hydrino reaction usually occurs on the surface of the dissociator
itself rather than in the plasma. If true, then this is probably why the BLP
plasma cell does not scale well to larger sizes and another reason why it is
very difficult to start the plasma with high voltage alone.

Also consider the "ultrasonic focusing" element from the recent medical patents.
This technique is probably also adaptable to the hydrino cell to give plenty of
Doppler spread to the photons so that the high heat of the plasma will not
nullify the needed absorption coherence range. Again, once the hydrino formation
has been underway for a while, enough EUV from hydrogen shrinkage will be
generated to make the thing autocatalytic, so we are probably only talking about
startup here.

Some of the delay that has occurred in implementing a commercial version of the
hydrino process could relate to trying to engineer a substitute for the 57Co
trigger source that would have been used previously (57Co is commonly used in
cancer treatment and is relatively safe to store and handle but is expensive) -
and it is likely that such an isotope would not be acceptable commercially.
Mills' delay may relate to engineering alternative non-isotopic sources for
these photons, not an easy task. The source must be tunable over a narrow range
to counteract the increasing Doppler spread of an energetic plasma as it heats
up. There are a number of possibilities for this gamma photon source, including
the many small commercial medical x-ray machines that use small accelerators.

Next consider this, I have been assuming that 57Fe has been used as a dopant
with the Mills catalysts but other possibilities exist, such as the Mills
catalysts themselves being Mossbauer-like in the broader sense. Consider the two
most effective of the "Mills' catalysts," strontium and rubidium. Of all the
common elements, these two "share" a most unusual nuclear isomeric oddity at
Z=87. 87Rb, which is 28% of natural, is radioactive and highly deformed. 87Sr,
which is 7% of natural, is stable but so highly deformed that it was the first
isomer to confirm the IGE, Induced Gamma Emission theory - the reaction Sr87
(gamma, gamma') Sr-87m served to confirm the radiative model of IGE and validate
its use. IGE can be understood as a subset of a broader field IPE, or Induce
Photon Emission which extends the range down into the extreme ultraviolet
spectrum.

One question that I kept asking myself when tossing around this hypothesis
regarding the MET trigger is this. If you have an external source of ionizing
radiation and Mills' catalysts themselves are chosen to promote IPE reactions,
then why do you even need a Mossbauer target as a trigger? The answer may lie
simply in cross-sectional probabilities and in the difficulty of getting the
reaction started in a warm plasma. Normally, externally applied radiation will
most likely be absorbed either by "free" electrons and seldom by inner orbitals
or else absorbed by a resonant nucleus, and on re-emission, it is only then you
are far more likely to see the needed higher-level ionization from the Auger
cascade and those initial EUV photons to act as seed.

Also this point IPE should be mentioned in regard to the ZPE mechanism of Drs.
Puthoff and Ibison. If there is any arguably indisputable ZPE pumping effect to
be presently found in all of the physics literature, then the best candidate
IMHO would be the Mossbauer effect. This is because even though it is
technically not OU, it is "lossless" in a situation where losses should clearly
be present and on a spatial scale it is consistent with the Casimir effect. So
if the ZPE hypothesis can be extended to the broader subject of the IPE chain
reaction, then an alternative hypothesis to the hydrino or shrunken hydrogen can
be undertaken from.

That would be important only if Mills stumbles, and what Mills claims are actual
recovered shrunken hydrino hydrides turns out to be something else. He is
presently having these compounds analyzed, but the final word is not in on just
what they are.

END of draft


Well. I warned you that this analysis was going to be pretty extreme!

Regards,

Jones Beene








From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 14:56:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09559;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:52:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 14:52:35 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <10c.df2098f.29b6a609 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 17:51:53 EST
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_10c.df2098f.29b6a609_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"OPj3G.0.DL2.pmKXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46442
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_10c.df2098f.29b6a609_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi All - 

I won't pretend to have the competence to analyze this in depth, but here I 
think is an error.  From what I understand, Mills' 1988 paper in Nature 
doesn't say there's more iron in cancer cells.  It says that iron could be 
delivered to cells for the proposed therapy.

Indeed, he's moved beyond iron and has significantly modified his ideas about 
practicing his MIRAGE therapy.

More on this in my article from some while ago:

http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0004/baard.php

One danger here, as a side note, is that people might mistakenly conflate 
Mills' medical work and his hydrino theory.  I'm not saying the author of 
this post is doing that, but that casual readers might slip in the language 
of it all.  The two research paths are distinct, even if the author of this 
post is correct that radiation from one could be employed to enable the 
other.

Erik 

In a message dated 3/5/02 5:42:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jonesb9 pacbell.net writes:


> More than a decade ago, Mills made the connection that iron is highly
> concentrated in cancer cells, as opposed to healthy cells, and that by 
> adding
> Mossbauer tracers (57Fe) to compounds that were absorbed preferentially by
> cancer cells he could irradiate them with the focused doses of the
> characteristic 14.4 keV gamma photon from a radioactive isotope of cobalt, 
> 57Co,
> and then selectively kill the cancer by proximity to the "Auger cascade" of
> electrons that follows a resonant photon absorption/re-emission by the iron
> tracer. The actually dosage employed in this therapy is still *orders of
> magnitude* less than the dosage of radiation that traditional cancer 
> radiation
> therapy requires and that is because of the selectivity of the MET tracer, 
> the
> iron target.
> 
> 


--part1_10c.df2098f.29b6a609_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hi All - <BR>
<BR>
I won't pretend to have the competence to analyze this in depth, but here I think is an error.&nbsp; From what I understand, Mills' 1988 paper in Nature doesn't say there's more iron in cancer cells.&nbsp; It says that iron could be delivered to cells for
 the proposed therapy.<BR>
<BR>
Indeed, he's moved beyond iron and has significantly modified his ideas about practicing his MIRAGE therapy.<BR>
<BR>
More on this in my article from some while ago:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0004/baard.php<BR>
<BR>
One danger here, as a side note, is that people might mistakenly conflate Mills' medical work and his hydrino theory.&nbsp; I'm not saying the author of this post is doing that, but that casual readers might slip in the language of it all.&nbsp; The two r
esearch paths are distinct, even if the author of this post is correct that radiation from one could be employed to enable the other.<BR>
<BR>
Erik <BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 3/5/02 5:42:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, jonesb9 pacbell.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">More than a decade ago, Mills made the connection that iron is highly<BR>
concentrated in cancer cells, as opposed to healthy cells, and that by adding<BR>
Mossbauer tracers (57Fe) to compounds that were absorbed preferentially by<BR>
cancer cells he could irradiate them with the focused doses of the<BR>
characteristic 14.4 keV gamma photon from a radioactive isotope of cobalt, 57Co,<BR>
and then selectively kill the cancer by proximity to the "Auger cascade" of<BR>
electrons that follows a resonant photon absorption/re-emission by the iron<BR>
tracer. The actually dosage employed in this therapy is still *orders of<BR>
magnitude* less than the dosage of radiation that traditional cancer radiation<BR>
therapy requires and that is because of the selectivity of the MET tracer, the<BR>
iron target.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_10c.df2098f.29b6a609_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 15:40:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA02093;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:37:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:37:19 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 10:36:42 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <egla8u87m6j56mqg2gh46a8ht7k6j26uhg 4ax.com>
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
In-Reply-To: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA02029
Resent-Message-ID: <"FUFjp3.0.YW.kQLXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46443
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Tue, 05 Mar 2002 13:47:51 -0800:
Hi Jones,
[snip]
>Well. I warned you that this analysis was going to be pretty extreme!
[snip]
Not so much extreme, as hard to follow. Could you perhaps be clearer on
the actual mechanism itself, and leave out the anecdotal stuff and
justifications?

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 16:11:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA24102;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 16:08:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 16:08:29 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8ab07a1ee24 [12.21.208.202]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 15:12:17 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Taubes and Park try to screw the world again... the bastards!
Resent-Message-ID: <"ukAju2.0.Qu5.ztLXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46444
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

First, let me say kudos to Donald Kennedy, Editor of Science magazine for
his decision to publishin his refereed journal the controversial material
that is the subject of this tempest.


At 10:21 AM 3/5/2, Eugene F. Mallove wrote:
[snip]
>By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY
[snip]
>A computer model suggests that temperatures reached around 18 million
>degrees inside the implosions ? fusion temperatures ? the authors report.
[snip]


I would like to point out that the kinetic energy involved, corresponding
to 18 million deg., is only about 1550 eV, not nearly enough for sustained
or "ignition" based fusion.  In that sense, it is "cold", or at least
"warm" as compared to the 100 million degrees required for ignition.  It is
true though that the tail of the kinetic energy distibution may support a
significant number of fusions, and it is also true that ignition style
fusion is not the objective of the authors.  It is important to know
whether the temperature estimate is based on spectroscopy or computed from
the gas compression or whether fusion is assumed and the temperature back
solved from the number of neutrons.  It is possible the neutron flux is due
in large part to stripping reactions, and thus not fusion.  It would not be
the first time such a mistake was made.  However, based on the neutron
energies leaked to the press so far, it seems nearly impossible that the
neutrons are not at least in part from ordinary hot fusion reactions.  The
fusion reactions being observed are in nature closer to the hot fusion
realm than the cold, so the feasibility of this should not be nearly so
threatening to Taubes and Park as a true "cold" fusion device.

Since ignition based fusion is not the goal, power input is required to
sustain power output and the ratio of those powers is, once again, all
important to potential utility of the approach for energy generation.  It
is notable that 1550 eV is right at the threshold of "electron catalysed
fusion" as described here recently.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar  5 22:57:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA03312;
	Tue, 5 Mar 2002 22:55:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2002 22:55:14 -0800
From: JNaudin509 aol.com
Message-ID: <3c.1a579537.29b7172d aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 01:54:37 EST
Subject: Taleyarkhan's Bubble Fusion - PHOTO and VIDEO
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_3c.1a579537.29b7172d_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows FR sub 161
Resent-Message-ID: <"1OZVv1.0.dp.IrRXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46445
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_3c.1a579537.29b7172d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear All,

You will find a PHOTO and a VIDEO of the Taleyarkhan' sonofusion experiment 
at : 

<A HREF="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/taleyarkh-3-8-02.html">http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/taleyarkh-3-8-02.html</A>

<< The dramatic flashing implosion of tiny bubbles--in acetone containing 
deuterium atoms--produces tritium and nuclear emissions similar to those 
characteristic of nuclear fusion involving deuterium-deuterium reactions, 
scientists report. The overall results of the study, published in the 8 March 
2002 issue of Science, only suggest, but do not confirm, nuclear fusion in 
the bubbles' collapse. Scientists have long been interested in fusion, 
because unlike fission, the process has the potential to generate energy 
using readily available raw materials with little radioactive waste. The tiny 
bubbles generated by Rusi P. Taleyarkhan and colleagues may reach up to 10 
million degrees Kelvin in their collapse, as hot as the center of the sun. 
The researchers detected promising signs of fusion, including tritium 
production and neutron emissions with an energy close to that expected from 
deuterium-deuterium fusion. In a related Perspective, F. D. Becchetti 
discusses the study's implications for "table-top" research on nuclear 
fusion. The journal Science is published by the American Association for the 
Advancement of Science (AAAS).>>

Best Regards
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: <A HREF="mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A>
Main Web site : <A HREF="http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://go.to/jlnlabs/</A>
Alternate site : <A HREF="http://jnaudin.free.fr/">http://jnaudin.free.fr/</A>
Site France : <A HREF="http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/lifters/index.htm">http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/</A>


--part1_3c.1a579537.29b7172d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">Dear All,<BR>
<BR>
You will find a </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"><B>PHOTO and a VIDEO</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG
="1"></B> of the Taleyarkhan' sonofusion experiment at : <BR>
<BR>
<A HREF="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/taleyarkh-3-8-02.html">http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/taleyarkh-3-8-02.html</A><BR>
<BR>
&lt;&lt; The dramatic flashing implosion of tiny bubbles--in acetone containing deuterium atoms--produces tritium and nuclear emissions similar to those characteristic of nuclear fusion involving deuterium-deuterium reactions, scientists report. The overa
ll results of the study, published in the 8 March 2002 issue of <I>Science</I>, only suggest, but do not confirm, nuclear fusion in the bubbles' collapse. Scientists have long been interested in fusion, because unlike fission, the process has the potentia
l to generate energy using readily available raw materials with little radioactive waste. The tiny bubbles generated by Rusi P. Taleyarkhan and colleagues may reach up to 10 million degrees Kelvin in their collapse, as hot as the center of the sun. The re
searchers detected promising signs of fusion, including tritium production and neutron emissions with an energy close to that expected from deuterium-deuterium fusion. In a related Perspective, F. D. Becchetti discusses the study's implications for "table
-top" research on nuclear fusion. The journal <I>Science</I> is published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).&gt;&gt;<BR>
<BR>
Best Regards<BR>
Jean-Louis Naudin<BR>
Email: <A HREF="mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A><BR>
Main Web site : <A HREF="http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://go.to/jlnlabs/</A><BR>
Alternate site : <A HREF="http://jnaudin.free.fr/">http://jnaudin.free.fr/</A><BR>
Site France : <A HREF="http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/lifters/index.htm">http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/</A><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_3c.1a579537.29b7172d_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 00:46:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA15185;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 00:43:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 00:43:47 -0800
Message-ID: <002001c1c4e6$f0e5d1c0$12dbf1c3 p7l2i4>
From: "peter v Noorden" <pjvannrd knmg.nl>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020305130048.00b17140 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 09:14:22 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Resent-Message-ID: <"PdGfR2.0.Aj3.3RTXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46446
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed,
Here in the Netherlands the papers mentioned the discovery of the bubble
fusion.
They mentioned that Sience stated that it has nothing to do with cold
fusion. Then half of the article was  used to describe the cold fusion
fiasco. According to the article  these experiments where never reproduced
and never produced any excess energy.
Could you send me the polite objection letter to inform these writers about
the true facts?

Best regards,

Peter van Noorden



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 01:14:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25143;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 01:11:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 01:11:20 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05100300b8ab888d9427 [63.233.226.199]>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 03:09:48 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Translation of the Meyl website
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"1evYB.0.n86.tqTXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46447
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Translation of the Meyl
website</title></head><body>
<div><font face="Palatino" size="+2" color="#000000">Potential eddies,
newly discovered characteristics of the electrical field, change the
physical conception of the world fundamentally! Professor Dr. Dr.-Ing.
Konstantin Meyl develops a uniform field theory in its books, from
which all well-known reciprocal effects are derivable. In place of the
usually used Maxwell equations he selects the prototype of the
induction law discovered of Faraday as beginning and shows that eddies
of the electrical field are contained in<br>
it. These potential eddies spread in the area as scalar wave, a
longitudinal electrical wave, whose existence was already proven
before 100 years by Nikola Tesla and whose characteristics at a
historical reproduction everyone can study.<br>
<br>
The field theory after Meyl gets along without postulates and makes
nevertheless a new interpretation possible of several basic phenomena
of electro-technology and atomic physics and leads to plausible
interpretations of several physical experiments, which were not
explainable in the context of the past theory. For example the quantum
characteristics of elementary particles can be computed with the eddy
interpretation. Also many neutrino experiments are explainable, if one
neutrinos not as particles, but when one understands cyclic fields.
Afterwards even a energy-technical use would be conceivable in the
form of neutrino power. The dielectric losses of a condenser emerge as
vortex losses and regarding the environmental compatibility result
from the corrected theory new substantial aspects about electrical
smog.<br>
<br>
Since the presented theory is based on an extension of the Maxwell
theory, it includes the classical theory as a special case also, which
means that all classical physical laws keep further their validity.
>From the extended point of view of the potential eddies the physical
conception of the world objektiviert itself, so that equally apart
from Einstein' relativity theory the objectivity theory pushes itself
after Meyl, which also explains additionally as the reciprocal
effects, what temperature is, to which past theories are not able.<br>
<br>
Professor Meyl wrote numerous books. In its lectures e.g. at the
technical universities in Berlin and in Clausthal, to the FH in ford
cheeks, as well as in its week final seminars opportunity, potential
eddy and objectivity theory consists more near to become acquainted
with and with the author to discuss. In specialized technical and
lectures individual aspects are deepened. They can see the current
dates now or order the scalar wave transmission set, a video or also
books<br>
<br>
Demo set<br>
<br>
Due to interest and the questions into tracing during and after the
lectures of Professor Meyl (e.g. like a transfer of energy distance
functioned and like the individual components procure to be must) to
have we move decided a demonstration set and an experimentation set to
develop, with<br>
whose assistance the interested practical men can make own experiences
and experiments.<br>
Thus characteristics can be investigated by Teslaspulen, dependence of
the resonant frequency on position and size of the ball electrodes,
change of the system resonance in dependence of the distance between
transmitters and receiver, etc..<br>
<br>
The goal is pursued of reaching on the one hand reproductibility of
the results of measurement. This would be alone not done with a
tinkering guidance. On the other hand Skeptiker give frequently only
to the results of measurement faith, which determined them with them
trusted the devices. Therefore&nbsp; connection types of external
measuring instruments are planned.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;The demo set contains a simple function table from 4 MHz to 8
MHz, a pair of decks&nbsp; with different loads, which can be used on
different kind, as well as all necessary accessories. It is possible
without developing and demonstrate additional instrumentation, a
complete scalar wave transmission circuit for first experiences.&nbsp;
It is also possible to refer the different components individually
(for those, already&nbsp; appropriate devices at the disposal are to
those or by the set to extend). Additionally the experimentation set&nbsp;
contains an extended function table (135 kHz to 10 MHz) and a simple
frequency counter, as well as two further pairs of coils with the half
and/or the&nbsp;&nbsp; double wire length.&nbsp; Contained in the sets
is&nbsp; likewise a description of&nbsp; the set with theoretical
explanations and practical&nbsp; attempt guidances.</font></div>
<div><font face="Palatino" size="+2" color="#000000"><br>
Since we are interested in your realizations and measurements much, we
would be pleased, if you communicate us your results. It would be
helpful, if these are arranged following the attempt guidances. These
metrology records are collected, multiplied and offered as empiric
reports starting from Dezenber 2001. Buyers set, who supply us
accordingly extensive and useful test logs, adequately with current
empiric reports are compensated.<br>
<br>
Here you find an overview of from Professor Dr. - engineers Konstantin
Meyl wrote books and other media. You find a short description of the
individual titles, if you click on the names of the appropriate book
or over the menu border left down.<br>
<br>
&quot;potential eddy&quot; volume 1 ,<br>
Discussion contributions for scientific interpretation and for
physical-technical use, based on a mathematical computation newly
discovered hydrotischer eddy<br>
<br>
&quot;potential eddy&quot; volume 2 ,<br>
Suggestions on the new interpretation of the atomistic, the
materialistic and the scientific conception of the world onthe basis
of electromagnetic eddies<br>
<br>
&quot;electromagnetic environmental compatibility&quot; part of 1:
Reprint for lecture , Causes, phenomena and scientific
consequences<br>
<br>
&quot;electromagnetic environmental compatibility&quot; part of 2:
Reprint to the energy-technical seminar ,<br>
Free energy and the reciprocal effect of the neutrinos<br>
<br>
&quot;electromagnetic environmental compatibility&quot; part of 3:
Reprint to the information-technical seminar ,&nbsp; Only starting
from 2002 available!<br>
<br>
&quot;scalar wave technology&quot; ,<br>
With excerpts from the third volume to the &quot;electromagnetic
environmental compatibility&quot;<br>
and documentation for the demonstration set for the transmission of
electrical scalar waves<br>
<br>
&quot;neutrino power&quot; ,<br>
Johannes of Buttlar in the discussion with Professor Dr. K. Meyl<br>
<br>
Video &quot;Teslastrahlung&quot;<br>
Mitschnitt of a week final seminar</font></div>
<div><font face="Palatino" size="+2" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Palatino" size="+2" color="#000000">I would like to
thank http://www.systranet.com for making this translation
possible.</font></div>
<div><font face="Palatino" size="+2" color="#000000"><br>
<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<x-sigsep><pre>-- 
</pre></x-sigsep>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 04:00:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA29797;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 03:58:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 03:58:24 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 04:00:03 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"nrj7V3.0.QH7.WHWXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46448
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

March 6, 2002

Vortex,

American Association of Advancement of Science (Kennedy, ed.)has
immediately put the March 8th article on ORNL's Sonofusion discovery
Online at its Science website ahead of schedule. It is in PDF format. 6
pages with diagrams. Nice move. It deflates heavy pressures against the
publication. Let's see how the skeptics' cookie crubles.
The article is accessible by anyone.

-AK-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 04:03:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA31476;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:03:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:03:06 -0800
Message-ID: <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:02:48 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"k2pBZ2.0.jh7.vLWXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46449
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> The article is accessible by anyone.

Where?

Craig


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 04:43:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14843;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:43:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:43:07 -0800
Message-ID: <00ee01c1c50c$6eb1f3c0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com> <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:42:51 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"XxeLm3.0.rd3.RxWXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46451
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> > The article is accessible by anyone.
> 
> Where?

And to answer my own question, here it is -- in Science!

http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml

Craig (Houston)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 04:44:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA14310;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:41:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:41:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3C860EF4.824AB6C2 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 04:43:32 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com> <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xKZBU1.0.WV3.HwWXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46450
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

March 6, 2002

I assumed people on the Vortex could use a search engine like Google.
Look under Science Online or AAAS.

-AK-

Craig Haynie wrote:

> > The article is accessible by anyone.
>
> Where?
>
> Craig

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 04:49:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA17086;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:48:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 04:48:48 -0800
Message-ID: <3C861093.549179B4 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 04:50:27 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com> <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"PiULx.0.pA4.l0XXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46452
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

TRY <<http://www.scienceomline.org/>>

Craig Haynie wrote:

> > The article is accessible by anyone.
>
> Where?
>
> Craig

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 05:16:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA25535;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 05:14:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 05:14:03 -0800
From: JNaudin509 aol.com
Message-ID: <d2.14aceb07.29b76ff6 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 08:13:26 EST
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_d2.14aceb07.29b76ff6_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows FR sub 161
Resent-Message-ID: <"TlUt_2.0.vE6.ROXXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46453
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_d2.14aceb07.29b76ff6_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dans un e-mail dat=E9 du 06/03/2002 13:03:44 Paris, Madrid,=20
cchaynie ix.netcom.com a =E9crit :


> Where?
>=20
> Craig
>=20

Here :
<A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1067589.p=
df">http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1067589.pdf</A>
Related articles:
   Science advance announcement, (including all of the other links): <A HREF=
=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml">
http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml</A>
"Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Imploding Bubbles"- Commentary
by Science magazine's F. D. Becchetti
<A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1070165.p=
df">http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1070165.pdf</A>
" 'Bubble Fusion' Paper Generates A Tempest in a Beaker" =20
   by Science magazine's Charles Seife=20
<A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1808.pdf"=
>http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1808.pdf</A>
   "Bubble Fusion Furor" (may require subscription or password)
<A HREF=3D"http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2002/304/1">htt=
p://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2002/304/1</A>

Best Regards
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: <A HREF=3D"mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A>
Main Web site : <A HREF=3D"http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://go.to/jlnlabs/</A>
Alternate site : <A HREF=3D"http://jnaudin.free.fr/">http://jnaudin.free.fr/=
</A>
Site France : <A HREF=3D"http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/lifters/index.htm">ht=
tp://jlnlabs.multimania.com/</A>

--part1_d2.14aceb07.29b76ff6_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" FACE=
=3D"Arial" LANG=3D"1">Dans un e-mail dat=E9 du 06/03/2002 13:03:44 Paris, Ma=
drid, cchaynie ix.netcom.com a =E9crit :<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Where?<BR>
<BR>
Craig<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Here :<BR>
<B><A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/106758=
9.pdf">http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1067589.pdf</=
A></B></B><BR>
Related articles:<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; Science advance announcement, (including all of the other links=
): <A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.=
shtml">http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml</=
A><BR>
"Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Imploding Bubbles"- Commentary<BR>
by Science magazine's F. D. Becchetti<BR>
<A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1070165.p=
df">http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1070165.pdf</A><=
BR>
" 'Bubble Fusion' Paper Generates A Tempest in a Beaker"&nbsp; <BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; by Science magazine's Charles Seife <BR>
<A HREF=3D"http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1808.pdf"=
>http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/1808.pdf</A><BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; "Bubble Fusion Furor" (may require subscription or password)<BR=
>
<A HREF=3D"http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2002/304/1">htt=
p://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2002/304/1</A><BR>
<BR>
Best Regards<BR>
Jean-Louis Naudin<BR>
Email: <A HREF=3D"mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A><BR>
Main Web site : <A HREF=3D"http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://go.to/jlnlabs/</A><=
BR>
Alternate site : <A HREF=3D"http://jnaudin.free.fr/">http://jnaudin.free.fr/=
</A><BR>
Site France : <A HREF=3D"http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/lifters/index.htm">ht=
tp://jlnlabs.multimania.com/</A></FONT></HTML>

--part1_d2.14aceb07.29b76ff6_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 06:24:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20019;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:22:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:22:18 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20020306091655.00b5b168 alcor.concordia.ca>
X-Sender: simonb alcor.concordia.ca
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 09:16:55 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Bart Simon <simonb alcor.concordia.ca>
Subject: Shapira and Saltmarsh replication attempt
In-Reply-To: <00ee01c1c50c$6eb1f3c0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
 <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"pKJFW3.0.fu4.QOYXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46454
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi all,

woohoo - the fun begins again.  The Science paper has the url for the paper
by Shapira and Saltmarsh on their negative replication at
http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/ (its the one pdf doc listed there).

Wasn't Saltmarsh involved in the ORNL CF effort in '89. I seem to recall
his name popping up in Franl Close's book (actually didn't Close hang out
at ORNL for a time?).

cheers,
Bart



------------------------------------------------------
Bart Simon, Asst. Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Concordia University, LB-687
1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. W.
Montreal, Quebec, Canada  H3G 1M8

phone: 514-848-2164
email: simonb alcor.concordia.ca
-------------------------------------------------------

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 06:30:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA23158;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:30:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:30:20 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20020306092455.00b59400 alcor.concordia.ca>
X-Sender: simonb alcor.concordia.ca (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 09:24:55 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Bart Simon <simonb alcor.concordia.ca>
Subject: reply to negative replication
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Luizh1.0.mf5.yVYXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46455
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Oops - I should have included the link for Taleyarkhan's reply -

www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf

cheers,
bart




------------------------------------------------------
Bart Simon, Asst. Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Concordia University, LB-687
1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. W.
Montreal, Quebec, Canada  H3G 1M8

phone: 514-848-2164
email: simonb alcor.concordia.ca
-------------------------------------------------------

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 06:33:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA24318;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:32:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:32:57 -0800
Message-ID: <3C86286B.BE78D45F bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 09:32:11 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: SCIENCE ONLINE HAS tALEYARKHAN SONOFUSION ARTICLE NOW
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"1Oq-v2.0.tx5.PYYXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46456
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Akira Kawasaki wrote:
> 
> March 6, 2002
> 
> Vortex,
> 
> American Association of Advancement of Science (Kennedy, ed.)has
> immediately put the March 8th article on ORNL's Sonofusion discovery
> Online at its Science website ahead of schedule. It is in PDF format. 6
> pages with diagrams. Nice move. It deflates heavy pressures against the
> publication. Let's see how the skeptics' cookie crubles.
> The article is accessible by anyone.

It's going to be difficult to turn this into a heat engine since
the cavitation heat drops rapidly with increasing fluid
temperature (fig. 6, p. 1872).

Of course acetone doesn't freeze until -94.7 Celcius and if you
extrapolate (caution!) the graph . . .

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 06:43:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28846;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:42:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 06:42:34 -0800
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 06:34:40 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Shapira and Saltmarsh replication attempt
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <004601c1c51c$0cf31d20$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
 <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
 <3.0.3.32.20020306091655.00b5b168 alcor.concordia.ca>
Resent-Message-ID: <"aJtzm3.0.e27.QhYXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46457
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Bart Simon" <simonb alcor.concordia.ca>

> woohoo - the fun begins again.  The Science paper has the url for the paper
> by Shapira and Saltmarsh on their negative replication at
> http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/ (its the one pdf doc listed there).

I think it is a little extreme to call this a negative replication.

Shapira and Saltmarsh did not find high energy neutrons consistent with normal
D+D fusion. That is all that can be said for their "negative replication".

They did not ostensibly look for tritium itself - but neither did they dispute,
nor even hint, that the high tritium findings of Taleyarkhan et al. were not
accurate. And I think this is an important point, and one that is likely to be
overlooked by the skeptics and some of the press - as it has already seemingly
been overlooked by a university professor ;-)

Since Shapira and Saltmarsh did not attempt to look for tritium, which is
actually easier to detect than are neutrons, I think it is at least permissible
for us to assume that they implicitly agree that the tritium is there - and it
is that alone that should be the focus of this story.

This makes the story even most important item for dissemination by those who
support Cold Fusion, as for a long time - before he was "squelched" by
higher-ups, Claytor at LANL has found lots of tritium in CF reactions without
the necessary high energy neutrons.

The fact that this story is just now making such a big splash is only an
indication to some of us that the popular press in this country is in need of
more thorough science journalism. Why aren't they mentioning Claytor?

Regards,

Jones Beene

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 07:13:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA08556;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 07:10:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 07:10:20 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20020306101021.00b83798 alcor.concordia.ca>
X-Sender: simonb alcor.concordia.ca
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32)
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 10:10:21 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Bart Simon <simonb alcor.concordia.ca>
Subject: Re: Shapira and Saltmarsh replication attempt
In-Reply-To: <004601c1c51c$0cf31d20$8837fea9 computer>
References: <3C8604C3.9D7231D7 ix.netcom.com>
 <00d901c1c506$d5fdf2f0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
 <3.0.3.32.20020306091655.00b5b168 alcor.concordia.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"xVOKR1.0.R52.R5ZXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46458
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 06:34 AM 06/03/2002 -0800, Jones Beene wrote:

>I think it is a little extreme to call this a negative replication.
>
>Shapira and Saltmarsh did not find high energy neutrons consistent with
normal
>D+D fusion. That is all that can be said for their "negative replication".

Agreed. But that is how they rhetorically position their comments -

>They did not ostensibly look for tritium itself - but neither did they
dispute,
>nor even hint, that the high tritium findings of Taleyarkhan et al. were not
>accurate. And I think this is an important point, and one that is likely
to be
>overlooked by the skeptics and some of the press - as it has already
seemingly
>been overlooked by a university professor ;-)

ho, ho - actually I think whats going on here is very similar to the
original CF case - the invokation of neutrons as the only definitive proof
of fusion in spite of anything else that's anomalous. The hot fusion
community sustained this mantra through 89 and 90 and IMO it has been the
thorn generating the CF-blindness disease Jed and Gene are always pointing to.

Perhaps this new announcement will drive a wedge into the tacit assumption
that in order to have fusion one needs 2.5 MeV neutrons - if this claim is
"unsettled" people may start to look at the corpus of CF research more
seriously.

cheers,
Bart




------------------------------------------------------
Bart Simon, Asst. Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Concordia University, LB-687
1455 De Maisonneuve Blvd. W.
Montreal, Quebec, Canada  H3G 1M8

phone: 514-848-2164
email: simonb alcor.concordia.ca
-------------------------------------------------------

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 08:49:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA27064;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 08:46:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 08:46:03 -0800
Message-ID: <3C863AF9.A5D68540 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 09:51:22 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Village Voice article on Park and Bubble Fusion
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020305130048.00b17140 pop.mindspring.com> <002001c1c4e6$f0e5d1c0$12dbf1c3@p7l2i4>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5dpYt2.0.Xc6.9VaXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46459
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear Peter,
While Jed will write a good letter, I suggest you read the review "Cold
Fusion: An Objective Assessment" on my web site at
http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html.  I think you can generate your own
letter based on facts noted there.

Regards,
Ed Storms

peter v Noorden wrote:

> Jed,
> Here in the Netherlands the papers mentioned the discovery of the bubble
> fusion.
> They mentioned that Sience stated that it has nothing to do with cold
> fusion. Then half of the article was  used to describe the cold fusion
> fiasco. According to the article  these experiments where never reproduced
> and never produced any excess energy.
> Could you send me the polite objection letter to inform these writers about
> the true facts?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Peter van Noorden

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 12:45:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28569;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 12:42:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 12:42:43 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306153414.04ecad80 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 15:42:27 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Shrimp Fusion
In-Reply-To: <3C84D424.81118773 bellsouth.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y73U43.0.H-6.3zdXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46460
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>Here's another article about how a certain species of shrimp
>produce sonoluminescence:
>
>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/09/000922072104.htm

The shrimp use the shock waves to stun small prey. Suppose it turns out 
there is a component of plasma fusion in the energy of sonoluminescence. 
That will mean living creatures have evolved to use thermonuclear fusion as 
a weapon in the fight for survival. That is mind-boggling! Millions of 
years ago they beat us in the arms race to develop the ultimate weapon.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:05:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05587;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:02:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:02:47 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:02:49 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"W6m_o3.0.DN1.78fXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46461
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

OK, I read this paper two or three times, and I read the debate between 
Taleyarkhan and Shapira & Saltmarsh, which accuses them of "truly 
unfortunate and very unprofessional" behavior. Can someone explain to me 
what is controversial about these results? As far as I can tell the 
hypothesis proposed by the authors is that conventional plasma fusion is 
occurring on a microscopic scale. It only works at 0 deg C. It does not 
sound like a threat to ITER.

Is Taleyarkhan seeing an unbalanced, excess amount of tritium, such as cold 
fusion produces? It seems that would be difficult to establish, because 
tritium is easy to detect, but neutrons are hard.

Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him. Maybe I am missing 
something . . . But why are other people upset? The editor said this paper 
caused quite a commotion. Perhaps it is not widely known -- or accepted -- 
that sonoluminescence causes extreme pressure.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:16:01 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA14906;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:15:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:15:30 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <180.4a220bf.29b7eeca aol.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 17:14:34 EST
Subject: Re: Shrimp Fusion
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_180.4a220bf.29b7eeca_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"bbUzD.0.le3.2KfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46462
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_180.4a220bf.29b7eeca_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi - 

I think the temperature reached by the shrimp bubbles are quite a bit lower 
than in the Oak Ridge experiments -- thousands Kelvin, not millions.  So, for 
now, we might rest easy that the crustacean revenge killings against humanity 
won't commence.

: )

Erik

In a message dated 3/6/02 4:57:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jedrothwell infinite-energy.com writes:


> The shrimp use the shock waves to stun small prey. Suppose it turns out 
> there is a component of plasma fusion in the energy of sonoluminescence. 
> That will mean living creatures have evolved to use thermonuclear fusion as 
> 
> a weapon in the fight for survival. That is mind-boggling! Millions of 
> years ago they beat us in the arms race to develop the ultimate weapon.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 


--part1_180.4a220bf.29b7eeca_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Hi - <BR>
<BR>
I think the temperature reached by the shrimp bubbles are quite a bit lower than in the Oak Ridge experiments -- thousands Kelvin, not millions.&nbsp; So, for now, we might rest easy that the crustacean revenge killings against humanity won't commence.<BR
>
<BR>
: )<BR>
<BR>
Erik<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 3/6/02 4:57:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, jedrothwell infinite-energy.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">The shrimp use the shock waves to stun small prey. Suppose it turns out <BR>
there is a component of plasma fusion in the energy of sonoluminescence. <BR>
That will mean living creatures have evolved to use thermonuclear fusion as <BR>
a weapon in the fight for survival. That is mind-boggling! Millions of <BR>
years ago they beat us in the arms race to develop the ultimate weapon.<BR>
<BR>
- Jed<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_180.4a220bf.29b7eeca_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:28:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21674;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:25:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:25:59 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306171221.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:25:47 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-L@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"wZ4_C1.0.aI5.sTfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46463
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him.

I do understand that he is saying the tritons measured by Taleyarkhan 
greatly outnumber the neutrons measured by Shapira & Saltmarsh, but those 
are two different experiments, and S&S did not measure tritium, so who can 
say what their ratio is? For all anyone knows, nothing happened in the S&S 
cell, although  Taleyarkhan thinks they were seeing the same number of 
neutrons per second that he did, after adjusting for counting losses.

Do Taleyarkhan et al. claim a significant imbalance in the t/n ratio? I 
don't see that in the paper. They describes the difficulties capturing 
neutrons. Do they extrapolate the probable total neutron count? I expect 
they want to prove it t/n=1 after massaging. I hope it does not!

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:29:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA22956;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:28:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:28:31 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8697DF.48D0B258 bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:27:43 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"OnBWv3.0.Qc5.DWfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46464
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:
> 
> OK, I read this paper two or three times, and I read the debate between
> Taleyarkhan and Shapira & Saltmarsh, which accuses them of "truly
> unfortunate and very unprofessional" behavior. Can someone explain to me
> what is controversial about these results? As far as I can tell the
> hypothesis proposed by the authors is that conventional plasma fusion is
> occurring on a microscopic scale. It only works at 0 deg C. It does not
> sound like a threat to ITER.

The way I read it, 10^6 temperatures begin to be achieved at 0
deg C.  Higher temperatures allow gaseous acetone within the
bubble and premature collapse (bubble size is important in
achieving high temps).  Lower fluid temperatures should work more
better.  If you extrapolate that graph, 10^8 should be
achieveable before you reach the freeze point of acetone.  THAT
should scare ITER proponents.  Of course, it is pure conjecture
to extrapolate beyond the data.
 
> Is Taleyarkhan seeing an unbalanced, excess amount of tritium, such as cold
> fusion produces? It seems that would be difficult to establish, because
> tritium is easy to detect, but neutrons are hard.

Isn't one molecule considered excess by s(k)eptics where there
was none before?  ;-)

> Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him. Maybe I am missing
> something . . . But why are other people upset? The editor said this paper
> caused quite a commotion. Perhaps it is not widely known -- or accepted --
> that sonoluminescence causes extreme pressure.

If you do a restricted search on an exact phrase match on
"cavitation damage" on google, you get over 1100 hits.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:38:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30518;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:37:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:37:55 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306173316.04ed46d8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:37:54 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <3C8697DF.48D0B258 bellsouth.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"wBBeX2.0.ZS7.3ffXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46465
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>If you extrapolate that graph, 10^8 should be
>achieveable before you reach the freeze point of acetone.  THAT
>should scare ITER proponents.  Of course, it is pure conjecture
>to extrapolate beyond the data.

Yes, but as you said Terry, this would make a lousy heat engine. Maybe they 
are hoping to harvest the neutrons externally with a lithium blanket? That 
is what the hot fusion people want to do, I think. As someone remarked 
years ago, neutrons are a very inconvenient source of energy.

Maybe the ITER lobby is afraid someone will find some other fluid that 
works at higher temperatures.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:45:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02402;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:45:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:45:17 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8ac45292cc7 [12.21.209.94]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 13:48:26 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Resent-Message-ID: <"jSHmH.0.Db.xlfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46466
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:02 PM 3/6/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>OK, I read this paper two or three times, and I read the debate between
>Taleyarkhan and Shapira & Saltmarsh, which accuses them of "truly
>unfortunate and very unprofessional" behavior. Can someone explain to me
>what is controversial about these results? As far as I can tell the
>hypothesis proposed by the authors is that conventional plasma fusion is
>occurring on a microscopic scale. It only works at 0 deg C. It does not
>sound like a threat to ITER.


The issue between Taleyarkhan and Shapira & Saltmarsh is over the neutron
counting.  Not a big deal.  I think you have misread the "truly unfortunate
and very unprofessional" behavior remark to be directed by Taleyarkhan at
Shapira & Saltmarsh, which it is not, at least entirely.  It is directed at
those who attempted to squash publication - which includes senior ORNL
officials, Taubes, Park and others.

The issue about fusion in a "cold" bottle of stuff is only indirectly
ruffling.  There is no solid link to Pons and Fleischmann as of yet, except
maybe the possible low neutron to H3 debate.  A more serious issue might be
that a new tabletop method of studying fusion reactions might be at hand,
and that IS a threat to some big research budgets.  The REAL concern in my
opinion is that a lot of smoke could be blown in congressional faces
regarding budgets, be it correct or not.  The ostensible reason for
quashing publication is the "embarassment" of another "cold fusion fiasco"
but that is just a cover, because the only people who might actualy get the
egg are Taleyarkhan et al and Kennedy.  By sticking their necks out
already, the other parties have made a tactical error - unless of course
the concerns are not just about embarassment of the scientific community,
but rather about budget, and the high personal stake some have placed on CF
being bogus.

Given that, at best, you only get about one 2.5 MeV neutron out per 14 MeV
neutron in, it does not look like a threat to any other power generation
scheme as of yet, including those with limited near term promise, like
ITER.

>
>Is Taleyarkhan seeing an unbalanced, excess amount of tritium, such as cold
>fusion produces? It seems that would be difficult to establish, because
>tritium is easy to detect, but neutrons are hard.


Taleyarkhan et al DID see a balance.  It is Shapira & Saltmarsh that did
not see the expected neutrons, but Shapira & Saltmarsh did not bother to
look at the tritium at all.  It might be concluded that Shapira's &
Saltmarsh's management at ORNL, who requested the "replication", and who
also tried to stop publication in Science, did not see any possible benefit
to looking for tritium.


>
>Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him. Maybe I am missing
>something . . . But why are other people upset? The editor said this paper
>caused quite a commotion. Perhaps it is not widely known -- or accepted --
>that sonoluminescence causes extreme pressure.
>
>- Jed

Yes, and simulations done by Willy Moss et al, and others have shown the
feasibility of nominal amounts of fusion in D2O-T2O mixtures, which makes
it of possible lab interest, but not a fad.  However, Taleyarkhan et al
have really souped up the water based expriment several orders of
magnitude, and this could lead to some significant yet low cost reasearch
possibilities.  Perhaps the threat is the possibility of secrets revealed,
or maybe it's budgets whittled away by small science at small universites,
or maybe it's concern that new science will show there is something to CF
after all, especially the low neutron/tritium ratio, and the "magic"
breaking of the Coulomb barrier.  As Jones Beene has pointed out already,
it is overdue for considering the relevance of the tritium work of Clayter
et al to this little tempest.  There are too many fusion anomalies becoming
well established for the hard core CF skeptics to be comfortable.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:47:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03874;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:47:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:47:18 -0800
Message-ID: <3C869C44.647C7083 bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:46:28 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Potatov Failure
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mpf6N3.0.Sy.rnfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46467
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Gnorts, Vorts!

After reading the papers on acoustic fusion, it occurs to me why
our tests of the Potatov device failed.  Note that the
experimenters at Oak Ridge DEGASSED their fluid prior to the
experiment.  Also, low starting temperatures are important to
achieving large cavitation bubbles.

Here in the states we pump gas (air) INTO our processed water as
part of the purification process.  And our starting water
temperatures are likely much higher than Russia.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:51:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA04896;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:48:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:48:55 -0800
Message-ID: <3C869CA1.12D029C4 bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:48:01 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020306173316.04ed46d8@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"WpvA8.0.HC1.MpfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46468
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Maybe the ITER lobby is afraid someone will find some other fluid that
> works at higher temperatures.

Exactly!  Once this is accepted and the materials scientists get
involved, who knows what could be achieved.  

Hey, wasn't someone on the list doing cavitation experiments with
something other than water a couple of years ago?

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:53:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08057;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:52:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:52:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3C869D90.20BA1A05 bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:52:00 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Potatov Failure
References: <3C869C44.647C7083 bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"6P9o9.0.oz1.6tfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46469
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

That should read 'Potapov'!

Shades of Dan Quayle!

Terry
(going home)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 14:58:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11369;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:57:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:57:34 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306175049.04ec6c70 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:57:37 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <v01530500b8ac45292cc7 [12.21.209.94]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Z4vr32.0.Yn2.TxfXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46470
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>I think you have misread the "truly unfortunate and very unprofessional" 
>behavior remark to be directed by Taleyarkhan at Shapira & Saltmarsh, 
>which it is not, at least entirely.  It is directed at those who attempted 
>to squash publication . . .

Taleyarkhan is upset that the S&S internal ORNL paper was disseminated even 
though it was not peer reviewed. "Indeed, some people may have reached 
conclusions concerning the validity of our findings prior to the 
publication of our paper." Them's fighten' words.

- http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf


>Taleyarkhan et al DID see a balance.

Where does it say that? I don't get it.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 15:11:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA18607;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:10:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:10:41 -0800
Message-ID: <008a01c1c564$1eba1e80$e709da42 usadatanet.net>
From: "Ryan Hopkins" <thebishop usadatanet.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306175049.04ec6c70 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 18:10:32 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Resent-Message-ID: <"TBNij2.0.fY4.m7gXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46471
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This really sucks.  It's a prime example of the tendency of scientific
communities to get stuck in their own muck of solidifying a set of concepts
which have been experimentally verified - from a certain point of view.  One
would think that forward-thinking scientists would have learned this, having
rigorously studied what came before them.  Sadly, it seems as though the
study of what has come before, is precisely the key which locks a padlock
labeled 'dogma' around those unfortunate minds.

Alas, the old guard dies hard...

Ryan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
To: <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?


> Horace Heffner wrote:
>
> >I think you have misread the "truly unfortunate and very unprofessional"
> >behavior remark to be directed by Taleyarkhan at Shapira & Saltmarsh,
> >which it is not, at least entirely.  It is directed at those who
attempted
> >to squash publication . . .
>
> Taleyarkhan is upset that the S&S internal ORNL paper was disseminated
even
> though it was not peer reviewed. "Indeed, some people may have reached
> conclusions concerning the validity of our findings prior to the
> publication of our paper." Them's fighten' words.
>
> - http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf
>
>
> >Taleyarkhan et al DID see a balance.
>
> Where does it say that? I don't get it.
>
> - Jed
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 15:48:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA05306;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:46:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:46:19 -0800
Message-ID: <3C869D7E.6001C17C ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 16:52:02 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306171221.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ygr-o2.0.hI1.BfgXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46472
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> >Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him.
>
> I do understand that he is saying the tritons measured by Taleyarkhan
> greatly outnumber the neutrons measured by Shapira & Saltmarsh, but those
> are two different experiments, and S&S did not measure tritium, so who can
> say what their ratio is? For all anyone knows, nothing happened in the S&S
> cell, although  Taleyarkhan thinks they were seeing the same number of
> neutrons per second that he did, after adjusting for counting losses.
>
> Do Taleyarkhan et al. claim a significant imbalance in the t/n ratio? I
> don't see that in the paper. They describes the difficulties capturing
> neutrons. Do they extrapolate the probable total neutron count? I expect
> they want to prove it t/n=1 after massaging. I hope it does not!
>
> - Jed

Let me take a shot at proposing why Park et al. are so negative.  I can think
of three reasons.  First, many laboratories have attempted to produce fusion
during bubble collapse and have failed.  As a result, theoreticians have come
up with explanations of why the process does not work.  With this success,
previous work looks less competent.  Besides, an attempt at replication
appeared to fail.  Second, this simple method is similar to a simple method
proposed by P-F.  Modern physicists do not like simple experiments because
modern physics is based to the large experiments with the large amount of
money and power this gives.  The idea that something new can be discovered by
simple means is a threat.  Third, the method can be a threat to the hot
fusion program in the future.  Successful ideas always start small.

As for the n/t ratio, Teleyarkhan says on page 1872 that the "neutron
emission rate associated with cavitation was 4x10^4 to 8x10^4 n/s.  This
value is somewhat smaller than the estimated rate of n generation from the T
measurements (~7x10^5 n/s)".  In other words, the n/t ratio was about 0.1, a
value they, and I, consider to be equal to unity within the errors of the
measurement.  Unfortunately, both the neutron rate as well as the amount of
tritium detected is small, too small to establish a good n/t ratio.
Consequently, this issue has little bearing on the work.

Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 15:50:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA08191;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:49:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:49:33 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502b8ac58b3c3f6 [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:53:25 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Resent-Message-ID: <"tg5ds.0.s_1.DigXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46473
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:57 PM 3/6/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>>I think you have misread the "truly unfortunate and very unprofessional"
>>behavior remark to be directed by Taleyarkhan at Shapira & Saltmarsh,
>>which it is not, at least entirely.  It is directed at those who attempted
>>to squash publication . . .
>
>Taleyarkhan is upset that the S&S internal ORNL paper was disseminated even
>though it was not peer reviewed. "Indeed, some people may have reached
>conclusions concerning the validity of our findings prior to the
>publication of our paper." Them's fighten' words.


Yes, but that does not say WHERE the paper ended up, or WHO reached
conclusions.  I suspect "some people" is actually not aimed so much at
Shapira & Saltmarsh as at those who tried to make the trouble over at
Science.  Otherwise, they could have simply referred to the authors of the
paper to which they were responding, and not to the more cryptic "some
people."   As far as I can see, Shapira & Saltmarsh simply were doing their
jobs, and the basis for their disagreement was lay in their work.  It is
the other folks making the rush to judgement and who have no legitimate
business trying to gag a journal.


>
>- http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf
>
>
>>Taleyarkhan et al DID see a balance.
>
>Where does it say that? I don't get it.
>
>- Jed


Acutally, it is in the "COMMENTS ON THE SHAPIRA AND SALTMARSH REPORT",
March 2, 2002, page 4, bottom of first paragraph, not in the original
paper.  After correcting 50% for neutron scatter in the experiment (not
done in original paper) a neutron emission rate of ~1.6x10^5
neutorns/second is obtiained.  The article says: "Thus, contrary to what
Shapira and Saltmarsh claim, the PD neutron emission rates are in quite
good agreement (considering experimental uncertainties) with the emission
rate we estimate from our experiments and, with the rates of ~7x10^5
determined from our tritium data."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 15:54:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA10938;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:54:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:54:01 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503b8ac5cbeb733 [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 14:57:54 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Resent-Message-ID: <"CBofm3.0.hg2.PmgXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46474
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:48 PM 3/6/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
>Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
>> Maybe the ITER lobby is afraid someone will find some other fluid that
>> works at higher temperatures.
>
>Exactly!  Once this is accepted and the materials scientists get
>involved, who knows what could be achieved.
>
>Hey, wasn't someone on the list doing cavitation experiments with
>something other than water a couple of years ago?
>
>Terry


Somebody was trying to get funding to try a liquid (HOT) LiD-LiT mixture.
Was it Charles Cagle, or maybe Ross Tessien?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 15:56:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11976;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:55:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:55:52 -0800
Message-ID: <3C869FBC.84332E41 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 17:01:36 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Potatov Failure
References: <3C869C44.647C7083 bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"zopPv2.0.2x2.8ogXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46475
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



Terry Blanton wrote:

> Gnorts, Vorts!
>
> After reading the papers on acoustic fusion, it occurs to me why
> our tests of the Potatov device failed.  Note that the
> experimenters at Oak Ridge DEGASSED their fluid prior to the
> experiment.  Also, low starting temperatures are important to
> achieving large cavitation bubbles.
>
> Here in the states we pump gas (air) INTO our processed water as
> part of the purification process.  And our starting water
> temperatures are likely much higher than Russia.
>
> Terry

Or Potatov had a convenient method to turn electrical energy into
heat, and nothing more.  Remember, attempts to make the sonofusion
method work using D2O has always failed.  This recent success was
based on C3D6O.  Even when using acetone, the hydrogen version did
not work.  Consequently, no relationship exists between the Potatov
claims and the Taleyarkhan et al. work.

Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 16:00:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14026;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:59:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:59:20 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306185131.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2002 18:59:28 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <3C869D7E.6001C17C ix.netcom.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306171221.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"42p3p3.0.4R3.OrgXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46476
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>As for the n/t ratio, Teleyarkhan says on page 1872 that the "neutron
>emission rate associated with cavitation was 4x10^4 to 8x10^4 n/s.  This
>value is somewhat smaller than the estimated rate of n generation from the 
>T measurements (~7x10^5 n/s)".  In other words, the n/t ratio was about 
>0.1, a value they, and I, consider to be equal to unity within the errors 
>of the measurement.

Ah, I see. I missed that somehow.

I hope they measure it more carefully and come up with a much larger 
"neutron gap." In other words, I hope it is a form of CF.

Robert Park's "neutron gap" was the difference between S&S's neutrons (or 
lack of neutrons) and Teleyarkhan's tritium, which is a meaningless comparison.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 16:30:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28647;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:27:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:27:47 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530504b8ac636346cc [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:31:37 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Potapov Failure
Resent-Message-ID: <"SMPK-2.0.U_6.2GhXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46477
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 5:46 PM 3/6/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
>Gnorts, Vorts!
>
>After reading the papers on acoustic fusion, it occurs to me why
>our tests of the Potatov device failed.  Note that the
>experimenters at Oak Ridge DEGASSED their fluid prior to the
>experiment.  Also, low starting temperatures are important to
>achieving large cavitation bubbles.
>
>Here in the states we pump gas (air) INTO our processed water as
>part of the purification process.  And our starting water
>temperatures are likely much higher than Russia.
>
>Terry


Yes, but there was a reason for that.  Potapov was supposedly heating
apartment buildings with the hot water from the device.  The energy that
should have been required to heat the water to the temperature differential
observed was supposedly more than that expended on pumping, giving a high
COP.  The objective was hot water and the effort was merely to substantiate
a claim, not to redesign the device, though we did attempt lot of redesign
on vortex!  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 16:30:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA29686;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:30:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:30:27 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505b8ac65f2e0a4 [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:34:18 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Resent-Message-ID: <"o-fOf3.0.hF7.YIhXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46478
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:57 PM 3/6/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>>I think you have misread the "truly unfortunate and very unprofessional"
>>behavior remark to be directed by Taleyarkhan at Shapira & Saltmarsh,
>>which it is not, at least entirely.  It is directed at those who attempted
>>to squash publication . . .
>
>Taleyarkhan is upset that the S&S internal ORNL paper was disseminated even
>though it was not peer reviewed. "Indeed, some people may have reached
>conclusions concerning the validity of our findings prior to the
>publication of our paper." Them's fighten' words.


Yes, but that does not say WHERE the paper ended up, or WHO reached
conclusions.  I suspect "some people" is actually not aimed so much at
Shapira & Saltmarsh as at those who tried to make the trouble over at
Science.  Otherwise, they could have simply referred to the authors of the
paper to which they were responding, and not to the more cryptic "some
people."   As far as I can see, Shapira & Saltmarsh simply were doing their
jobs, and the basis for their disagreement was lay in their work.  It is
the other folks making the rush to judgement and who have no legitimate
business trying to gag a journal.


>
>- http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf
>
>
>>Taleyarkhan et al DID see a balance.
>
>Where does it say that? I don't get it.
>
>- Jed


Acutally, it is in the "COMMENTS ON THE SHAPIRA AND SALTMARSH REPORT",
March 2, 2002, page 4, bottom of first paragraph, not in the original
paper.  After correcting 50% for neutron scatter in the experiment (not
done in original paper) a neutron emission rate of ~1.6x10^5
neutorns/second is obtiained.  The article says: "Thus, contrary to what
Shapira and Saltmarsh claim, the PD neutron emission rates are in quite
good agreement (considering experimental uncertainties) with the emission
rate we estimate from our experiments and, with the rates of ~7x10^5
determined from our tritium data."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 16:35:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA32303;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:34:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 16:34:41 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530506b8ac66850329 [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 15:38:33 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: messages disappearing
Resent-Message-ID: <"PDztZ3.0.du7.WMhXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46479
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Just for general information, I've had some messages disappear recently,
especially those sent to vortex but which did not come back as vortex
posts.  Sorry if I repost and get duplicate posting.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 22:41:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA25006;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:39:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:39:11 -0800
From: "Matthew Rogers" <matt accelnet.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Sonofusion Released papers, can someone sort out the information for the basics ?
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:39:05 -0800
Message-ID: <001101c1c5a2$c7603770$0501a8c0 kitty>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook CWS, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
In-Reply-To: <B8AA4C92.187B%editor infinite-energy.com>
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"MHHFG.0.a66.FimXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46480
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Vor,
	I have tracked down the papers ( in PDF ) by order of appearance.

First is the announced Science Mag article as reported by Craig here on Vor.

http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml

Then is the report by Jean-Louis here on Vor the Sonofusion Video at

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/taleyarkh-3-8-02.html
with the video at
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_jrnls/sci/public_releases/images/SoundofNeutro
ns.rpt.mov

By clicking on the more info I found the Oak Ridge review

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/SLan5av2.pdf

and the response of Taleyarkhan here at

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/science/2002-03/TaleyarkhanResponse.p
df

I gather that the press is reporting the negative information located in the
Oak ridge report, even though it is not really negative,
According to Taleyarkhan.

In this case, I believe in publishing all the results like what is
happening, so independent review may be done.

My 2 questions are :
1. Does this appear to be a valid apparatus and test ?
2. Why don't we have a complete catalog of the CF metal D2  tests since
Pons-Fleishman posted on the web  with complete diagrams and test procedures
like was done by Taleyarkhan ?

Thanks VOR,

Matt Rogers


-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene F. Mallove [mailto:editor infinite-energy.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 10:21 AM
To: vortex l eskimo.com
Subject: Taubes and Park try to screw the world again... the bastards!


Fusion in beaker report leaves some physicists cold

By Dan Vergano, USA TODAY

A physics team Monday reported evidence that it had created high-temperature
fusion in a laboratory beaker.

Nuclear fusion, the same force that powers the sun, has been a longtime goal
of scientists because it promises abundant energy with no radioactive
waste.

But the finding triggered intense skepticism from some scientists, burned by
memories of "cold fusion," the 1989 claim by Utah researchers to have
produced fusion at room temperatures, a highly criticized result that no one
else could ever reproduce.

In the experiment, details of which were released ahead of schedule by the
journal Science, researchers led by Rusi Taleyarkhan of Oak Ridge (Tenn.)
National Laboratory imploded small bubbles in acetone, best known as an
ingredient in nail polish remover, by shooting neutrons into the liquid.
Neutrons are uncharged physics particles in the center of atoms.

When the researchers imploded the bubbles, the bursts gave off a flash of
light and thousands of neutrons, a sign of nuclear fusion.

"We tried a different approach that seemed promising and it works. We were
lucky," says team member Richard Lahey Jr. of the Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute in Troy, N.Y.

In their approach, the bubbles grew 10,000 times larger than their starting
size, to about eight hundredths of an inch across, before they imploded.
Past efforts grew bubbles only 10 times larger than their starting size.
Essentially, for every neutron the researchers shot into the solution, they
received thousands out of it.

A computer model suggests that temperatures reached around 18 million
degrees inside the implosions ? fusion temperatures ? the authors report.

However, some experts tried to burst the "bubble fusion" result. Last week
in an American Physical Society newsletter, physicist Robert Park wrote
that "distinguished physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco
13 years ago, advised against publication."

Park and others cited a critique by separate Oak Ridge physicists who tried
to duplicate the experiment. They failed to see enough neutrons, using the
 same apparatus, to justify fusion claims. Citing the disagreement, Science
released the original paper, the critique and a response by Taleyarkhan's
group. They say their critics misinterpreted the duplicate effort and did in
fact produce fusion neutrons.

"Nature loves to delude us on these things," says physicist Lawrence Crum of
the University of Washington-Seattle. "There has to be a great deal of
skepticism."

"If history is any indication, just the existence of this kind of brouhaha
and the criticism from very competent experts is good evidence that the
results are just dead wrong. And if it's dead wrong, then Science probably
shouldn't have decided to publish it," says science writer Gary Taubes, a
correspondent for Science and author of Bad Science: The Short Life and
Weird Times of Cold Fusion.







------ End of Forwarded Message


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar  6 23:33:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA13035;
	Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:30:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 23:30:47 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502b8acc7c6dcc8 [12.21.208.87]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 22:33:28 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Sonofusion Released papers, can someone sort out the information for the
 basics ?
Resent-Message-ID: <"F0J4j1.0.VB3.cSnXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46481
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:39 PM 3/6/2, Matthew Rogers wrote:

>My 2 questions are :
>1. Does this appear to be a valid apparatus and test ?


Yes, but like any other scientific work it needs replication.  That's
replication, not some experiment with "ego mods".


>2. Why don't we have a complete catalog of the CF metal D2  tests since
>Pons-Fleishman posted on the web  with complete diagrams and test procedures
>like was done by Taleyarkhan ?


Good idea.  Please implement.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 01:18:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA22679;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 01:15:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 01:15:34 -0800
Message-ID: <00a301c1c5b8$af00bcc0$878f209a ggrf30j>
From: "Nick Palmer" <nick7 itl.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020306173316.04ed46d8@pop.mindspring.com> <3C869CA1.12D029C4@bellsouth.net>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 09:07:16 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"p7jlD3.0.DY5.r-oXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46482
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:-

<<
Hey, wasn't someone on the list doing cavitation experiments with
something other than water a couple of years ago?>>

I remember emailing Chris Tinsley, when the sonofusion (in water) story
first broke, to speculate on what would happen if liquid deuterium was
cavitated. I wondered if there might be a loud noise, a lot of mess and a
big bill!

Nick Palmer


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 03:39:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA00669;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 03:36:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 03:36:41 -0800
Message-ID: <001c01c1c5cc$27789a20$7dfcc2d4 oemcomputer>
Reply-To: "Jean-Pierre Lentin" <jplentin club-internet.fr>
From: "Jean-Pierre Lentin" <jplentin club-internet.fr>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530504b8ac636346cc [12.21.211.189]>
Subject: Re: Potapov Failure
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 12:35:15 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Resent-Message-ID: <"IRnkP1.0.NA.93rXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46483
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Terry, Horace, Edmund & all

For a long time, I remained skeptical about American efforts to evaluate the
Potapov "Yusmar" system, especially since Peter Glueck from Romania, pro-CF
physicist and then Vortex member, kept insisting that something was wrong
with the U.S. replications and that Potapov, whom he knew personnally, had a
bona fide OU system.

However, by pure chance, I recently met a French engineer and businessman
who struck a deal with Potapov, paid for a French patent and was about to
commercialize the system. Hehad a team of good engineers to thoroughly test
the system, and found, like the Americans did, that Potapov's calculations
were wrong at that the C.O.P. was no better that a conventional electric
heating system - and certainly not O.U..

Last time this Frenchman saw Potapov in Moldavia, the inventor was living
the high life and driving a flashy big black limousine. For my French
contact, it seemed to indicate that Potapov's operation is now laundering
money for the local mafia...

Sic transit gloria mundi.





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 03:48:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA04997;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 03:47:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 03:47:41 -0800
Message-Id: <4.3.1.20020307111025.00bcae20 pop3.newnet.co.uk>
X-Sender: lawrence pop3.newnet.co.uk
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 11:15:08 +0000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Stephen Lawrence <stephen lawrence.newnet.co.uk>
Subject: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
Cc: rn214 hermes.cam.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"VPLAs2.0.wD1.TDrXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46484
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear All,

I don't hear much about the Casimir Effect on vortex-l, but if somebody 
would like to comment...

A while ago I reported an "Energy Conversion Device" invented by Geoffrey 
Spence, UK.  US patent 4,772,816 (1986).  That patent comes with its own 
appended theory of operation.  I include here an alternative idea, based on 
the Casmir Effect.  The patent (incl. diags) can be obtained from:
http://www.butlerlabs.com/patentlinks.htm

In a betatron, electrons are accelerated in a chamber with a magnetic field 
and assume a circular orbit of radius r.  Eventually, the electrons radiate 
their energy and lose speed, falling back to an anode.  An additional 
cylindrical electrode (radius r') is placed in the chamber in the centre of 
the orbit of the electrons, so that they orbit around it.  This electrode 
is now negatively biassed and is made bigger s.t. r' > r.   The electrons 
are thus bent towards the electrode by the magnetic field, and away from it 
by electrostatic repulsion.

Thus a thin cylindrical cloud of electrons should build up around the 
central electrode.  Spence's device (of this nature) has been observed to 
generate energy.  I hypothesize that when the electron cloud becomes dense 
enough and close enough to the central electrode, the electron cloud forms 
a barrier so that ZPF forces between the cloud and the electrode are 
reduced.  The electrons are forced on to the central electrode, overcoming 
electrostatic forces and doing considerable work, thereby generating energy.

I am guessing that the quantum 'jitter' away from the central electrode is 
less than the jitter towards it.  Thus electrons will randomly 'jitter' 
onto the central electrode: once there, they are caught in the metal 
conductor where they are fed through a load and return to the source, the 
electron gun.  Holes formed by electrons jittering onto the central 
collector are replenished by new electrons from the incoming beam.  If they 
'jitter' outwards they are magnetically attracted back again anyway.

Has Spence found a way of constructing an ever replenishing series of 
collapsing plates to harness the Casimir Effect?

Yours views would be greatly appreciated.

Stephen Lawrence, S.E.A., UK.
"As punishment for my contempt of authority, Fate has made me an authority 
myself." - A. Einstein.  To his dying day, Einstein tried to convince 
people not to believe unquestionly in him: "I may well be on the wrong 
track", he said.

8 Supanee Court, French's Road, Cambridge, England, CB4 3LB.  Tel/Fax +44 
1223 564373

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 07:18:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA05020;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:14:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:14:58 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [209.249.70.145]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 07:14:26 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F441lxACi32wfMGqDsi0000fdef hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Mar 2002 15:14:26.0668 (UTC) FILETIME=[C55362C0:01C1C5EA]
Resent-Message-ID: <"koLOJ1.0.ME1.oFuXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46485
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dear All,

We investigated the Spence device when it first surfaced, and visited the 
inventor and Suffolk University.  George Hathaway, an open minded engineer 
in Canada, who evaluates such devices, also visited Spence for several days. 
  Both Hathaway and we concluded that the device never functioned as 
claimed.  It was a sad case of inventor's delusion.

However, Lucent announced a working Casimir teeter-totter useful in MEMs 
last year in Nature.  There is also promising work involving the Casimir 
effect in progress at Interstellar Technologies, which has a web site.

Mark Goldes, CEO, Magnetic Power Inc.
Room Temperature Superconductors Inc.


>From: Stephen Lawrence <stephen lawrence.newnet.co.uk>
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>CC: rn214 hermes.cam.ac.uk
>Subject: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
>Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 11:15:08 +0000
>
>Dear All,
>
>I don't hear much about the Casimir Effect on vortex-l, but if somebody
>would like to comment...
>
>A while ago I reported an "Energy Conversion Device" invented by Geoffrey
>Spence, UK.  US patent 4,772,816 (1986).  That patent comes with its own
>appended theory of operation.  I include here an alternative idea, based on
>the Casmir Effect.  The patent (incl. diags) can be obtained from:
>http://www.butlerlabs.com/patentlinks.htm
>
>In a betatron, electrons are accelerated in a chamber with a magnetic field
>and assume a circular orbit of radius r.  Eventually, the electrons radiate
>their energy and lose speed, falling back to an anode.  An additional
>cylindrical electrode (radius r') is placed in the chamber in the centre of
>the orbit of the electrons, so that they orbit around it.  This electrode
>is now negatively biassed and is made bigger s.t. r' > r.   The electrons
>are thus bent towards the electrode by the magnetic field, and away from it
>by electrostatic repulsion.
>
>Thus a thin cylindrical cloud of electrons should build up around the
>central electrode.  Spence's device (of this nature) has been observed to
>generate energy.  I hypothesize that when the electron cloud becomes dense
>enough and close enough to the central electrode, the electron cloud forms
>a barrier so that ZPF forces between the cloud and the electrode are
>reduced.  The electrons are forced on to the central electrode, overcoming
>electrostatic forces and doing considerable work, thereby generating 
>energy.
>
>I am guessing that the quantum 'jitter' away from the central electrode is
>less than the jitter towards it.  Thus electrons will randomly 'jitter'
>onto the central electrode: once there, they are caught in the metal
>conductor where they are fed through a load and return to the source, the
>electron gun.  Holes formed by electrons jittering onto the central
>collector are replenished by new electrons from the incoming beam.  If they
>'jitter' outwards they are magnetically attracted back again anyway.
>
>Has Spence found a way of constructing an ever replenishing series of
>collapsing plates to harness the Casimir Effect?
>
>Yours views would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Stephen Lawrence, S.E.A., UK.
>"As punishment for my contempt of authority, Fate has made me an authority
>myself." - A. Einstein.  To his dying day, Einstein tried to convince
>people not to believe unquestionly in him: "I may well be on the wrong
>track", he said.
>
>8 Supanee Court, French's Road, Cambridge, England, CB4 3LB.  Tel/Fax +44
>1223 564373
>




_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 07:34:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA15532;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:33:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:33:22 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8ad334f2af0 [12.21.208.87]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 06:37:13 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: 1,000 to 1 neutron production noted in AIP update
Resent-Message-ID: <"sU-0w2.0.Zo3.2XuXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46486
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Note the comment about 1000 to 1 neutron production in the cell's active
region!  Moral to the story, make the entire radiated region active.
(1000*2.5 MeV)/(14 MeV) = 178 COP.   However, a very large flux would be
necessary, and the energy to maintain the bubbles plus generate the
neutrons has not been considered.  The output of 10^6 2.5 MeV neutrons is
only 1.6x10^-7 J, so it is way way under unity as is.


PHYSICS NEWS UPDATE
The American Institute of Physics Bulletin of Physics News
Number 579  March 5, 2002   by Phillip F. Schewe, Ben Stein, and
James Riordon


HAS NUCLEAR FUSION BEEN OBSERVED IN A BUBBLE
TANK?  A team of scientists has claimed evidence for deuterium-
deuterium fusion in a tabletop apparatus at Oak Ridge National
Lab (Taleyarkhan et al., Science, 8 March 2002), but other
scientists (including a separate group at Oak Ridge) are raising
serious concerns about the validity of the result.   In their
experiment, Taleyarkhan et al. (a collaboration of scientists from
Oak Ridge, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the Russian
Academy of Sciences) utilize sonoluminescence (SL), itself a well-
studied and highly regarded area of research (see, for example,
Updates 34, 299, 307, 327, and 355), in which powerful sound
waves sent into a liquid tank trigger the creation of single or
multiple bubbles which then collapse and release short flashes of
light.
     Sonoluminescence, literally the conversion of sound into light,
is a remarkable process in that sound itself is not a densely packed
form of energy.  Even the sound in the most powerful car stereo
has a much lower energy density than the light in a penlight laser
beam.  In an SL experiment, however, the energy from the sound
wave gets focused into a very small region, namely a collapsing
bubble.  This highly concentrated energy heats the gas inside the
bubble to incandescent temperatures resulting in the release of
light.  The conversion of sound energy into light energy represents
an energy concentration of over a trillion.  Researchers have long
speculated whether the conditions inside the collapsing bubbles
could be made to approach the high temperatures and densities
necessary to trigger energy-producing nuclear fusion reactions
such as those that occur inside the sun.  This is a great matter of
debate, as some details of the bubble collapse and light emission
are still incompletely understood.  With this incomplete
knowledge, researchers cannot discount the possibility that the
conditions can be tweaked to generate nuclear fusion, modest as
these fusion reactions are likely to be.  However, according to
leading sonoluminescence theorist William Moss of Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory, "We are all pretty sure that normal
SL conditions are nowhere near fusion temperatures--typical SL
temperatures don't exceed 11,000 degrees Kelvin or so, at least
from theoretical estimates"---as opposed to the millions of degrees
that nuclear fusion would typically require.
   In the newly reported experiment, many details are similar to a
traditional SL setup: researchers aimed 19.3-kHz sound waves at a
glass flask containing deuterated acetone.  But here's the novel part
of the experiment: a pulsed neutron generator injected 14.3 MeV
neutrons into the flask, in sync with the sound waves.  The
researchers claim that the neutrons trigger the creation of
extremely small bubbles which then grow to relatively large sizes
and then collapse to generate pulses of light.  In conjunction with
the light pulses, the researchers report the detection of significant
amounts of tritium and evidence for neutrons with an energy of 2.5
MeV.  Such neutrons would be produced in the fusion of
deuterium atoms in the glass flask.  They repeated the experiment
with normal acetone (lacking deuterium) and did not detect the
tritium or neutrons.
   However, another group at Oak Ridge, consisting of D. Shapira
and M.J. Saltmarsh, attempted to reproduce the experiment, except
for the fact that they used a larger neutron/gamma-ray detector and
what they report to be a more sophisticated data acquisition system
(http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/SLan5av2.pdf).  They found a 1%
increase in the neutron/gamma ray signal when the experiment was
set up to trigger cavitation (formation of bubbles), as opposed to
when the sound wave was turned off. However, they did not find
the 10-fold increase that they expected if the reported tritium levels
occurred as a result of deuterium-deuterium fusion.  And they
found nothing when they looked for neutrons or gamma rays being
emitted in coincidence with the light pulses.
     Outside researchers who have studied the Science paper have
expressed very significant concerns about its validity.  According
to Moss, the key measurement is the 2.5 MeV neutron peak. "If
measured neutrons are thermonuclear in origin, then there must be
a peak at 2.5MeV, and measuring and reporting that peak
constitutes a minimum requirement to support the claim of
thermonuclear origin," he says.   "Tritium production (claimed in
the paper) is not sufficient evidence, since it is difficult to
determine the source."  Moss rejects the conclusions of the paper
based on the "lack of a properly resolved neutron peak." He says,
"Extraordinary claims require unambiguous data, which they did
not provide.  This doesn't mean that thermonuclear neutrons from a
sonoluminescence source are impossible, only that they didn't
show data to support the claim."
    Seth Putterman, a leading sonoluminescence experimentalist at
UCLA, points out that the researchers claim a 1000-to-1
production of output neutrons to input neutrons that hit the
acoustically sensitive region of the resonator.  It should be
possible, he says, to turn this data into a huge signal and a clearly
detectable neutron spectrum, but this is not presented in the paper.
He also points out that no other paper on sonoluminescence has
ever detected a single neutron as a result of the SL process.  The
authors of the Science paper have invited other researchers to
attempt to reproduce the experiments.  They say that they have
reanalyzed the Shapira and Saltmarsh data and find that these data
are actually compatible with sonofusion and provide an
independent confirmation of their controversial claim
(http://www.rpi.edu/~laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf).
     However, according to Putterman and Moss, the experiment by
Taleyarkhan et al. does nothing to resolve the question of whether
acoustic cavitation can generate nuclear fusion reactions.  "The
actual scientific experiment appears to be flawed," Putterman says.
  "If confirmed, however," adds sonoluminescence pioneer
Lawrence Crum of the University of Washington, "it would be a
remarkable result, demonstrating that mechanical systems could
induce nuclear reactions."  However, Crum also adds, "I am very
skeptical that their results will ever be duplicated." "This is an
interesting, high-risk direction of research that should go on,"
Putterman says.  "These results may be so premature and so
flawed, however, that it may taint future attempts in the field."

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 07:35:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA16738;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:34:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:34:44 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 10:35:11 -0800
Subject: Voice of America on Bubble Fusion
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8ACF2DF.1982%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"oxbU01.0.A54.JYuXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46487
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Received from VOA -- Gene Mallove

*****

Slug Item Moved RUN TIME
5-51205 Nuclear Fusion Fuss 5-51205 03/06/02 02:09:37 04:06

DATE=03/06/02
TYPE= BACKGROUND REPORT
TITLE= Bubble Fusion Fuss
NUMBER=55-51205
BYLINE= Christine Elliott
DATELINE= Washington
CONTENT=

VOICED AT:

// Re-issuing from file of 3/5, correcting intro //

INTRO:  Some U-S government scientists say they have produced the elusive
effect of nuclear fusion, a long-sought form of nuclear energy that has no
toxic byproducts.  As V-O-A's Christine Elliott reports, some physicists say
this is a step that could lead to safer methods of nuclear energy, but
others are much more skeptical.

TEXT:  Nuclear fusion is the process the sun uses to convert matter into
energy.  The sun does this by combining two small atoms into a larger one.
The byproduct of the reaction is energy, but it can only be done when the
temperature is higher than a million degrees!

Researchers are in a race to find ways to reproduce nuclear fusion in
laboratories here on earth.  The journal "Science" reports that scientists
at the U-S Government Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee might have
won that race.

In a beaker the size of two drinking cups, the researchers grew large
bubbles in liquid acetone that collapsed.

/// OPT /// University of Michigan Physics Professor Fred Becchetti
(bee-KET-tee) says the process they used to do this is called
"sonoluminescence."

/// BECCHETTI ACT ///

It's the generation of light flashes using sound waves.  Now the extension
to that is, if we could increase the temperature and density in this
collapsing bubble, and add to it let's say deuterium, which is a heavy
hydrogen atom, we can in principal induce reactions that take place in the
sun, namely nuclear fusion.

/// END ACT ///
/// END OPT ///

The researchers report the temperature in the collapsing bubbles was indeed
high enough to produce the fusion of atoms.

But another team of researchers examined the experiment, and found that the
temperature in the bubbles was NOT high enough to produce fusion.  It is
this contradiction that has physicists skeptical.

The Deputy Director for Science and Technology at the Oak Ridge lab, Lee
Riedinger (REED-een-ger, hard G), says he is excited about the research, but
not overly optimistic.

/// RIEDINGER ACT ///

These clever authors have found a way to grow far bigger bubbles in liquids
than have been achieved before.  And that has potential for making nuclear
fusion.  Now, can this type of nuclear fusion that perhaps goes on inside of
bubbles, can that lead to energy supply?  I sincerely doubt it.

/// END ACT ///

But others are more hopeful, such as Richard Lahey, an engineering professor
at the Rensselear (REN-seh-LAYR) Polytechnic Institute in New York.
Professor Lahey says he has worked on bubble fusion for eight years, and has
teams of scientists who have performed this experiment successfully many
times.

/// OPT ///
/// LAHEY ACT ///

We're pretty pleased about this and, of course, there are skeptics as there
should be, and what's needed now is for them to go into their laboratories
and repeat our experiment.

/// END ACT ///
/// END OPT ///

He says if this method of creating energy proves to be possible, problems
associated with other types of nuclear energy processes such as nuclear
fission will be avoided.

In fission, a larger atom is broken down into smaller ones, giving off
harmful byproducts and nuclear waste.  Professor Lahey says, however, that
nuclear fusion is safer.

/// LAHEY ACT ///

It could eliminate many of the problems that have plagued nuclear energy in
the past, such as radioactive waste issue, safety issue, the fuel
availability issue.

/// END ACT ///

Mr. Lahey adds that people have to wait to see whether bubble fusion could
be used to produce energy as the sun does.

/// LAHEY ACT ///

It's not for sure that it can be scaled up to that level, but if it can, it
can be a tremendous contribution to producing energy for mankind.  So you
have to stay tuned to see if that will happen.

/// END ACT ///  

Lee Riedinger from the Oak Ridge National Lab says the world might be
waiting for a long time.

/// RIEDINGER ACT ///

I think that we are a million or a billion times away from how much energy
can come out from one such bubble or a set of bubbles to have any effect on
energy supply.

/// END ACT ///

For now, the United States will have to depend on other energy resources.
(SIGNED)

NB/MEM 

   

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 07:41:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA19095;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:38:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:38:38 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307103549.00b0eba0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 10:38:44 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Is SL fusion CF? The "neutron gap" will show
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"sGweP1.0.7g4.zbuXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46488
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is part of a message I sent to D. Britz. This is a restatement, or 
summary of some of the points made here in the last few days, with some 
comments published here deleted.


I have been reading various responses to the Taleyarkhan paper. I noticed 
that you are wondering whether to classify the sonoluminescence (SL) papers 
as cold fusion, plasma fusion or in a new category. This is an interesting 
question. It is too early to judge. Assuming the SL reactions are 
replicated, and progress is made, I think this issue will become clearer 
after additional research clarifies two things:

1. The presence or absence of macroscopic excess heat. If SL produces 
orders of magnitude more excess heat compared to the tritium and neutrons 
than plasma fusion does, it must be cold fusion. I do not think anyone has 
performed calorimetry on the Taleyarkhan cell. That would be difficult. The 
cell must be run at or below 0 deg C. It does not work at 20 deg C. 
Taleyarkhan thinks the reaction will be enhanced at temperatures of 260 K 
(-13 deg C). He has not yet been able to run it below zero. I do not think 
conventional calorimetry would work at these temperatures. Perhaps a 
Seebeck calorimeter would.

2. The extent of the "neutron gap," that is, the ratio of tritium to 
neutrons. If t/n=1, this is probably a plasma fusion reaction. If it is 100 
or more I would suspect cold fusion instead. The measurements so far have 
not been accurate enough to judge this, because the counting losses for 
neutrons are high. Edmund Storms wrote:

. . . Taleyarkhan says on page 1872 that the "neutron emission rate 
associated with cavitation was 4x10^4 to 8x10^4 n/s. This value is somewhat 
smaller than the estimated rate of n generation from the T measurements 
(~7x10^5 n/s)." In other words, the n/t ratio was about 0.1, a value they, 
and I, consider to be equal to unity within the errors of the measurement.

Robert Park confused this question, and made me think the reaction may be 
cold fusion. He wrote, "D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh, using the same 
apparatus, except for superior neutron detection equipment. They found no 
evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission correlated with sonoluminescence. Any 
neutron emission was many orders of magnitude too small to account for the 
tritium production reported by the first group. . . ." I thought he meant 
they measured the n/t ratio and found it was high or infinitely high, as it 
sometimes is in cold fusion; i.e. lots of tritium with no neutrons. It 
turns out he was comparing S&S to Taleyarkhan, and S&S did not even measure 
tritium, so we do not know whether they were seeing a fusion reaction or 
not. This comparison made no sense.

The debate is more complicated though, because Taleyarkhan now says S&S 
*did* see neutrons at approximately the same rate he did. Contrary to Park, 
he claims the S&S neutron detection equipment was inferior. So the n/t 
comparison would make sense according to him. Still, a direct comparison of 
the ratio within this experiment would be much more valuable. I cannot 
understand why S&S failed to measured tritium. Perhaps it is a deliberate 
ploy to evade the issue. Bart Simon suggested it may be "the invocation of 
neutrons as the only definitive proof of fusion in spite of anything else 
that's anomalous."

. . .

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 08:05:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA02870;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 08:02:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 08:02:47 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502b8ad3a5fd3bd [12.21.209.43]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:06:40 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
Cc: rn214 hermes.cam.ac.uk
Resent-Message-ID: <"-Da5y.0.mi.cyuXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46489
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:15 AM 3/7/2, Stephen Lawrence wrote:

>I am guessing that the quantum 'jitter' away from the central electrode is
>less than the jitter towards it.  Thus electrons will randomly 'jitter'
>onto the central electrode: once there, they are caught in the metal
>conductor where they are fed through a load and return to the source, the
>electron gun.  Holes formed by electrons jittering onto the central
>collector are replenished by new electrons from the incoming beam.  If they
>'jitter' outwards they are magnetically attracted back again anyway.
>
>Has Spence found a way of constructing an ever replenishing series of
>collapsing plates to harness the Casimir Effect?
>
>Yours views would be greatly appreciated.


My initial feeling is that the magnetic field, which can add no energy, is
superfluous. It seems to me that the Casimir effect should have already
been rolled into the emperically determined "work function" for the metals
and temperatures involved.  The flaw in the idea seems to be that the
Casimir effect should be the same on electrons entering the vacuum as on
those entering the circular plate, thus the Casimir effect is nullified
with respect to any net potential gained.

However, it has often bothered me that work functions at a given
temperature are not all the same.  It has seemed to me that this fact alone
is sufficient to gain free energy.  If we can eject electrons into a vacuum
from a plate with a low work function and absorb them on a plate with a
high work function, then the electrons should still be absorbed on the high
work function plate even though there is a small potential maintained
across the gap between the plates against the electron flow, smaller than
the difference in work function potentails, and provided the plates are
very close.  Instead of working against a potential, equal potential plates
could be used to generate a spontaneous current flow that could be used to
do work.  (These plates would have to be hot, but could be at the same
temperature to eliminate complexity.)  However, once again, there must be a
reverse potential drop in the system somewhere that prevents the gain of
free energy.  That drop must occur in the conductors (the circuit) at some
place where the metal types change.  The problem then is no longer vacuum
related, but rather related to making a solid state junction between
conductors of differing work functions that does not create a potential
barrier.  It is interesting that the gate between transistors can overcome
a large potential barrier between P and N type semiconductors.  Perhaps a
transistor like gate between the two metals is the way to make a boundary
between the two metal types that overcomes the potential drop.  Please
forgive the wild speculation, but that's what vortex is for ...  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 08:45:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30513;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 08:42:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 08:42:32 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307103916.03e90f18 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 11:08:55 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Consensus re: what is controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.
In-Reply-To: <00a301c1c5b8$af00bcc0$878f209a ggrf30j>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020306173316.04ed46d8 pop.mindspring.com>
 <3C869CA1.12D029C4 bellsouth.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"sBErc3.0.fS7.tXvXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46490
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I raised to the question in this message header yesterday. I think members 
of this forum have now reached a consensus. It seems to me, cold fusion was 
controversial for five reasons, but only three apply to Taleyarkhan et al. 
so far. They are:

1. CF was announced at a press conference supposedly in violation of 
academic decorum. Actually, most breakthroughs are announced at press 
conferences, especially in plasma fusion and high energy physics. 
Taleyarkhan avoided this problem.

2. CF seemed to violate some conventional nuclear theories. So far, 
Taleyarkhan appears to be conventional, although it is too early to judge. 
Some people are upset because they regard even a minor deviation from 
conventional theory as heresy.

3. CF was completely unexpected. Many people seem shocked by Taleyarkhan, 
but given previous experiments with sonoluminescence (SL) I do not 
understand why.

4. Both CF and SL may be developed into practical technology, which 
threatens vested interests ranging from plasma fusion researchers to the 
oil companies. The plasma fusion researchers may be put out of business 
very soon by significant progress in SL -- within a year or two. (I expect 
the plasma fusion researchers are frantically working to suppress the news 
of SL, prevent replications, and oust Taleyarkhan to prevent this.) The oil 
and electric power companies probably feel they would not be affected for 
decades, and I doubt they are worrying about it. They have occasionally 
taken active measures to suppress cold fusion, such as Amoco's treatment of 
its own successful cold fusion research.

5. All breakthroughs are controversial. This is human nature. People were 
upset and morally outraged by the invention of the zipper. Famous 
scientists ganged up on Townes and tried to stop him from developing the maser.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 10:32:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA27625;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 10:28:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 10:28:21 -0800
X-Originating-IP: [209.249.70.226]
From: "Mark Goldes" <mgoldes msn.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 10:27:46 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Message-ID: <F41LYujqKLkss83X3CJ0002a0f1 hotmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Mar 2002 18:27:46.0540 (UTC) FILETIME=[C76362C0:01C1C605]
Resent-Message-ID: <"yqZIl.0.Kl6.45xXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46491
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace,

A very interesting idea!

NelsonScientific.com has been trying to do something similar with a vacuum 
tube device.

The Casimir Effect work I referred to earlier can be found at the URL 
http://www.interstellartechcorp.com/#

Mark Goldes


>From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
>Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>To: vortex-l eskimo.com
>CC: rn214 hermes.cam.ac.uk
>Subject: Re: A Functioning Casimir Effect Generator?
>Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:06:40 -0900
>
>At 2:15 AM 3/7/2, Stephen Lawrence wrote:
>
> >I am guessing that the quantum 'jitter' away from the central electrode 
>is
> >less than the jitter towards it.  Thus electrons will randomly 'jitter'
> >onto the central electrode: once there, they are caught in the metal
> >conductor where they are fed through a load and return to the source, the
> >electron gun.  Holes formed by electrons jittering onto the central
> >collector are replenished by new electrons from the incoming beam.  If 
>they
> >'jitter' outwards they are magnetically attracted back again anyway.
> >
> >Has Spence found a way of constructing an ever replenishing series of
> >collapsing plates to harness the Casimir Effect?
> >
> >Yours views would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>My initial feeling is that the magnetic field, which can add no energy, is
>superfluous. It seems to me that the Casimir effect should have already
>been rolled into the emperically determined "work function" for the metals
>and temperatures involved.  The flaw in the idea seems to be that the
>Casimir effect should be the same on electrons entering the vacuum as on
>those entering the circular plate, thus the Casimir effect is nullified
>with respect to any net potential gained.
>
>However, it has often bothered me that work functions at a given
>temperature are not all the same.  It has seemed to me that this fact alone
>is sufficient to gain free energy.  If we can eject electrons into a vacuum
>from a plate with a low work function and absorb them on a plate with a
>high work function, then the electrons should still be absorbed on the high
>work function plate even though there is a small potential maintained
>across the gap between the plates against the electron flow, smaller than
>the difference in work function potentails, and provided the plates are
>very close.  Instead of working against a potential, equal potential plates
>could be used to generate a spontaneous current flow that could be used to
>do work.  (These plates would have to be hot, but could be at the same
>temperature to eliminate complexity.)  However, once again, there must be a
>reverse potential drop in the system somewhere that prevents the gain of
>free energy.  That drop must occur in the conductors (the circuit) at some
>place where the metal types change.  The problem then is no longer vacuum
>related, but rather related to making a solid state junction between
>conductors of differing work functions that does not create a potential
>barrier.  It is interesting that the gate between transistors can overcome
>a large potential barrier between P and N type semiconductors.  Perhaps a
>transistor like gate between the two metals is the way to make a boundary
>between the two metal types that overcomes the potential drop.  Please
>forgive the wild speculation, but that's what vortex is for ...  8^)
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner
>
>




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 12:39:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28987;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 12:35:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 12:35:54 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307152424.00b0d978 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 15:35:53 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: L. Case comments on catalytic converters and other matters
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"6Nn-x3.0.f47.fyyXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46492
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I spoke with Les Case about his upcoming presentation at ICCF 9 in Beijing. 
He will describe improved catalysts that he believes are producing on the 
order of five to 10 watts per pound of material, which is 0.1% palladium by 
weight. Compared to his previous catalysts, this is two or three times more 
power, and the mass of palladium has been reduced by a factor of five.

He and I discussed some issues that came up in this forum recently: 
automotive catalytic converters, palladium supplies and transmutation. He 
knows a great deal about catalysis with precious metals, and he made many 
interesting observations. He recommends literature from Johnson Matthey.

The power density he believes he has achieved comes to 0.05 grams per watt. 
That is impressive, but unfortunately if the reaction works best with the 
platinum group, especially palladium and rhodium, there will not be enough 
in the world to produce all the energy we now use. I will run a spreadsheet 
on this later. I will try to determine to within a few orders of magnitude 
how much palladium this would call for. He does not think the amount of 
platinum-group metals mined every year can be expanded much. The industry 
is trying to expand output.

He says automotive catalytic converters would not be suitable for cold 
fusion, because they are oxidation catalysts and cold fusion calls for 
hydrogenation catalysts such as the ones used to make margarine from 
vegetable oil. The main differences between the two types are the surface 
morphology, surface treatment, and choice of substrate. This is an 
extremely complicated business. Catalysts have to be carefully engineered 
for different applications, with as much art as science.

He does not know whether the cold fusion reaction transmits palladium or 
not. He is aware of claims by Mizuno and others that it does. He says we 
will have to run a very large sample for a longtime high-powered to confirm 
this. If the reaction converts palladium to rhodium that would be fine. If 
it converts to silver this would sideline cold fusion as a niche energy 
source because world production of palladium would not be enough to supply 
the energy we need. Also, this would shorten the operating lifetime of the 
cells. He hopes to run cells with standard catalysts for about five years 
before dismantling and recycling the precious metals. If transmutation does 
not occur, none of the metal would be lost because the cells would be 
tightly sealed, unlike catalytic converters. The deuterium gas would have 
to be replenished periodically, and helium would have to be bled off, but 
the catalyst should last five years based on performance in similar 
applications. He did not say this, but I presume that estimate is based 
upon a moderate operating temperature, no higher than 300 degrees C. 
Previous catalysts he tested have reached 180 degrees as I recall.

Getting back to this 0.05 grams per watt estimate . . . Case says that 
modern automobiles used generally 10 to 15 grams per car in the catalytic 
converter. This is close to the number I derived from industry sources the 
other day. Case thinks that cold fusion devices will be too heavy to mount 
and automobiles, so they will be used at central generation plants to 
produce chemical fuel for automobiles, from electricity or directly from 
heat. He thinks methane would be a good choice. Others have said pure 
hydrogen would be better. Come to think of it, this arrangement would save 
a great deal of palladium. Automobiles require maximum instantaneous 
propulsion power ranging from 50 to 100 kW I believe, but the average car 
while driving is closer to 20 kW vehicle propulsion power. I assume a 
palladium cold fusion car would be a battery hybrid, to conserve precious 
metal. It would produce 20 kW constantly while storing energy for peak 
demand. If Ni CF can be ramped up rapidly to peak power, it would use a 
brute force heat engine capable of putting out 200 or 300 kW of heat, and 
100 kW propulsion power. Whether the demand is 20 or 100 kW, most of the 
time the palladium in your car would be doing no useful work while the car 
is parked in the driveway. Cold fusion engines would not be shut down 
completely, because there is no point to doing that, and in cold climates 
the engine fluids might freeze, but most of the capacity of the palladium 
would be wasted in standby mode most hours of the day. On the other hand, 
if central plants are used to generate chemical fuel, the palladium would 
be in use nearly 24 hours a day and maximum power for the average car would 
be a few hundred watts.

(The U.S. model Toyota Prius ICE develops 52 kW (70 hp) at 4500 rpm. The 
electric motor develops 33 kW maximum. See 
http://www.sae.org/automag/features/prius/.)

Case does not think that hydrogen fuel cells will ever be widely used 
because they are restricted by limited supplies of platinum, just as cold 
fusion may be limited by palladium. He does not think there is anywhere 
near enough platinum in the world to build fuel cells for every house and 
automobile. In recent years great progress has been made in reducing the 
amount of platinum per fuel cell, but it is still not enough.

Case did not think much of the paper by Taleyarkhan, because as they said 
in the radio broadcast Mallove quoted here, energy levels are a billion 
times too small for practical applications. Case says he is within a factor 
of 2 to 10 below commercially valuable levels, so he is not afraid of 
competition from Taleyarkhan who needs to increase a billion times.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 13:03:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09259;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:00:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:00:50 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307155855.03e8acc8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:00:34 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Bockris reaction to Taleyarkhan
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"MxtMT1.0.bG2.2KzXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46493
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The inimitable and irrepressible John Bockris writes:

Dear Jed:

I wrote to the Editor of Science pointing out that there were 3000 papers
before this one he just published.

By coincidence, I mailed today a letter to the Editors of the main journals
telling them that the present situation of denial is a farce.

Any suggestions except BATHE IN THE GLORIOUS LIGHT?

Sincerely,

John Bockris

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 13:05:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10575;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:04:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:04:02 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307160141.03e8acc8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:03:35 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: SL temperature difficult to determine
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"xI_Se.0.3b2.1NzXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46494
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a follow up message I wrote to Britz, who is wondering how to 
catalog the SL fusion findings. He is a good librarian but I wish he 
would  look at the big picture instead.


Earlier I wrote:

"I noticed that you are wondering whether to classify the sonoluminescence 
(SL) papers as cold fusion, plasma fusion or in a new category. . . . I 
think this issue will become clearer after additional research clarifies 
two things:

1. The presence or absence of macroscopic excess heat. . . ."

Some people have suggested the distinction would depend upon the operating 
temperature of the reaction. Perhaps this is literally true; a plasma 
fusion reaction is certainly occurring if temperatures are in the bubble 
reach millions of degrees. However, I do not think this would be a good 
criterion to distinguish between hot and cold fusion, for two reasons:

First, the experts do not know what maximum temperature is reached when 
bubbles collapse. This may take years to determine. Some dogmatic experts 
are already saying that Taleyarkhan must be wrong because they think the 
bubble temperature is much too cool. As usual, they would put theory ahead 
of experimental evidence, and the cart before the horse.

Second, I gather that some theorists think that cold fusion reactions take 
place on such a small-scale -- atom by atom as it were -- temperature is 
not a  meaningful concept. The individual atom undergoing the cold fusion 
reaction might be as excited as the atoms in solar or tokamak plasma 
fusion, even though the average temperature of the sample is only 20 deg C. 
I cannot address these theories, but if they turn out to be right then cold 
fusion was hot all along.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 13:06:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11183;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:06:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:06:06 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307160452.00a8b2b0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:05:45 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: L. Case comments on catalytic converters and other matters
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307152424.00b0d978 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"QgoWZ1.0.ek2.zOzXy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46495
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>He does not know whether the cold fusion reaction transmits palladium or not.

Meant transmutes. Sorry.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 13:57:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04899;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:54:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 13:54:59 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 16:55:26 -0800
Subject: New hydrogen reaction -- Nature Magazine
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AD4BFE.19B0%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"c1tVp.0.RC1.o6-Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46496
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

All,

Looks like Nature and Science will be doing battle over who gets to publish
the heretical physics and chemistry of hydrogen first :)

Lovely.  Maybe this gives some support to R. Mills -- some kind of new QM
involved -- or support for another twist to the possible basis of cold
fusion reactions?  Whatever the case, it sure may opens some people's minds
to the possibility that there was something, after all, to cold fusion.

Eugene Mallove
Www.infinite-energy.com

***


Mar 6, 2002
HYDROGEN REACTION EXPERIMENT REAPS A SURPRISE

   Scientists got a surprise recently when a team of physical chemists at
Stanford University studied a common hydrogen reaction. The experiment and
an associated new theory revealed behaviors completely opposed to what had
previously been expected.
   In the effort to learn more about fundamental chemical reactions,
scientists have intensively studied the hydrogen exchange reaction, which
occurs when a hydrogen atom (H) collides with a hydrogen molecule (H2). In
the recent experiment, scientists supported by the National Science
Foundation (NSF) used a sophisticated laser laboratory at Stanford to
observe the collision between a single hydrogen atom (H) and a heavy form of
hydrogen molecule (D2, or deuterium). In hydrogen, the nucleus of the atom
is a single proton, while deuterium's nucleus consists of a proton and a
neutron bonded together.
   One of the products resulting from the collision, HD, traveled in an
unexpected direction. As predicted by longstanding theories of scattering,
the HD is expected to recoil, or scatter, in the opposite direction from
that of the incoming H atom. In this experiment, however, the resulting
product moved forward, in the same direction the single atom had been
traveling. The experiment also revealed a time delay before the HD product
began its forward motion. These results are reported in the March 7 issue of
Nature.
   "Even in the simplest kinds of chemical reactions, including hydrogen
atoms colliding with hydrogen molecules, we are still finding surprises,"
said Donald Burland, acting director of NSF's chemistry division. "These
results demonstrate the importance of continued research in fundamental
chemistry."
   "This news is quite exciting for the world of chemistry because it
suggests that the 'simple' hydrogen reaction is a more complicated process
than previously thought, involving more than one reaction mechanism," said
Stanford chemist and team leader Richard Zare.
   The results of Zare's experiment demonstrate that the hydrogen reaction
involves more than the direct atom-molecule exchange mechanism commonly
observed. The explanation, the Stanford scientists believe, is that in
addition to the direct reaction mechanism that leads to backward scattering,
as predicted, another indirect mechanism at the quantum mechanical level
(the level of subatomic particles) leads to forward scattering after a brief
delay.
   Both the forward motion and the time delay are in keeping with new
theories recently developed by a team at the University of Durham, England,
led by Stuart Althorpe.
   animated graphics: http://www.dur.ac.uk/chemistry/publications/
sc_althorpe/nature.html
   contacts: Amber Jones (703) 292-8070/aljones nsf.gov; Frank Wodarczyk
(703) 292-7235/fwodarcz nsf.gov

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 15:05:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA09299;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:02:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:02:30 -0800
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 18:10:33 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: SL temperature difficult to determine
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020307160141.03e8acc8 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020307180655.345I-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"TQBeF1.0.AH2.56_Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46497
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	SL or sonoluminescence is not verified as having any one specific
mechanism.
	We have one paper which is getting as lot of attention...but not
many people have commented that a RADIATION source is used as part of
this....

	This should be called a hybrid paper or finding.

	Lumping SL as fusion is as off the mark as sying the light is
CAUSED by:

	fusion
	plasma
	heat
	triboluminescent action
	electrostatic effect
	you fill in the blank

	....... 

On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Here is a follow up message I wrote to Britz, who is wondering how to 
> catalog the SL fusion findings. He is a good librarian but I wish he 
> would  look at the big picture instead.
> 
> 
> Earlier I wrote:
> 
> "I noticed that you are wondering whether to classify the sonoluminescence 
> (SL) papers as cold fusion, plasma fusion or in a new category. . . . I 
> think this issue will become clearer after additional research clarifies 
> two things:
> 
> 1. The presence or absence of macroscopic excess heat. . . ."
> 
> Some people have suggested the distinction would depend upon the operating 
> temperature of the reaction. Perhaps this is literally true; a plasma 
> fusion reaction is certainly occurring if temperatures are in the bubble 
> reach millions of degrees. However, I do not think this would be a good 
> criterion to distinguish between hot and cold fusion, for two reasons:
> 
> First, the experts do not know what maximum temperature is reached when 
> bubbles collapse. This may take years to determine. Some dogmatic experts 
> are already saying that Taleyarkhan must be wrong because they think the 
> bubble temperature is much too cool. As usual, they would put theory ahead 
> of experimental evidence, and the cart before the horse.
> 
> Second, I gather that some theorists think that cold fusion reactions take 
> place on such a small-scale -- atom by atom as it were -- temperature is 
> not a  meaningful concept. The individual atom undergoing the cold fusion 
> reaction might be as excited as the atoms in solar or tokamak plasma 
> fusion, even though the average temperature of the sample is only 20 deg C. 
> I cannot address these theories, but if they turn out to be right then cold 
> fusion was hot all along.
> 
> - Jed
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 15:33:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA25365;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:31:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:31:11 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 18:30:56 -0800
Subject: The Anti-Sonofusion Attack - Why?
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AD6260.19B6%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA25284
Resent-Message-ID: <"31S2p.0.4C6.-W_Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46498
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


                        The Anti-Sonofusion Attack - Why?

      by Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
                    www.infinite-energy.com     March 7, 2002

   Science magazine's publication of the Taleyarkhan et al paper, "Evidence
for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation² and associated commentary
in its March 8, 2002 issue has provoked unusual criticism and controversy ‹
even before the actual appearance of the article.  It is reminiscent of what
followed after the March 23, 1989 announcement of cold fusion by Fleischmann
and Pons at the University of Utah. Actually, after the Utah announcement
there was a relatively polite ³grace period² of a few weeks (at least in
most public pronouncements), before the behind-the-scenes rabid critics came
out with guns blazing and accused Fleischmann and Pons of incompetence
and/or fraud‹a stigma which has lasted almost 13 years.

    There has been no grace period this time, even though the subject of the
Science paper makes no claims of cold fusion. The authors discuss their
evidence for neutron emissions and tritium elevation above background in the
context of D + D hot fusion occurring at elevated temperature within the
collapsing cavitation bubbles.  The vehemence of the attack on this
table-top fusion claim has surprised many people, including some in the cold
fusion field, who wonder ³what all the fuss is about.² After all, why should
a new potential HOT fusion method be criticized?  As a long-time participant
in the cold fusion war, let me suggest some of the ³whys² for the vicious
attacks that have already occurred this month. These are not necessarily in
order of their relative importance in the current furor; there is surely
much overlap and interaction among them:

€ The similarities to cold fusion:
This has to be a very big factor.  The current ³Science-sonofusion² (to
distinguish it from other sonofusion efforts, especially in the cold fusion
community) is ³table-top² in size,  was done in a deuterated liquid
(acetone, not heavywater), and is of relatively modest expense‹ just like
cold fusion;  the Science-sonofusion is being purveyed mainly by nuclear
engineers, not plasma physicists (cold fusion was prompted by chemists, not
physicists), and thus outsiders to the hot fusion/physics community; there
is evidence of neutron emission and tritium ‹ the early and continuing
claims in cold fusion. Because of these similarities, the critics‹ who were
part of the anti-cold fusion camp already‹ feared and will continue to fear
a possible new openness to classical cold fusion by the media and from
funding sources. In the general confusion of the recent events, this
possible confusion of Science-sonofusion with cold fusion (has already
occurred (e.g. the headline in the UK Sunday Times of 3/3/02). It may not
actually be a confusion; coherent cold fusion-like processes may be at work
in Science-sonofusion, at least in part. After all, the process is occurring
in the environment of sonoluminescence, which was a mysterious process to
begin with. There is no generally accepted explanation for the light
emission and coherent processes have been implicated in SL.  The late Nobel
laureate Julian Schwinger, a cold fusion theorist,  had suggested
similarities between cold fusion and sonoluminescence in ³A Progress Report:
Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence.² [a lecture at MIT,
November 11, 1991; reprinted in Infinite Energy, March-April 1999.]

€ Impact on hot fusion funding:
There is nothing worse for the hot fusioneers ‹ the ³tokamak Maffia²‹ than
any suggestion that alternative paths to fusion energy might reasonably be
considered.  Alternative paths, such as cold fusion or Science-sonofusion,
might mean losing some hot fusion funding to the alternative modes ­ or a
cancellation of hot fusion projects generally. Hundreds of millions of
dollars per year in hot fusion funding are at stake.  Furthermore, in the
immediate time period, the hot fusioneers have been orchestrating to get the
U.S. back into the multi-billion dollar ITER hot fusion project. Many
stories have recently appeared on that budget matter. This news about
sonofusion in a very prestigious publication, Science, is the last thing the
hot fusioneers wanted anyone to hear about at this time.  If nothing else,
it pushes the ITER funding story to the backburner.

€ Intellectual arrogance of physicists ­ NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome:
Cavitation bubbles, sonoluminescence, postulated very high temperatures in
these collapsing bubbles, and even the possibility of fusion occurring in
cavitation bubbles has been around since at least the early 1990s.
Therefore, the physicists who are attacking Science-sonofusion, must have
given this possibility some thought, and even some testing from time to
time. They evidently concluded that it was not a feasible process ­ on
theoretical or experimental grounds ­ and now someone comes along to tell
them that there is a way to make it work! This is a challenge to their
vaunted intellects ­ as it was in 1989. ³Why didn¹t we think of that? Wait,
it¹s got to be a stupid/invalid idea because we didn¹t think of how to do
it!  Now let¹s prove that it is wrong and can¹t be real. We¹ll be heroes!²

€ Suspicions of ³Pathological Science²:
The scientific community has been conditioned by the likes of CSICOP
(Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) and
the bashing of cold fusion to look at any very surprising results in terms
of the possibility that the new claim is ³pathological science²‹ what they
believe cold fusion to be. They thus fear a new outbreak of this alleged
disease and are eager to kill the virus before it spreads to far.

€ The Cheerleader Effect:
The scientific establishment has its boosters, spokesmen, and cheerleaders.
Unfortunately for the APS, it has one of the biggest and most ignorant
mouths in science on  its web page ‹ pseudoscientist Robert Park with his
weekly ³What¹s New² column. So intent was Park to valiantly lead the troops
against the Science-sonofusion claim, that he jumped the gun on the March
7th embargo and on March 1 revealed the emerging story and the
behind-the-scenes attempt to kill the story.  Park both follows and leads.
He gathers faulty information from sources, like the late Douglas Morrison ‹
or the hot fusion people in this instance, and then spreads it around.
Park¹s groupies then use this as a signal to move in for the kill against
the offending new idea.  Journalists are especially susceptible to this. One
monkey sees Park spouting off in outlet A and soon outlet B many other
outlets have other physicist monkeys chiming in.

€ Fear of Errors and Mistakes:
Closely related to the crackpot idea of ³pathological science² as a major
ailment of science that must be guarded against at all costs, is the
creeping notion that it is not OK to make errors in science.  There is some
kind of imagined ³contest² going on to make sure that no scientific paper
published by Science or Nature is wrong in some fundamental way.  This, of
course, is completely against the spirit of true science.  The history of
science is permeated by errors that have taught us how to move forward in
the right direction. Furthermore, many revolutionary concepts that were
initially roundly criticized as error, later became acknowledged as true.
Still, the message of this history is not getting through to the general
community and there is a palpable fear of publishing something that might be
wrong ‹ and thus open to attack by science-bigot cheerleaders like Park.

€ Peer Review = Sneer Review:
The fact that this paper was almost killed by its opponents, and even after
it came out is being attacked for its very existence, should be a good case
study for the scientific community that its so-called ³peer-review² system
has completely broken down ­ if it ever had been a  truly legitimate
process. ³Peer review² today accomplishes two things: A. It fixes many minor
and/or major mistakes in articles in an accepted field of study (and that
part is to the good) and B. It completely weeds out topics that are
forbidden, e.g. cold fusion, while allowing such ³acceptable² discussions as
how to create baby universes and whether the universe has 10 or 26
dimensions.

€ Fear of Loss of Reputation:
Much is at stake today in the scientific community in being always right
with such opinions as ³cold fusion is nonsense,² ³homeopathy can¹t work,²
³all UFO reports are bogus,² etc.  Thus, as soon as any purported evidence
comes to light that hints directly or indirectly that the purveyors of
CSICOP-like myths might be in for a big pie-in-the-face (or crow-eating),
out go the defensive statements to the press. The most ludicrous one so far
in this Science-sonofusion affair is from cold fusion-basher Gary Taubes:
³If history is any indication, just the existence of this kind of brouhaha
and the criticism from very competent experts is good evidence that the
results are just dead wrong. And, if it¹s dead wrong, then Science probably
shouldn¹t have decided to publish it.²(USA Today, 3/5/02)

€ ³Good Scientists² Proved It Wrong Already:
As soon as the Chief Cheerleader put out the notion that ³good physicists
with much better equipment² can¹t seem to find the claimed
Science-sonofusion effect, this is taken as encouraging news to the
attacking troops. More groups form to perform hatchet jobs and receive new
honors for helping to slay ³pathological science.²  Never mind that the
first group of ³good scientists² did not measure tritium!

€ Fear of ³Free Energy²:
This is the basic reason that all laboratory claims of a new kind of robust
energy that could have a vanishingly small ³fuel² cost, or actually zero
fuel cost, face an uphill battle.  The idea that energy could become free is
as alien a concept as the notion in the 15th century that celestial lights
might be other worlds. Anything that touches the idea of free energy is
rejected by society at an extremely primitive level.  There is a
subconscious understanding by everyone of what free energy would mean, even
if it hasn¹t been thought out carefully by each individual.  The average
mind recoils from it; it is too unsettling. People who want  business as
usual aren¹t interested in hearing that their world could turn upside down
and be unrecognizable.  ³It¹s too good to be true, therefore it can¹t be
true.²  

That¹s all for now.


Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 15:39:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA29665;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:39:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 15:39:00 -0800
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 18:47:03 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
cc: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: The Anti-Sonofusion Attack - Why?
In-Reply-To: <B8AD6260.19B6%editor infinite-energy.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020307184318.345M-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA29614
Resent-Message-ID: <"i0-dy1.0.LF7.Je_Xy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46499
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 




	The primary points of the  pseudo replication paper involve the
use of discrimination and selective manipulation of the detectors.
	It is not a replication for this reason alone.... 
	and to put the icing on the cake ther is a 3 cm barrier of
	"cold pack" between the experiment and the detector which is NOT
defined and is NOT in the original paper's experiment

	Beside which this is a hbrid experiment.... the original, and the
term sonofusion is misleading...
	No need to compound errors.

On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Eugene F. Mallove wrote:

> 
>                         The Anti-Sonofusion Attack - Why?
> 
>       by Eugene F. Mallove, Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
>                     www.infinite-energy.com     March 7, 2002
> 
>    Science magazine's publication of the Taleyarkhan et al paper, "Evidence
> for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation² and associated commentary
> in its March 8, 2002 issue has provoked unusual criticism and controversy ‹
> even before the actual appearance of the article.  It is reminiscent of what
> followed after the March 23, 1989 announcement of cold fusion by Fleischmann
> and Pons at the University of Utah. Actually, after the Utah announcement
> there was a relatively polite ³grace period² of a few weeks (at least in
> most public pronouncements), before the behind-the-scenes rabid critics came
> out with guns blazing and accused Fleischmann and Pons of incompetence
> and/or fraud‹a stigma which has lasted almost 13 years.
> 
>     There has been no grace period this time, even though the subject of the
> Science paper makes no claims of cold fusion. The authors discuss their
> evidence for neutron emissions and tritium elevation above background in the
> context of D + D hot fusion occurring at elevated temperature within the
> collapsing cavitation bubbles.  The vehemence of the attack on this
> table-top fusion claim has surprised many people, including some in the cold
> fusion field, who wonder ³what all the fuss is about.² After all, why should
> a new potential HOT fusion method be criticized?  As a long-time participant
> in the cold fusion war, let me suggest some of the ³whys² for the vicious
> attacks that have already occurred this month. These are not necessarily in
> order of their relative importance in the current furor; there is surely
> much overlap and interaction among them:
> 
> € The similarities to cold fusion:
> This has to be a very big factor.  The current ³Science-sonofusion² (to
> distinguish it from other sonofusion efforts, especially in the cold fusion
> community) is ³table-top² in size,  was done in a deuterated liquid
> (acetone, not heavywater), and is of relatively modest expense‹ just like
> cold fusion;  the Science-sonofusion is being purveyed mainly by nuclear
> engineers, not plasma physicists (cold fusion was prompted by chemists, not
> physicists), and thus outsiders to the hot fusion/physics community; there
> is evidence of neutron emission and tritium ‹ the early and continuing
> claims in cold fusion. Because of these similarities, the critics‹ who were
> part of the anti-cold fusion camp already‹ feared and will continue to fear
> a possible new openness to classical cold fusion by the media and from
> funding sources. In the general confusion of the recent events, this
> possible confusion of Science-sonofusion with cold fusion (has already
> occurred (e.g. the headline in the UK Sunday Times of 3/3/02). It may not
> actually be a confusion; coherent cold fusion-like processes may be at work
> in Science-sonofusion, at least in part. After all, the process is occurring
> in the environment of sonoluminescence, which was a mysterious process to
> begin with. There is no generally accepted explanation for the light
> emission and coherent processes have been implicated in SL.  The late Nobel
> laureate Julian Schwinger, a cold fusion theorist,  had suggested
> similarities between cold fusion and sonoluminescence in ³A Progress Report:
> Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence.² [a lecture at MIT,
> November 11, 1991; reprinted in Infinite Energy, March-April 1999.]
> 
> € Impact on hot fusion funding:
> There is nothing worse for the hot fusioneers ‹ the ³tokamak Maffia²‹ than
> any suggestion that alternative paths to fusion energy might reasonably be
> considered.  Alternative paths, such as cold fusion or Science-sonofusion,
> might mean losing some hot fusion funding to the alternative modes ­ or a
> cancellation of hot fusion projects generally. Hundreds of millions of
> dollars per year in hot fusion funding are at stake.  Furthermore, in the
> immediate time period, the hot fusioneers have been orchestrating to get the
> U.S. back into the multi-billion dollar ITER hot fusion project. Many
> stories have recently appeared on that budget matter. This news about
> sonofusion in a very prestigious publication, Science, is the last thing the
> hot fusioneers wanted anyone to hear about at this time.  If nothing else,
> it pushes the ITER funding story to the backburner.
> 
> € Intellectual arrogance of physicists ­ NIH (Not Invented Here) syndrome:
> Cavitation bubbles, sonoluminescence, postulated very high temperatures in
> these collapsing bubbles, and even the possibility of fusion occurring in
> cavitation bubbles has been around since at least the early 1990s.
> Therefore, the physicists who are attacking Science-sonofusion, must have
> given this possibility some thought, and even some testing from time to
> time. They evidently concluded that it was not a feasible process ­ on
> theoretical or experimental grounds ­ and now someone comes along to tell
> them that there is a way to make it work! This is a challenge to their
> vaunted intellects ­ as it was in 1989. ³Why didn¹t we think of that? Wait,
> it¹s got to be a stupid/invalid idea because we didn¹t think of how to do
> it!  Now let¹s prove that it is wrong and can¹t be real. We¹ll be heroes!²
> 
> € Suspicions of ³Pathological Science²:
> The scientific community has been conditioned by the likes of CSICOP
> (Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal) and
> the bashing of cold fusion to look at any very surprising results in terms
> of the possibility that the new claim is ³pathological science²‹ what they
> believe cold fusion to be. They thus fear a new outbreak of this alleged
> disease and are eager to kill the virus before it spreads to far.
> 
> € The Cheerleader Effect:
	> The scientific establishment has its boosters, spokesmen, and cheerleaders.
> Unfortunately for the APS, it has one of the biggest and most ignorant
> mouths in science on  its web page ‹ pseudoscientist Robert Park with his
> weekly ³What¹s New² column. So intent was Park to valiantly lead the troops
> against the Science-sonofusion claim, that he jumped the gun on the March
> 7th embargo and on March 1 revealed the emerging story and the
> behind-the-scenes attempt to kill the story.  Park both follows and leads.
> He gathers faulty information from sources, like the late Douglas Morrison ‹
> or the hot fusion people in this instance, and then spreads it around.
> Park¹s groupies then use this as a signal to move in for the kill against
> the offending new idea.  Journalists are especially susceptible to this. One
> monkey sees Park spouting off in outlet A and soon outlet B many other
> outlets have other physicist monkeys chiming in.
> 
> € Fear of Errors and Mistakes:
> Closely related to the crackpot idea of ³pathological science² as a major
> ailment of science that must be guarded against at all costs, is the
> creeping notion that it is not OK to make errors in science.  There is some
> kind of imagined ³contest² going on to make sure that no scientific paper
> published by Science or Nature is wrong in some fundamental way.  This, of
> course, is completely against the spirit of true science.  The history of
> science is permeated by errors that have taught us how to move forward in
> the right direction. Furthermore, many revolutionary concepts that were
> initially roundly criticized as error, later became acknowledged as true.
> Still, the message of this history is not getting through to the general
> community and there is a palpable fear of publishing something that might be
> wrong ‹ and thus open to attack by science-bigot cheerleaders like Park.
> 
> € Peer Review = Sneer Review:
> The fact that this paper was almost killed by its opponents, and even after
> it came out is being attacked for its very existence, should be a good case
> study for the scientific community that its so-called ³peer-review² system
> has completely broken down ­ if it ever had been a  truly legitimate
> process. ³Peer review² today accomplishes two things: A. It fixes many minor
> and/or major mistakes in articles in an accepted field of study (and that
> part is to the good) and B. It completely weeds out topics that are
> forbidden, e.g. cold fusion, while allowing such ³acceptable² discussions as
> how to create baby universes and whether the universe has 10 or 26
> dimensions.
> 
> € Fear of Loss of Reputation:
> Much is at stake today in the scientific community in being always right
> with such opinions as ³cold fusion is nonsense,² ³homeopathy can¹t work,²
> ³all UFO reports are bogus,² etc.  Thus, as soon as any purported evidence
> comes to light that hints directly or indirectly that the purveyors of
> CSICOP-like myths might be in for a big pie-in-the-face (or crow-eating),
> out go the defensive statements to the press. The most ludicrous one so far
> in this Science-sonofusion affair is from cold fusion-basher Gary Taubes:
> ³If history is any indication, just the existence of this kind of brouhaha
> and the criticism from very competent experts is good evidence that the
> results are just dead wrong. And, if it¹s dead wrong, then Science probably
> shouldn¹t have decided to publish it.²(USA Today, 3/5/02)
> 
> € ³Good Scientists² Proved It Wrong Already:
> As soon as the Chief Cheerleader put out the notion that ³good physicists
> with much better equipment² can¹t seem to find the claimed
> Science-sonofusion effect, this is taken as encouraging news to the
> attacking troops. More groups form to perform hatchet jobs and receive new
> honors for helping to slay ³pathological science.²  Never mind that the
> first group of ³good scientists² did not measure tritium!
> 
> € Fear of ³Free Energy²:
> This is the basic reason that all laboratory claims of a new kind of robust
> energy that could have a vanishingly small ³fuel² cost, or actually zero
> fuel cost, face an uphill battle.  The idea that energy could become free is
> as alien a concept as the notion in the 15th century that celestial lights
> might be other worlds. Anything that touches the idea of free energy is
> rejected by society at an extremely primitive level.  There is a
> subconscious understanding by everyone of what free energy would mean, even
> if it hasn¹t been thought out carefully by each individual.  The average
> mind recoils from it; it is too unsettling. People who want  business as
> usual aren¹t interested in hearing that their world could turn upside down
> and be unrecognizable.  ³It¹s too good to be true, therefore it can¹t be
> true.²  
> 
> That¹s all for now.
> 
> 
> Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
> Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
> Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
> PO Box 2816
> Concord, NH 03302-2816
>    editor infinite-energy.com
>    www.infinite-energy.com
> Ph: 603-228-4516
> Fx: 603-224-5975
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 16:15:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA16553;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 16:12:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 16:12:25 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 19:12:06 -0800
Subject: "Sanity, I submit, is not a canon of science.
	"=?ISO-8859-1?B?iw==?=Julian Schwinger, 1991, MIT
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AD6C06.19C6%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA16528
Resent-Message-ID: <"aWuJ-2.0.Y24.f70Yy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46500
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The late Nobel laureate Julian Schwinger, a cold fusion theorist,  had
suggested similarities between cold fusion and sonoluminescence in ³A
Progress Report: Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence.² [a
lecture at MIT, November 11, 1991; reprinted in Infinite Energy, March-April
1999.]

Here is one of the eloquent things that he said in that article:

"Well, to the extent that sanity implies conformity with the mores of a
society -- didn't the Soviets clap their egregious dissidents into insane
asylums? --sanity, I submit, is not a canon of science. Indeed, isn't it a
goal of physics, specifically, to push at the frontiers of accepted theory
through suitably designed experiments, not only to extend those frontiers,
but, more importantly, to find fundamental flaws that demand new and
revolutionary physics?"

Good wishes,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Www.infinite-energy.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 19:43:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA32143;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:41:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 19:41:17 -0800
Message-ID: <3C88260B.EBC75892 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 20:46:37 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: free energy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"DWlXR.0.8s7.RB3Yy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46501
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Here is an interesting idea from the Daily University
Science News for those of us who search for free energy.

Microbes Turn Underwater Gunk Into Electric Energy

       Certain microorganisms known as Geobacters can
transform organic
       matter commonly found at the bottom of the ocean into
electrical
       energy.

       Aside from raising the possibility that microbes
someday could be used
       to produce power in subsurface settings, the findings
have implications
       for many industrial and military applications,
according to Derek R.
       Lovley, UMass microbiologist and team leader of the
study.

       The research by University of Massachusetts
microbiologists is
       reported in today's issue of Science.

       An understanding of how microbes generate and use
electrical energy
       may prompt the development of new technologies to
decontaminate
       polluted water and sediment-containing organic
materials, including
       petroleum and other aromatic hydrocarbons, Lovley
says.

       In the Science article, he explains how the team used
water and
       sediment from Boston Harbor, a collection of mason
jars, ordinary
       electrical wiring and sterile graphite electrodes to
determine the
       science behind the mechanics of a simple sediment
battery.

       The researchers added a layer of common mud to water
in the jars,
       then put one graphite electrode in the mud and
another in the overlying
       water. The resulting electrical current was strong
enough to activate a
       lightbulb, or a simple computer.

       "Even using a primitive electrode made from
graphite," Lovely said,
       "it is possible to produce enough current to power
basic electronic
       marine instruments."

       Through more refined experiments, Lovley’s group
found that the
       family of energy-harvesting microorganisms commonly
referred to as
       Geobacters, were key to the production of the
electrical current.

       Most life forms, including humans, get their energy
by oxidizing
       organic compounds with oxygen, but Geobacters can
grow in
       environments lacking oxygen by using the iron
naturally present in soil
       in place of oxygen.

       This new research demonstrates that Geobacters can
also substitute an
       unnatural substance, such as an electrode, for the
iron, according to
       Lovley.

       A large number of a Geobacter species known as
Desulfuromonas
       acetoxidans (D. acetoxidans) were found on the anode
end of the
       primitive batteries. When the researchers destroyed
the D. acetoxidans
       in the sediment, the current stopped.

       "In the mud, a community of microorganisms cooperates
to break
       down larger, more complex organic compounds to
acetate. Geobacters
       then transfer the electrons from the acetate to the
electrode, generating
       the electrical energy," he said.

       Lovley’s group also has found that some Geobacters
can convert toxic
       organic compounds, such as toluene, to electricity.
Lovley says this
       suggests that some Geobacters can be used to harvest
energy from
       waste matter, or can be included in technology used
to clean up
       subsurface environments contaminated by organic
matter, especially
       petroleum.

       Earlier studies had shown bacteria could produce
electricity under
       artificial conditions in which special chemicals were
added, but the
       UMass study was the first to prove that the nearly
ubiquitous microbes
       living in a typical marine environment could produce
electricity under
       the conditions naturally found in that environment.

       "Once we know more about the genome of Geobacters, we
will be able
       to manipulate these organisms to make them receptive
to a variety of
       organic or inorganic contaminants. Theoretically,
when they begin to
       degrade the contaminant, they will throw electrons on
an electrode,
       and that could set off a light, a sound or some other
form of signal,"
       Lovely said.

       "An understanding of how this phenomenon operates has
a number of
       extremely timely applications," he continued,
"especially in developing
       technologies to recognize toxins and organic
contaminants."

       Lovley cites, for example, the potential for using
such technology to
       develop military equipment that could alert soldiers
to the presence of
       toxins or biological warfare agents in the immediate
environment.

       The Office of Naval Research funded this study. The
research team
       included Daniel R. Bond and Dawn E. Holmes from UMass
and
       Leonard M. Tender of the Naval Research Laboratories.



       [Contact: Derek Lovley, Paula Hartman Cohen]

       18-Jan-2002

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar  7 22:53:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA21230;
	Thu, 7 Mar 2002 22:49:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 22:49:05 -0800
Message-ID: <3C885EE6.AB0238E3 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2002 22:49:10 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: AAAS Annual Meeting]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------982289AAABFC70EE5283D54D"
Resent-Message-ID: <"hEJeu1.0.aB5.Xx5Yy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46502
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--------------982289AAABFC70EE5283D54D
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit



-------- Original Message --------
 Subject: AAAS Annual Meeting
    Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:17:27 -0600
    From: "Floyd Bloom" <memuser aaas.org>
Reply-To: "AAAS Member Services" <memuser aaas.org>
      To: <AKI IX.NETCOM.COM>



From: Floyd Bloom

Scripps Research Institute,

President, AAAS and

Chair, 2003 AAAS Annual Meeting Program Committee

Date: March 7, 2002

The 2002 AAAS Meeting in Boston this past month was an exhilarating
success! The program presented an impressive array of speakers spanning
the breadth of science. What struck me was that AAAS' reputation for
assembling the best and brightest stars of science was coupled this year
with an international vision…captured in the meeting's theme, "Science
in a Connected World."

We heard AAAS President Peter Raven (now Chair of the AAAS Board of
Directors) present a compelling argument for the imperative to move to a
sustainable world. He was followed the next evening by Ismail
Serageldin, Director General of Egypt’s Library of Alexandria, and
formerly Vice President of the World Bank, highlighting the role and
responsibilities of science and technology to meet the needs of the
world’s poorest citizens. Larry Smarr of UC San Diego and the Cal-(IT)2
project illustrated the many ways that emerging sensornet technology
will connect all of us in the not-too-distant future. And Lila Gleitman,
University of Pennsylvania, told us how "the language we speak…" affects
"…the thoughts we think." Finally, we learned of the ingenuity and
productivity of India's research establishment from Ragunath Mashelkar,
Director General of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research.
We also heard about Hungarian science and technology from that nation's
Minister of Education, Jozsef Palinkas, and about science and democracy
from Khotso Mokhele of South Africa's National Research Foundation.

Special 2-day seminars on nanotechnology and genomics provided
opportunity for the leading researchers and an overflow audience of
several hundred to examine the progress in these rapidly evolving
fields.

Public Science Day, an outreach to hundreds of school children in the
Greater Boston Area, began the meeting with events in Cambridge, at the
Boston Museum of Science, and at the meeting itself.

Nearly 800 young people attended a Science Career Fair, organized by
Science magazine and the Science Careers web site, and met with more
than 35 prospective employers. In addition, Career Development Workshops
provided tools and skills for navigating the scientific job market.

Also present was the largest and broadest representation of the global
press that I have ever seen at a single meeting. More than 1,000
reporters from the U.S., UK (BBC), Australia, Japan, several European
countries, and many other nations vied for the best stories and
opportunities to interview researchers.

We are now planning the 2003 meeting and are in the process of receiving
and selecting symposia. I invite you to be a part of 2003 meeting by
organizing a symposium that highlights the cutting-edge issues in your
field. Our theme, "Science as a Way of Life," highlights the central
role of science in today's society. You can see the preliminary themes
and topics developed by the program committee at the 2003 Web page:
www.aaasmeeting.org/MPE_12.shtml

You will need to act soon, however. Proposals for symposia must be
received this month. The official deadline for receipt of proposals is
March 18, but we will include all received by Friday, March 29 in the
first round of review. I, therefore, urge you to take time from your
busy schedule to prepare a brief proposal. We seek proposals for
90-minute or 3-hour symposia in all areas of science. While special
attention is afforded those of an interdisciplinary nature, all symposia
are expected to showcase leading areas of science and technology.

Instructions for submitting a proposal are at
www.aaasmeeting.org/MPE_10.shtml.

Proposals are peer reviewed and those selected for presentation at the
2003 meeting will be announced in early June, 2002.

I invite you to join us in Denver for what will be yet another exciting
experience.

For additional details visit www.aaasmeeting.org.

AAAS Meetings Office

1200 New York Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 326-6450

Fax: (202) 289-4021

American Association for the Advancement of Science
----
If you do not wish to receive e-mail messages from AAAS in the future,
please reply to this message with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line and
your e-mail address in the body and we will remove your name from the
list promptly. PLEASE NOTE: This will UNSUBSCRIBE you from ALL further
email announcements sent from AAAS, including announcements of new
member benefits, discounts, or meetings of interest.

This message was sent to AKI IX.NETCOM.COM.

If you wish to change your email address, please log in to
AAASMember.org and click on "Online Member Services."

--------------982289AAABFC70EE5283D54D
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body link="#0000FF" vlink="#800080">
&nbsp;
<p>-------- Original Message --------
<table BORDER=0 CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 >
<tr>
<th ALIGN=RIGHT VALIGN=BASELINE NOWRAP>Subject:&nbsp;</th>

<td>AAAS Annual Meeting</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<th ALIGN=RIGHT VALIGN=BASELINE NOWRAP>Date:&nbsp;</th>

<td>Thu, 7 Mar 2002 07:17:27 -0600</td>
</tr>

<tr>
<th ALIGN=RIGHT VALIGN=BASELINE NOWRAP>From:&nbsp;</th>

<td>"Floyd Bloom" &lt;memuser aaas.org></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<th ALIGN=RIGHT VALIGN=BASELINE NOWRAP>Reply-To:&nbsp;</th>

<td>"AAAS Member Services" &lt;memuser aaas.org></td>
</tr>

<tr>
<th ALIGN=RIGHT VALIGN=BASELINE NOWRAP>To:&nbsp;</th>

<td>&lt;AKI IX.NETCOM.COM></td>
</tr>
</table>

<br>&nbsp;
<p>From: Floyd Bloom
<p>Scripps Research Institute,
<p>President, AAAS and
<p>Chair, 2003 AAAS Annual Meeting Program Committee
<p>Date: March 7, 2002
<p>The <a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/home.html">2002 AAAS Meeting</a>
in Boston this past month was an exhilarating success! The program presented
an impressive array of speakers spanning the breadth of science. What struck
me was that <a href="http://www.aaas.org/">AAAS</a>' reputation for assembling
the best and brightest stars of science was coupled this year with an international
vision…captured in the meeting's theme, <a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/themes.html">"Science
in a Connected World."</a>
<p>We heard AAAS President <a href="http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/Raven.shtml">Peter
Raven</a> (now Chair of the AAAS Board of Directors) present a compelling
argument for the imperative to move to a sustainable world. He was followed
the next evening by <a href="http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/serageldin.shtml">Ismail
Serageldin</a>, Director General of Egypt’s Library of Alexandria, and
formerly Vice President of the World Bank, highlighting the role and responsibilities
of science and technology to meet the needs of the world’s poorest citizens.
<a href="http://www.eurekalert.org/aaasnewsroom/">Larry
Smarr</a> of UC San Diego and the Cal-(IT)2 project illustrated the many
ways that emerging sensornet technology will connect all of us in the not-too-distant
future. And <a href="http://www.aaas.org/meetings/MPE_02.shtml">Lila Gleitman</a>,
University of Pennsylvania, told us how "the language we speak…" affects
"…the thoughts we think." Finally, we learned of the ingenuity and productivity
of India's research establishment from <a href="http://www.aaas.org/meetings/MPE_02.shtml">Ragunath
Mashelkar</a>, Director General of the Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research. We also heard about Hungarian science and technology from that
nation's Minister of Education, Jozsef Palinkas, and about science and
democracy from Khotso Mokhele of South Africa's National Research Foundation.
<p>Special 2-day seminars on <a href="http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/nanotech.shtml">nanotechnology</a>
and <a href="http://www.aaas.org/meetings/MPE_04.shtml">genomics</a> provided
opportunity for the leading researchers and an overflow audience of several
hundred to examine the progress in these rapidly evolving fields.
<p><a href="http://www.aaas.org/news/releases/pubsciday.shtml">Public Science
Day</a>, an outreach to hundreds of school children in the Greater Boston
Area, began the meeting with events in Cambridge, at the Boston Museum
of Science, and at the meeting itself.
<p>Nearly 800 young people attended a Science Career Fair, organized by
<i>Science</i>
magazine and the <a href="http://www.aaas.org/careers/">Science Careers</a>
web site, and met with more than 35 prospective employers. In addition,
Career Development Workshops provided tools and skills for navigating the
scientific job market.
<p>Also present was the largest and broadest representation of the global
press that I have ever seen at a single meeting. More than 1,000 reporters
from the U.S., UK (BBC), Australia, Japan, several European countries,
and many other nations vied for the best stories and opportunities to interview
researchers.
<p>We are now planning the <a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/home.html">2003
meeting</a> and are in the process of receiving and selecting symposia.
I invite you to be a part of 2003 meeting by organizing a symposium that
highlights the cutting-edge issues in your field. Our theme, "<a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/themes.html">Science
as a Way of Life</a>," highlights the central role of science in today's
society. You can see the preliminary <a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/themes.html">themes
and topics</a> developed by the program committee at the 2003 Web page:
<a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/themes.html">www.aaasmeeting.org/MPE_12.shtml</a>
<p>You will need to act soon, however.<b> Proposals for symposia</b> must
be received this month. The official deadline for receipt of proposals
is March 18, but we will include all received by Friday, March 29 in the
first round of review. I, therefore, urge you to take time from your busy
schedule to prepare a brief proposal. We seek proposals for 90-minute or
3-hour symposia in all areas of science. While special attention is afforded
those of an interdisciplinary nature, all symposia are expected to showcase
leading areas of science and technology.
<p><a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/proposals.html">Instructions</a>
for submitting a proposal are at
<a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/proposals.html">www.aaasmeeting.org/MPE_10.shtml.</a>
<p>Proposals are peer reviewed and those selected for presentation at the
2003 meeting will be announced in early June, 2002.
<p>I invite you to join us in Denver for what will be yet another exciting
experience.
<p>For additional details visit <a href="http://promo.aaas.org/bloom/home.html">www.aaasmeeting.org</a>.
<p>AAAS Meetings Office
<p>1200 New York Avenue, NW
<p>Washington, DC 20005
<p>Phone: (202) 326-6450
<p>Fax: (202) 289-4021
<p>American Association for the Advancement of Science
<br>----
<br>If you do not wish to receive e-mail messages from AAAS in the future,
please reply to this message with "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line and
your e-mail address in the body and we will remove your name from the list
promptly. PLEASE NOTE: This will UNSUBSCRIBE you from ALL further email
announcements sent from AAAS, including announcements of new member benefits,
discounts, or meetings of interest.
<p>This message was sent to AKI IX.NETCOM.COM.
<p>If you wish to change your email address, please log in to AAASMember.org
and click on "Online Member Services."
</body>
</html>

--------------982289AAABFC70EE5283D54D--


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 08:46:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA04229;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 08:44:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 08:44:03 -0800
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:52:09 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Society of Cassiodorus <kuefel yahoo.com>
cc: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: [Existence] Re:  color temperature
In-Reply-To: <20020308004722.38176.qmail web11207.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020308114644.3577C-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id IAA04186
Resent-Message-ID: <"714uJ.0.u11.IfEYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46503
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Where does the sight occur?
	Where does hearing occur?


	These are serious questions, I have a strong background in
multidisciplinary fields including but in no manner limited to:

	molecular, micro, functional, and physics of biology
	chemical
	physics
	sensors and systems

	And I have spent over a decade studying the huamn system and one
idea of a 'transfer system' of or for the brain at Armstrong Aerospace med
Labs, WPAFB.

	Is the retina an extension of the brain?

	Where do the ear structures perform their 'FFT" so-to-say?

	I am and will probably be until I am no longer able, looking to
couple to the human system to return the gift of sight and speech and
hearing.

			JHS

On Thu, 7 Mar 2002, Society of Cassiodorus wrote:

> Greetings to all. What a privledge it is to converse
> with this noble group.
> 
> It a tree falls in the forest, and no one is there to
> hear it - does it make a sound? Oh to be sure, all the
> mechanical vibrations in the air and other mediums
> will occure - but sound is not mechanical vibrations.
> Sound is preception (not vibrations per se).
> Preception occures only in a mind.
> 
> When a stellar object (or a light bulb) is turned on,
> and no one is there to see it, does it make light? Oh
> to be sure, all the electromagnetic vibrations will
> occure, but light is a preception (not vibrations per
> se). Preception occures only in a mind.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dr. John Kuefel
> 
> *****************************************************
> --- dekasges aol.com wrote:
> > Thema:Re: Re: [Existence] Re: color temperature
> > Datum:02.03.02 02:31:56 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische Zeit
> > From:    a.mil chello.nl (Minerva)
> > Reply-to:    Existence yahoogroups.com
> > To:    Existence yahoogroups.com
> > 
> > > Not at all!  The medium light travels trough and
> > the observation of that 
> > > travel are quite different things!  Light travels
> > from sun to moon, no 
> > > matter, if you look at it or not.
> > > 
> > > Why do you put everything, that seems to be
> > strange to you, into a 
> > > subjectivistic corner?
> > > 
> > > Peter
> > 
> > ==== We can't see that light travels from sun to
> > moon, the only light we see 
> > is the light we DETECT (by our eyes or by machines).
> > So how would we know if 
> > there is always light travelling to the moon from
> > the sun? We don't know... 
> > we only assume since that seems to make most sense
> > to us.. 
> > Even the light detected by machines is ultimately
> > detected by us. If not, the 
> > measurement wouldn't be a measurement since never
> > anyone would see the 
> > outcome. I recognize the 
> > same manner of thinking I had in the past. It seems
> > very plausible that we 
> > can see "all light", however this is absolutely not
> > true. You can't see a ray 
> > of sunlight, unless that ray passes into your eye,
> > directly or indirectly.
> > 
> >           Cheers Albert
> > 
> > I agree, that most events we believe, because it
> > makes sense to us.  But the 
> > main point is, that the light travels to the moon
> > independent of, whether 
> > somebody sees it or assumes that. - Perhaps, you
> > would return to a more 
> > practical point of view when returning to your
> > previous occupation (which is 
> > similar to mine).
> > 
> > Best wishes! Peter
> > 
> > > >> Thema:Re: Re: [Existence] Re: color temperature
> > 
> > >> Datum:26.02.02 12:30:11 (MEZ) Mitteleuropäische
> > Zeit 
> > >> From:    a.mil chello.nl (Minerva) 
> > >> Reply-to:    Existence yahoogroups.com 
> > >> To:    Existence yahoogroups.com 
> > >> 
> > >> > Van: "Anna" <pantheon ix.netcom.com> 
> > >> > Datum: 2002/02/26 di AM 12:18:55 GMT+01:00 
> > >> > Aan: <Existence yahoogroups.com>, 
> > >> >     "Anna" <pantheon ix.netcome.com> 
> > >> > cc:: <Existence yahoogroups.com> 
> > >> > Onderwerp: Re: [Existence] Re:  color
> > temperature 
> > >> > 
> > >> > Then obviously they can and they do depending
> > on a medium they travel 
> > >> through. 
> > >> > Such *slowdowns* can  happen all the way  to
> > the observer's eye. 
> > >> > Seems nothing we see is real and  we indeed
> > live in a matrix. 
> > >> > Anna 
> > >> 
> > >> === Hi Anna, 
> > >> 
> > >> yes indeed! :) 
> > >> The only reality you see/feel is the reality just
> > outside your body, you 
> > >> don't see what's happening ten meters further up,
> > you see what happens at 
> > >> your body position. 
> > >> You can also look at your body (your feet), are
> > they real?? 
> > >> You think so, but is that true?? You can look in
> > a mirror, but is that 
> > >> image real? etc, etc.... 
> > >> 
> > >>       Albert 
> > >> 
> > > 
> > > Not at all!  The medium light travels trough and
> > the observation of that 
> > > travel are quite different things!  Light travels
> > from sun to moon, no 
> > > matter, if you look at it or not. 
> > > 
> > > Why do you put everything, that seems to be
> > strange to you, into a 
> > > subjectivistic corner? 
> > > 
> > > Peter 
> > > 
> > > >> Then obviously they can and they do depending
> > on a medium they travel 
> > >> through. 
> > >> Such *slowdowns* can  happen all the way  to the
> > observer's eye. 
> > >> Seems nothing we see is real and  we indeed live
> > in a matrix. 
> > >> Anna 
> > >> 
> > >> 
> > >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> > >> 
> > >> >>> From: <A
> > HREF="mailto:herman antioch-college.edu">John
> > Schnurer</A> 
> > >>> To: <A
> > HREF="mailto:pantheon ix.netcome.com">Anna</A> 
> > >>> Cc: <A
> >
> HREF="mailto:Existence yahoogroups.com">Existence@yahoogroups.com</A>
> > 
> > >>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 4:03 PM 
> > >>> Subject: [Existence] Re: color temperature 
> > >>> 
> > >>>      This is EM, electromagnetic radiation ...
> > like light. 
> > >>> 
> > >>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Anna wrote: 
> > >>> 
> > >>> > < the hotter it gets, 
> > >>> > > the shorter the wavelength..... THIS is the
> > color temperature> 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > Can  these  waves as they travel cool down and
> > lengthen? 
> > >>> > Anna 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > >>> > From: "John Schnurer" <<A
> >
> HREF="mailto:herman antioch-college.edu">herman@antioch-college.edu</A>>
> > 
> > >>> > To: <<A
> >
> HREF="mailto:Existence yahoogroups.com">Existence@yahoogroups.com</A>>
> > 
> > >>> > Cc: "Anna" <<A
> >
> HREF="mailto:pantheon ix.netcom.com">pantheon@ix.netcom.com</A>>
> > 
> > >>> > Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 1:16 PM 
> > >>> > Subject: color temperature 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > A perfect radiation source is also a perfect
> > absorber. 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > SO:  when you want to build emission sources
> > they are black.... 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > As you HEAT this... it begins to
> > radiate..... the hotter it gets, 
> > >>> > > the shorter the wavelength..... THIS is the
> > color temperature. 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > What you'alls talkin' about is bits and
> > pieces of different WAYS 
> > >>> > > to make BB radiation sources.... 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > Hit the encylopedias of sciences to get the
> > full pictures here 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > Read.... absorb....write 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > VS 
> > >>> > > 
> > >>> > > guess......write 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
> http://mail.yahoo.com/
> 
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
> Access Your PC from Anywhere
> It's Easy. It's Fast. - Free Download
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/AxtVhB/6XkDAA/_ZuFAA/fCsqlB/TM
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
> 
> Post message:	Existence yahoogroups.com
> Subscribe:   	Existence-subscribe yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe: 	Existence-unsubscribe yahoogroups.com
> Moderators: 	 Existence-owner yahoogroups.com
>  
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 10:26:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24054;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:24:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:24:17 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:23:12 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306164935.04ef77e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020308101507.1833A-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"TM4cp3.0.at5.G7GYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46504
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> OK, I read this paper two or three times, and I read the debate between 
> Taleyarkhan and Shapira & Saltmarsh, which accuses them of "truly 
> unfortunate and very unprofessional" behavior. Can someone explain to me 
> what is controversial about these results? As far as I can tell the 
> hypothesis proposed by the authors is that conventional plasma fusion is 
> occurring on a microscopic scale. It only works at 0 deg C. It does not 
> sound like a threat to ITER.

It is premature to speculate what physics is involved in sonofusion. All
the experiment shows is that fusion occurs. 
 
> Is Taleyarkhan seeing an unbalanced, excess amount of tritium, such as cold 
> fusion produces? It seems that would be difficult to establish, because 
> tritium is easy to detect, but neutrons are hard.

Since the other branchs are not indicated, one cannot speculate
on what the branching ratios are for this reaction. 
 
> Robert Park is upset because all discoveries upset him. Maybe I am missing 
> something . . . But why are other people upset? 

They say they are worried about appearing foolish in the eyes of the
unwashed masses. It is not a rational concern.

> The editor said this paper 
> caused quite a commotion. Perhaps it is not widely known -- or accepted -- 
> that sonoluminescence causes extreme pressure.

The experiments I've read about do not show extreme pressure and
temperature. Extreme pressure and temperature are speculated as the cause
of the fusion observed. That is logically inconsistant. IF there is
extreme temperature and pressure, then fusion. But it is not true that if
fusion, then extreme temperature and pressure. 

This last logical error seems to be one of the errors made by Parks and
the AIP. 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 10:30:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA25601;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:27:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:27:44 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 10:26:40 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020306173316.04ed46d8 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020308102514.1833B-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qqsja3.0.tF6.VAGYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46505
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Terry Blanton wrote:
> 
> >If you extrapolate that graph, 10^8 should be
> >achieveable before you reach the freeze point of acetone.  THAT
> >should scare ITER proponents.  Of course, it is pure conjecture
> >to extrapolate beyond the data.
> 
> Yes, but as you said Terry, this would make a lousy heat engine. Maybe they 
> are hoping to harvest the neutrons externally with a lithium blanket? That 
> is what the hot fusion people want to do, I think. As someone remarked 
> years ago, neutrons are a very inconvenient source of energy.
> 
> Maybe the ITER lobby is afraid someone will find some other fluid that 
> works at higher temperatures.

This is a physics experiment that demonstrates a new effect. There isn't
even enough info to form a good theory as to what is happening yet,
engineering for power reactors is way premature, and clearly isn't the
intent of the experiment.



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 11:55:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA08552;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:51:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:51:47 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 14:52:06 -0800
Subject: Dr. Scott Chubb Statement About Bubble Fusion
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AE8096.1A0D%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3098443926_1274930"
Resent-Message-ID: <"pn74p2.0.Y52.JPHYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46506
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--B_3098443926_1274930
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

All,

The statement below sent to me by Dr. Scott Chubb suggests that there is
much more to the science of bubble fusion than most commentators on the
Science articles are discussing.

Sincerely,

Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D.
Www.infinite-energy.com

*



Statement About Science Magazine Bubble Fusion Papers

Dr. Scott R. Chubb, Research Systems, Inc, 9822 Pebble Weigh Ct.,
Burke, VA 22015-3378


Donald Kennedy (DK)[1] is to be congratulated for deciding to publish and
profile[1-3] the article by Taleyarkhan et al [4] in the 8 March issue of
Science magazine.  Faced with controversial opinions[1], he decided to
publish a controversial article as well as commentaries[2-3] about it,
despite harsh criticism[3,5]..  Charles Seife[3] should also be
congratulated for presenting background material concerning the relevant
facts about both sides of a potentially spectacular scientific discovery,
involving room, or near-room temperature Nuclear Fusion.

It is unfortunate (but understandable) that  Charles Seife missed a number
of key points, about the underlying dynamic of the debate.  Part of the
problem is sociological: Chemists and Nuclear Engineers view the world
differently from Nuclear Physicists.  Part of the problem is more basic.
Nuclear Physicists have ignored important effects (with good reason, until
1989) involving potentially non-local effects associate with
electromagnetism (EM) in most applications of nuclear physics .  The proble=
m
is that non-local EM effects can make a big difference in the way nuclear
fusion begins and ends, provided an appropriately constructed procedure is
developed. =20

Nobelauriate Julian Schwinger=B9s view[6] of the situation provides an
instructive lesson.  The father of the Rarita-Schwinger equation, which is
used to describe the underlying building blocks (Deuterons D) of nuclear
fusion, as well as of quantum electrodynamics, which provides the basic
framework for most theories of interaction, Julian Schwinger recognized tha=
t
coherence, driven through electromagnetic (EM) effects, could significantly
alter the possible ways that nuclear fusion could occur.  Thus, implicitly,
throughout, he made the point that EM potentially can couple disparately
different length scales, and for this reason he replaced the use of
intuitive ideas about localization in certain circumstances with more
precisely-understood ideas associated with coherence.  These can lead to
non-local (more wave-like) features (for example, in the Mossbauer effect)
that are implicit in the EM interaction [6], in which momentum is shared by
many locations (as in a Bose Einstein Condensate or in the behavior of a
periodically ordered solid) instantly.  However, although he pointed this
out, up front, no one listened.  Part of the problem is that implicit in
this view is the idea that phenomena can become non-local in nature.
Although this is known to occur in solids, Nuclear Physicists for the most
part have not been prepared to accept the possibility that it can occur in
nuclear fusion, despite the fact that implicitly the fact that it can occur
is already known..

Part of the problem appears to be the result of a breakdown in
communication.  Since the 1930's, after Chemists discovered a cornerstone o=
f
Nuclear Physics (Nuclear Fission), a gradual decline in communication
between Chemists and Nuclear Physicists has taken place.  An important
reason for this involves length-scale: Nuclear reactions appear to only
occur when isolated particles collide at a particular location where
particles are separated from each other by distances that are as much as
100000 times shorter than when they interact in normal chemical reactions.
Thus, Chemists and Nuclear Physicists have assumed they are dealing with
such completely different phenomena that they have believed that what they
study can not be possibly related.

The key point of confusion has involved the role of EM in nuclear fusion
(NF).  Most Nuclear Physicists believe NF occurs when EM alters reactions
through particle-particle collisions at isolated locations, through
=B3tunnelling=B2 effects, associated with a simplified picture of the EM
interaction.  For this reason,  Nuclear Physicists ignore more subtle,
potentially, longer-range effects that can be triggered in dynamically
changing environments, which very easily can be present in solids (as in th=
e
case of Cold Fusion) or in cavitating bubbles (as in Bubble Fusion).  In
both situations, as Schwinger pointed out[6], coherent forms of interaction
involving EM can occur.  For this reason many of the intuitive ideas that
Nuclear Physicists have about NF need not be valid.

An important question associated with both Cold Fusion (CF) and Bubble
Fusion (BF)[4] is whether or not the assumption that it is necessary for
comparable numbers of tritons Nt and neutrons Nn be produced.  Provided
non-local EM interaction only occur over sufficiently long length scales,
through processes that proceed sufficiently slowly, the effect of EM can be
treated statically, and its effect on the nuclear interaction through
dynamical forms of coupling can be ignored.  Then, it is true, effectively,
with respect to the nuclear reaction, the effect of the EM interaction on
the make up of the final state becomes inconsequential, and Nt =3D Nn.

But in the BF work[4], Nt is at least an order of magnitude greater than Nn
[4], and it could be as much as two orders of magnitude greater.  In fact,
in Cold Fusion, not only is the disparity between Nt and Nn significantly
greater, the reason for the disparity is well-understood[7].  It occurs
because for this case, the dominant reaction, D+D->4He, involves non-local
EM coupling[8].  For this reason the amounts of neutrons or tritons that ar=
e
produced usually are statistically insignificant, although both experimenta=
l
evidence and theoretical explanations exist for understanding how cold (i.e=
.
low energy) tritons can be produced.

In fact, in more general terms, when non-local EM effects become important,
the normal assumptions about NF (such as the requirement that interacting
D=B9s have high enough kinetic energy to circumvent the Coulomb barrier) need
not apply.  In particular, for example, for D+D fusion to result in the
production of 4He, each of the interacting D=B9s must be indistinguishable
from the other on length scales associated with conventional EM
interaction[8].  Because at high incident energy and momentum, this
condition is rarely met, 4He is rarely produced in NF.  However, at lower
values of the incident momentum, not only do the underlying features
associated with our understanding of conventional D+D->4He at higher
momentum require that this symmetry be present, the fact that the dominant
excess heat reaction in electrolytic CF occurs in this manner implies that
this requirement is being satisfied when the incident D=B9s have lower
momentum..

An important point of confusion is that although D+D->4He occurs relatively
infrequently, the reason for this is that this particular reaction involves
significant coupling between the nuclear and EM forces.  Because in
single-bubble cavitation, an acoustical field can be used to produce
precisely tuned, time-varying EM radiation[6], it is plausible that the
coupling between the boundaries of the bubble and its potentially
interacting D=B9s may also result in significant EM coupling, in a
dynamically-driven fashion .

Especially at close separation, when 2 D-nuclei begin to overlap, it is
possible to view the 2D state as an excited state of a 4He nucleus.  Then,
significant coupling to a dynamically changing EM field (as pointed out by
Schwinger[6]) can occur.  This suggests that since in the experiment[4],
fast (~14.1 MeV)  neutrons (n's) are introduced to foster bubble growth, it
is entirely possible that on occasion particular n=B9s collide with a 2D
initial state configuration that resembles a 4He nucleus.  If this happens,
provided this excited state nucleus effectively recoils in an appropriate
manner, it may be possible to create a reverse D-t fusion reaction, in whic=
h
-4He+n-> D+t.  In this way, one can see how effects that are well-known can
be used to explain the potentially anomalously high ratio of tritons to
neutrons. =20

An important point is that regardless of whether or not the details
associated with this argument are correct, the possibility that the reactio=
n
could occur is associated with potentially significant coupling with the EM
field.  Over the years, in CF it has also been found that the EM field not
only can couple to potentially interacting D=B9s but that it can do so in a
coherent fashion, without high energy particles being released.  Thus, the
fact that Nt does not equal Nn in Bubble Fusion may be related to the fact
that the dominant reaction in Cold Fusion involves the production of 4He.

With hindsight, it=B9s obvious that confusion about potential effects
associated with coherent coupling to the EM field could lead to situations
in which high energy particles would be inhibited, in CF.  It is also
obvious that because of the highly non-linear coupling to the EM field that
occurs in many of the electrolytic experiments, under certain circumstances
the process of triggering the associated forms of interaction can be closel=
y
associated with changes in the local environment in the electrodes.  This
led to considerable confusion in 1989.  Additional confusion resulted
because at that time most Nuclear Physicists adopted the conventional view
of the potential role of EM, and the impossibility of coherence and related
factors altering the relevant forms of reaction.

Further compounding this confusion was the fact that Cold Fusion claims wer=
e
made simultaneously by Chemists (Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons),
followed by counter-claims by Nuclear Physicists (Steven Jones and
coworkers), involving very different phenomena.  A second, key source of
confusion was the assumption that the claims were related when they were
not.  Thus, at an early stage, as a consequence, the dynamic of the debate
(or lack of debate) rapidly became unscientific.

A tragic aspect of the episode is that new vehicles for communication (the
internet and FAX machines), as well as the Press also became involved.  As =
a
consequence,  unprecedented confusion about the various claims escalated.
It is unfortunate that even at this late date, Charles Seife is neither
aware of the underlying dynamic, the relevant experimental situation and
(from all appearances) the fact that the debate remains unresolved.
Potentially more tragic is that he provides quotations from individuals who
either are ignorant of what has transpired during the last 13 years or have
deliberately decided to not disclose new information about the associated
field.

In contrast to the situation described by Seife[3], where Cold Fusion not
only is not taken seriously, but where through apparent fear about potentia=
l
embarrassment, the subject continues to be ridiculed, as guest editor of a
recent volume of an Ethics in Science Journal[9], I asked a number of
journalists, editors, and scientists to re-examine what happened in the Col=
d
Fusion controversy. Contrary to the assertions made by Seife[3] about this
subject, in fact, the consensus was that no consensus exists because
meaningful dialogue about Cold Fusion ended very early.  This occurred
partly because of confusion that resulted from the very strong opinions tha=
t
were expressed at an early stage in the controversy.  But it also occurred
because arguments and claims were not adequately reviewed and discussed
prior to their being announced in the Press.

However, remarkable as it may seem, it is also true that a number of the
more important CF claims, made by the Chemists, may very well be true,
despite the fact that most Nuclear Physicists dispute them. An important
point involves perspective: Nuclear Physicists and Chemists are different.
Chemists pay attention to fine details involving the environment of a
particular reaction that may include important long-range EM effects that
are often missed (or dismissed) by Nuclear Physicists.

It also is not true that the "Cold Fusion" field has been dismissed,
although this seemed to be the case, following a raucous, unwieldy meeting
of the American Physical Society (APS), that was held in Baltimore, on 1 Ma=
y
1989. In fact, on 22 March, 2002, not only will a session be held concernin=
g
Cold Fusion at a meeting of the APS, others have been held since 1999. At
this session, well-defined experiments, based on well-defined protocols wil=
l
be discussed. If Charles Seife covers the associated debate at that time in
an as even-handed manner as he did in his 8 March article, it will greatly
help to eliminate on-going confusion about an important, contentious area o=
f
scientific debate.

[1]Donald Kennedy, =B3To Publish or Not to Publish=B2, Science, 295, 1793 (2002=
)

[2]Charles Seife, =B3=B9Bubble Fusion=B9 Paper Generates a Tempest in a Beaker,=B2
Science, 295 , 1808-1809 (2002)

[3] F.D. Becchetti, Commentary: "Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Implodin=
g
Bubbles," Science, 295,  1850 (2002).

[4]R.P.Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey, Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin,
and R.C.
Block, "Evidence for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, "
Science, 295, 1868-1873 (2002).

[5]Robert L. Park, =B3BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD,=B2
WHATSNEW in the APS, 2 March 2002, American Physical Society,
http://www.aps.org/WN.

[6] Julian Schwinger, =B3Cold Fusion Theory A Brief History of Mine,=B2 Trans
Fus Tech., 26, #2, xiii-xxi (1994).

[7]Edmund Storms, "A Review of the Cold fusion Effect," J. Sci. Exploration=
,
10, 2, 185 (1996). (also,
http://www.scientificexploration.org/jse/articles/storms/1.html)

[8] D. R. Thompson, Nuclear-Physics-A. vol.A1 54, no.2, 442-8(1970).  S. R.
Chubb, Finding the Missing g in D+D->4He Cold Fusion Excess Heat., Bulletin
of the Amer. Phys. Soc., 47, #1
(2002).(http://www.aps.org/meet/MAR02/baps/tocW.html#SW21.011)

[9] Scott Chubb, Martin Fleischmann, Stephen E. Jones, David Goodstein,
Francesco. Scaramuzzi, George H.  Miley, John O'M Bockris, and David J.
Nagel, Accountability in Research, 8, 1 - 162  (2000).





--B_3098443926_1274930
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>Dr. Scott Chubb Statement About Bubble Fusion</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Times New Roman"><H3>All,<BR>
<BR>
The statement below sent to me by Dr. Scott Chubb suggests that there is mu=
ch more to the science of bubble fusion than most commentators on the Scienc=
e articles are discussing.<BR>
<BR>
Sincerely,<BR>
<BR>
</H3><FONT SIZE=3D"4"><B>Eugene F. Mallove, Sc.D.<BR>
</B></FONT><H3>Www.infinite-energy.com<BR>
<BR>
*<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Statement About Science Magazine Bubble Fusion Papers<BR>
<BR>
</H3>Dr. Scott R. Chubb, Research Systems, Inc, 9822 Pebble Weigh Ct.,<BR>
Burke, VA 22015-3378<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Donald Kennedy (DK)[1] is to be congratulated for deciding to publish and p=
rofile[1-3] the article by Taleyarkhan et al [4] in the 8 March issue of Sci=
ence magazine. &nbsp;Faced with controversial opinions[1], he decided to pub=
lish a controversial article as well as commentaries[2-3] about it, despite =
harsh criticism[3,5].. &nbsp;Charles Seife[3] should also be congratulated f=
or presenting background material concerning the relevant facts about both s=
ides of a potentially spectacular scientific discovery, involving room, or n=
ear-room temperature Nuclear Fusion. <BR>
<BR>
It is unfortunate (but understandable) that &nbsp;Charles Seife missed a nu=
mber of key points, about the underlying dynamic of the debate. &nbsp;Part o=
f the problem is sociological: Chemists and Nuclear Engineers view the world=
 differently from Nuclear Physicists. &nbsp;Part of the problem is more basi=
c. &nbsp;Nuclear Physicists have ignored important effects (with good reason=
, until 1989) involving potentially non-local effects associate with electro=
magnetism (EM) in most applications of nuclear physics . &nbsp;The problem i=
s that non-local EM effects can make a big difference in the way nuclear fus=
ion begins and ends, provided an appropriately constructed procedure is deve=
loped. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
Nobelauriate Julian Schwinger&#8217;s view[6] of the situation provides an =
instructive lesson. &nbsp;The father of the Rarita-Schwinger equation, which=
 is used to describe the underlying building blocks (Deuterons D) of nuclear=
 fusion, as well as of quantum electrodynamics, which provides the basic fra=
mework for most theories of interaction, Julian Schwinger recognized that co=
herence, driven through electromagnetic (EM) effects, could significantly al=
ter the possible ways that nuclear fusion could occur. &nbsp;Thus, implicitl=
y, throughout, he made the point that EM potentially can couple disparately =
different length scales, and for this reason he replaced the use of intuitiv=
e ideas about localization in certain circumstances with more precisely-unde=
rstood ideas associated with coherence. &nbsp;These can lead to non-local (m=
ore wave-like) features (for example, in the Mossbauer effect) that are impl=
icit in the EM interaction [6], in which momentum is shared by many location=
s (as in a Bose Einstein Condensate or in the behavior of a periodically ord=
ered solid) instantly. &nbsp;However, although he pointed this out, up front=
, no one listened. &nbsp;Part of the problem is that implicit in this view i=
s the idea that phenomena can become non-local in nature. &nbsp;Although thi=
s is known to occur in solids, Nuclear Physicists for the most part have not=
 been prepared to accept the possibility that it can occur in nuclear fusion=
, despite the fact that implicitly the fact that it can occur is already kno=
wn..<BR>
<BR>
Part of the problem appears to be the result of a breakdown in communicatio=
n. &nbsp;Since the 1930's, after Chemists discovered a cornerstone of Nuclea=
r Physics (Nuclear Fission), a gradual decline in communication between Chem=
ists and Nuclear Physicists has taken place. &nbsp;An important reason for t=
his involves length-scale: Nuclear reactions appear to only occur when isola=
ted particles collide at a particular location where particles are separated=
 from each other by distances that are as much as 100000 times shorter than =
when they interact in normal chemical reactions. Thus, Chemists and Nuclear =
Physicists have assumed they are dealing with such completely different phen=
omena that they have believed that what they study can not be possibly relat=
ed. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
The key point of confusion has involved the role of EM in nuclear fusion (N=
F). &nbsp;Most Nuclear Physicists believe NF occurs when EM alters reactions=
 through particle-particle collisions at isolated locations, through &#8220;=
tunnelling&#8221; effects, associated with a simplified picture of the EM in=
teraction. &nbsp;For this reason, &nbsp;Nuclear Physicists ignore more subtl=
e, potentially, longer-range effects that can be triggered in dynamically ch=
anging environments, which very easily can be present in solids (as in the c=
ase of Cold Fusion) or in cavitating bubbles (as in Bubble Fusion). &nbsp;In=
 both situations, as Schwinger pointed out[6], coherent forms of interaction=
 involving EM can occur. &nbsp;For this reason many of the intuitive ideas t=
hat Nuclear Physicists have about NF need not be valid.<BR>
<BR>
An important question associated with both Cold Fusion (CF) and Bubble Fusi=
on (BF)[4] is whether or not the assumption that it is necessary for compara=
ble numbers of tritons Nt and neutrons Nn be produced. &nbsp;Provided non-lo=
cal EM interaction only occur over sufficiently long length scales, through =
processes that proceed sufficiently slowly, the effect of EM can be treated =
statically, and its effect on the nuclear interaction through dynamical form=
s of coupling can be ignored. &nbsp;Then, it is true, effectively, with resp=
ect to the nuclear reaction, the effect of the EM interaction on the make up=
 of the final state becomes inconsequential, and Nt =3D Nn. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
But in the BF work[4], Nt is at least an order of magnitude greater than Nn=
 [4], and it could be as much as two orders of magnitude greater. &nbsp;In f=
act, in Cold Fusion, not only is the disparity between Nt and Nn significant=
ly greater, the reason for the disparity is well-understood[7]. &nbsp;It occ=
urs because for this case, the dominant reaction, D+D-&gt;4He, involves non-=
local EM coupling[8]. &nbsp;For this reason the amounts of neutrons or trito=
ns that are produced usually are statistically insignificant, although both =
experimental evidence and theoretical explanations exist for understanding h=
ow cold (i.e. low energy) tritons can be produced. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
In fact, in more general terms, when non-local EM effects become important,=
 the normal assumptions about NF (such as the requirement that interacting D=
&#8217;s have high enough kinetic energy to circumvent the Coulomb barrier) =
need not apply. &nbsp;In particular, for example, for D+D fusion to result i=
n the production of 4He, each of the interacting D&#8217;s must be indisting=
uishable from the other on length scales associated with conventional EM int=
eraction[8]. &nbsp;Because at high incident energy and momentum, this condit=
ion is rarely met, 4He is rarely produced in NF. &nbsp;However, at lower val=
ues of the incident momentum, not only do the underlying features associated=
 with our understanding of conventional D+D-&gt;4He at higher momentum requi=
re that this symmetry be present, the fact that the dominant excess heat rea=
ction in electrolytic CF occurs in this manner implies that this requirement=
 is being satisfied when the incident D&#8217;s have lower momentum..<BR>
<BR>
An important point of confusion is that although D+D-&gt;4He occurs relativ=
ely infrequently, the reason for this is that this particular reaction invol=
ves significant coupling between the nuclear and EM forces. &nbsp;Because in=
 single-bubble cavitation, an acoustical field can be used to produce precis=
ely tuned, time-varying EM radiation[6], it is plausible that the coupling b=
etween the boundaries of the bubble and its potentially interacting D&#8217;=
s may also result in significant EM coupling, in a dynamically-driven fashio=
n . &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
Especially at close separation, when 2 D-nuclei begin to overlap, it is pos=
sible to view the 2D state as an excited state of a 4He nucleus. &nbsp;Then,=
 significant coupling to a dynamically changing EM field (as pointed out by =
Schwinger[6]) can occur. &nbsp;This suggests that since in the experiment[4]=
, fast (~14.1 MeV) &nbsp;neutrons (n's) are introduced to foster bubble grow=
th, it &nbsp;is entirely possible that on occasion particular n&#8217;s coll=
ide with a 2D initial state configuration that resembles a 4He nucleus. &nbs=
p;If this happens, provided this excited state nucleus effectively recoils i=
n an appropriate manner, it may be possible to create a reverse D-t fusion r=
eaction, in which -4He+n-&gt; D+t. &nbsp;In this way, one can see how effect=
s that are well-known can be used to explain the potentially anomalously hig=
h ratio of tritons to neutrons. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
An important point is that regardless of whether or not the details associa=
ted with this argument are correct, the possibility that the reaction could =
occur is associated with potentially significant coupling with the EM field.=
 &nbsp;Over the years, in CF it has also been found that the EM field not on=
ly can couple to potentially interacting D&#8217;s but that it can do so in =
a coherent fashion, without high energy particles being released. &nbsp;Thus=
, the fact that Nt does not equal Nn in Bubble Fusion may be related to the =
fact that the dominant reaction in Cold Fusion involves the production of 4H=
e.<BR>
<BR>
With hindsight, it&#8217;s obvious that confusion about potential effects a=
ssociated with coherent coupling to the EM field could lead to situations in=
 which high energy particles would be inhibited, in CF. &nbsp;It is also obv=
ious that because of the highly non-linear coupling to the EM field that occ=
urs in many of the electrolytic experiments, under certain circumstances the=
 process of triggering the associated forms of interaction can be closely as=
sociated with changes in the local environment in the electrodes. &nbsp;This=
 led to considerable confusion in 1989. &nbsp;Additional confusion resulted =
because at that time most Nuclear Physicists adopted the conventional view o=
f the potential role of EM, and the impossibility of coherence and related f=
actors altering the relevant forms of reaction. &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
Further compounding this confusion was the fact that Cold Fusion claims wer=
e made simultaneously by Chemists (Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons), fol=
lowed by counter-claims by Nuclear Physicists (Steven Jones and coworkers), =
involving very different phenomena. &nbsp;A second, key source of confusion =
was the assumption that the claims were related when they were not. &nbsp;Th=
us, at an early stage, as a consequence, the dynamic of the debate (or lack =
of debate) rapidly became unscientific. <BR>
<BR>
A tragic aspect of the episode is that new vehicles for communication (the =
internet and FAX machines), as well as the Press also became involved. &nbsp=
;As a consequence, &nbsp;unprecedented confusion about the various claims es=
calated. &nbsp;It is unfortunate that even at this late date, Charles Seife =
is neither aware of the underlying dynamic, the relevant experimental situat=
ion and (from all appearances) the fact that the debate remains unresolved. =
&nbsp;Potentially more tragic is that he provides quotations from individual=
s who either are ignorant of what has transpired during the last 13 years or=
 have deliberately decided to not disclose new information about the associa=
ted field.<BR>
<BR>
In contrast to the situation described by Seife[3], where Cold Fusion not o=
nly is not taken seriously, but where through apparent fear about potential =
embarrassment, the subject continues to be ridiculed, as guest editor of a r=
ecent volume of an Ethics in Science Journal[9], I asked a number of journal=
ists, editors, and scientists to re-examine what happened in the Cold Fusion=
 controversy. Contrary to the assertions made by Seife[3] about this subject=
, in fact, the consensus was that no consensus exists because meaningful dia=
logue about Cold Fusion ended very early. &nbsp;This occurred partly because=
 of confusion that resulted from the very strong opinions that were expresse=
d at an early stage in the controversy. &nbsp;But it also occurred because a=
rguments and claims were not adequately reviewed and discussed prior to thei=
r being announced in the Press.<BR>
<BR>
However, remarkable as it may seem, it is also true that a number of the mo=
re important CF claims, made by the Chemists, may very well be true, despite=
 the fact that most Nuclear Physicists dispute them. An important point invo=
lves perspective: Nuclear Physicists and Chemists are different. &nbsp;Chemi=
sts pay attention to fine details involving the environment of a &nbsp;parti=
cular reaction that may include important long-range EM effects that are oft=
en missed (or dismissed) by Nuclear Physicists.<BR>
<BR>
It also is not true that the &quot;Cold Fusion&quot; field has been dismiss=
ed, although this seemed to be the case, following a raucous, unwieldy meeti=
ng of the American Physical Society (APS), that was held in Baltimore, on 1 =
May 1989. In fact, on 22 March, 2002, not only will a session be held concer=
ning Cold Fusion at a meeting of the APS, others have been held since 1999. =
At this session, well-defined experiments, based on well-defined protocols w=
ill be discussed. If Charles Seife covers the associated debate at that time=
 in an as even-handed manner as he did in his 8 March article, it will great=
ly help to eliminate on-going confusion about an important, contentious area=
 of scientific debate.<BR>
<BR>
[1]Donald Kennedy, &#8220;To Publish or Not to Publish&#8221;, Science, <B>=
295</B>, 1793 (2002)<BR>
<BR>
[2]Charles Seife, &#8220;&#8217;Bubble Fusion&#8217; Paper Generates a Temp=
est in a Beaker,&#8221; Science, <B>295</B> , 1808-1809<B> </B>(2002)<BR>
<BR>
[3] F.D. Becchetti, Commentary: &quot;Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Imp=
loding Bubbles,&quot; Science, <B>295</B>, &nbsp;1850 (2002).<BR>
<BR>
[4]R.P.Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey, Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin, =
and R.C.<BR>
Block, &quot;Evidence for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, &qu=
ot; Science, <B>295</B>, 1868-1873 (2002).<BR>
<BR>
[5]Robert L. Park, &#8220;BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD,&#=
8221; WHATSNEW in the APS, 2 March 2002, American Physical Society, http://w=
ww.aps.org/WN.<BR>
<BR>
[6] Julian Schwinger, &#8220;Cold Fusion Theory A Brief History of Mine,&#8=
221; Trans Fus Tech., 26, #2, xiii-xxi (1994).<BR>
<BR>
[7]Edmund Storms, &quot;A Review of the Cold fusion Effect,&quot; J. Sci. E=
xploration, 10, 2, 185 (1996). (also, http://www.scientificexploration.org/j=
se/articles/storms/1.html)<BR>
<BR>
[8] D. R. Thompson<U>, </U>Nuclear-Physics-A<U>.</U> vol.<B>A1 54</B>, no.2=
, 442-8(1970). &nbsp;S. R. Chubb, Finding the</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Arial"> </FO=
NT><FONT FACE=3D"Times New Roman">Missing</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Arial"> </FONT><FO=
NT FACE=3D"Symbol">g</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Times New Roman"> in D+D-&gt;4He Cold F=
usion Excess Heat., Bulletin of the Amer. Phys. Soc., 47, #1 (2002).(http://=
www.aps.org/meet/MAR02/baps/tocW.html#SW21.011)<BR>
<BR>
[9] Scott Chubb, Martin Fleischmann, Stephen E. Jones, David Goodstein, Fra=
ncesco. Scaramuzzi, George H. &nbsp;Miley, John O'M Bockris, and David J. Na=
gel, Accountability in Research, <B>8</B>, 1 - 162 &nbsp;(2000).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>


--B_3098443926_1274930--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 13:40:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30693;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:37:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 13:37:12 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020308163530.033985e0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 16:37:19 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: The Anti-Sonofusion Attack - Why? REFORMATTED
In-Reply-To: <B8AD6260.19B6%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA30664
Resent-Message-ID: <"T5EH91.0.TV7.7yIYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46507
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

[Here is a de-Mac-ed, de-Gates-ed version of Gene's statement. - JR]

Cold Fusion Technology, Inc. • Infinite Energy Magazine
P.O. Box 2816 • Concord, NH 03302-2816
Tel. 603-228-4516
Fax 603-224-5975
http://www.infinite-energy.com
editor infinite-energy.com
					
				
Infinite Energy Magazine's Statement on the Science Sonofusion Article

by Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
www.infinite-energy.com   March 4, 2002

As an AAAS member, I am delighted that Science magazine will be publishing 
an article and a commentary about table-top sonofusion in its March 8, 2002 
issue -- it is said to be highlighted as a high-profile cover story.  We 
congratulate Science and the authors.  I learned earlier today that because 
the New York Times has decided to publish an article about the Science 
paper in its March 5th edition, Science has lifted the March 7th embargo to 
other journalists. I have now read the technical paper and its associated 
commentary and will remarking briefly about it in general terms below.

Sonofusion (and sonoluminescence) is an area in which Infinite Energy has 
published since its inception in 1995. In fact, our first issue, 
March/April 1995, had Roger Stringham (now of First Gate Energies, Inc.) on 
the cover cradling his sonofusion reactor. The cover story, "A 
'Micro-Fusion' Reactor: Nuclear Reactions 'In the cold' by Ultrasonic 
Cavitation," was  by Tom Benson, Vol.1, No.1, pp.33-37.  There have been 
many other pieces, notably:

* "Cavitation in D2O with Metal Targets Produces Predictable Excess Heat," 
by Roger Stringham, John Chandler, Russ George, Tom Passell, and Dick 
Raymond, Infinite Energy, Vol. 4, No.19, April-May 1998,pp.41-44

* "A Progress Report: Energy Transfer in Cold Fusion and Sonoluminescence," 
by Nobel Laureate Julian Schwinger (Reprint of his Nov. 11, 1991 lecture at 
MIT), Infinite Energy, Vol. 4, No. 24, March-April 1999, pp.81-83.

In more recent issues of Infinite Energy since November 2000 (Nos. 35-41), 
New Energy Research Laboratory's Manager, Kenneth Rauen and I have 
chronicled our experience in experimenting with Roger Stringham's 
sonofusion reactor, and our smaller modified reactor derived from it. The 
primary purpose of this work has been to identify the primary and most 
desirable signature of cold fusion/low energy nuclear reactions: excess 
heat.  This work, furthermore, has been aimed at producing a commercially 
viable demonstration device for excess heat, a still elusive goal for 
reasons mentioned in our Device and Process Testing Update articles.  Since 
we are aware that Roger Stringham and others have found nuclear products, 
as well as excess heat in cavitation devices, we have been driven to 
examine the evidence for excess heat in his and our design reactor. At this 
point, our evidence is not strong enough to promote a commercial 
demonstration device, but the quest to understand the mechanical and 
electrical interactions that could manifest reliable excess heat, as well 
as nuclear products, continues. Another laboratory is now working with us 
to examine the possible helium production in this sonofusion reactor. Roger 
Stringham et al have already found helium and other nuclear evidence in 
their sonofusion devices, in addition to observing melting under heavy 
water of normally high melting point metals.

Comments on the Science Articles:

The articles are:

"Evidence for Nuclear Emissions During Acoustic Cavitation, " R.P. 
Taleyarkhan, C.D. West, J.S. Cho, R.T. Lahey, Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin, and 
R.C. Block, Science, Vol. 295, March 2002, pp.1868-1873.
          and
Commentary: "Evidence for Nuclear Reactions in Imploding Bubbles," F.D. 
Becchetti, Science, Vol. 295, March 2002, p.1850.


The matter to celebrate the most in these Science articles is the apparent 
discovery of yet another particular system for producing fusion reactions 
-- other than with the large and expensive, and so far unproductive, 
magnetic confinement tokamak  and large laser inertial confinement fusion 
devices of the DOE. And we certainly celebrate that the experiments are, 
indeed, "table-top" -- just like most cold fusion experiments. Of course, 
the work reported in Science needs to be reproduced in its particular form, 
just as cold fusion experiments had to be and were reproduced, 
repeatedly.  But on first examination today, the work reported in Science 
appears to have been done very thoroughly.  It is also immediately apparent 
that sonofusion work carried out in the cold fusion/low energy nuclear 
reaction (LENR) field, although not referenced by these authors, can 
provide significant support in both experimental and theoretical aspects. 
(I imagine that the authors were not aware of much of this work.)

Perhaps the appearance of the Science articles will cause scientists, 
technologists, and officials to reconsider their previous impression of 
other fusion technologies, including the much maligned cold fusion science 
and its emerging technology.  Cold fusion/LENR has been under research and 
development for some years, since being prematurely dismissed by a 
egregiously flawed and rush-to-judgment DOE report in 1989.

We note with some dismay that Dr. Robert Park of the American Physical 
Society chose last Friday to pre-empt the Science articles' appearance with 
an attack on the articles, which  he published on his "What's New" web site 
run by the American Physical Society, but which allegedly does not endorse 
his opinions:

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 1 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. BUBBLE FUSION: A COLLECTIVE GROAN CAN BE HEARD.  A report out
of Oak Ridge of d-d fusion events in collapsing bubbles formed by
cavitation in deuterated acetone, is scheduled for publication in
the March 8 issue of Science magazine.  Taleyarkhan et al. observe
2.5 MeV neutron peaks, evidence of d-d fusion, correlated with
sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles.  Pretty exciting stuff
huh?  It might be, if the experiment had not been repeated by two
experienced nuclear physicists, D. Shapira and M.J. Saltmarsh,
using the same apparatus, except for superior neutron detection
equipment.  They found no evidence for 2.5 MeV neutron emission
correlated with sonoluminescence.   Any neutron emission was many
orders of magnitude too small to account for the tritium
production reported by the first group.  Although distinguished
physicists, fearing a repeat of the cold fusion fiasco 13 years
ago, advised against publication, the editor has apparently
chosen not only to publish the work, but to do so with unusual
fanfare, involving even the cover of Science.  Perhaps Science
magazine covets the vast readership of Infinite Energy magazine.
...

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

*******

Park's assessment is quite faulty, not unusual for his uninformed and often 
malicious commentary over the past 13 years, but it is nice that he gave 
publicity to the forthcoming Science articles (and to our magazine!-- which 
he evidently dislikes for its bold examination of cold fusion science). In 
contrast to Science magazine's general abdication of responsibility for 
over a decade in covering cold fusion and properly reviewing technical 
submissions, Infinite Energy has been in the vanguard of publishing and 
discussing this science.

We did, however, enjoy the appearance today of the London Sunday Times 
piece concerning the forthcoming Science articles:

*****
Cold fusion 'breakthrough' heralds clean nuclear power
By Jonathan Leake, Science Editor
The Sunday Times, UK
Sunday, March 3, 2002

Nuclear scientists will this week announce they may have
achieved a controlled form of cold fusion, a technology
that potentially offers humanity a limitless source of
clean energy....the latest research, by scientists at the
American government's Oak Ridge National Laboratory and
the University of Michigan, was done on a laboratory
bench using relatively simple and cheap equipment at room
temperature.

The study echoes the work of Professor Martin Fleischmann
and Stanley Pons who, in 1989, announced they had
achieved cold fusion at Southampton University but were
ridiculed when no one could repeat their work.
...
******

Unfortunately, this latter comment,  "no one could repeat their work," is 
entirely in error, but it is good that the Sunday Times  referred to the 
sonofusion work in terms of "cold fusion," which it may well be, at least 
in part. It may, in fact, be exhibiting both hot fusion and cold fusion 
characteristics.  More needs to be known. More testing needs to be done -- 
calorimetry and helium measurements, in particular, which were not made by 
these authors. But as Park himself highlights, the anomalous ratio of 
tritium to neutron production reported in the article -- which he dismisses 
outright as indicating an experiment flaw - has long been a known 
characteristic of cold fusion systems.

The critique by Bechetti was well done and will likely anger the hot 
fusioneers, because it puts this work too much into the same context as 
energy generation via tokamaks and big lasers, something they do not want 
to hear.  As usual, they want all DOE resources concentrated on THEIR 
well-funded projects.  And, I noticed that Becchetti did refer to a paper 
in 1990 of a supposedly failed "table top" experiment (likely one of the 
"failed" cold fusion replication attempts, but I do not have the specific 
paper referred to) in which he said he participated.  He and Science are to 
be roundly criticized for referring to an early cold fusion era experiment, 
while not properly mentioning that numerous other highly positive 
experiments with repeatable results -- especially at tritium generation 
(e.g. by Dr. Tom Claytor at Los Alamos National Laboratory), but also 
neutron generation -- have been done in cold fusion.   It must be recalled 
that in June 1990, Science magazine produced a virtually slanderous attack 
by Gary Taubes against the work of cold fusion researchers at Texas A&M 
University, suggesting that fraud was the likely explanation of the tritium 
findings in cold fusion experiments.  That this past poor journalism and 
continuing tritium findings in cold fusion continue to be ignored at 
Science -- except when an alleged HOT fusion explanation is given -- is 
intellectually dishonest.

There is an effort throughout the March 8 technical paper (but of course!) 
to put the observed reactions into the context exclusively of HOT 
fusion.  However, I do note that the experimenters were still unable to get 
the gap between neutron counts and tritium measured to fall below a single 
order of magnitude difference! I had hoped that the measured/inferred gap 
would be greater, but it is there nonetheless. Tritium is higher than 
neutron production. The authors do much hand-waving to say that this might 
be "explained" by various measurement errors and inefficiencies.  Indeed, 
cold fusion experiments show many times a factor of 10 -- up to a 
100-million ratio of tritium to neutrons when tritium is found. And, cold 
fusion experiments have proved that the birth of the tritium can be COLD, 
not HOT.  If it had been hot (energetic), as in tritium formed by the D + D 
hot fusion reaction, 14 MeV hot fusion neutrons (from T + D collision 
reaction) would have been seen and they are not seen, e.g. what Claytor et 
al at LANL have found.

Because of the uncertainties in this Science paper data, it is not exactly 
possible to determine whether this is fully mini-hot fusion, or some 
mixture of cold fusion and hot fusion. That will come later. The most 
important matter is that this article will get more people thinking again 
about alternative ways to do fusion. This inevitably will bring up the huge 
body of cold fusion literature that has been ignored by these authors and 
Science. It is too bad that it has to happen this way. It would have been 
better if proper coverage by Science had been occurring all along. Many 
cold fusion people long ago gave up even submitting to Science.  They 
publish in the Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, Physics Letters A, and 
Fusion Technology, among other journals, including Infinite Energy 
magazine.   I predict that the hot fusion people will do their best to 
trash this new table-top work, especially because it is in the context of 
on-going work that they well know is occurring world-wide on 
cavitation-induced fusion. They helped kill off more widespread interest in 
electrolytic fusion, but it will be much harder for them to kill off these 
kinds of sonofusion experiments, especially now that they are documented in 
a very visible publication.

As more is learned from the Science papers, I may post further 
commentary.  Note that the Ninth International Conference on Cold Fusion 
(ICCF-9) will be held May 19-24, 2002 in Beijing.  Sonofusion and the 
articles in Science are certain to be a topic of discussion 
there.    (http://iccf9.global.tsinghua.edu.cn)

Sincerely,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
    editor infinite-energy.com
    www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 14:03:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11935;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:02:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:02:54 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <185.4bc1462.29ba8ec7 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:01:43 EST
Subject: Fwd: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_185.4bc1462.29ba8ec7_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"0HuZD2.0.kv2.8KJYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46509
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_185.4bc1462.29ba8ec7_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

--part1_185.4bc1462.29ba8ec7_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Erikbaard aol.com>
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Full-name: Erikbaard
Message-ID: <16c.9f6033e.29ba8e41 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:59:29 EST
Subject: Re: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
To: whatsnew aps.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_185.4bc1462.29ba8e41_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121


--part2_185.4bc1462.29ba8e41_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/8/02 4:26:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, whatsnew aps.org 
writes:


> A press embargo is a
> device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
> 

In all matters, science and otherwise, I have usually found embargoes to be a 
way for journalists to research and prepare stories to make sense of them 
once they break.  If anything, the opposite is implied -- rather than just 
repeating what a scientist or other mover claims, writers have a chance to 
build context and interview dissenters.

Partly this also maximizes the impact of the breaking story as opposed to 
trickling out, so that benefits the people imposing the embargo.  But it also 
helps print media keep up with real-time news services who provide less 
depth.

Damn!  That was the last 2 cents I had!

Sincerely,

Erik

--part2_185.4bc1462.29ba8e41_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 3/8/02 4:26:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, whatsnew aps.org writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">A press embargo is a<BR>
device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
In all matters, science and otherwise, I have usually found embargoes to be a way for journalists to research and prepare stories to make sense of them once they break.&nbsp; If anything, the opposite is implied -- rather than just repeating what a scient
ist or other mover claims, writers have a chance to build context and interview dissenters.<BR>
<BR>
Partly this also maximizes the impact of the breaking story as opposed to trickling out, so that benefits the people imposing the embargo.&nbsp; But it also helps print media keep up with real-time news services who provide less depth.<BR>
<BR>
Damn!&nbsp; That was the last 2 cents I had!<BR>
<BR>
Sincerely,<BR>
<BR>
Erik</FONT></HTML>

--part2_185.4bc1462.29ba8e41_boundary--

--part1_185.4bc1462.29ba8ec7_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 14:03:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11975;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:02:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:02:56 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <24.22050444.29ba8edd aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:02:05 EST
Subject: my reply to park for What's New
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_24.22050444.29ba8edd_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"SiOoA2.0.1x2.DKJYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46510
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_24.22050444.29ba8edd_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

--part1_24.22050444.29ba8edd_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-path: <Erikbaard aol.com>
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Full-name: Erikbaard
Message-ID: <16c.9f6033e.29ba8e41 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:59:29 EST
Subject: Re: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
To: whatsnew aps.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part2_24.22050444.29ba8e41_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121


--part2_24.22050444.29ba8e41_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/8/02 4:26:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, whatsnew aps.org 
writes:


> A press embargo is a
> device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
> 

In all matters, science and otherwise, I have usually found embargoes to be a 
way for journalists to research and prepare stories to make sense of them 
once they break.  If anything, the opposite is implied -- rather than just 
repeating what a scientist or other mover claims, writers have a chance to 
build context and interview dissenters.

Partly this also maximizes the impact of the breaking story as opposed to 
trickling out, so that benefits the people imposing the embargo.  But it also 
helps print media keep up with real-time news services who provide less 
depth.

Damn!  That was the last 2 cents I had!

Sincerely,

Erik

--part2_24.22050444.29ba8e41_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 3/8/02 4:26:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, whatsnew aps.org writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">A press embargo is a<BR>
device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
In all matters, science and otherwise, I have usually found embargoes to be a way for journalists to research and prepare stories to make sense of them once they break.&nbsp; If anything, the opposite is implied -- rather than just repeating what a scient
ist or other mover claims, writers have a chance to build context and interview dissenters.<BR>
<BR>
Partly this also maximizes the impact of the breaking story as opposed to trickling out, so that benefits the people imposing the embargo.&nbsp; But it also helps print media keep up with real-time news services who provide less depth.<BR>
<BR>
Damn!&nbsp; That was the last 2 cents I had!<BR>
<BR>
Sincerely,<BR>
<BR>
Erik</FONT></HTML>

--part2_24.22050444.29ba8e41_boundary--

--part1_24.22050444.29ba8edd_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 14:04:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11151;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:01:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:01:30 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <c.244bea58.29ba8e97 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:00:55 EST
Subject: Fwd: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="part1_c.244bea58.29ba8e97_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 121
Resent-Message-ID: <"cW39Z2.0.8k2.wIJYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46508
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_c.244bea58.29ba8e97_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

 

--part1_c.244bea58.29ba8e97_boundary
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Disposition: inline

Return-Path: <whatsnew tron.aps.org>
Received: from  rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (v83.45) with ESMTP id MAILINZA48-0308162611; Fri, 08 Mar 2002 16:26:11 -0500
Received: from  tron.aps.org (tron.aps.org [149.28.112.105]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v83.35) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINZA15-0308162602; Fri, 08 Mar 2002 16:26:02 -0500
Received: (from whatsnew localhost)
	by tron.aps.org (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) id QAA07627;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:25:56 -0500 (EST)
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 16:25:56 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <200203082125.QAA07627 tron.aps.org>
To: erikbaard aol.com
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
Subject: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 8 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. BUBBLES: TO FLACK OR NOT TO FLACK. An editorial by Don Kennedy
in the March 8 issue of Science, "To Publish or Not to Publish,"
describes his courageous stand in publishing a controversial paper
even though "it had become clear that a number people didn't want
us to publish this paper."  Last week WN revealed that Science
would carry an article by Taleyarkhan et al. from Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (WN 1 Mar 02), claiming evidence of d-d fusion
correlated with sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles in
deuterated acetone.  However, Shapira and Saltmarsh, also from Oak
Ridge, using purportedly superior detection and analysis
equipment, found no evidence for fusion.  Kennedy, it turns out,
was merely urged to delay publishing the Taleyarkhan result until
it could be accompanied by the Saltmarsh finding.  Instead,
Science accompanied the Taleyarkhan paper with a glowing
"Perspectives" article, a "News" report and an editorial.  Worse,
Science issued an embargoed press release.  A press embargo is a
device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
We at WN are not press, however, nor did our information come from
Science.  After WN broke the story, Science dropped its embargo.
Both sides, Kennedy's editorial concludes, "would do well to wait
for the scientific process to do its work."  But in the end, it
was Science that refused to wait until it had a balanced report.

2. HEALTH PROBLEMS: WHITE HOUSE COMMISSION ENDS, PROBLEMS BEGIN.
In the waning months of his administration, while pardoning felons
and bestowing various favors on supporters, Bill Clinton rewarded
loyal Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), an ardent believer in superstitious
medicine, with an executive order creating a 20-member White House
Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy.  It
was to last two years and submit a report to the President on how
to spread the benefits of magic medicine.  James Gordon, a leading
"mind-body" proponent, was picked to head the commission, and he
proceeded to select a "balanced" collection of true believers in
acupuncture, Reiki, homeopathy, herbs, native American cures,
quack diets and "energy" medicine of every sort. There are no
legitimate scientific researchers on the Commission.  Gordon
himself has an interesting background, having been an ardent
follower of the late Bhagwan Shri Rajneesh, he of the 35 Rolls
Royces.  The Bhagwan was deported after it was learned that his
followers had deliberately poisoned some 700 residents of
Antelope, Oregon with salmonella to keep them from the polls in a
local election.  The Commission officially terminated yesterday,
and delivered its report to the White House. The report, which
will not be made public for at least a month, is expected to call
for legislation that would require insurance providers to cover
the witch doctor of your choice.  Since the Commission was created
under the Clinton administration, it is hoped that the Bush White
House will name a panel of medical experts to review the report.

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

--part1_c.244bea58.29ba8e97_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 15:01:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10866;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:58:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 14:58:25 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020308173453.033985e0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 17:58:20 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
In-Reply-To: <c.244bea58.29ba8e97 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"AVuAn3.0.Zf2.G8KYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46511
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robert Park wrote:

>deuterated acetone.  However, Shapira and Saltmarsh, also from Oak
>Ridge, using purportedly superior detection and analysis
>equipment, found no evidence for fusion.

Taleyarkhan says their equipment was inferior. I know little about neutron 
detection, but I did help Akimoto translate a chapter of a book on low 
level neutron detection, and it is clear that Taleyarkhan is using more of 
the techniques recommended by Akimoto and others.


>Kennedy, it turns out, was merely urged to delay publishing the 
>Taleyarkhan result until it could be accompanied by the Saltmarsh finding.

This looks like a delaying tactic. The Saltmarsh report was already written 
but it has not gone through peer-review. Taleyarkhan's paper took a year to 
peer-review. Since the Taleyarkhan response to Saltmarsh was already 
written, why not go a step further and include that too? For that matter, 
why not wait for Saltmarsh to respond to Taleyarkhan? You could stall 
publication for years!

It is not customary to hold back a peer-reviewed paper for a pending 
response or rebuttal. In publishing, you print the papers which are 
finished and ready, and in due time when the rebuttals are ready, you 
publish them, usually alongside a response from the original researcher. 
(Second-round papers are sometimes published together, not the first round.)

For all we know, Saltmarsh may not survive peer-review, and may never be 
suitable for publication. He will have to make an effort to respond to 
Taleyarkhan's critique, I assume. The problems Taleyarkhan pointed out are 
fairly elementary, since even I knew about them.


>Worse,
>Science issued an embargoed press release.  A press embargo is a
>device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.

This is nonsense. First, as Erik Baard pointed out, this is not the usual 
purpose of an embargo. But suppose that is your purpose, and you succeed in 
delaying dissenting views on that day. So what? The sun rises, another day 
comes, and dissenting views bloom. Most people remember events for more 
than one day, and they are capable of reevaluating on Tuesday what they 
learned on Monday.

This is a telling comment. Robert Park and his ilk are always anxious to 
jump to a conclusion the first day, or the first minute. Apparently, Park 
thinks that everyone makes up their mind after glancing at a press release, 
since he thinks the timing of announcements is a powerful tool to suppress 
dissent. Scientists are supposed to wait for replications which may take 
months or years. It is supposed to be a slow business. What happens the 
first day should not affect anyone's judgment.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 15:54:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA08959;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:52:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 15:52:05 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8941D9.1709462 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 16:58:25 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Fwd: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020308173453.033985e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"9LtZf2.0.cB2.ZwKYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46512
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Robert Park wrote:
>
> >deuterated acetone.  However, Shapira and Saltmarsh, also from Oak
> >Ridge, using purportedly superior detection and analysis
> >equipment, found no evidence for fusion.
>
> Taleyarkhan says their equipment was inferior. I know little about neutron
> detection, but I did help Akimoto translate a chapter of a book on low
> level neutron detection, and it is clear that Taleyarkhan is using more of
> the techniques recommended by Akimoto and others.
>
> >Kennedy, it turns out, was merely urged to delay publishing the
> >Taleyarkhan result until it could be accompanied by the Saltmarsh finding.
>
> This looks like a delaying tactic. The Saltmarsh report was already written
> but it has not gone through peer-review. Taleyarkhan's paper took a year to
> peer-review. Since the Taleyarkhan response to Saltmarsh was already
> written, why not go a step further and include that too? For that matter,
> why not wait for Saltmarsh to respond to Taleyarkhan? You could stall
> publication for years!
>
> It is not customary to hold back a peer-reviewed paper for a pending
> response or rebuttal. In publishing, you print the papers which are
> finished and ready, and in due time when the rebuttals are ready, you
> publish them, usually alongside a response from the original researcher.
> (Second-round papers are sometimes published together, not the first round.)
>
> For all we know, Saltmarsh may not survive peer-review, and may never be
> suitable for publication. He will have to make an effort to respond to
> Taleyarkhan's critique, I assume. The problems Taleyarkhan pointed out are
> fairly elementary, since even I knew about them.
>
> >Worse,
> >Science issued an embargoed press release.  A press embargo is a
> >device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
>
> This is nonsense. First, as Erik Baard pointed out, this is not the usual
> purpose of an embargo. But suppose that is your purpose, and you succeed in
> delaying dissenting views on that day. So what? The sun rises, another day
> comes, and dissenting views bloom. Most people remember events for more
> than one day, and they are capable of reevaluating on Tuesday what they
> learned on Monday.
>
> This is a telling comment. Robert Park and his ilk are always anxious to
> jump to a conclusion the first day, or the first minute. Apparently, Park
> thinks that everyone makes up their mind after glancing at a press release,
> since he thinks the timing of announcements is a powerful tool to suppress
> dissent. Scientists are supposed to wait for replications which may take
> months or years. It is supposed to be a slow business. What happens the
> first day should not affect anyone's judgment.

In addition to the above comments, with which I agree, Park also made one
additional blunder. He said,

"Both sides, Kennedy's editorial concludes, "would do well to wait
for the scientific process to do its work."  But in the end, it was Science
that refused to wait until it had a balanced report."

In short, he is saying that Science was mostly at fault for not waiting until
the skeptics had time to take a shot.  Apparently, Park feels self-righteous
enough to take on Science for just doing its job.  The man has no shame.

Ed



>
>
> - Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 17:22:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA00636;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:20:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:20:03 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 20:20:31 -0800
Subject: Re: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8AECD8F.1A35%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020308173453.033985e0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"u7D531.0.s9.2DMYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46513
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 3/8/02 2:58 PM, "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com> wrote:

> This is nonsense. First, as Erik Baard pointed out, this is not the usual
> purpose of an embargo. But suppose that is your purpose, and you succeed in
> delaying dissenting views on that day. So what? The sun rises, another day
> comes, and dissenting views bloom. Most people remember events for more
> than one day, and they are capable of reevaluating on Tuesday what they
> learned on Monday.

Park's statement is even more nonsense and B.S. than Jed thinks.  Any
journalist who wants to sign up for the list of Nature's or Science's
favored "hot story" list can do so. The list usually arrived in a paper
envelope in the "old days" when I was at the MIT News Office -- 1987-91. All
the stories on that "heads up" list were strictly embargoed. They did not
single out some of these on the list for the embargo.  There was a uniform
embargo date and time for all the stories. I image there is some web site
with password that may be used for this purpose today by these magazines.

- Gene Mallove
Www.infinite-energy.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar  8 21:14:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA09568;
	Fri, 8 Mar 2002 21:12:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 21:12:06 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8998BC.82DAD8EF ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2002 21:08:12 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 08, 2002]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"c7jDC3.0.ML2.bcPYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46514
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: What's New for Mar 08, 2002
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 17:13:34 -0500 (EST)
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
To: aki ix.netcom.com

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 8 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. BUBBLES: TO FLACK OR NOT TO FLACK. An editorial by Don Kennedy
in the March 8 issue of Science, "To Publish or Not to Publish,"
describes his courageous stand in publishing a controversial paper
even though "it had become clear that a number people didn't want
us to publish this paper."  Last week WN revealed that Science
would carry an article by Taleyarkhan et al. from Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (WN 1 Mar 02), claiming evidence of d-d fusion
correlated with sonoluminescence from collapsing bubbles in
deuterated acetone.  However, Shapira and Saltmarsh, also from Oak
Ridge, using purportedly superior detection and analysis
equipment, found no evidence for fusion.  Kennedy, it turns out,
was merely urged to delay publishing the Taleyarkhan result until
it could be accompanied by the Saltmarsh finding.  Instead,
Science accompanied the Taleyarkhan paper with a glowing
"Perspectives" article, a "News" report and an editorial.  Worse,
Science issued an embargoed press release.  A press embargo is a
device meant to suppress dissenting views the day a story breaks.
We at WN are not press, however, nor did our information come from
Science.  After WN broke the story, Science dropped its embargo.
Both sides, Kennedy's editorial concludes, "would do well to wait
for the scientific process to do its work."  But in the end, it
was Science that refused to wait until it had a balanced report.

2. HEALTH PROBLEMS: WHITE HOUSE COMMISSION ENDS, PROBLEMS BEGIN.
In the waning months of his administration, while pardoning felons
and bestowing various favors on supporters, Bill Clinton rewarded
loyal Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), an ardent believer in superstitious
medicine, with an executive order creating a 20-member White House
Commission on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy.  It
was to last two years and submit a report to the President on how
to spread the benefits of magic medicine.  James Gordon, a leading
"mind-body" proponent, was picked to head the commission, and he
proceeded to select a "balanced" collection of true believers in
acupuncture, Reiki, homeopathy, herbs, native American cures,
quack diets and "energy" medicine of every sort. There are no
legitimate scientific researchers on the Commission.  Gordon
himself has an interesting background, having been an ardent
follower of the late Bhagwan Shri Rajneesh, he of the 35 Rolls
Royces.  The Bhagwan was deported after it was learned that his
followers had deliberately poisoned some 700 residents of
Antelope, Oregon with salmonella to keep them from the polls in a
local election.  The Commission officially terminated yesterday,
and delivered its report to the White House. The report, which
will not be made public for at least a month, is expected to call
for legislation that would require insurance providers to cover
the witch doctor of your choice.  Since the Commission was created
under the Clinton administration, it is hoped that the Bush White
House will name a panel of medical experts to review the report.

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar  9 23:04:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA15066;
	Sat, 9 Mar 2002 23:01:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 9 Mar 2002 23:01:28 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05100306b8b0b07e1de7 [63.233.196.161]>
In-Reply-To: <3C8A77A8.FF74F01D ipa.net>
References: <112.dcf8673.29bbcc4f aol.com> <3C8A77A8.FF74F01D@ipa.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 00:57:48 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: LENR story
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"uScBx2.0.Jh3.7JmYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46515
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

Fellow Vortexians;

Someone posted this on the SVPVRIL list. This is the first time that 
I've heard about a LENR releasing enough energy to explode, Too bad 
we can't ask the scientist, eh?

I'm posting this for too reasons. One is the reported explosion, the 
other is Keely's work in cavitation.

Some else just came to mind. Various researchers were going on about 
the temperature at the center of that reaction. I assume that if you 
measure the frequency of the energy emitted, then you can extraplate 
the temperature, of the reaction that produced it, is that correct?

>
>
>>   ooooh, this is odd synchronisity for me. I know nothing of science and cold
>>  fusion but a couple of weeks ago during meditation an old school 
>>friend's face
>>  came into my mind very clearly. His name was Andrew Riley; his brother was
>>  married to my old best friend.  Anyway, having graduated from 
>>Oxford he later
>>  moved to USA as a physicist working on Cold fusion research. 
>>Unfortunately, he
>>  moved a test tube or something in the lab he was working in and blew the lab
>>  and himself up. A really horrible accident several years ago now.
>>  But Andys face was so clear and the memory of him that I wondered if his
>>  consciousness was trying to get in touch or something so I surfed the net to
>>  no avail.  And now I read this posting!....(maybe some of you scientists
>>  remember the accident)?
>
>There were several accidents of this type and extent a few years ago. Which is
>why I've cautioned everyone choosing to work with Cold Fusion (& dissociation
>via cavitation) to be careful in the utmost. Keely, the real expert, 
>repeatedly
>blew up his lab. Cavitation releases (liberates) enormous pressures held in
>latent equilibrium.
>
>--
>Life, Love and Laughter,
>Dale Pond
>Sympathetic Vibratory Physics
>Sacred Science - Sacred Life
>http://www.svpvril.com
>SVP Discussion Forum:
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svpvril/
>http://www.ezinfocenter.com/1186527/FREE
>
>
>
>
>Get your FREE SVP catalog of 400 books, pamphlets & videos.
>
>Email your snail mail address to info svpvril.com.
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 10 08:53:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA30998;
	Sun, 10 Mar 2002 08:49:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 08:49:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8B81E7.EBACA091 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 09:55:24 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: LENR story
References: <112.dcf8673.29bbcc4f aol.com> <3C8A77A8.FF74F01D@ipa.net> <a05100306b8b0b07e1de7@[63.233.196.161]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"L7Fjq1.0.7a7.owuYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46516
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The explosion that killed Andrew Riley was a chemical reaction between high
pressure D2 + O2.  It was not a cold fusion reaction.  You can read all about it in
"Forensic Analysis of Explosion Debris from the January 2, 1992 Pd/D2O
Electrochemistry Incident at SRI International" LLNL Special report 15 August
1992.  The very nature of the CANR reaction prevents an explosion from this
mechanism.

Ed

thomas malloy wrote:

> Fellow Vortexians;
>
> Someone posted this on the SVPVRIL list. This is the first time that
> I've heard about a LENR releasing enough energy to explode, Too bad
> we can't ask the scientist, eh?
>
> I'm posting this for too reasons. One is the reported explosion, the
> other is Keely's work in cavitation.
>
> Some else just came to mind. Various researchers were going on about
> the temperature at the center of that reaction. I assume that if you
> measure the frequency of the energy emitted, then you can extraplate
> the temperature, of the reaction that produced it, is that correct?
>
> >
> >
> >>   ooooh, this is odd synchronisity for me. I know nothing of science and cold
> >>  fusion but a couple of weeks ago during meditation an old school
> >>friend's face
> >>  came into my mind very clearly. His name was Andrew Riley; his brother was
> >>  married to my old best friend.  Anyway, having graduated from
> >>Oxford he later
> >>  moved to USA as a physicist working on Cold fusion research.
> >>Unfortunately, he
> >>  moved a test tube or something in the lab he was working in and blew the lab
> >>  and himself up. A really horrible accident several years ago now.
> >>  But Andys face was so clear and the memory of him that I wondered if his
> >>  consciousness was trying to get in touch or something so I surfed the net to
> >>  no avail.  And now I read this posting!....(maybe some of you scientists
> >>  remember the accident)?
> >
> >There were several accidents of this type and extent a few years ago. Which is
> >why I've cautioned everyone choosing to work with Cold Fusion (& dissociation
> >via cavitation) to be careful in the utmost. Keely, the real expert,
> >repeatedly
> >blew up his lab. Cavitation releases (liberates) enormous pressures held in
> >latent equilibrium.
> >
> >--
> >Life, Love and Laughter,
> >Dale Pond
> >Sympathetic Vibratory Physics
> >Sacred Science - Sacred Life
> >http://www.svpvril.com
> >SVP Discussion Forum:
> >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/svpvril/
> >http://www.ezinfocenter.com/1186527/FREE
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Get your FREE SVP catalog of 400 books, pamphlets & videos.
> >
> >Email your snail mail address to info svpvril.com.
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 10 09:32:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19921;
	Sun, 10 Mar 2002 09:29:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 09:29:48 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 12:29:13 -0800
Subject: Business Week sonofusion article - 3/18 issue
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B10218.1A6B%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"wvjBU.0.At4.CWvYy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46517
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

All,

Otis Port of Business Week, who has covered cold fusion in the past, did a
nice two-page story on the sonofusion development, "Is It Really Fusion This
Time?", March 18, 2002 issue, pp.90-91. I received my subscription copy
yesterday (it may not yet be on newsstands till early this week). He
mentions Roger Stringham of First Gate Energies, Inc. and also Ross Tessien
of Impulse Devices -- both known in the cold fusion/new energy community.

Toward the end of the article Port mentions that Stringham will discuss his
latest efforts "on Mar. 22, during a final-day cold fusion session at the
American Physical Society's Annual March Meeting in Indianapolis."

[Note: Our group from NERL will have a video tape of our lab set up and
experiments in cold fusion/sonofusion (work cooperative with Roger
Stringham) at the APS meeting. But I will be unable to attend.--EFM]

Closing paragraph of the BW article:

  "Session moderator Scott R. Chubb, head of Research Systems, Inc. of
Arlington, Va.  [Note: by day he is at NRL --Gene], predicts that
researchers will eventually uncover 'some very exotic reactions' that
explain how table-top fusion works.  For instance, he suggests that physical
dynamics of sonofusion 'become deeply intertwined with electromagnetism,"
causing deuterium to behave somewhat like electrons. 'This is something
you'd never expect to see in conventional fusion reactions,' he adds. As
more physicists get intrigued by sonofusion in coming months, he anticipates
many other surprises."


All in all a very good story, except for the obligatory off-putting phrase
for journalists these days -- "Cold fusion fizzled, leaving scientists
bitterly disappointed."  Cold fusion obviously didn't fizzle. It was the
scientific establishment that fizzled and continues to do so on the matter
of cold fusion.  The Science sonofusion article -- and good coverage such as
this Business Week article-- may change that, but we shall see.  It's good
to have the issue on the table again, so to speak!  And, wonder of wonders,
Robert Park was NOT quoted...

Best,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 10 15:19:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA00417;
	Sun, 10 Mar 2002 15:16:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 15:16:45 -0800
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2002 15:08:37 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: A Trout in the Milk
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <005901c1c888$83354b60$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"oTgHp1.0.66.Sb-Yy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46518
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

A Trout in the Milk, an anti-skepticism rant

"Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the
milk"  - Henry Thoreau

From:
http://www.alternativescience.com/chapter%2011.htm

On his website, Richard Milton has some stories about examples of so-called
'pathological science' from several generations ago. One self-appointed expert
on such things in the 1930s, was Nobelist Irving Langmuir - and as it turns out,
things then were not too different from today - except that today's tunnel-blind
gadfly, Bob Park, gets no prize other than the potential to win, hands down,
that unwanted award for pig-headed ignominy - when and if LENR succeeds in
opening up new vistas for alternative energy...

Among the examples of pathological science, according to Langmuir were a number
of related experiments carried out around 1930 at Columbia University by
Professor Bergen Davis and his colleague Dr Arthur Barnes. The implications of
these experiments with alpha particles and electrons purposefully designed to
explore energy levels around 54.4 eV attracted wide attention in the physics
community of the day, until Langmuir exposed some sloppiness in one version of
the experiments.  Langmuir did use a little trickery to get a short -term laugh,
but the end-result of the whole episode look very different today because of the
findings from any number of sophisticated "merged-beam" experiments that largely
corroborate Davis/Barnes.

BTW, one recent conclusion of merged beam experiments goes something like "While
the ionization cross section for hydrogen and helium have been exhaustively
investigated, uncertainties still remain concerning the mechanisms that are
important at energies *near the threshold* for this fundamental process."
Seventy years and we are still not sure about the simplest of all ionization
mechanisms!! If the importance of those threshold levels in the context of LENR
are not clear to the reader by now, then nothing else that follows will make
sense either.


"What goes around, comes around..."
       - Every Temporarily Disenfranchised Optimist since Ptolemy

Many moderately mis-informed skeptics, even recently, are quoting the Davis/
Barnes incident as evidence of the problems that ensue from letting personal
beliefs overwhelm observational evidence. BUT because Davis and Barnes were
later largely proven correct in the bulk of their assertions, the final results
of Langmuir's intrusion serves mainly to undercut the whole rationale of
scientific skepticism. No one knows how much progress was lost or delayed by the
unnecessary controversy- which was not about results but techniques. Whether or
not Langmuir's trickery really proves the evils of self-deception or the evils
of skepticism is an open question. In truth, the bottom line may yet prove that
Langmuir himself was little more than a half-sighted flounderer who should be
scaled clean of his prize, particularly if indeed his efforts to expose
"pathological science" actually resulted in the postponement for seventy years
of the early evidence of several unusual energy phenomena of great importance.

That leads up to this curious note on the Davis-Barnes experiments at 54.4 eV,
especially with respect to Randell Mills ideas: maybe Mill's is only partially
correct and the main thing he got right was the importance of photons in
multiples of 13.6 eV in many anomalous quasi-nuclear processes of light nuclei.
Perhaps the mysterious hydrino may end up looking more like "disappearance into
a 4D wormhole" than mere shrinkage, and perhaps even at least one mechanism of
stellar energy production may involve mass exchanges with a fourth spatial
dimension (shades of ZPE). I wonder if the percentage of scintillations that
didn't get deflected by the magnet during the D&B calibration could have been
related to reactions involving anomalous energy EUV photons. That is, something
akin to shrunken hydrogen, the reaction Randell Mills says happens when hydrogen
gets in proximity  with "holes" or "energy deficits" which are multiple of 13.6
eV. But maybe the correct concept is 13.6*Z^2 - and that is exactly the issue
that Davis and Barnes would have pursued, but for Langmuir .... And whether it
all relates to Mills is far from certain. It certainly falls far outside of
Mills' CQM theory, but Mills may not have all the answers...

The only certainty is that the older research shouldn't have gotten quashed by
Langmuir's misdirected self-righteousness and more importantly - the world in
2072 will be better off if the nay-sayers of today like Bob Park, Taubes, Close,
and their ilk should volunteer for an unceremonious version of 1st amendment
hari-kari tongue removal.

Occasionally, perhaps, looking back at older reported phenomena with a new
perspective offers insight. OTOH, it should be mentioned that maybe this
particular incident is not really the prized trout... perhaps instead it's just
a red herring...

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 11 09:14:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07769;
	Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:10:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:10:20 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8CE401.D5F44390 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 09:06:09 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: ChemWeb.com Member News Bulletin]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"xBg_l3.0.Gv1.xJEZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46519
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: ChemWeb.com Member News Bulletin
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 08:51:34 -0600
From: "ChemWeb.com" <chemweb ProcessRequest.com>
To: <aki ix.netcom.com>

================================================== 
ChemWeb.com News Bulletin - Volume 5, Issue 10 
Dear Akira Kawasaki, (Member Name:aki22)
================================================== 

In this issue:

1 - the alchemist highlights
2 - Visit us at PITTCON booth 1122!
3 - Sign up for the alchemist conference reporter
4 - New look Conference Centre
5 - Over 400 articles in the CPS
6 - Celebrate St.Patrick's Day
7 - Book of the week

================================================= 
1 - the alchemist highlights
================================================= 

Sign up to receive the alchemist headlines each week. Go to:
http://www.chemweb.com/mailing_list/add_user.asp?firstlist=Alchemist

A Heap of the Smelly Stuff 
Composting is perhaps not the most pleasant of subjects to discuss 
but there is a lot of it going on around the world and given the 
right conditions it could help solve the landfill crises. 
http://www.chemweb.com/alchem/articles/1014822009170.html

Applications of Chemometrics
So chemometrics is reaching into the public domain. It struck me how 
broadly based the applications of chemometrics really are, in many 
fields of chemistry, as well as chemical engineering, archaeology, 
food science, biology and so on.
http://www.chemweb.com/alchem/articles/1014822038074.html

Nuclear Fusion in a Flask? Controversy ensues about reports of 
nuclear fusion in chilled completely deuterated acetone from Oak 
Ridge National Laboratory. 
http://www.chemweb.com/alchem/articles/1014822039279.html

Read more headlines and see the latest features at:
http://alchemist.chemweb.com

=====================================================
2 - Visit us at PITTCON booth 1122!
=====================================================

We are exhibiting at Pittcon 2002 in New Orleans March 18-21. Come 
and check us out to see what new and exciting features we have added 
to ChemWeb.com to make it better for you. We have freebies to give 
away including a special inflatable give-away! So come and have a 
look and see what you've been missing.

Come by and see us at booth 1122

================================================= 
3 - Sign up for the alchemist conference reporter
================================================= 

The next Conference Reporter will cover 'Pittcon 2002' to be
held in New Orleans, USA on 18-21 March 2002.

Pittcon is one of the biggest Analytical Chemistry Exhibitions with 
an estimated 30000 attendees including 1300 exhibitors from 120 
countries displaying the latest analytical instrumentation and 
software over 4 days.

Sign up for the Email Update and be first with the news.

http://www.chemweb.com/utils/email.cfm?id=9122&uid=294183

================================================= 
4 - New look Conference Centre
=================================================

The Conference Centre has been redesigned with a new look and 
improved functionality. It is now easier to promote your own event 
and find relevant meetings.

Click here to find out more:

http://www.chemweb.com/conferences

================================================= 
5 - Over 400 articles in the CPS
================================================= 

The Chemistry Preprint Server (CPS) continues to receive support 
from the worldwide chemistry community with over 400 preprints 
uploaded for browsing, review and discussion since its launch in 
August 2000. Submissions have been received from more than 50 
countries.
 
Browse the latest submissions on the CPS:
http://preprint.chemweb.com/CPS/show/most_recent.html
 
Submission of a research paper, short communication or conference
proceeding can be made online by visiting:
http://www.chemweb.com/utils/email.cfm?id=9120&uid=294183
 
Remember - your comments are important! Each article forms its own
discussion group making the CPS the perfect forum to openly discuss
articles with your peers.

================================================= 
6 - Celebrate St.Patrick's Day
================================================= 

Celebrate with the Irish by sending a St Patrick's postcard to a 
friend or colleague free with ChemWeb.com. 

http://www.chemweb.com/utils/email.cfm?id=9121&uid=294183

================================================= 
7 - Book of the week
================================================= 

Stories of the Invisible
Philip Ball

Stories of the Invisible is an aspirational appetiser that hopefully 
will inspire the bright minds of inchoate 'molecular scientists' to 
delve deeper and, as the jacket blurb says, "reinvent chemistry as 
the central creative science of the new century."

Read the alchemist's review at:

http://www.chemweb.com/alchem/articles/1014215516587.html

================================================= 

If you would like a reminder of your Member Name/password, please 
use our reminder service at: 

http://www.chemweb.com/home?forgot=1
 
================================================= 

This email has been sent to you because you are a registered member 
of ChemWeb.com and we feel it is important to keep you up-to-date 
with new developments. If you would prefer not to receive any more 
of these emails, please click on the link below to automatically 
unsubscribe:

http://www.chemweb.com/unsubscribe?uid=294183

================================================== 

Best regards 
Kristina Thrower 
Member Services 

PS.  If you think that a friend or colleague might find ChemWeb.com
useful, don't forget to forward them this message. 

==================================================

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 12 07:46:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA21265;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2002 07:43:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 07:43:50 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:43:00 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Commercial Biomass Project
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"anG1J3.0.xB5.p8YZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46520
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sparber was right about bull$hit!

http://redding.com/top_stories/business/20020311topbus037.shtml

Cow power could light Northwest 

Manure-to-methane projects considered environment friendly 

Linda Ashton Associated Press 

March, 11 2002 - 2:52 a.m. SUNNYSIDE, Wash. - It's a little bit
like the old saying, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade.

Dairies have given the Yakima Valley an abundance of cow manure
and, one day, it might be used to make methane.

To that end, Energy Northwest, the public power group that owns
the region's only nuclear power plant, is looking at the
possibility of teaming up with dairy farms in Washington, Oregon
and Idaho to develop this form of "green" power.

The goal is to build a 3- to 4-megawatt electrical power plant
fueled with "biogas," or manure-derived methane.

"We've been working with the dairy industry for 10 to 15 years,
trying to solve the manure waste problem," said Ivan White,
president of Sunnyside Inc., the economic development group for
this central Washington city of 14,000.

Sunnyside, in Yakima County, is one of the locations Energy
Northwest is looking at, along with northwestern Washington's
Whatcom County, Boise and Twin Falls, Idaho, and Tillamook, Ore.

Yakima County alone has 85,000 head of dairy cows, and tons of
manure. That's a very renewable resource.

And it's no bull that biodigester technology today makes it
possible to get about 0.3 kilowatts of electricity per cow, as
much as 0.9 kilowatts in some European studies, said Stan
Davison, business development specialist for the Richland-based
utility. One kilowatt is enough to power 10 100-watt light bulbs.

The manure-to-methane project would work like this:

A big digester tank, acting essentially as a mechanical stomach,
is filled with a slurry of manure and water. Bacteria, already
present in the waste, process the manure into methane while
thriving in the 130-degree temperature of the tank.

The methane rises to the top - it's lighter than air - and is
piped off to power a pair of modified diesel generators outfitted
with spark plugs.

While the generators make electricity, the remaining fiber in the
tanks settles to the bottom. Liquid squeezed out of the fiber
makes fertilizer and the dry fiber makes compost.

The Northwest accounts for 8 percent of the nation's dairy farm
business. A biomass power plant would need access to a dairy or
dairies, room to build the power plant and access to transmission
lines.

"The real issue is high capital costs," Davison said. "If you
ignore the capital costs, the fuel is free - it's a byproduct of
milk. It's something you're going to be producing anyway. You
might as well handle it as fuel as handle it as waste."

The rough estimate for building such a plant is about $2,800
dollars a kilowatt. Wind power runs about $1,000 per kilowatt.

But on average, a wind farm only produces about 30 percent of
capacity over the course of a year, while a cow-powered plant can
produce at 90 percent. That just about evens up the costs,
Davison said.

"Over the years, there have been a number of people promoting
methane digesters. The one thing they're always lacking is
capital," said Jay Gordon, a Lewis County dairy farmer and
director of the Washington State Dairy Federation, which
represents about 650 family dairy farms in the state.

The margin is thin, Davison said. So Energy Northwest's next step
is to approach utilities to see if there's enough interest in
such a project to pay for it.

It could be a nice fit for a lot of dairy farms, if it doesn't
cost the farmer money, Gordon said.

"We know the technology works. We know it's a great concept. We
know it's renewable. We know it's green," he said.

<end>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 12 09:35:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA19408;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2002 09:32:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 09:32:10 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8E2EC7.60D86900 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 10:37:43 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"zMdhl1.0.6l4.PkZZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46521
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this
one overlooks a very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.  In the
process, materials are removed from this land which must be
replaced.  This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.   Your proposal
would increase the energy needed to generate fertilizer as well as
deny the soil the complex chemicals found in compost.  The net
result would be a faster destruction of the soil and a faster loss
of nutrient value to the food chain than is already occurring.  This
idea is one of many examples of how ignorance can cause an even
worse problem.

Ed

Terry Blanton wrote:

> Sparber was right about bull$hit!
>
> http://redding.com/top_stories/business/20020311topbus037.shtml
>
> Cow power could light Northwest
>
> Manure-to-methane projects considered environment friendly
>
> Linda Ashton Associated Press
>
> March, 11 2002 - 2:52 a.m. SUNNYSIDE, Wash. - It's a little bit
> like the old saying, when life gives you lemons, make lemonade.
>
> Dairies have given the Yakima Valley an abundance of cow manure
> and, one day, it might be used to make methane.
>
> To that end, Energy Northwest, the public power group that owns
> the region's only nuclear power plant, is looking at the
> possibility of teaming up with dairy farms in Washington, Oregon
> and Idaho to develop this form of "green" power.
>
> The goal is to build a 3- to 4-megawatt electrical power plant
> fueled with "biogas," or manure-derived methane.
>
> "We've been working with the dairy industry for 10 to 15 years,
> trying to solve the manure waste problem," said Ivan White,
> president of Sunnyside Inc., the economic development group for
> this central Washington city of 14,000.
>
> Sunnyside, in Yakima County, is one of the locations Energy
> Northwest is looking at, along with northwestern Washington's
> Whatcom County, Boise and Twin Falls, Idaho, and Tillamook, Ore.
>
> Yakima County alone has 85,000 head of dairy cows, and tons of
> manure. That's a very renewable resource.
>
> And it's no bull that biodigester technology today makes it
> possible to get about 0.3 kilowatts of electricity per cow, as
> much as 0.9 kilowatts in some European studies, said Stan
> Davison, business development specialist for the Richland-based
> utility. One kilowatt is enough to power 10 100-watt light bulbs.
>
> The manure-to-methane project would work like this:
>
> A big digester tank, acting essentially as a mechanical stomach,
> is filled with a slurry of manure and water. Bacteria, already
> present in the waste, process the manure into methane while
> thriving in the 130-degree temperature of the tank.
>
> The methane rises to the top - it's lighter than air - and is
> piped off to power a pair of modified diesel generators outfitted
> with spark plugs.
>
> While the generators make electricity, the remaining fiber in the
> tanks settles to the bottom. Liquid squeezed out of the fiber
> makes fertilizer and the dry fiber makes compost.
>
> The Northwest accounts for 8 percent of the nation's dairy farm
> business. A biomass power plant would need access to a dairy or
> dairies, room to build the power plant and access to transmission
> lines.
>
> "The real issue is high capital costs," Davison said. "If you
> ignore the capital costs, the fuel is free - it's a byproduct of
> milk. It's something you're going to be producing anyway. You
> might as well handle it as fuel as handle it as waste."
>
> The rough estimate for building such a plant is about $2,800
> dollars a kilowatt. Wind power runs about $1,000 per kilowatt.
>
> But on average, a wind farm only produces about 30 percent of
> capacity over the course of a year, while a cow-powered plant can
> produce at 90 percent. That just about evens up the costs,
> Davison said.
>
> "Over the years, there have been a number of people promoting
> methane digesters. The one thing they're always lacking is
> capital," said Jay Gordon, a Lewis County dairy farmer and
> director of the Washington State Dairy Federation, which
> represents about 650 family dairy farms in the state.
>
> The margin is thin, Davison said. So Energy Northwest's next step
> is to approach utilities to see if there's enough interest in
> such a project to pay for it.
>
> It could be a nice fit for a lot of dairy farms, if it doesn't
> cost the farmer money, Gordon said.
>
> "We know the technology works. We know it's a great concept. We
> know it's renewable. We know it's green," he said.
>
> <end>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 12 12:01:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA04824;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:58:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:58:23 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 11:58:17 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
In-Reply-To: <3C8E2EC7.60D86900 ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020312115506.23772A-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"YefdQ3.0.AB1.TtbZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46522
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Actually, you are better off skipping the cow process and using the grass
to produce gas directly, and then returning the left over grass product to
the pasture. 

But as you say, it's still a loss, energy wise. 

Just use cold fusion and be done with it. 

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Edmund Storms wrote:

> Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this
> one overlooks a very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
> is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.  In the
> process, materials are removed from this land which must be
> replaced.  This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
> the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
> expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.   Your proposal
> would increase the energy needed to generate fertilizer as well as
> deny the soil the complex chemicals found in compost.  The net
> result would be a faster destruction of the soil and a faster loss
> of nutrient value to the food chain than is already occurring.  This
> idea is one of many examples of how ignorance can cause an even
> worse problem.
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 12 15:23:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA11866;
	Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:20:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 15:20:45 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 18:20:56 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
In-Reply-To: <3C8E2EC7.60D86900 ix.netcom.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"3-Fop2.0.Fv2.CreZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46523
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this
>one overlooks a very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
>is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.  In the
>process, materials are removed from this land which must be
>replaced.  This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
>the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
>expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.

I believe you're missing the point here, Ed. No one proposes raising cows 
in order to generate energy. The cows are being raised anyway, for food. 
The manure must be disposed of, and it may make economic sense to convert 
it to energy. As a source of energy, the manure is probably uneconomical, 
but the processing probably reduces waste disposal costs. The combination 
of energy revenue and savings in disposal costs may make this viable.

A breeder fission reactor is a much grimmer example of the same principle. 
When you use up more of the remaining potential energy of the fuel, you 
reduce the half-life, the volume of spent fuel, and greatly reduce the 
ultimate disposal costs. Unfortunately, breeder fission reactors are 
fantastically expensive compared to conventional uranium reactors, and the 
savings in fuel cost and disposal cost would not justify making them.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 06:11:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20841;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 06:08:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 06:08:35 -0800
Message-ID: <004601c1ca90$250a06c0$5a8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Biomass Thread?
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:07:37 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"PZoHJ1.0.R55.YrrZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46524
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Thanks Terry. Your post was forwarded to me by a co-conspirator.  :-)

Since I had been unsubscribed from Vortex for a spell and missed out on first-hand
posts, especially Ed Storms' post regarding starving out soil nutrition by using
biomass for energy production, I would like to jump into the foray with some thoughts
based on many years as a farm kid trained in vocational agriculture added to about 30
years of biomass energy research.

The Feedlot-Dairy Manure Disposal Problem.

Present efforts to keep Nitrates-Nitrites from polluting ground/surface waters
requires that dairies have a  fermentation lagoon bottom-sealed to keep
nitrates-nitrites out of the ground water, which allows the anaerobic produced methane
produced to go into the atmosphere  and the ozone layer, and the lost energy aerobic
oxidation- produced CO2 ( at a rate of 44/12 Tons of CO2/Ton plant carbon to go into
the environment as a lost resource.

In several Eastern States, in order to protect streams and ground water, environmental
protection laws require that the lagoon effluent be piped for miles, and immediately
"plowed" into the soil, precluding the option of "no till" agriculture.

Based on D.O.E. studies, present agricultural biomass residues ( not needed for soil
humus or nutrition) represents an immediately available  5 Quad/Year carbon-neutral
energy resource to offset part of the 98 Quad/Year U.S. energy use.

More Later, Ed.   :-)

Regards,   Frederick

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 06:46:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03326;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 06:43:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 06:43:50 -0800
Message-ID: <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:43:30 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"2e-gv1.0.up.cMsZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46525
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I found the thread title.

Ed Storms wrote:

> Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this one overlooks a
very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
> is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.

True!

 In the
> process, materials are removed from this land which must be
> replaced.

Mainly Potassium and Phosphorus which can be recycled in
a more available form than that in most soils. It had been common practice to burn
corn stover and wheat straw in the field to get higher yields from the increased
availability of nutrients.
The  legumes soy beans, clover, alfalfa, peas, etc., do not require a nitrogen source
as does wheat and corn.

This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
> the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
> expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.

The thermochemical conversion of biomass to hydrogen
for ammonia/urea fertilizer synthesis has over 16:1 benefit/requirement ratio.

IOW, 40 acres of high tonnage biomass will support ALL
of the Energy Requirements for 640 acres, excluding deep well pumped irrigation.

The main thrust of biomass energy was to support the Energy Requirements of
Agriculture, not the gas tank of kids from Acne-High cruising St. Francis Drive.   :-)


   Your proposal
> would increase the energy needed to generate fertilizer as well as
> deny the soil the complex chemicals found in compost.  The net
> result would be a faster destruction of the soil and a faster loss
> of nutrient value to the food chain than is already occurring.

That's a gut reaction, Ed.

This
> idea is one of many examples of how ignorance can cause an even
> worse problem.

OTOH.  :-)

Regards,   Frederick
>
> Ed
>



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 07:47:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31736;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:41:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 07:41:29 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8F6660.3833819D ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:47:02 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"MRrS_3.0.nl7.fCtZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46526
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Edmund Storms wrote:
>
> >Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this
> >one overlooks a very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
> >is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.  In the
> >process, materials are removed from this land which must be
> >replaced.  This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
> >the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
> >expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.
>
> I believe you're missing the point here, Ed. No one proposes raising cows
> in order to generate energy. The cows are being raised anyway, for food.
> The manure must be disposed of, and it may make economic sense to convert
> it to energy.

I never assumed that cows would be raised for energy.  However, once an
industry is created based on turning cow manure into energy, this industry
will compete with the use of manure to make compost.  Already, the compost
business has to compete with the fertilizer industry, causing a loss of soil
quality.  Another competitor would make the problem worse.

> As a source of energy, the manure is probably uneconomical,
> but the processing probably reduces waste disposal costs. The combination
> of energy revenue and savings in disposal costs may make this viable.

The same advantage can be obtained by turning manure into compost.  This
action would tie up the nitrates, eliminate the smell, provide a better
nutrient for the soil, and reduce energy used to make fertilizer.  Granted,
this would not completely eliminate the use of fertilizer, but it would
improve average soil health.  The main reason compost is not more widely used
is because chemical fertilizer has become of habit.  If the use of compost
were encouraged by a lower price based on large operations, we would all
benefit.

>
>
> A breeder fission reactor is a much grimmer example of the same principle.
> When you use up more of the remaining potential energy of the fuel, you
> reduce the half-life, the volume of spent fuel, and greatly reduce the
> ultimate disposal costs. Unfortunately, breeder fission reactors are
> fantastically expensive compared to conventional uranium reactors, and the
> savings in fuel cost and disposal cost would not justify making them.

While less Pu or U would be present as a disposal problem, more of the other
dangerous isotopes are present.  In addition, a chemical separation is
required, which adds to the volume of dangerous material needed to be
disposed.  Its a bad method no matter what the argument.

Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 08:23:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA19276;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:19:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:19:51 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8F6F51.5B16BFF2 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:25:15 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer> <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce@computer>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mmw8s3.0.yi4.amtZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46527
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Frederick Sparber wrote:

> I found the thread title.
>
> Ed Storms wrote:
>
> > Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this one overlooks a
> very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
> > is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.
>
> True!
>
>  In the
> > process, materials are removed from this land which must be
> > replaced.
>
> Mainly Potassium and Phosphorus which can be recycled in
> a more available form than that in most soils. It had been common practice to burn
> corn stover and wheat straw in the field to get higher yields from the increased
> availability of nutrients.
> The  legumes soy beans, clover, alfalfa, peas, etc., do not require a nitrogen source
> as does wheat and corn.

True, but soil also needs humates in order to retain moisture and to allow  efficient
microbe action.

>
>
> This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
> > the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
> > expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.
>
> The thermochemical conversion of biomass to hydrogen
> for ammonia/urea fertilizer synthesis has over 16:1 benefit/requirement ratio.

Are you suggesting that the hydrogen is best put back into the soil as NH4 rather than
being burned for energy?

>
>
> IOW, 40 acres of high tonnage biomass will support ALL
> of the Energy Requirements for 640 acres, excluding deep well pumped irrigation.

>
> The main thrust of biomass energy was to support the Energy Requirements of
> Agriculture, not the gas tank of kids from Acne-High cruising St. Francis Drive.   :-)

Very true, but this fact is being ignored in "modern" thinking.

>
>
>    Your proposal
> > would increase the energy needed to generate fertilizer as well as
> > deny the soil the complex chemicals found in compost.  The net
> > result would be a faster destruction of the soil and a faster loss
> > of nutrient value to the food chain than is already occurring.
>
> That's a gut reaction, Ed.

A gut reaction based on facts.  People who have turned to compost are finding that their
soil requires less water, that the plants are more productive and healthy, and that the
plants have a higher nutritional value.  Thanks to the growing organic food industry,
these facts are becoming better known.  Like the method of analysis applied to most
industries, the real cost to society of using chemical fertilizer is not taken into
account.  Fortunately, intelligent people who have the necessary money are able to
protect themselves from the shortsighted greed of the chemical fertilizer industry.  This
process will gradually demonstrate to ordinary farmers the advantages of using organic
fertilizers, causing improved farming in general.

>
>
> This
> > idea is one of many examples of how ignorance can cause an even
> > worse problem.
>
> OTOH.  :-)

Regards,
Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 08:41:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA32508;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:39:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:39:47 -0800
Message-ID: <009d01c1caa5$4173b080$5a8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08@pop.mindspring.com> <3C8F6660.3833819D@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:39:21 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"Je3pd3.0.ax7.G3uZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46528
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project

Gosh Ed, if you stood ankle-deep in cow dooty covering an acre of 60 bushel/acre
wheat, or 150 bushel/acre corn crops you couldn't get enough nitrogen or mineral
nutrients back to sustain that yield.

How many 1,000 head dairies at about 12 lbs/day/cow (~ 1/3 cubic feet manure/day, or
about 12 cubic ft of methane at about 12 ft^3/cow day) would it take to fertilize and
compost a 4,000 acre agricultural operation?

Where did it go? You're flushing it into your municipal sewage treatment plant and
it's making it's  ~ 90 mile journey down the Rio Grande and ending up in my well
water.

That's why I had to invest ~ $500.00 in a Reverse Osmosis
water purification system. This way it will eventually end up
in El Paso,  :-)

ADM doesn't use Organic Farming either.

Regards,  Frederick


>
>
> Jed Rothwell wrote:
>
> > Edmund Storms wrote:
> >
> > >Well Terry, like all attempts to address the energy problem, this
> > >one overlooks a very important unintended consequence.  Cow manure
> > >is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.  In the
> > >process, materials are removed from this land which must be
> > >replaced.  This replacement can either be accomplished by returning
> > >the manure to the land as compost or raw manure, or energy must be
> > >expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.
> >
> > I believe you're missing the point here, Ed. No one proposes raising cows
> > in order to generate energy. The cows are being raised anyway, for food.
> > The manure must be disposed of, and it may make economic sense to convert
> > it to energy.
>
> I never assumed that cows would be raised for energy.  However, once an
> industry is created based on turning cow manure into energy, this industry
> will compete with the use of manure to make compost.  Already, the compost
> business has to compete with the fertilizer industry, causing a loss of soil
> quality.  Another competitor would make the problem worse.
>
> > As a source of energy, the manure is probably uneconomical,
> > but the processing probably reduces waste disposal costs. The combination
> > of energy revenue and savings in disposal costs may make this viable.
>
> The same advantage can be obtained by turning manure into compost.  This
> action would tie up the nitrates, eliminate the smell, provide a better
> nutrient for the soil, and reduce energy used to make fertilizer.  Granted,
> this would not completely eliminate the use of fertilizer, but it would
> improve average soil health.  The main reason compost is not more widely used
> is because chemical fertilizer has become of habit.  If the use of compost
> were encouraged by a lower price based on large operations, we would all
> benefit.
>
> >
> >
> > A breeder fission reactor is a much grimmer example of the same principle.
> > When you use up more of the remaining potential energy of the fuel, you
> > reduce the half-life, the volume of spent fuel, and greatly reduce the
> > ultimate disposal costs. Unfortunately, breeder fission reactors are
> > fantastically expensive compared to conventional uranium reactors, and the
> > savings in fuel cost and disposal cost would not justify making them.
>
> While less Pu or U would be present as a disposal problem, more of the other
> dangerous isotopes are present.  In addition, a chemical separation is
> required, which adds to the volume of dangerous material needed to be
> disposed.  Its a bad method no matter what the argument.
>
> Ed
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 08:50:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01552;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:42:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 08:42:34 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:42:48 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
In-Reply-To: <3C8F6660.3833819D ix.netcom.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"WX73E2.0.2O.u5uZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46529
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>I never assumed that cows would be raised for energy.  However, once an 
>industry is created based on turning cow manure into energy, this industry 
>will compete with the use of manure to make compost.

Most of the methods of extracting energy I have read about also yield 
useful compost. Perhaps the quality is degraded -- I wouldn't know. But in 
any case there is too much manure.


>Already, the compost business has to compete with the fertilizer industry, 
>causing a loss of soil quality.  Another competitor would make the problem 
>worse.

If the manure could be pre-processed to yield energy, this would add to the 
profit and help it compete with chemical fertilizer. It might produce 
enough energy to run the fertilizer factory, for example.


>The main reason compost is not more widely used is because chemical 
>fertilizer has become of habit.

I think chemical fertilizer is cheaper, because it requires less processing.


>While less Pu or U would be present as a disposal problem, more of the 
>other dangerous isotopes are present.

The Japanese breeder program advocates said the half-life of most dangerous 
isotopes was much shorter than in conventional spent fuel.


>   In addition, a chemical separation is
>required, which adds to the volume of dangerous material needed to be
>disposed.  Its a bad method no matter what the argument.

No doubt, but it would be an attractive idea, if only it could be 
implemented in a safe and cost-effective manner. It would be nice to reduce 
waste AND extract more energy.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 09:07:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15615;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:06:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:06:12 -0800
Message-ID: <00a901c1caa8$f5e18a80$5a8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer> <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce@computer> <3C8F6F51.5B16BFF2@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:05:52 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q5AtJ.0.pp3.4SuZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46530
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Edmund Storms" <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 9:25 AM
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article

Ed Storms wrote:
>
> Frederick Sparber wrote:
>
> >
> > Ed Storms wrote:
> >
> > Mainly Potassium and Phosphorus which can be recycled in
> > a more available form than that in most soils. It had been common practice to burn
> > corn stover and wheat straw in the field to get higher yields from the increased
> > availability of nutrients.
> > The  legumes soy beans, clover, alfalfa, peas, etc., do not require a nitrogen
source
> > as does wheat and corn.
>
> True, but soil also needs humates in order to retain moisture and to allow
efficient
> microbe action.

Yes. But the root system and plant stubble allows adequate
humus.  You can overdo turning under too much "sod/humus" because the bacterial
metabolism will starve out a succeeding crop. The switch to No-Till and Organic
farming has got around this problem, especially when going from a hay crop to a corn
or cereal grain crop.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > The thermochemical conversion of biomass to hydrogen
> > for ammonia/urea fertilizer synthesis has over 16:1 benefit/requirement ratio.
>
> Are you suggesting that the hydrogen is best put back into the soil as NH4 rather
than
> being burned for energy?

I think you meant anhydrous NH3 or water soluble pellets of Urea, NH2-CO-NH2, Yes.
Biomass energy and it's by-products should only be used to maintain a food supply.

Now that "wheeling" of electrical power and or natural gas is a matter of public
policy, the logistics for a system of ag wastes to energy and ag waste energy to
agriculture is tractable.
> >
> >
> > IOW, 40 acres of high tonnage biomass will support ALL
> > of the Energy Requirements for 640 acres, excluding deep well pumped irrigation.
>
> >
> > The main thrust of biomass energy was to support the Energy Requirements of
> > Agriculture, not the gas tank of kids from Acne-High cruising St. Francis Drive.
:-)
>
> Very true, but this fact is being ignored in "modern" thinking.

Yes. People are more concerned about the anthropomorphism of the automobile than
assurance of a "stable" food supply.  :-)
>
> >
> >
>
> A gut reaction based on facts.  People who have turned to compost are finding that
their
> soil requires less water, that the plants are more productive and healthy, and that
the
> plants have a higher nutritional value.  Thanks to the growing organic food
industry,
> these facts are becoming better known.  Like the method of analysis applied to most
> industries, the real cost to society of using chemical fertilizer is not taken into
> account.  Fortunately, intelligent people who have the necessary money are able to
> protect themselves from the shortsighted greed of the chemical fertilizer industry.
This
> process will gradually demonstrate to ordinary farmers the advantages of using
organic
> fertilizers, causing improved farming in general.
>
Agreed.
>
Regards,    Frederick
>
> Regards,
> Ed
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 09:29:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA27406;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:26:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:26:38 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:26:26 -0800
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B4F5F2.1B32%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA27376
Resent-Message-ID: <"07kbp.0.5i6.CluZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46531
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 3/13/02 8:42 AM, "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com> wrote:

> Most of the methods of extracting energy I have read about also yield
> useful compost. Perhaps the quality is degraded -- I wouldn't know. But in
> any case there is too much manure.


The careful work of David Wallman and Wilbur Dammann of DW Research
(Colorado and Nebraska) reported in a number of issues of Infinite Energy,
employs a carbon arc in pure water or an organic waste pool to generate a
new kind of gas, which DW calls CarboHydrogen� gas -- other has referred to
it as "AquaFuel." No matter what you call it, the properties of this gas are
emerging as quite amazing.  I was speaking with David Wallman just yesterday
and he told me that two independent test facilities determined that the BTU
content of one STP cubic foot of such gas has a heating value of about 1170
BTU. (The tests were done by comparing the heating of water by natural gas
at the same pressure as a test of CarboHydrogen gas).

Careful measurements by DW Research have determined separately from these
heating value tests, they say, that 12 (twelve!) cu ft. of said gas can be
created from I.0 kWHr of electrical energy, plus a minimal consumption of
carbon (which like the water is "free").   Now I.0 kWHr of energy is 3413
BTU. So the formal O/U is 4.11/1.  The carbon consumption may reduce
"scientific O/U", but not necessarily by that much. Moreover, new methods
being pioneered by DW seem to indicate even greater gas production than 12
cu ft/kwHr, according to David Wallman.

Like cold fusion, this process is marginalized by the mainstream and even by
most cold fusion/new energy researchers. Fortunately, DW is very, very
intensely focused on commercialization and will no doubt succeed. They have
a significant patent position. The integrity of this company, based on my
intimate knowledge of the people, is extremely high.  This work should not
be ignored in biomass energy discussions.

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 09:39:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA02137;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:38:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:38:54 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313123837.00b13fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:39:13 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Is Saltmarsh paper available?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"BCl923.0.7X.kwuZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46532
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Does anyone have the Shapira & Saltmarsh paper?

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 09:53:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA10281;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:50:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 09:50:38 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8F9140.A8A2176C bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:49:52 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Is Saltmarsh paper available?
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313123837.00b13fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"-YqmF1.0.OW2.j5vZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46533
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:
> 
> Does anyone have the Shapira & Saltmarsh paper?
> 
> - Jed

It's available at:

http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/SLan5av2.pdf

but I have sent it to you directly.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 10:07:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17812;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:06:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:06:03 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:06:33 -0800
Subject: Letter to the Editor re: "Star in a Jar?"
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: <scinews sciserv.org>
Message-ID: <B8B4FF59.1B37%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA17762
Resent-Message-ID: <"PeyH_2.0.2M4.AKvZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46534
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Letter to the Editor:

Dear Julie Ann Miller (Editor, Science News):

In your coverage of the recent sonofusion work reported in Science by
Taleyarkhan et al, SN: 3/9/01, p.147, we find the unsubstantiated and false
remark regarding cold fusion and Fleischmann and Pons: "However, neither the
original pair nor anyone else could reproduce those findings, which have
largely been discredited as a case study in mistaken science."  If P. Weiss
really believes this utter falsehood, then I suggest that Science News send
him to the 9th International Conference on Cold Fusion, meeting in Beijing,
May 19-24, 2002 under the sponsorship of official Chinese physics
organizations. Let him determine, if he can, that no replications of
electrochemical cold fusion have been performed.  He will fail, since the
peer-reviewed and Proceedings literature since 1989 does indeed contain such
substantial replications‹ including the accurate correlation of excess heat
to helium-4 production.  I believe an apology and a correction by Science
News is in order.  The reputation of Science News is not served by repeating
the  uninformed scientific bigotry of certain "Voodoo" scientists at the
American Physical Society.

Sincerely,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 10:16:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22185;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:13:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:13:44 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313130648.00b13fa8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:13:46 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: OFF TOPIC Good news on population
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"qecUp3.0.PQ5.NRvZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46535
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

Population Estimates Fall as Women Assert Control

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/10/international/10POPU.html

Third world population growth is dropping rapidly. Here are two paragraphs 
that Arthur C. Clarke must find gratifying, since he predicted this and 
helped bring it about:


"Gelson Fonseca, Brazil's ambassador to the United Nations, said that 
television was important. Brazilians see small and apparently happy 
families in television programs and think about emulating that example.

In Bangladesh, family planning experts noticed a decade ago that in some of 
the remotest areas, information gleaned from satellite television was 
influencing contraceptive choices. In one case, a certain intrauterine 
device was rejected by many women in an area where one of them had seen it 
described as hazardous in a Western television program."


This is a superb example of the benefits of technology. In developed 
nations we have so much television exposure it probably hurts us. Children 
should play outside instead of watching the boob tube. But for the human 
race as a whole, television is an enormous benefit. It is an unparalleled 
source of liberation, education and hope, and a window on the rest of humanity.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 10:49:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA07330;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:46:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 10:46:42 -0800
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:54:38 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Frederick Sparber <fjsparber earthlink.net>
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
In-Reply-To: <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce computer>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020313135425.10826B-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"D7ASU.0.Oo1.HwvZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46536
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Where is St. Francis Drive?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 11:04:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19095;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:03:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:03:35 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313140144.00a8fcc0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 14:03:52 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Bubble fusion in Japanese press
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"VCZ9r1.0.Gg4.7AwZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46537
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The Japanese press has taken note of the bubble fusion claims.

The Yomiuri devotes a third of a page to the story, in the Wednesday March 
13 print edition, p. 11. Headlines:

"Bubble Fusion" Could It Be Real?

Theoretically Possible
Replicability not yet ascertained

"We must objectively wait for verification," says the editor of the journal 
in which paper was published

The introductory paragraph says: "After claims of 'bubble nuclear fusion' 
were published in the March 8 edition of the journal Science, a dispute has 
erupted over whether the claims are true or false. This may be a 
re-enactment cold fusion dispute, which ended as a great fuss about 
nothing. Or could it be true this time?"



Except for that first crack at cold fusion, the article is informative and 
balanced, in my opinion. Although the introduction begins by mentioning the 
conflict, it downplays the dispute in the rest of the article. It says that 
similar experiments have been done for many years, and innovation in this 
particular experiment is the use of an external neutron source. It says the 
research is similar to cold fusion. Several leading people involved in the 
experiment are quoted, including: Taleyarkhan, Kennedy, Putterman, and in 
Japan Takahashi and someone named Hayashi who has been ultrasound, and who 
expresses doubt, "I do not think temperatures high enough for fusion can be 
achieved." Takahashi says the Taleyarkhan paper, "seems well-written. 
Actually, the replication experiment performed in the same lab has many 
unclear aspects."

The article concludes: "Science editor Donald Kennedy agrees, ' we will 
have to wait until objective scientific experiments have been conducted.' 
It seems likely that will be awhile before conclusions can be reached."

The Asahi online edition has a short, dismissive report that sounds like it 
was translated from an APS press release or "What's New." It says claims 
were made but an attempt to replicate failed, and it now seems "the 'bubble 
fusion' bubble is deflating." In Japanese, see:

http://www.asahi.com/science/news/K2002030500983.html

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 12:01:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA19298;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:59:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 11:59:04 -0800
Message-ID: <002201c1cac1$13e729a0$cf8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020313135425.10826B-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:57:43 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"rtRWi1.0.Pi4.5-wZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46538
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Schnurer" <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
Cc: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 12:54 PM
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article


John wrote: 
> 
> Where is St. Francis Drive?
>
Ask Ed Storms.  He cruises it on occasion.  :-)

Regards,    Frederick 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 12:11:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26725;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:11:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:11:11 -0800
Message-ID: <3C8FA599.367E2FFC ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:17:17 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
	 <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08 pop.mindspring.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"rZVIb2.0.NX6.U9xZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46539
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Edmund Storms wrote:
>
> >I never assumed that cows would be raised for energy.  However, once an
> >industry is created based on turning cow manure into energy, this industry
> >will compete with the use of manure to make compost.
>
> Most of the methods of extracting energy I have read about also yield
> useful compost. Perhaps the quality is degraded -- I wouldn't know. But in
> any case there is too much manure.

You are correct, extracting energy as methane does degrade the compost.  True,
there is too much manure.  I suggest this is because people are not taking
advantage of using it as compost.  If the amount of compost required to keep
the soil healthy were used, there would no longer be too much manure.  Why not
encourage the use of compost rather than using the manure as energy, something
we can get  from many other sources.  Already the soil is being mined to raise
corn to make alcohol as fuel.  Why add to the problem?

>
>
> >Already, the compost business has to compete with the fertilizer industry,
> >causing a loss of soil quality.  Another competitor would make the problem
> >worse.
>
> If the manure could be pre-processed to yield energy, this would add to the
> profit and help it compete with chemical fertilizer. It might produce
> enough energy to run the fertilizer factory, for example.

Turning manure into compost does release energy, but at a slow rate, too slow
to make its harvest practical.

>
>
> >The main reason compost is not more widely used is because chemical
> >fertilizer has become of habit.
>
> I think chemical fertilizer is cheaper, because it requires less processing.

It is cheaper if only the product is considered.  It is not cheaper when the
total cost to society is considered.  In addition, compost would also be
cheaper  if it were more widely used.

>
>
> >While less Pu or U would be present as a disposal problem, more of the
> >other dangerous isotopes are present.
>
> The Japanese breeder program advocates said the half-life of most dangerous
> isotopes was much shorter than in conventional spent fuel.

As I said, less of the long-lived U and Pu is present because these elements
are extracted.  The rest of the junk is dangerous far longer than the attention
span of modern man.  Therefore, I see absolutely no merit to their argument.

>
>
> >   In addition, a chemical separation is
> >required, which adds to the volume of dangerous material needed to be
> >disposed.  Its a bad method no matter what the argument.
>
> No doubt, but it would be an attractive idea, if only it could be
> implemented in a safe and cost-effective manner. It would be nice to reduce
> waste AND extract more energy.

I agree, in an ideal world, this would be the way to go.  The world being very
nonideal, I think a breeder reactor is a very bad idea.  Also, in this nonideal
world, a hot fusion reactor is also a bad idea because it further concentrates
energy production, thereby increasing the risks.

Ed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 12:43:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11680;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:40:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:40:39 -0800
Message-ID: <004101c1cac6$ea6e0a20$cf8f85ce computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08@pop.mindspring.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 13:39:44 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"G1rbd3.0.Ms2.7bxZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46540
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>; <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2002 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project

Jed wrote:
>
> Most of the methods of extracting energy I have read about also yield
> useful compost. Perhaps the quality is degraded -- I wouldn't know. But in
> any case there is too much manure.

Not if you let it rot real good, then add corn meal or distillers grains from ADM's
ethanol plants, for a startup
worm farm.
The other end of the food chain?   :-)
>
> >Already, the compost business has to compete with the fertilizer industry,
> >causing a loss of soil quality.  Another competitor would make the problem
> >worse.
>
> If the manure could be pre-processed to yield energy, this would add to the
> profit and help it compete with chemical fertilizer. It might produce
> enough energy to run the fertilizer factory, for example.

In 1986 I shipped several tons of dry (virtually odorless) feedlot manure 1400 miles
to a DOE-funded 5,000 horsepower (~3.5 Megawatt) external combustion gas turbine test
facility operated by Joseph Hamrick of Aerospace Research Corporation in Roanoke,
Virginia for burning sawdust and other biomass wastes.

Almost all of the ash was removed and recovered by cyclone separators, such that the
36 lbs/second of > 1500 F turbine exhaust gases met EPA air quality standards.

We were getting a bit over 1.0 Megawatt-hr/ ton of manure. And that is no bull.  :-)

It is all documented in the DOE reports.

The commercialization problems Were Not Technical. But rather the glut of power
generating capacity brought on by new fossil and nuclear plants coming on line.

Perhaps now the pendulum will swing the other way?

Regards,   Frederick
>
> - Jed
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 13 12:47:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15032;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:47:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:47:01 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313151802.03e22c08 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 15:47:18 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
In-Reply-To: <3C8FA599.367E2FFC ix.netcom.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"kN0-63.0.ng3.5hxZy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46541
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>Turning manure into compost does release energy, but at a slow rate, too 
>slow to make its harvest practical.

It is practical, but it often takes a lot of space. Methane from often 
taken from garbage, compost and manure. In the third world this is done on 
a small scale. In the U.S., some large landfills make significant revenue 
from this. It works best when they plan for it before constructing the 
landfill.

In Georgia, several urban counties have effective composting programs. They 
do not produce energy but they do reduce solid waste and improve soil. In 
DeKalb County I believe they use a slow acting landfill, but Cobb County 
has and advanced, enclosed factory that organically digests garbage in 
three days, and produces good compost a month later. See:

http://www.cobbcounty.org/compostfacility/compostfacility.htm


> > The Japanese breeder program advocates said the half-life of most dangerous
> > isotopes was much shorter than in conventional spent fuel.
>
>As I said, less of the long-lived U and Pu is present because these 
>elements are extracted.  The rest of the junk is dangerous far longer than 
>the attention span of modern man.

I believe they said most of the half-lives are reduced from hundreds of 
thousands of years to a range of 1,000 to 10,000 years. Reducing the 
half-life of most dangerous isotopes by this amount would be meaningful. 
Many human institutions, such as Oxford University, have remained active 
with a reliable institutional memory for more than 1,000 years. Some have 
lasted nearly 2,000 years -- 1/5 the required duration. I think it is 
reasonable to hope that human beings can maintain a 10,000 year stewardship 
over nuclear waste, unless some catastrophic event such as a nuclear war or 
meteor strike wipes out our knowledge. It is much less likely we could 
maintain a vigil for 200,000 years.

Also, the physical containers designed to hold the material could be 
engineered to survive 10,000 years unattended. Ancient structures half that 
old have survived in good shape. The ancient pyramids still have intact, 
open rooms inside, which might have safely held nuclear waste, if the 
institutional memory could have been kept alive to prevent tomb robbers. It 
is impossible to build a structure from metal or rock that will survive 
100,000 years.


>The world being very
>nonideal, I think a breeder reactor is a very bad idea.

So do I! So do the Japanese, in retrospect. In 1992, the New York Times 
quoted a senior Japanese official who asked not to be identified: "It is 
almost inconceivable that such a good idea would have turned this bad. We 
spent the last 20 years building this project, and we'll probably spend the 
next 20 killing it."

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 01:26:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA25545;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:24:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 01:24:16 -0800
Message-ID: <00a401c1cb3a$16350640$bd8f209a ggrf30j>
From: "Nick Palmer" <nick7 itl.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer> <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce@computer>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:24:41 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"ofFuf2.0.-E6.0n6ay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46542
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hello Fred,
            Living in Jersey, as I do, we have loads of Jersey cows
wandering about the fields but mostly they are kept in large sheds where the
cow slurry builds up at a rate of knots. Current practice is to keep it in
large tanks until sufficient has built up then the farmers spay it on the
fields. This causes the neighbours to keep the windows shut for days! I
believe in places such as Holland, they have to inject it directly into the
soil. Oddly enough we have too high levels of nitrates in our water but
every body denies responsibility - if anything is blamed publicly, it is the
application of granular nitrogenous chemical fertiliser.
    So, we don't compost or "digest" our cow manure but we do digest our
human toilet waste to create methane which is burned in piston engines to
create electricity. The remaining solids are dried to a granular form which
is promoted as a "soil conditioner". I believe they cannot promote it as a
general fertiliser for a couple of reasons - firstly it has been somewhat
nutritionally degraded but more importantly, human sewage contains lots of
perhaps unexpected chemicals such as female hormones, heavy metals, drug
residues etc which make it not ideal for food crops. They sell it to places
such as golf courses.


Nick Palmer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 08:35:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA20474;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:31:58 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 08:31:58 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314112649.00b141b0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:32:09 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Administration's nuclear weapons policy
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"yynz42.0.o_4.w1Day" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46543
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The new proposed strategy to use small nuclear weapons has stirred up a lot 
of opposition. See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24156-2002Mar13.html

http://www.sfgate.com/comics/fiore/

A quote from document #1:

"The Pentagon reviewers may seem to be activating the nuclear trigger by 
asserting that we will use nuclear weapons against any nation threatening 
biological or chemical warfare. Hitherto, nonnuclear states were exempt 
from U.S. nuclear attack, but the president says he has to have every 
possible option.

For some, the review offered a trip down memory lane. The advocacy of small 
nuclear weapons brought back memories of 1964, when Republican presidential 
contender Barry Goldwater traversed the country peddling tactical 
battlefield nukes no bigger than a fountain pen -- so small they could be 
clipped to a GI's shoulder tabs."

Thermonuclear weapons require a critical mass of fissionable fuel, much 
bigger than a fountain pen. It is hard to believe Goldwater actually said that.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 11:02:37 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA15290;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:59:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 10:59:33 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:00:08 -0800
Subject: Re: Administration's nuclear weapons policy
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B65D68.1B8D%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314112649.00b141b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"pLxYN3.0.dk3.KCFay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46544
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On 3/14/02 8:32 AM, "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com> wrote:

> Thermonuclear weapons require a critical mass of fissionable fuel, much
> bigger than a fountain pen. It is hard to believe Goldwater actually said
> that.
> 
> - Jed

The late Hermann Kahn speculated about bullet-sized nuclear weapons -- the
fissionable material was Californium, as I recall. Someone may know the
critical mass of the transuranic Californium.

--Gene

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 11:04:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18598;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:04:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:04:34 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314135246.00b14390 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:04:25 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
In-Reply-To: <00a401c1cb3a$16350640$bd8f209a ggrf30j>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer>
 <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce computer>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"xbAN-.0.WY4.2HFay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46545
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Nick Palmer wrote:

>So, we don't compost or "digest" our cow manure but we do digest our human 
>toilet waste to create methane which is burned in piston engines to create 
>electricity.

Piston engines or gas turbines? How much horsepower?


>. . . human sewage contains lots of perhaps unexpected chemicals such as 
>female hormones, heavy metals, drug residues etc which make it not ideal 
>for food crops.

Also tomato seeds, which grow. They are very hardy. Female hormones are no 
more common in natural human waste than any other species as far as I know, 
but there may be a slight elevation from contraceptives. I very much doubt 
it could be measured! In Japan, hardline conservatives blocked legalization 
of oral contraception until a few years ago. Their last ditch argument was 
that it might increase the amount of hormones in the water supply. That's 
outrageous. Many of these same people are conservative business leaders who 
are responsible for the frightful pollution, floating trash, filth and 
untreated sewage that clogs Japan's rivers and seas.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 11:19:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA23634;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:13:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:13:29 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314140654.00a8ca68 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:12:54 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020313151802.03e22c08 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <3C8FA599.367E2FFC ix.netcom.com>
 <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020312180831.03191e08 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020313113407.03dfa968 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"9naGa1.0.Bn5.OPFay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46546
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>Also, the physical containers designed to hold the material could be 
>engineered to survive 10,000 years unattended. . . .It is impossible to 
>build a structure from metal or rock that will survive 100,000 years.

Source: a recent article in Sci. Am. You would think that a man-made cave 
would last this long, but apparently engineers project the roof would 
collapse and containers made from any metal alloy would decay, spilling the 
contents.

Somewhere I read that the goal of deep burial projects is to end up in the 
distant future with levels of radioactivity in the rocks no higher than in 
the most concentrated naturally occurring uranium ore. That seems reasonable.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 11:27:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA30820;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:24:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 11:24:57 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314141421.00b14390 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:24:46 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Administration's nuclear weapons policy
In-Reply-To: <B8B65D68.1B8D%editor infinite-energy.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314112649.00b141b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"7b4j03.0.UX7.9aFay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46547
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Eugene F. Mallove wrote:


>The late Hermann Kahn speculated about bullet-sized nuclear weapons . . .

Yikes. What a fun-loving guy he was. Always thinking the unthinkable!


>-- the fissionable material was Californium, as I recall.

Great! Just what the world needs. I sure hope CF cannot be made into a 
weapon. A quick search of the web comes up with a message by someone 
speculating about this:

http://yarchive.net/nuke/micronuke.html

This person calculates the critical mass would be a 2.7 cm sphere. It 
sounds impractical.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 12:44:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA24302;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:41:19 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 12:41:19 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3C910ABB.BE4BAD bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 15:40:27 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer>
	 <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce computer> <5.1.0.14.2.20020314135246.00b14390@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"5s0PH2.0.Px5.ghGay" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46548
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Female hormones are no
> more common in natural human waste than any other species as far as I know,
> but there may be a slight elevation from contraceptives. I very much doubt
> it could be measured! In Japan, hardline conservatives blocked legalization
> of oral contraception until a few years ago. Their last ditch argument was
> that it might increase the amount of hormones in the water supply. That's
> outrageous. Many of these same people are conservative business leaders who
> are responsible for the frightful pollution, floating trash, filth and
> untreated sewage that clogs Japan's rivers and seas.

Ackshully, this was just recently in the local news:

http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/epaper/editions/wednesday/metro_c3e8df9762e0324d001f.html

excerpting:

"In raw water, concentrations of most of the compounds were very
low, much less than 1 part per billion. But previous research
shows that exposure to levels even lower than reported in the new
study can have adverse effects on wildlife. 

Those effects might be particularly true for "endocrine
disrupters," chemicals that can affect animals' growth and
reproductive systems.  Various forms of estrogen, including those
in birth control pills, might act as endocrine disrupters."

Nasty stuff, those female hormones!

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 13:52:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10328;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 13:49:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 13:49:00 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314152208.00a8ca68 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 16:31:40 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Bill from Allegheny Power illustrates CF prospects
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"yi38o.0.EX2.BhHay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46549
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Below is a spreadsheet of the numbers from an informative electric power 
bill, issued by Allegheny Power in Pennsylvania. "Generation charges" are 
38% of the total. "Distribution" costs 28%. Something called the "KWH 
charge" is 21%. Apparently this is also a distribution cost. See:

http://www.alleghenypower.com/CSC/Choice/guide.pdf

Anyway, the point is if CF or Mills hydrino power is used in large central 
plants, this would not have much effect on the cost of electric power, and 
it would have a limited impact on overall energy problems. Mills has talked 
about building centralized power generators. Based on this bill and other 
sources, I estimate this would reduce the cost of electricity by roughly 
20%, half the generation cost. (I wish I could get a better handle on this 
number.)

It has often been noted that wind power is at best marginally competitive 
even though fuel costs are zero. CF or hydrino power may be similar, 
especially if they require expensive Pd or other materials. This comparison 
is unfair to wind power, because the power bill does not cover damage to 
the environment or health. I doubt that such costs will be added to 
electric bills or the cost of gasoline anytime soon.

A 20% reduction in cost may not be enough to justify decentralized small 
scale production of hydrogen with electrolysis for transportation in 
filling stations. It might not justify replacing many coal and gas-fired 
blast furnaces and space heating with electric furnaces. In other words, 
centralized power production with CF may only clean up pollution from 
electric power generation, not transportation or manufacturing. 
Small-scale, decentralized CF would have larger impact, much sooner. (The 
same goes for hydrino power, magnet power or what-have-you.)

Large scale, centralized production of hydrogen from CF heat might be more 
economical than decentralized production with CF electricity.

Small scale cogeneration with conventional fuel (especially natural gas) 
might save more money than centralized CF.

Centralized CF would be cheaper than wind power, so if society decides to 
pay the cost and invest in pollution-free, chemically fueled 
transportation, it would pay less with CF than wind.

Half of Pennsylvania's electricity comes from coal, and one-fourth from 
nuclear fission, which is typical for the U.S. Allegheny Power is a 
Maryland supplier. I do not know how it generates electricity, but I 
suppose its rates are influenced by overall state supplies and competition. 
Maryland has an unusual mix of supplies that looks expensive to me. See:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/pennsylvania/pa.html#t2

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/st_profiles/maryland/md.html#t1


KWH206
Generation charge at .03301 per KWH6.8038%
Transmission charges0.915%
Distribution charges
   Customer Charge5.0028%
    KWH Charge3.7821%
Transition Charges:
   Competitive Transition Charge(0.10)-1%
   Intangible Transition Charge1.287%
PA Tax Adjustment at 1.59%0.282%
Current Allegheny Power Charges (total)17.95

(Note. This table is copied from a spreadsheet and it came nicely formatted 
in a Eudora message form. I will try sending it in this format. I hope it 
does not mess up anyone's e-mail. It would be handy for this forum to 
support tables of numbers.)

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 14:07:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20614;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:07:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:07:01 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314170325.04386c78 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:06:36 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Bill from Allegheny Power illustrates CF prospects
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314152208.00a8ca68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"qTdUb2.0.w15.5yHay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46550
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Oops. The table format was lost. Here it is again.

KWH 206
Generation charge at .03301 per KWH:  $6.80  38%
Transmission charges                             0.91   5%
Distribution charges
Customer Charge                                    5.00  28%
KWH Charge                                          3.78  21%
Transition Charges:
Competitive Transition Charge               (0.10)   -1%
Intangible Transition Charge                    1.28     7%
PA Tax Adjustment at 1.59%                  0.28     2%

Current Allegheny Power Charges (total) 17.95

- JR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 14:29:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30422;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:25:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:25:11 -0800
Message-ID: <3C91231B.87B0C58A bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:24:27 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
References: <v01530503b8ac5cbeb733 [12.21.211.189]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"R4HFx.0.FR7.6DIay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46551
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
> At 5:48 PM 3/6/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
> >Jed Rothwell wrote:
> >
> >> Maybe the ITER lobby is afraid someone will find some other fluid that
> >> works at higher temperatures.
> >
> >Exactly!  Once this is accepted and the materials scientists get
> >involved, who knows what could be achieved.
> >
> >Hey, wasn't someone on the list doing cavitation experiments with
> >something other than water a couple of years ago?
> >
> >Terry
> 
> Somebody was trying to get funding to try a liquid (HOT) LiD-LiT mixture.
> Was it Charles Cagle, or maybe Ross Tessien?

Must have been Ross.  He's mentioned in the Business Week article
on Sonofusion:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/02_11/b3774095.htm

"Actually, the entrepreneurial phase has already begun. Three
years ago, engineer Ross Tessien founded Impulse Devices Inc. His
Grass Valley (Calif.) startup has hired a leading
sonoluminescence researcher--D. Felipe Gaitan, a protege of
Crum's--and is working on simulations of sonofusion reactors up
to 20 feet in diameter that would create giant bubbles. Tessian
is now negotiating with Los Alamos National Laboratory to verify
his computer models."

And Jed might need to send Otis Port his "nice" CF letter.  He
says "Cold fusion fizzled . . ."  Otis is faily open minded.  I
corresponded with him after he wrote the article on the gravity
shielding superconducting disk.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 14:51:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA09979;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:47:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 14:47:47 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314174622.04398a48 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 17:47:16 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: What is so controversial about Taleyarkhan et al.?
In-Reply-To: <3C91231B.87B0C58A bellsouth.net>
References: <v01530503b8ac5cbeb733 [12.21.211.189]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"PDxa63.0.lR2.JYIay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46552
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>And Jed might need to send Otis Port his "nice" CF letter.  He
>says "Cold fusion fizzled . . ."  Otis is faily open minded.

I am disappointed in him. He knows the score. I don't think I'll bother 
sending him the letter.

Maybe his editor is to blame.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 18:53:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA20382;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:50:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 18:50:13 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Looking thru a glass onion.
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 22:01:28 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMIEENDCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"RiMfo.0.F-4.a5May" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46553
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi Vo.

Here's something for all you CF conspiracy theorists.
Nick Nichols is shaking the GOP tree for money and as
you can see on his website,

http://www.nichols-dezenhall.com/marketdef.htm

his "attack-dog" marketing campaign includes
mobilization of junk-science critics... Maybe something
our esteemed VV muckracker Eric B. could look
into?

K.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 14 21:05:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA14096;
	Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:02:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:02:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3C918077.C5B4B886 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 21:02:47 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: 11 mARCH ACS C&E NEWS REPORTS ON THE ORNL TALYARKHAN et al ARTICL;E
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"0a1Mw.0.kR3.x1Oay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46554
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

March 14 2002

Vortex,

The weekly C&E News publication by the American Chemical Society has
given a top placement of the Science publication of ORNL's sonofusion
report and initial controversy. It is an one page balanced reporting by
Ron Dagani.
Dagani gives links to Shapira and Saltmarsh's negative replication
results and Taleyarkhan et al's rebuttal of their results.
<<http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/SLan5av2.pdf>> for Shapirs et al.
<<http://www.rpi.edu/-laheyr/SciencePaper.pdf>> for Taleyarkhan et al.
I would say the chemical community has been, just a little fraction more
sympathetic of the "cold" fusion scene than ---
Some years ago, Infinite Energy carried a cartoon of a fight between
chemists and physicists outside a lanboratory.

-AK- in an one eyed  (temporary) report


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 00:27:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA25506;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:25:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:25:00 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05100300b8b74c60fc10 [209.23.136.10]>
In-Reply-To: <3C8E2EC7.60D86900 ix.netcom.com>
References: <3C8E2204.9A31FBC5 bellsouth.net>
 <3C8E2EC7.60D86900 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 02:23:42 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Commercial Biomass Project
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q6TNL2.0.SE6.S_Qay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46555
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: Commercial Biomass Project</title></head><body>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000">Ed Storms wrote;<br>
<br>
&gt;&nbsp; Cow manure<br>
is generated from plants that are raised on land somewhere.&nbsp; In
the<br>
process,</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000">True, but the
process of producing milk and fuel removes very little of the critical
minerals. In both cases, the basic material that is being removed is
carbon.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"><br>
<br>
&gt;materials are removed from this land which must be<br>
replaced.<br>
<br>
Practitioners of intensive agriculture do a good job of adding things
to the soil.<br>
<br>
<br>
&gt; This replacement can either be accomplished by returning<br>
the manure to the land as compost or raw manure,<br>
<br>
<br>
composting organic manure is better for the soil than the raw
material.<br>
<br>
&gt; or energy must be<br>
expended to generate even more chemical fertilizer.<br>
<br>
We (practitioners of intense agriculture) are doing a good job of that
at the moment.<br>
<br>
&nbsp; &gt;Your proposal<br>
would increase the energy needed to generate fertilizer as well as<br>
deny the soil the complex chemicals found in compost.</font><br>
<font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000">I disagree. Given
the way things are out here at the moment, and given that things
aren't going to change that much, this isn't that bad an idea. Since
it is &quot;Green&quot; it will qualify for tax credits, too bad most
farmers don't make enough money to use those credits.</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"><br>
&nbsp;&gt;The net<br>
result would be a faster destruction of the soil and a faster loss<br>
of nutrient value to the food chain than is already occurring.&nbsp;
This<br>
idea is one of many examples of how ignorance can cause an even<br>
worse problem.<br>
<br>
Ed</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000">You worry too much
Ed. OTOH, you could make the case that I don't worry enough. You might
wonder why I include myself in the practitioners of intensive
agriculture, which I don't like. I've been working this week as an
electrician, well the bills have to be paid. One job was at the local
Co-op's agricultural chemical facility, and the other was at a big
farmer's new shop. Both of these projects represent high fuel input,
chemical agriculture. I recently reflected that when I&nbsp; was
studying vocational agriculture in high school, they told us that very
few of us would be able to farm, but that there would be lots of jobs
in agricultural related fields, which has been exactly what happened.
If it wasn't for these sort of jobs, even more people would have had
to move into the Twincity area.&nbsp;</font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000"><br></font></div>
<div><font face="Arial" size="+3" color="#000000">Do I like industrial
agriculture, no. Is there anything that I can do about it, no. This
discussion made me think about potential applications that some of
Malloy Electric's customers might be interested in building one of
those plants especially if I can figure out how to get someone else to
pay for their construction. .</font></div>
<div><br></div>
<x-sigsep><pre>-- 
</pre></x-sigsep>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 00:30:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA27265;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:29:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:29:31 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315003202.00a486f0 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: steve mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 00:32:35 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Steve <steve dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: Business Week sonofusion article - 3/18 issue
In-Reply-To: <B8B10218.1A6B%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ax4-E3.0.nf6.e3Ray" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46556
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Gene:

Could you send me the full text of the article?

Thanks,
Steve

At 12:29 PM 3/10/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>All,
>
>Otis Port of Business Week, who has covered cold fusion in the past, did a
>nice two-page story on the sonofusion development, "Is It Really Fusion This
>Time?", March 18, 2002 issue, pp.90-91. I received my subscription copy
>yesterday (it may not yet be on newsstands till early this week). He
>mentions Roger Stringham of First Gate Energies, Inc. and also Ross Tessien
>of Impulse Devices -- both known in the cold fusion/new energy community.
>
>Toward the end of the article Port mentions that Stringham will discuss his
>latest efforts "on Mar. 22, during a final-day cold fusion session at the
>American Physical Society's Annual March Meeting in Indianapolis."
>
>[Note: Our group from NERL will have a video tape of our lab set up and
>experiments in cold fusion/sonofusion (work cooperative with Roger
>Stringham) at the APS meeting. But I will be unable to attend.--EFM]
>
>Closing paragraph of the BW article:
>
>   "Session moderator Scott R. Chubb, head of Research Systems, Inc. of
>Arlington, Va.  [Note: by day he is at NRL --Gene], predicts that
>researchers will eventually uncover 'some very exotic reactions' that
>explain how table-top fusion works.  For instance, he suggests that physical
>dynamics of sonofusion 'become deeply intertwined with electromagnetism,"
>causing deuterium to behave somewhat like electrons. 'This is something
>you'd never expect to see in conventional fusion reactions,' he adds. As
>more physicists get intrigued by sonofusion in coming months, he anticipates
>many other surprises."
>
>
>All in all a very good story, except for the obligatory off-putting phrase
>for journalists these days -- "Cold fusion fizzled, leaving scientists
>bitterly disappointed."  Cold fusion obviously didn't fizzle. It was the
>scientific establishment that fizzled and continues to do so on the matter
>of cold fusion.  The Science sonofusion article -- and good coverage such as
>this Business Week article-- may change that, but we shall see.  It's good
>to have the issue on the table again, so to speak!  And, wonder of wonders,
>Robert Park was NOT quoted...
>
>Best,
>
>Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
>Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
>Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
>PO Box 2816
>Concord, NH 03302-2816
>    editor infinite-energy.com
>    www.infinite-energy.com
>Ph: 603-228-4516
>Fx: 603-224-5975

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 01:33:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA18134;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 01:30:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 01:30:05 -0800
Message-ID: <005101c1cc04$0f544140$a28f209a ggrf30j>
From: "Nick Palmer" <nick7 itl.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer> <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce@computer> <5.1.0.14.2.20020314135246.00b14390@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 09:30:29 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"2Cafm3.0.ER4.SyRay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46557
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed wrote:-

<Piston engines or gas turbines? How much horsepower?>

They do use piston engines (since the 1960's) - I know because I used to
live within 150 yards of the building they were located in and had to listen
to the throb throb throb 24 hours a day. I do not know the horsepower but
there were about three engines parallel to each other; each was about 7 feet
tall, five feet wide and about 12 feet long. Judging from the assorted
noise, they never ran all three at once, presumably maintaining the idle
one. They generate enough electricity to power the waste handling site. N.B.
Jersey has an average population of 100,000.


<Female hormones are no
more common in natural human waste than any other species as far as I know,
but there may be a slight elevation from contraceptives. I very much doubt
it could be measured!>

The elevation in hormones from contraceptives is a problem. I was told this
by a senior civil servant/engineer who was NOT environmentally minded and
his usual modus operandi was to pooh pooh any such concerns. If he wouldn't
authorise the use of human manure derived soil conditioner as a fertiliser
for agricultural use, there must have been serious problems with it.

As Terry Blanton pointed out, the presence in our environment of hormone
mimicking chemicals (endocrine disruptors) is a problem too. Many think
these chemicals are responsible for the marked decline in sperm count that
has occurred.

Nick Palmer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 08:19:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA24938;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:15:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:15:49 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315111251.03e7afb8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:15:33 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Vortex replies to Biomass article
In-Reply-To: <005101c1cc04$0f544140$a28f209a ggrf30j>
References: <001f01c1ca96$752eefc0$8837fea9 computer>
 <005c01c1ca95$13295be0$5a8f85ce computer>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020314135246.00b14390 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZYMoK3.0.V56.ruXay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46558
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Nick Palmer wrote:

>They do use piston engines (since the 1960's) - I know because I used to 
>live within 150 yards of the building they were located in and had to 
>listen to the throb throb throb 24 hours a day. I do not know the 
>horsepower but there were about three engines parallel to each other; each 
>was about 7 feet tall, five feet wide and about 12 feet long.

I see. These are small scale generators. Similar Diesel generators are 
manufactured today for temporary or emergency power. They are mobile units, 
built on large truck chassis.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 10:28:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA32569;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:24:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:24:06 -0800
Message-Id: <200203151823.g2FINMx26468 mail4.mx.voyager.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Standing Bear <rockcast net-link.net>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell@infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Administration's nuclear weapons policy
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:25:18 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.1]
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314112649.00b141b0 pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314112649.00b141b0 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"BynV33.0.ny7.5nZay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46559
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Thursday 14 March 2002 11:32, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> The new proposed strategy to use small nuclear weapons has stirred up a lot
> of opposition. See:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24156-2002Mar13.html
>
> http://www.sfgate.com/comics/fiore/
>
> A quote from document #1:
>
> "The Pentagon reviewers may seem to be activating the nuclear trigger by
> asserting that we will use nuclear weapons against any nation threatening
> biological or chemical warfare. Hitherto, nonnuclear states were exempt
> from U.S. nuclear attack, but the president says he has to have every
> possible option.
>
> For some, the review offered a trip down memory lane. The advocacy of small
> nuclear weapons brought back memories of 1964, when Republican presidential
> contender Barry Goldwater traversed the country peddling tactical
> battlefield nukes no bigger than a fountain pen -- so small they could be
> clipped to a GI's shoulder tabs."
>
> Thermonuclear weapons require a critical mass of fissionable fuel, much
> bigger than a fountain pen. It is hard to believe Goldwater actually said
> that.
>
> - Jed


Jed,
	I highly doubt that the man that I supported in 1964 would ever have
said that.  The times then were highly charged.  Tape recorders were beginning
to be widely used and had become portable, facilitating  a new fashion
then called loosely:  'the politics of the remark'.  The charge:  'Shooting 
from the lip!'  was over used and applied thoughtlessly to any and all
politicians that had an opposing view to the accuser.  Lying was very
rampant.  Just about everything was recorded so that it could later be
misquoted, misconstrued, ad nauseum, at leisure.

	Anybody who dared to be even a little different was mercilessly
attacked.  This was a time of the 'string tie' fashion, when it was considered
chic to look like a dweeb, nerd, nerf, ...you know....just a plain nobody.
Goldwater supporters were reputed to be all old ladies in worn tennis shoes.
Do you even know what tennis shoes ARE today?  Folks now often would
not even venture out on a tennis court with less than the 100 big company
product that cost 59 cents to produce using asian slave or prison labor.

	As for fissionable material.  Transuranic elements are very unstable,
undergoing spontaneous fission easily.  However, suppose one could find
the 'sweet spot' in a transuranic in the predicted 'zone of stability' around
atomic number 114-116.  There just might be a relatively stable isotope
out there;  we just have to find it.  Such an isotope conceivably could 
have a very low critical mass indeed;  maybe even fit in a pencil lead!?

Standing Bear

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 10:28:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA01443;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:26:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 10:26:41 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315125952.03e80658 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:26:32 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: California Energy Commission, distributed energy costs
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314152208.00a8ca68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KDQiu.0.DM.WpZay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46560
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>I estimate [zero cost fuel] would reduce the cost of electricity by 
>roughly 20%, half the generation cost. (I wish I could get a better handle 
>on this number.)

This web page shows gas turbine fuel costs at about 75% of the generation cost:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/distgen/economics/cost_of_electricity.html

The other numbers on this page are questionable. It says the cost of 
generation is $0.11 per kWh. That seems too high. Elsewhere it says large 
scale wind turbine equipment cost is $800 per kW capacity, which sounds too 
low. Maybe these numbers apply to California, which is unique in some ways.

Anyway, fuel is between 50% and 75% of the cost up to the busbar, depending 
on the type of fuel, according to various sources. Low cost or zero cost 
fuel by itself is unlikely to trigger a major commercial revolution. 
(Naturally, CF or hydrinos would trigger a scientific revolution.) The real 
savings will be in eliminating the distribution network, and scaling 
generators down to the demands of applications. Mills and others hope to 
work with electric power companies to produce centralized power. If the 
power companies go along with this plan, it will be an excellent way to 
generate  profits quickly, and establish credibility. But after five years 
or so I think competition from distributed small scale power will make this 
strategy obsolete.

Using CF or hydrinos in large, central generator plants would be like using 
slow, first generation microprocessors in mainframe computers. That does 
not 'play to the strength' of the new product. New products have often been 
held back when people tried to market them or employ them as direct 
replacements for the older product. Often, the way tasks and tools were 
arranged, the old products worked better. Around 1880 people talked about 
installing one telephone per town, like a telegraph. This would be more 
expensive and less reliable than a telegraph, with a shorter range between 
stations. It would be equally inconvenient, since you would still have to 
post one person at the end of the line to take messages and dispatch them.

There are other interesting pages here, such as:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/distgen/economics/operation.html

These maintenance costs for wind power are lower than EPRI estimated years 
ago. Evidently maintenance costs have fallen, which is not surprising.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 11:59:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA17586;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:56:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:56:30 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315143558.03e7b100 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:56:00 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: CA monthly off-line data table
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"6bA5z3.0.fI4.j7bay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46561
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

People have argued that the California energy crisis has many complex 
causes: demand grew, new construction languished, consumer price caps 
distorted the market. Maybe so, but the proximate cause was that power 
companies took generators off line. The power companies say the plants went 
off line for scheduled or emergency maintenance. Opponents say it was to 
jack up the prices. Here are the numbers:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/1999-2001_monthly_off_line.html

The power companies said maintenance and outages increased because 
equipment was getting older. I do not think they could have increased so 
suddenly.

Sometimes a single table of numbers cuts through the bunk.

Another document shows that peak demand -- which is what triggers outages 
-- fell from 1998 to 2001, from 53,119 MW to 47,820 MW. See:

http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/2001-11-20_700-01-002.PDF

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 12:47:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA06439;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:39:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:39:23 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 12:39:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: CA monthly off-line data table
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315143558.03e7b100 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020315123004.11138H-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"MVqk62.0.Ra1.vlbay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46562
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


I don't doubt that the power companies did go off line for reasons other
than what they claim. They didn't want to sell and the laws say they have
to, the only excuse to not sell is downtime. I don't doubt that they did
do maintence, what is the reason they decided to do the maintenace then?

At issue, is what is that reason.

Some people think the generator companies were trying to increase demand
and raise prices. 

One obvious reason that the advocates of the drive up demand theorist
always reject is that they were selling to a bad credit risk, and were not
likely to get paid. I wonder why the advocates of this theory believe the
power generator companies were smart enough to conspire and raise prices,
yet too dumb to know that the comapnies they were selling to were not
likely to be able to pay them regardless of what they charged.

I don't see the need to suppose the invivible hand of conspiracy to
explain what common econmic theory predicts.


On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> People have argued that the California energy crisis has many complex 
> causes: demand grew, new construction languished, consumer price caps 
> distorted the market. Maybe so, but the proximate cause was that power 
> companies took generators off line. The power companies say the plants went 
> off line for scheduled or emergency maintenance. Opponents say it was to 
> jack up the prices. Here are the numbers:
> 
> http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/1999-2001_monthly_off_line.html
> 
> The power companies said maintenance and outages increased because 
> equipment was getting older. I do not think they could have increased so 
> suddenly.
> 
> Sometimes a single table of numbers cuts through the bunk.
> 
> Another document shows that peak demand -- which is what triggers outages 
> -- fell from 1998 to 2001, from 53,119 MW to 47,820 MW. See:
> 
> http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/2001-11-20_700-01-002.PDF
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 13:12:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA26359;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:07:54 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:07:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315153134.03e7afb8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:07:24 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Bill from Allegheny Power illustrates CF prospects
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314170325.04386c78 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020314152208.00a8ca68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"j28kV3.0.mR6.dAcay" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46563
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

My previous analysis of this bill is not fair. I use very little 
electricity. The  $5 "customer charge" is the fixed monthly cost "for 
services such as meter reading and billing." This was 28% of my bill, but 
for most customers it would be a much smaller fraction. On the other hand, 
people using CF home generators will not pay anyone $5 to account for their 
use. Also, very poor rural families today might pay only $18, because they 
heat with firewood and avoid using electricity whenever possible. For them, 
this $5 is a substantial expense.

Let me adjust the percentages slightly, ignoring this $5 charge.

KWH 206

Generation charge at .03301 per KWH: $6.80 53%
Transmission charges 0.91 7%
Distribution charges
Customer Charge DELETED
KWH Charge 3.78 29%
Transition Charges:
Competitive Transition Charge (0.10) -1%
Intangible Transition Charge 1.28 10%
PA Tax Adjustment at 1.59% 0.28 2%
Total 12.95

Based on this, the fuel of cost is roughly a third of the total expense, 
which is substantially more than I estimated yesterday. This is in line 
with other rule of thumb estimates I have heard.

If this cost reduction were passed on to the customers, it would have a 
large impact. Still, electricity might not be cheap enough for things like 
space heating or distributed hydrogen production for transportation. Fuel 
cell transportation would be economical, but straight hydrogen ICE probably 
would not be. (Source: NREL Hydrogen Program Plan.) Hydrogen ICE hybrid 
electric might work, but why bother?

Again, let me emphasize that this is strictly based on dollar costs, 
ignoring social costs & benefits, health, environment, the threat of 
oil-funded terrorism, war, and so on.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 13:25:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32335;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:22:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:22:19 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315160808.03e7b100 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:22:09 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: CA monthly off-line data table
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020315123004.11138H-100000 eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315143558.03e7b100 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Z987K.0.-u7.9Ocay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46564
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Stephen Lajoie wrote:

>Some people think the generator companies were trying to increase demand 
>and raise prices.

Maybe this was a typo? Withholding supplies and causing power outages does 
not increase demand. It causes drastic, permanent reductions when customers 
conserve, mainly by buying new appliances and lights.


>One obvious reason that the advocates of the drive up demand theorist
>always reject is that they were selling to a bad credit risk, and were not
>likely to get paid. . . .

>I don't see the need to suppose the invivible hand of conspiracy to
>explain what common econmic theory predicts.

No doubt economic forces drove them to withhold power. My point is that it 
would have been more honest for them to say this, rather than pretend 
something was wrong with their generators. It is now clear that 
"maintenance" was an excuse, or a cover-up. They had to pretend, because it 
is against the law to take the generators off line when nothing is wrong 
with them, even when you are being forced to sell power at a loss. Everyone 
agrees that situation was economic insanity.

The power companies created long-term troubles for themselves when they 
came up with this excuse. Apparently, some people, including some power 
company executives and regulators, actually believed generator capacity 
could not meet the demand. They have now built thousands of megawatts of 
new capacity, while at the same time peak demand fell by 5,000 MW (10%). I 
predict this will lead to a huge glut in capacity.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 13:56:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA15655;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:53:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:53:15 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020315163232.03e9b350 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:35:37 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Hormones etc. in water
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KVkfg.0.Lq3.9rcay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46565
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The New York Times copied this story. See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/14/health/14POLL.html

"The survey of more than 100 waterways downstream from treatment plants and 
animal feedlots in 30 states found minute amounts of dozens of antibiotics, 
hormones, pain relievers, cough suppressants, disinfectants and other 
products."

They point out that some of the antibiotics and hormones probably come from 
livestock. Livestock waste is usually not treated as carefully as human 
waste. Some of the chemicals detected may be a natural product of 
indigenous plants and animals.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 15 15:31:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04050;
	Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:28:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:28:17 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9283F8.759B763A ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 15:30:00 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 15, 2002]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"OIfXJ3.0.0_.GEeay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46566
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: What's New for Mar 15, 2002
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 14:40:04 -0500 (EST)
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
To: aki ix.netcom.com

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 15 Mar 02   Washington, DC

1. NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW: LEAKED DOCUMENT IGNITES HEATED DEBATE.
For more than half a century, the sole use for US nuclear weapons
has been to deter a nuclear attack.  For a decade, US policy had
been to maintain existing weapons under a Science-Based Stockpile
Stewardship Program.  As What's New has repeatedly warned (WN 11
Jan 02), that has all changed.  This week, a classified Pentagon
report, The Nuclear Posture Review, suddenly appeared on various
web sites.  It describes a plan to develop a new class of small
nuclear weapons for a nuclear strike force, even while calling
for deep cuts in strategic weapons.  This has ignited a healthy
public debate over nuclear policy in a post 9/11 world.  It's all
reminiscent of the 1971 publication of the Pentagon Papers by the
New York Times.  We aren't telling who the Daniel Ellsberg is in
the Nuclear-Posture leak, but conscientious government employees
who are willing to risk their careers by leaking classified
documents may be the only check on government excesses carried
out behind the screen of national security.

2. BUBBLE FUSION: IT'S NOTHING LIKE THE COLD FUSION FIASCO.  But
it's getting there.  The first warning sign that a scientific
claim is voodoo is that it's pitched directly to the media.  That
didn't happen with the Taleyarkhan et al. bubble-fusion paper (WN
8 Mar 02).  The authors went through all the hoops, submitting
their paper to a respected, peer-reviewed journal. It was Science
that seemed determined to sensationalize the work.  In the course
of a year, various drafts went to 13 or 14 reviewers, which does
not inspire confidence.  A number of reviewers reportedly advised
against publication and some complain that Science did not tell
them of Shapira and Saltmarsh's failure to confirm fusion claims. 
The second warning sign of voodoo science is that any failure to
confirm is blamed on an "establishment" conspiracy.  A Business
Week story says one author of the Taleyarkhan paper "hinted" that
Shapira and Saltmarsh were protecting "the fusion establishment." 

3. NASA: WHITE HOUSE DROPS NOMINATION OF MARINE CORPS GENERAL. 
The 1958 charter establishing NASA calls for the Administrator
and Deputy Administrator to be appointed "from civilian life."
When Admiral Truly, a former astronaut, took the top job in 1989
he retired from the Navy.  But when the White House chose Charles
Bolden for the No.2 job, the two-star Marine Corps general, also
a former astronaut, was offered a third star to take the job. But
the chair of Armed Services, Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), and ranking
member, John Warner (R-VA), balked.  The nomination was dropped.

4. BURTON AWARD: ADRIAN MELOTT IS SELECTED FOR THE 2002 AWARD.  
A professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Kansas,
Melott played a key role in helping the people of Kansas reverse
a creationist inspired action of the school board (WN 13 Aug 99).

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 00:34:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA11206;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:31:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:31:40 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05100300b8b89f296f49 [209.23.136.42]>
In-Reply-To: <B8B4F5F2.1B32%editor infinite-energy.com>
References: <B8B4F5F2.1B32%editor infinite-energy.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 02:30:00 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: D W Research
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"JxdLH3.0.0l2.hBmay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46567
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Eugene Mallove Posted;

>
>The careful work of David Wallman and Wilbur Dammann of DW Research
>(Colorado and Nebraska) reported in a number of issues of Infinite Energy,
>employs a carbon arc in pure water or an organic waste pool to generate a

When I E first posted the article on this I took an interest in it. 
As I understood it at the time, the oxidation of the carbonacious 
material in the waste accounted for all the energy observed. OTON, 
given the deuterium in the water, a small amount of fusion would 
account for the excess energy

>carbon (which like the water is "free").   Now I.0 kWHr of energy is 3413
>BTU. So the formal O/U is 4.11/1.  The carbon consumption may reduce
>"scientific O/U", but not necessarily by that much. Moreover, new methods

As I understand it, the patent is owned by Tupe Technology Corp. What 
is the Connection between them and D W Technology?

>
>Like cold fusion, this process is marginalized by the mainstream and even by
>most cold fusion/new energy researchers. Fortunately, DW is very, very
>intensely focused on commercialization and will no doubt succeed. They have
>a significant patent position. The integrity of this company, based on my
>intimate knowledge of the people, is extremely high.  This work should not
>be ignored in biomass energy discussions.

The marginalization of this by the establishment press is typical. 
What is their patent number? At 400% OU, the prospects for closing 
the loop are marginal, but this is a very interesting development 
never the less. It does have potential for heat production. IMHO, if 
they could get the effect to 1000% OU, that would have significant 
commercialization potential.

While I'm thinking about it, Hisho Kaku was on the Art Bell program 
last night. He was commenting on the sonically induced fusion and 
said that if confirmed, it would be the first time that LENR's had 
been verified. I emailed Art Bell and mentioned the list of LENR's 
synopsis that Ed Storms emailed to me, but he ignored me.




-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 05:29:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA12294;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:25:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:25:52 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 08:25:42 -0800
Subject: Re: D W Research
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B8B206.1BE8%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <a05100300b8b89f296f49 [209.23.136.42]>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"oZodw.0.x_2.WVqay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46568
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 3/16/02 12:30 AM, "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com> wrote:

> Eugene Mallove Posted;
> 
>> 
>> The careful work of David Wallman and Wilbur Dammann of DW Research
>> (Colorado and Nebraska) reported in a number of issues of Infinite Energy,
>> employs a carbon arc in pure water or an organic waste pool to generate a
> 
> When I E first posted the article on this I took an interest in it.
> As I understood it at the time, the oxidation of the carbonacious
> material in the waste accounted for all the energy observed. OTON,
> given the deuterium in the water, a small amount of fusion would
> account for the excess energy
> 
>> carbon (which like the water is "free").   Now I.0 kWHr of energy is 3413
>> BTU. So the formal O/U is 4.11/1.  The carbon consumption may reduce
>> "scientific O/U", but not necessarily by that much. Moreover, new methods
> 
> As I understand it, the patent is owned by Tupe Technology Corp. What
> is the Connection between them and D W Technology?

There is NO connection whatsoever.  In my opinion, DW Research is by far the
most scientific group working on this process and they have what appears to
be a significant patent position. The other players deal in smoke and
mirrors and in fact are in the process of suing one another!  (I'm not going
to get into this right now. Let them sink their own ships.)
> 
>> 
>> Like cold fusion, this process is marginalized by the mainstream and even by
>> most cold fusion/new energy researchers. Fortunately, DW is very, very
>> intensely focused on commercialization and will no doubt succeed. They have
>> a significant patent position. The integrity of this company, based on my
>> intimate knowledge of the people, is extremely high.  This work should not
>> be ignored in biomass energy discussions.
> 
> The marginalization of this by the establishment press is typical.
> What is their patent number?

I'll get the list of patent numbers from Wallman and post them.


> At 400% OU, the prospects for closing
> the loop are marginal, but this is a very interesting development
> never the less. It does have potential for heat production. IMHO, if
> they could get the effect to 1000% OU, that would have significant
> commercialization potential.

They may be there already.
> 
> While I'm thinking about it, Hisho Kaku was on the Art Bell program

That is "Michu Kaku"

> last night. He was commenting on the sonically induced fusion and
> said that if confirmed, it would be the first time that LENR's had
> been verified. 

Kaku has not bowed one inch to cold fusion in the past. He is an opportunist
trying to take over Sagan's mantle, peddling the non-sense of hyperspace and
the Big Bang.  I helped him with his Hyperspace book and was credited by him
in the acknowledgements, but today I view such books as the jokes that they
are.

>I emailed Art Bell and mentioned the list of LENR's
> synopsis that Ed Storms emailed to me, but he ignored me.
> 
> 

Gene Mallove
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 05:32:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA13635;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:31:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:31:03 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 08:31:42 -0800
Subject: Earthfirst Tech -- press release
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B8B36E.1BEB%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Urulh1.0.zK3.Naqay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46569
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This press release has been circulating.


*****


On February 14, 2002, EarthFirst Technologies, Incorporated and EarthFirst
NextGas, Inc. (collectively, the "Company") filed a lawsuit against Ruggero
M. Santilli ("Santilli"), Hadronic Press, Inc. ("HPI") and Institute for
Basic Research, Inc. ("IBR") in the Circuit Court in Hillsborough County,
Florida (the "Lawsuit"). In the Lawsuit, the Company alleges, among other
things, that Santilli, HPI and IBR, through Santilli's "Notice to Cease and
Desist Your Civil and Criminal Violations in Your Activities with the
MagneGas-Next Gas Technology", tortiously interfered with the Company's
contractual and business relationships. As part of the Lawsuit, the Company
filed a Verified Motion for Temporary Injunction in which the Company asked
the Circuit Court to enjoin Santilli, HPI and IBR from engaging in the
alleged interference. On February 15, 2002, the Circuit Court entered its
Temporary Injunction enjoining Santilli, HPI and IBR from interfering with
the Company's contractual and business relationships. With the Temporary
Injunction in place, the Company will pursue the lawsuit towards a final
resolution.

Our employees and management look forward to now devoting all of our
energies to bring the Company's first commercial installation of our
BigSpark(TM) converter into operation, to completing sales of our
NextGas(TM) synthetic fuel, and to achieving additional installations of
BigSpark(TM) converters.

CONTACT:
EarthFirst Technologies, Incorporated, Tampa
Jim Mahoney, 813/258-1065 ext. 238
jmahoney earthfirsttech.com

or

Beverly Mercer, 813/258-1065 ext. 237
bmercer earthfirsttech.com
http://www.earthfirsttech.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 05:33:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA14749;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:33:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 05:33:02 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 08:33:41 -0800
Subject: DW Energy Research
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B8B3E5.1BED%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"WMXCd3.0.Nc3.Dcqay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46570
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Correction:

DW Research is actually DW Energy Research.

Gene

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 06:33:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA01895;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:30:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 06:30:42 -0800
Message-ID: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 07:30:11 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"ErXw32.0.XT.ISray" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46571
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Delving into the quark make-up of the proton suggests that there could be a natural
population of protons that have a net dipole moment (-++) as opposed to those that
don't (+-+) depending on the quark arrangement.

This poses a problem of separation of these "proton isomers", that may only show a
mass difference of a fraction of an Mev.

An electrostatic separator that would allow the non-polar
ion species to be swept out of an ion beam passing between a pair of charged plates,
perhaps?

Other, less energy intensive (chemical) means?

If such a proton species exists, it could explain a lot of CF/OU and low energy
Neutron Stripping effects and possibly Mills' Hydrino phenomena.

Regards,    Frederick





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 09:15:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA28325;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:12:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 09:12:02 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05100300b8b92885cacc [209.23.136.30]>
In-Reply-To: <B8B8B206.1BE8%editor infinite-energy.com>
References: <B8B8B206.1BE8%editor infinite-energy.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:10:43 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re:The great Dr. Kaku
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"GIeL63.0.Qw6.Xptay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46572
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

That patent that D W Research has interests me. First of att it is O 
U, second I'm wondering how they got around the patent that Toupe has.

>
>That is "Michu Kaku"
>
>>  last night. He was commenting on the sonically induced fusion and
>>  said that if confirmed, it would be the first time that LENR's had
>>  been verified.
>
>Kaku has not bowed one inch to cold fusion in the past. He is an opportunist
>trying to take over Sagan's mantle, peddling the non-sense of hyperspace and
>the Big Bang.

I listened to as much of Carl Sagan's Cosmos on Public TV as I could 
stand. I come up with the Moniquer of Cosmic B S to describe my 
feelings for the show.

>  I helped him with his Hyperspace book and was credited by him
>in the acknowledgements, but today I view such books as the jokes that they
>are.

According to Howard, who has a PhD in Chem Eng., If there are worm 
holes in space will be on the atomic level in terms of size. This 
would mean that if you succeeded in getting through one it would be 
like going through a screen with holes that size which, IMHO, would 
have the effect of atomizing you. As I told a woman who wanted to 
know if I could build a transport beam like the one on Star Trek. The 
problem isn't taking you apart, the problem is putting you back 
together again and getting you to work.

>
>>I emailed Art Bell and mentioned the list of LENR's
>>  synopsis that Ed Storms emailed to me, but he ignored me.


Now that you mention it Eugens, I think that Michu would be an 
excellent successor for Carl Sagan. He can spread it with the best of 
them, get your hip boots!.

>  >
>  >
>
>Gene Mallove
>  >


-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 10:25:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA23536;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:22:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 10:22:33 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 13:23:11 -0800
Subject: DW Energy Research Patents
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8B8F7BF.1BFA%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"SR3o41.0.dl5.fruay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46573
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>From David Wallman at DW Energy Research

Gene Mallove

********

Gene,
Our issued U.S. Patents are:
 
5,159,900 "Method & Means For Generating Gas From Water For Use As A Fuel",
Dammann

5,417,817 "Biomass Gasification Process & Apparatus"; Dammann, et al

6,113,865 "Reactor Configuration For A Liquid Gasification Process";
Dammann, et al

6,183,608 B1 "Electrode Positioning Mechanism"; Dammann, et al
 
We also have various patents based on 5,417,817 in eight foreign countries
and one patent pending in the U.S.  I can provide more information if
needed.
 
Best regards,
David

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 11:03:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06157;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:00:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 11:00:12 -0800
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 14:07:59 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
Reply-To: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>, vencislav_ygroups <vencib@yahoo.com>,
        William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>,
        Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>,
        Stefan Hartmann <harti harti.com>, harti@harti.com,
        Hamdi Ucar <hamdix verisoft.com.tr>
Subject: AND...Here I am again
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020316134622.27301D-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"qWcow1.0.pV1.vOvay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46574
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear Folks

	Recently I have been called to task about why I ask questions.

	Some persons have inferred or have wondered if I am part of some
group seeking to quash Free Energy.
	
	I have been called to task for:

	Debunking or bringing doubt to: 
	1]	Free Energy 
	2]	Reactionless Drive or Propellentless Propulsion
	3]	Over Unity

	4]	Aether or Ether

	On the last item, Aether or Ether, I will only say what I have
said about many terms:  
	If you use the term Aether, please tell us what you mean by it.
In classical literature there have been many many many different meanins
for Aether.

	SO:

	I ask individual and the forum, respectfully:

	Please let me know where I stand.....
	Am I For all of the Above, Against it and trying to kill it, am I
part of a group ...other than the perpetually curious ....

	One further NOTE:  Many Many time I write private messages off
line.  One reason for this, in some cases, is to try to make sure I do not
say anything that may be taken as negative about individuals.  ANY person
is entitled to their opinion... but no indivdual is Entitled to be wrong
in their facts. 
	I was hammered on years ago when I made a public statement about
some work I was doing.  The work was Gravity Modification, and EVERYONE
was hot to know the Do All End All Be All Answer: HOW do I make GM
Work?
	I publicly said:
	"Do Not hang your hat on what I say today, because next week I may
say something completely Different."
	On comment was "How can you SAY that?  How can you do work and NOT
have a solid answer?"
	Again, in public forum I replied:
	"I am exploring, learning and Next Week I may know different"

	The Point?   Any person may learn new information and may chnage
how they present.  The people I have most respect for are the people who
say, in forum, "I was wrong."  Why?  Because this lets people know a
result, a direction.

	So, please, a little comment from the Gallery:  
	What is my position?


				John Herman Schnurer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 13:14:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04485;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 13:10:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 13:10:58 -0800
Message-ID: <00f101c1cd26$a0741ce0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Underwater carbon arcs
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 14:09:29 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"UAMTW3.0._51.YJxay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46575
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The combustible nature of the gas bubbling to the surface from an underwater welding
arc between carbon electrodes was discovered and patented in the last century. Various
improved equipment for the production of said combustible gas have been patented
during this century. Nevertheless, the technology has not yet reached sufficient
maturity for regular industrial and consumer production and sales because of numerous
insufficiencies, including excessively short duration of the carbon electrodes which
requires prohibitive replacement and service, as well as low efficiency and high
content of carbon dioxide responsible for the green house effect. As a result of
numerous experimentations, this invention deals with a new equipment for the
production of a combustible gas from underwater arcs between carbon electrodes which
resolves said insufficiencies, and achieves the first known maturity for industrial
production and sales.

The technology of underwater electric welding via the use of an arc between carbon
electrodes to repair ships, was established in the last century. It was then
discovered that the gas bubbling to the surface from underwater arcs is combustible.
In fact, one of the first U.S. patent on the production of a combustible gas via an
underwater electric arc between carbon electrodes dates back to 1898 (U.S. Pat. No.
603,058 by H. Eldridge).

Subsequently, various patents were obtained in this century on improved equipment for
the production of said combustible gas, among which I quote U.S. Pat. No. 5,159,900
(W. A. Dammann and D. Wallman, 1992); U.S. Pat. No. 5,435,274 (W. H. Richardson, Jr.,
1995); U.S. Pat. No. 5,417,817 (W. A. Dammann and D. Wallman, 1995); U.S. Pat. No.
5,692,459 (W. H. Richardson, Jr., 1997); U.S. Pat. No. 5,792,325 (W. H. Richardson,
Jr., 1998); and U.S. Pat. No. 5,826,548 (W. H. Richardson, Jr., 1998).

The main process in these inventions is essentially the following. The arc is
generally produced by a DC power unit, such as a welder, operating at low voltage
(25-35 V) and high current (300 A to 3,000 A) depending on available Kwh. The high
value of the current brings to incandescence the tip of the carbon electrode in the
cathode, with consequential disintegration of the carbon crystal, and release of
highly ionized carbon atoms to the arc. Jointly, the arc separates the water into
highly ionized atoms of Hydrogen and Oxygen. This causes in the immediate surrounding
of the arc a high temperature plasma of about 7,000 F, which is composed by highly
ionized H, O and C atoms. A number of chemical reactions then occur within or near
said plasma, such as: the formation of the H.sub.2 and O.sub.2 molecule; the burning
of H and O into H.sub.2 O; the burning of C and O into CO; the burning of CO and O
into CO.sub.2 ; and other reactions. Since all these reactions are highly exothermic,
they result in the typical, very intense glow of the arc within water, which is bigger
than that of the same arc in air. The resulting gases cool down in the water
surrounding the discharge, and bubble to the surface, where they are collected with
various means. According to numerous measurements conducted at various independent
laboratories, the combustible gas produced with the above process essentially consists
of 45%-48% H.sub.2, 36%-38% CO, 8%-10% CO.sub.2, and 1%-2% O.sub.2, the remaining gas
consisting of parts per million of more complex molecules composed by H, O and C.

This process produces an excellent combustible gas because the combustion exhausts
meet all current EPA requirement without any catalytic muffler at all, and without the
highly harmful cancerogenic pollutants which are contained in the combustion exhausts
of gasoline, diesel, natural gas and other fuels of current use.

Despite the indicated excellent combustion characteristics, and despite research and
development conducted by inventors for decades, the technology of the combustible gas
produced by an underwater arc between carbon electrodes has not reached industrial
maturity until now, and no equipment producing said combustible gas for actual
practical usages is currently sold to the public in the U.S.A. or abroad, the only
equipment currently available for sale being limited to research and testing. The sole
equipment currently sold for public use produce different gases, such as the Brown gas
which is not suitable for use in internal combustion engines because it implodes,
rather than explodes, during combustion.

The main reason for lack of industrial and consumer maturity is the excessively short
duration of the carbon electrodes, which requires prohibitive replacement and
services. According to extensive, independently supervised, and certified
measurements, the electrodes are typically composed of solid carbon rods of about 3/8
inch in diameter and about 1 foot length. Under 14 Kwh power input, said electrodes
consume at the rate of about one and one quarter inch length per minute, requiring the
halting of the operation, and replacement of the electrodes every ten minutes.

The same tests have shown that, for 100 Kwh power input, said electrodes are generally
constituted by solid carbon rod of about 1 inch diameter and of the approximate length
of one foot, and are consumed under a continuous underwater arc at the rate of about 3
inch length per minute, thus requiring servicing after 3 to 4 minutes of operation. In
either case of 14 Kwh or 100 Kwh, current equipment requires servicing after only a
few minutes of usage, which is unacceptable on industrial and consumer grounds for
evident reasons, including increased risks of accidents for very frequent manual
operations in a high current equipment

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 15:26:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA28340;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:18:24 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 15:18:24 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <010101c1cd38$68a9b6a0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <B8B8F7BF.1BFA%editor infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: DW Energy Research Patents
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:17:04 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"hjlaY2.0.kw6.-Azay" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46576
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 3:23 PM
Subject: DW Energy Research Patents

Gene,

Rather than throwing a lot of energy into creating photons with an energy-intensive
electric arc, one can immerse a suitably sheathed heating element (12, 120, or 240
volts ac or dc) in a water biomass slurry (cow manure or other) to create combustible
gases long before the water in the vessel comes to a boil.

The cellulosic-starch materials, n(C6H10O5) + nH2O --->
n(C6H12O6) materials react exothermally with water, that is why anaerobic bacteria can
hydrolyze and metabolate them.This is the material left over in manures that bacteria
use to produce methane. I found this out ca. 1974, but Chevron Research Labs in the
San Francisco area beat me to a patent. Also similar exothermic pathways are why
lumber exotherms when heated to ~ 450 F giving off CO + H2 etc., in house fires.

C6H12O6 + 6 H2O ---->  6 CO2 +  12 H2 + Energy

The Lignin Polymers n(CxHyOz, aromatic ring compounds) in biomass, undergo hydrolysis
much easier than do the strong carbon-carbon bonds in carbon rods or coke such as is
used in water gas production and will produce C2 and C3 hydrocarbon gases under less
stringent conditions. If one pressurizes the vessel so that the H2O is kept close to
the heating element, the carbon can react with the H2O before the carbon-carbon bonds
can form a char:

C + 2H2O + Heat --->  CO2 +  2 H2

A water or air-cooled "standpipe" condenses the steam mixed with the non-condensable
gases (CH4,C2H4, CO, and CO2)and pushes them to the top of the pipe under the same
pressure as that in the vessel, so that they can be bled off with a needle valve, and
burned in an engine,or stored under pressure.

Regards,     Frederick














From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 16:18:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA19131;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:16:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:16:01 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 11:15:23 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
In-Reply-To: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA19104
Resent-Message-ID: <"elJPh.0.og4.01-ay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46577
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Frederick Sparber's message of Sat, 16 Mar 2002 07:30:11
-0600:
Hi,
[snip]

>Delving into the quark make-up of the proton suggests that there could be a natural
>population of protons that have a net dipole moment (-++) as opposed to those that
>don't (+-+) depending on the quark arrangement.

I would expect the 2 ++ to repel one another, making -++ unstable.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 16:51:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA01324;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:48:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:48:36 -0800
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:40:09 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
 <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wwley3.0.TK.ZV-ay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46578
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>

> In reply to  Frederick Sparber's message:

> >Delving into the quark make-up of the proton suggests that there could be a
natural
> >population of protons that have a net dipole moment (-++) as opposed to those
that
> >don't (+-+) depending on the quark arrangement.

> I would expect the 2 ++ to repel one another, making -++ unstable.

Robin,

Here is Fred's explanation to me some time ago when I asked the same question:

Relativistic Electrodynamics stipulates that like charges moving/spinning in the
same
direction attract by the magnetic force:

 Fm = 1.0E-7 *q^2*(v)^2/R^2

so that when v reaches c, the Electrostatic Repulsive Force

Fes = kq^2/R^2 is canceled by the attractive magnetic force Fm.

Thus if the "captured electron-circle" (e-) end of a neutron couples to the
electron
(down quark end) of the proton, if the spins are in the same direction, then:

Fm = 1.0E-7 q^2 * c * v2/r^2 where c is the spin velocity of the electron (down
quark
end) of the proton and v2 is the spin velocity of "captured electron-circle"
(e-).


In short, Fred is explaining that the electrostatic repulsive force is cancelled
by the attractive magnetic force.

This makes a lot of sense to me and goes some distance towards explaining such
matters as low energy stripping, etc.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 17:34:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18864;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:31:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:31:39 -0800
Message-ID: <012d01c1cd4b$09f3d2e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:31:07 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Resent-Message-ID: <"O5eDw3.0.cc4.w7_ay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46579
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jones Beene" <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2002 6:40 PM
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?

And why nuclei with a  proton/neutron ratio greater than
1:1 don't fly apart.    :-)

Regards,  Frederick 


> From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
> 
> > In reply to  Frederick Sparber's message:
> 
> > >Delving into the quark make-up of the proton suggests that there could be a
> natural
> > >population of protons that have a net dipole moment (-++) as opposed to those
> that
> > >don't (+-+) depending on the quark arrangement.
> 
> > I would expect the 2 ++ to repel one another, making -++ unstable.
> 
> Robin,
> 
> Here is Fred's explanation to me some time ago when I asked the same question:
> 
> Relativistic Electrodynamics stipulates that like charges moving/spinning in the
> same
> direction attract by the magnetic force:
> 
>  Fm = 1.0E-7 *q^2*(v)^2/R^2
> 
> so that when v reaches c, the Electrostatic Repulsive Force
> 
> Fes = kq^2/R^2 is canceled by the attractive magnetic force Fm.
> 
> Thus if the "captured electron-circle" (e-) end of a neutron couples to the
> electron
> (down quark end) of the proton, if the spins are in the same direction, then:
> 
> Fm = 1.0E-7 q^2 * c * v2/r^2 where c is the spin velocity of the electron (down
> quark
> end) of the proton and v2 is the spin velocity of "captured electron-circle"
> (e-).
> 
> 
> In short, Fred is explaining that the electrostatic repulsive force is cancelled
> by the attractive magnetic force.
> 
> This makes a lot of sense to me and goes some distance towards explaining such
> matters as low energy stripping, etc.
> 
> Jones
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 18:24:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA08917;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:21:27 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:21:27 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:20:16 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA08881
Resent-Message-ID: <"VgWBw.0.CB2.cs_ay" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46580
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sat, 16 Mar 2002 16:40:09 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>> I would expect the 2 ++ to repel one another, making -++ unstable.
>
>Robin,
>
>Here is Fred's explanation to me some time ago when I asked the same question:
>
>Relativistic Electrodynamics stipulates that like charges moving/spinning in the
>same
>direction attract by the magnetic force:
[snip]
>In short, Fred is explaining that the electrostatic repulsive force is cancelled
>by the attractive magnetic force.
[snip]
This leads, at best, to a situation of "no force". IOW the two would
ignore one another and drift apart at the slightest nudge.
OTOH, situations in which the magnetic attraction was aided by electric
attraction, would be doubly strong. Ergo the latter would be very
stable, and the former unstable.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 16 19:51:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA13779;
	Sat, 16 Mar 2002 19:43:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 19:43:52 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 14:43:08 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <pt389uslc93t1o7gb2nsusiiqbphbogoam 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer> <012d01c1cd4b$09f3d2e0$a3b4bfa8@computer>
In-Reply-To: <012d01c1cd4b$09f3d2e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id TAA13711
Resent-Message-ID: <"H2v7k3.0.DN3.t31by" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46581
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Frederick Sparber's message of Sat, 16 Mar 2002 18:31:07
-0600:
Hi,
[snip]

>And why nuclei with a  proton/neutron ratio greater than
>1:1 don't fly apart.    :-)
>
>Regards,  Frederick 
[snip]
Such nuclei don't fly apart because the protons are separated by
neutrons.

Where this isn't possible, e.g. He2, the nucleus doesn't exist.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 07:56:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA07914;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 07:51:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 07:51:09 -0800
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 07:41:38 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
 <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
 <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
 <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"lU-3p2.0.Ux1.ijBby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46582
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>

> This leads, at best, to a situation of "no force". IOW the two would
> ignore one another and drift apart at the slightest nudge.
> OTOH, situations in which the magnetic attraction was aided by electric
> attraction, would be doubly strong. Ergo the latter would be very
> stable, and the former unstable.

Maybe, if that was as far as it went. But there are two other force to contend
with  at small distances, the strong and weak forces.

I like Fred's "stacked string circle" visualization of the quark structure of
the nucleus. The fact that it opens up the possibility of a certain population
of protons with a net dipole moment should not be a problem, AFAIK -in fact -
for those looking for answers to otherwise intractable cold fusion and hydrino
phenomena, this hypothesis of Fred's could be very instructive.

How better to explain such mysteries as the Lamb shift, QM stripping and certain
other unusual hydrogen phenomena in nature (that are usually ignored), such as:
"In classical quantum physical chemistry, the water molecule has two basic bond
angles, one angle being 104.degree., and the other angle being 109.degree.28'."

Also consider this, Robin. If Fred is correct and it is only that population of
hydrogen  that possesses a net dipole moment that is amenable to "shrinkage"
then this could  serve to partially explain one (of many) of R. Mills reported
"engineering" difficulties  in getting an "on demand" demonstration device into
the public arena.

As to the question of how large this population could be, here is a ballpark
estimate. Lets say a LENR cell (Pd-D) was designed that showed consistent a COP
of 2 (Pin  electrical and Pout thermal). Lets say this cell showed no evidence
of He or T but that there was significant transmutation in the Pd electrodes
that could be best explained as a neutron absorption. Lets say the energy of
such a transmutation was about half an MeV or about 100,000 times greater than
normal electrolysis/recombination.

Then of course, if every D atom in the cell were acted on equally by the
electrolysis reaction, then even a low ratio of polarized protons in some of the
D nuclei (1:100,000 - which are hypothesized to be easily stripped) - could
explain the entire excess energy of the cell. Since deuterium is only found in
water at a rate of 1:6000 AND if the polarized proton is far more likely to form
D from  P-e-P reaction, then perhaps only one in every billion or so protons in
nature would have to be polarized, ab initio, to explain the OU of the
particular cell just described.

That would explain why these have yet to be seen as anything but "noise"
in spectrographic or other kinds of analysis. We simply have never looked for
them!

Of course, in actual CF cells, things are never this simple and there could be
two or three other reactions, including QM tunneling that resulted in actual
fusion, all of which serve to complicate the situation by accounting for some of
the excess energy.

Regards,

Jones



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 08:01:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12871;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:01:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:01:23 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100304b8b9e2577470 [209.23.136.33]>
In-Reply-To: <200203152010.g2FKABm21290 bmail.newswire.ca>
References: <200203152010.g2FKABm21290 bmail.newswire.ca>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:59:09 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Tathacus President's Note to Shareholders
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"DrC-b2.0.w83.ItBby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46583
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html><head><style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { padding-top: 0 ; padding-bottom: 0 }
 --></style><title>Re: Tathacus President's Note to
Shareholders</title></head><body>
<div>Fellow Vortexians;</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>I have been following this story for the past year. For those of
you who aren't familiar with the story, Tathecus owns Xogen which has
the rights to a series of patents which sites Stan Meyers'patents in
the previous patents section. When the Canadian stock exchange
suspended trading on Tathecus' stock, I assumed that there was another
F E scandle developing. Well, you know what happens when you assume.
If you read through this message, it appears that these people are
proceeding withe development of this technology. I wonder if Tom
Valentine is the same man who used to be on the radio. </div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Courier"><b>Tathacus
President's Note to Shareholders</b></font><br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Calgary, March 15,
2002<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Tathacus would like to provide its shareholders
with an update on the<br>
activity since its December 19th, 2001 AGM. As always, your patience
and<br>
support through this period is greatly appreciated.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Tathacus is in ongoing discussions with CDNX staff
and is in receipt of<br>
the second draft of the AMCL report. The Company is currently working
with<br>
Xogen on finalizing its response thereto. In order to ensure that all
areas of<br>
the report are addressed in detail, a great deal of time and attention
have<br>
been dedicated to this issue. At this time, Tathacus expects the
final<br>
response to be completed shortly. It is difficult to predict when the
audit<br>
process will be completed, but please rest assured the Company is
doing all<br>
that it can to ensure that it concludes in as timely a fashion as is
possible<br>
under the circumstances.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In the meantime, Tathacus remains focused on
increasing revenues by way<br>
of additional production from its 100% owned gas properties and third
party<br>
gas processing contracts, while continuing to closely monitor and
control its<br>
spending.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For your records, a summary of December 19, 2001
AGM is provided below.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Summary of December 19, 2001 AGM<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The minutes from the AGM cover only the formal
procedural portion of the<br>
meeting, including the election of Directors, the approval of the
minutes from<br>
the previous AGM, the approval of the annual financials, and the
appointment<br>
of the auditor.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The discussion period and the Question and Answer
portion of the AGM were<br>
held on an informal basis, and thus were not recorded as part of the
official<br>
minutes.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Below is a brief synopsis of the informal
discussions.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Speakers included Tathacus Executive Management and
Directors, Xogen<br>
Scientific staff and Mr. Tom Valentine, legal counsel to the Company
for<br>
purposes of the CDNX audit.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; CDNX Audit<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The shareholders were advised that the audit is
on-going, and that a<br>
first draft of the Report had been delivered to the Company. Xogen
and<br>
Tathacus reviewed the report in detail and determined that it
contained errors<br>
of both logic and fact. Xogen and Tathacus prepared and delivered a
detailed<br>
response to both AMCL (the auditors) and the CDNX.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Meetings were then held in an attempt to assist the
audit team in better<br>
understanding the technology. AMCL is expected to deliver a second
draft which<br>
will then be reviewed and commented on by Xogen and Tathacus. Tom
Valentine</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>noted that this is a time-consuming
process, and while both sides are working</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>toward a resolution as quickly as
possible, it is difficult to estimate when</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>the audit will be concluded and
reinstatement of trading will occur.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Xogen<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Clair Shoemaker and Stephen Chambers of Xogen
advised the meeting that<br>
while a prototype burner rack for the furnace has been completed,
several<br>
engineering issues have held up the finalization of a
demonstration-ready<br>
furnace prototype. These issues are being addressed, and work is in
progress<br>
to find solutions and complete the prototype as quickly as
possible.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Finances<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; James Norrie, CFO, advised that the Company's cash
flow has been<br>
understandably tight during the suspension period. Tathacus relies on
its<br>
natural gas producing subsidiary, Crucero Resources Ltd., for income.
With</tt></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><tt>natural gas prices remaining as low
as they have over the past 8 months,<br>
income has been lower than anticipated. As well, the length of the
suspension<br>
has prevented Tathacus from acting upon two significant equity
financing<br>
offers which have expired. As a result, management and the Board are
working<br>
hard to manage costs. Likewise, new revenue generating opportunities
are also<br>
being pursued such as subleasing extra office space and aggressively
seeking<br>
out third-party gas processing opportunities for Crucero.<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Barrie Shibley, President and CEO, advised that
overhead savings have<br>
already been achieved through a voluntary decrease in salaries for all
members<br>
of Tathacus' executive management team. Mr. Shibley emphasized
that<br>
notwithstanding the audit and financial challenges, all members of
Tathacus<br>
remain completely committed to resolving the issues and growth and
success for<br>
Tathacus as a whole.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thank you for your interest; please feel free to
contact us with any<br>
further questions and/or comments you may have at</tt> <a
href="mailto:ir tathacus.ca"><tt>ir@tathacus.ca</tt></a><tt>.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Sincerely,<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Tathacus Investor Relations</tt></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<x-sigsep><pre>-- 
</pre></x-sigsep>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 08:01:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12944;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:01:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:01:28 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100305b8b9e498fc30 [209.23.136.33]>
In-Reply-To: <B8B8B36E.1BEB%editor infinite-energy.com>
References: <B8B8B36E.1BEB%editor infinite-energy.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:59:09 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Earthfirst Tech -- press release
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"RAtWH2.0.5A3.NtBby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46584
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Eugene Mallove posted;


Eugene, does this have anyting to do with D W Technology?

>
>On February 14, 2002, EarthFirst Technologies, Incorporated and EarthFirst
>NextGas, Inc. (collectively, the "Company") filed a lawsuit against Ruggero
>M. Santilli ("Santilli"), Hadronic Press, Inc. ("HPI") and Institute for
>Basic Research, Inc. ("IBR") in the Circuit Court in Hillsborough County,


-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 08:19:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18597;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:15:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:15:52 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 11:16:33 -0800
Subject: Re: Earthfirst Tech -- press release
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8BA2B91.1C1A%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <a05100305b8b9e498fc30 [209.23.136.33]>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jd51n3.0.TY4.t4Cby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46585
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 3/17/02 7:59 AM, "thomas malloy" <temalloy metro.lakes.com> wrote:

> Eugene Mallove posted;
> 
> 
> Eugene, does this have anyting to do with D W Technology?

> 
>> On February 14, 2002, EarthFirst Technologies, Incorporated and EarthFirst
>> NextGas, Inc. (collectively, the "Company") filed a lawsuit against Ruggero
>> M. Santilli ("Santilli"), Hadronic Press, Inc. ("HPI") and Institute for
>> Basic Research, Inc. ("IBR") in the Circuit Court in Hillsborough County,
> 


No!!  DW Energy Technology has no connection with EarthFisrt, Santilli,
Aquafuel, etc.  The only connection is that DW Energy Research is working on
a carbon arc in water/biomass system..

Note well: It is impossible to patent the generic carbon arc in water system
to generate a fuel gas -- that was patented by Eldridge in 1898. Only
specific embodiments can be patented (such as the controlled feeding of the
carbon rod into the arc or the capture of light energy by a spherical
absorber). And that is precisely what Wallman and Damann have done.

Gene
> 
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 08:57:37 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA06284;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:54:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 08:54:49 -0800
From: "xplorer" <xplorer indo.net.id>
To: "Vortex-L Eskimo. Com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>,
        "Freenrg-L Eskimo. Com" <freenrg-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:59:52 +0700
Message-ID: <NFBBJMADALIIAMPEBBELCEGFCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ou3M9.0.zX1.OfCby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46586
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A


Hi folks.

Several weeks ago a company drilling a gas well near here had
 a minor incident involving some loose fumes and an open flame.
The result was a towering inferno that can be heard for over a 
 kilometer and a half, and a nightly cloud lighting exhibition
 that never fails to remind us of why safety policies exist.
The top of the jet at 50 m. can almost be seen here in our camp,
 over thirty kilometres from the site. The well has high pressure
 natural gas shrieking out of a new discovery here that the
 company in question can't seem to do anything about. 

At any rate, some of us are here for another week and I will be
 one of the last expatriates here to get an opportunity to
 go visit the sight up close (I'll take video when I go).
I have been pondering what we witnessed on the veranda two nights
 ago, thinking that there should be some way to get a video or night
 shot of what we saw then.
Cloud cover was thin and intermittent over the well site,
 and we saw the brightness of the flare had increased considerably,
 more likely due to atmospherics than anything else.
The general glow of the flare illuminating the clouds was somewhat
 dim at altitude, the cloud layer ranging up to somewhere near 10000 m.
 according to rough estimates by triangulation.
We saw for several moments the clouds pierced by the light of the flare
 as if the flare had become the source of a rough beam.
The effect was incredible, and it lasted for minutes at a time,
 until some few minutes before we found a camera capable of
 taking night photos, (Aarrgh!) when the effect collapsed.
All I could think of was that the flame had become a natural laser,
 that the energy was being coherently focused into the clouds to
 produce the effect.
I would imagine this has been seen elsewhere, but I have not heard of it
 and my colleagues have also never seen this or heard tales about this
 type of phenomena before either.

A brief summary of the known (by us here) facts:
 Natural gas flare burning 50 m. into the air.
 Some H2S content, amount unknown.
 No wind or breeze at the time of occurrence.
 Light from flare is roughly orange.
 Beam effect was transitory, lasting at longest duration 10 minutes.
 Beam perceived to pierce perhaps 3 to 5 kilometres of thin clouds,
  at an elevation near 10,000 m. and up (triangulation based on GPS
  coordinates our camp, the well site, angle of site elevation).
 Well site at roughly same elevation as our camp, 100 M. mean sea level.
 All facilities around wellsite had been removed or incinerated,
  this means no electrical power connection to flame. [This said,
  the local power utility systems are notorious for having live grounds!]
 Radios in vicinity probably less than 150 watts.
 Powerful shrieking sound as the jet passes through what is left
  of the drilling equipment, possibly only a collar on the casing.
 
If this was indeed a natural laser activity,
 I would imagine it could be recreated in miniature
 using a long pipe to entrain the flame with either acoustic
 or electric stimulation to cause the lasing activity.

No, it wasn't our operation - we don't drill wells.
We make maps.

cheers




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 09:33:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA25704;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:31:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:31:34 -0800
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 09:23:10 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <00a101c1cdd8$69815c40$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <NFBBJMADALIIAMPEBBELCEGFCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Wr2t-1.0.WH6.rBDby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46587
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

From: "xplorer" <xplorer indo.net.id>

> If this was indeed a natural laser activity,
>  I would imagine it could be recreated in miniature
>  using a long pipe to entrain the flame with either acoustic
>  or electric stimulation to cause the lasing activity.

Methane and other kinds of combustion have been suggested for years as a
possible methodology for powering a ultra-high intensity laser. I suspect that
if it were possible (and could be used in such top secret programs as "Star
Wars") then a lot of the information would have been quashed in the USA.

The Japanese are looking into this too and the conclusion below seems to be that
there is at least the possibility of using methane combustion for laser
applications.

The long pipe as you suggest might substitute for an external EM resonance,
particularly since its diameter can be assumed to be in the range of appropriate
microwave wavelengths and the thermionic discharge, if it didn't melt first)
would likely be in the mega-amp range.


For instance:
"Determination of Population Inversion in Microwave-Enhanced Combustion of
Methane-Air Mixture in Ceramic Burner "  ERWIN F. CABRIDO, YOSHINORI ITAYA AND
SHIGEKATSU MORI  Department of Chemical Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya
464-8603, Japan

Abstract: Microwave enhanced combustion of methane-air mixture in a ceramic
burner is studied and the results suggest perturbation of the assumed Boltzmann
distribution of molecular energy levels. A small signal gain, which represents
the level of amplification of an incident beam in a medium, was detected using a
CO 2 laser. An increase in the signal ratio of two MCT photodetectors when the
combustion zone was irradiated by microwaves (2.45 GHz) indicates amplification
of infrared radiation (10.6 mm) hence the possibility of using the system for
laser applications. However, statistical analysis reveals that varying levels of
microwave power are not significantly different.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 12:53:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA18281;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 12:50:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 12:50:19 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:49:03 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t6ha4bd6r 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer> <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8@4ax.com> <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA18210
Resent-Message-ID: <"wahbL2.0.ST4.B6Gby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46588
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 07:41:38 -0800:
Hi Jones,
[snip]

>> attraction, would be doubly strong. Ergo the latter would be very
>> stable, and the former unstable.
>
>Maybe, if that was as far as it went. But there are two other force to contend
>with  at small distances, the strong and weak forces.

Forces superimpose. Ergo, the result would still be far greater
stability for one than for the other. In short, the unstable form would
rapidly convert to the stable form. Even normal nuclear reactions (inter
particle) happen in a time frame of E-23 to E-24 sec. These internal
conversions (intra particle) would be even faster.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 13:09:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA22634;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:02:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:02:28 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 08:01:38 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <pj0a9u0qs4ilaggrlumdfpv321nggpsiev 4ax.com>
References: <NFBBJMADALIIAMPEBBELCEGFCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
In-Reply-To: <NFBBJMADALIIAMPEBBELCEGFCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA22599
Resent-Message-ID: <"MR71p2.0.aX5.ZHGby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46589
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  xplorer's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:59:52 +0700:
Hi,
[snip]
>A brief summary of the known (by us here) facts:
> Natural gas flare burning 50 m. into the air.
> Some H2S content, amount unknown.
> No wind or breeze at the time of occurrence.
[snip]
Given the absence of wind it seems more likely to me that what you saw
was the effect of the hot air column above the flare, as it evaporated
the water droplets that form the clouds.
There may even have been a stabilising vortex formed around the hot air
column, such that an "eye" was punched in the clouds.
Normally, the wind would disperse the hot air column, so that the effect
would not occur (but I wouldn't rule the laser out altogether).

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 13:53:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06317;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:45:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:45:42 -0800
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:37:14 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
 <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
 <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
 <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8 4ax.com>
 <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9 computer>
 <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t6ha4bd6r 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"0XGmy.0.dY1.6wGby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46590
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>

> Forces superimpose. Ergo, the result would still be far greater
> stability for one than for the other. In short, the unstable form would
> rapidly convert to the stable form.

Why would the proton rapidly convert?

The strong force is certainly adequate to keep two loosely bound like-spin
quarks together - Ergo, a rather large amount of force would have to be extended
just to overcome the strong force - and overcoming the strong force would be a
prerequisite - after which a lesser force would be required for the reversal -
if time permitted.

> Even normal nuclear reactions (inter particle) happen in a time frame of  E-23
to E-24 sec. These internal conversions (intra particle) would be even faster.

What makes you think that any "internal conversion" would occur at all? What
would be the mechanism for such conversion?

Even if some sort of QM suspension of the strong force did occur intermittently,
it might lower the probability of protons with a net dipole moment over vast
eons of time, but wouldn't necessarily eliminate them, and all that is necessary
for substantial OU, as previously estimated, might be one per billion of all
protons.

Jones



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 17:03:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA01228;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:00:23 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:00:23 -0800 (PST)
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 11:54:29 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <trda9u4p6ol0pk08470o9lal1to75l5t8r 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer> <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8@4ax.com> <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9@computer> <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t
6ha4bd6r 4ax.com> <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx2.eskimo.com id RAA01204
Resent-Message-ID: <"v6bUh.0.6J.cmJby" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46591
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 13:37:14 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
>
>> Forces superimpose. Ergo, the result would still be far greater
>> stability for one than for the other. In short, the unstable form would
>> rapidly convert to the stable form.
>
>Why would the proton rapidly convert?

Because the +-+ form is far more stable, and there is nothing to prevent
the conversion.

>
>The strong force is certainly adequate to keep two loosely bound like-spin
>quarks together - Ergo, a rather large amount of force would have to be extended
>just to overcome the strong force - and overcoming the strong force would be a
>prerequisite - 

The purported strong force would also act between every other possible
pair combination within the particle, so that it's net ability to
distinguish between states would be zero, if it existed as a separate
force of nature.
(Actually, I think the strong force is probably electromagnetic in
nature; see http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/checker.ppt ).
Take a look at the internal structure of protons presented in this
document - it is directly related to this thread.

>after which a lesser force would be required for the reversal -
>if time permitted.

You are trying to balance a marble on the point of a needle. It's going
to fall off.

>
>> Even normal nuclear reactions (inter particle) happen in a time frame of  E-23
>to E-24 sec. These internal conversions (intra particle) would be even faster.
>
>What makes you think that any "internal conversion" would occur at all? What
>would be the mechanism for such conversion?

The electrostatic force.
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 17:33:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA06234;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:31:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:31:58 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 12:31:14 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <vhfa9ugm5ke0dgr9jc7bsjeoaitbm68t7a 4ax.com>
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
In-Reply-To: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id RAA06181
Resent-Message-ID: <"ebA72.0.HX1.DEKby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46593
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Tue, 05 Mar 2002 13:47:51 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>superset, IPE. The Mossbauer effect itself may be a subset of a larger class of
>reactions that can be called IPE or Induced Photon Emissions. IPE technology 

I believe that IPE is commonly referred to as "stimulated emission", as
in laser (Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation).


>may
>be a most notable new addition to the lexicon of LENR: To the extent that when
>carefully controlled, IPE permits a new type of meta-phenomenon to appear and
>self-perpetuate - a *photon chain reaction*.

This is exactly what happens in a laser.

>
>A photon chain reaction, as here defined, is a correlate of the nuclear chain
>reaction, but limited to induced photon emission from electron orbitals at a
>particular wavelength or multiple thereof. Such a phenomenon has reputedly been
>discovered and documented ....

and is in widespread use across the world ;)
[snip]
>The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
>
>Dr. Randell Mills and his company, Blacklight Power, BLP, have made the
>fantastic claim that a new form of energy can be released from hydrogen by
>catalytically forcing it "below ground state." 

Not so fantastic, when one considers that hydrogen atoms in a hydrogen
molecule are already "below the ground state", as Mills has previously
pointed out.

[snip]
>Mills uses "Mossbauer effect technology" (hereafter, MET) as a trigger for
>starting the hydrino reaction (after which it becomes auto-catalytic in the
>sense of a photon chain reaction propagating at multiples of 27.2 eV, a
>frequency in the Extreme Ultraviolet, or EUV spectrum):

The problem with this is that the difference in energy levels between
the shrunken states is not a constant 27.2 eV. IOW each shrinkage
reaction would need to emit two photons, one at 27.2 eV to perpetuate
the chain, and another carrying the energy difference between 27.2 eV
and the real energy level differential.
Mills accounts for this by "allowing" the 27.2 eV to be removed
mechanically through collision.
[snip]


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 17:33:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA05798;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:30:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:30:47 -0800
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:22:15 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <00f101c1ce1b$57abcbc0$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
 <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
 <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
 <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8 4ax.com>
 <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9 computer>
 <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t6ha4bd6r 4ax.com>
 <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9 computer>
 <trda9u4p6ol0pk08470o9lal1to75l5t8r 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"1WT58.0.SQ1.6DKby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46592
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>

> >Why would the proton rapidly convert?

> Because the +-+ form is far more stable, and there is nothing to prevent
> the conversion.

The strong force prevents the conversion

> >The strong force is certainly adequate to keep two loosely bound like-spin
> >quarks together - Ergo, a rather large amount of force would have to be
extended
> >just to overcome the strong force - and overcoming the strong force would be
a
> >prerequisite -

> The purported strong force would also act between every other possible
> pair combination within the particle, so that it's net ability to
> distinguish between states would be zero, if it existed as a separate
> force of nature.

It doesn't have to distinguish - but it would have to be overcome if it exists,
and all the evidence points to its existence.

Consider two magnets held together by some glue. If they are in polar alignment
they are held more strongly together than if they are in polar oposition but if
they are in polar opposition they still cannot ovecome the effect of the glue
and they will stay bound in opposition until the glue fails.  Does the strong
force ever fail?


> (Actually, I think the strong force is probably electromagnetic in
> nature; see http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/checker.ppt ).
> Take a look at the internal structure of protons presented in this
> document - it is directly related to this thread.

I can't open this document with Word or Adobe. What is a PPT file?

For the limited purpose of this argument what is in there that supports your
argument?

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 18:27:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA28417;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:25:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:25:16 -0800
Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:16:46 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <010901c1ce22$f4f6a7e0$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
 <vhfa9ugm5ke0dgr9jc7bsjeoaitbm68t7a 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"UQ_E53.0.rx6.B0Lby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46594
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Robin,

> >Dr. Randell Mills and his company, Blacklight Power, BLP, have made the
> >fantastic claim that a new form of energy can be released from hydrogen by
> >catalytically forcing it "below ground state."

> Not so fantastic, when one considers that hydrogen atoms in a hydrogen
> molecule are already "below the ground state", as Mills has previously
> pointed out.

But Mills apparently claims not to use the molecular form as his startimg point,
but instead the hydrogen atom - not the ion, not the molecule, just the singlet
atom which is/must be at ground state if it is to give up 13.6 eV.

> The problem with this is that the difference in energy levels between
> the shrunken states is not a constant 27.2 eV. IOW each shrinkage
> reaction would need to emit two photons, one at 27.2 eV to perpetuate
> the chain, and another carrying the energy difference between 27.2 eV
> and the real energy level differential.

The chain reaction, perhaps it should be called a "virtual chain reaction" is
not propagated by one photon that stimulates more than one photon (if you buy
into Mills explanation) but by a photon that starts a hydrino to shrink - and
that it is that shrinkage which continues unabated to some stage, whether it be
20 steps or 40 steps that is the propagating modality of the chain reaction.

The weak link here is that Mills can find nobody, so far, who is an authority
who will confirm that his hydrino hydride is a real entity. And you have
probably seen on HSG that his spectroscopy has some doubters as well.

Regards,

Jones



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 22:54:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA10294;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:51:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:51:16 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 17:50:36 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <nu1b9u44snqs4mbnq9ngi9qehbrvcp0ujl 4ax.com>
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer> <vhfa9ugm5ke0dgr9jc7bsjeoaitbm68t7a@4ax.com> <010901c1ce22$f4f6a7e0$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <010901c1ce22$f4f6a7e0$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id WAA10259
Resent-Message-ID: <"Xitvt.0.mW2.avOby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46595
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 18:16:46 -0800:
Hi Jones,

>Hi Robin,
>
>> >Dr. Randell Mills and his company, Blacklight Power, BLP, have made the
>> >fantastic claim that a new form of energy can be released from hydrogen by
>> >catalytically forcing it "below ground state."
>
>> Not so fantastic, when one considers that hydrogen atoms in a hydrogen
>> molecule are already "below the ground state", as Mills has previously
>> pointed out.
>
>But Mills apparently claims not to use the molecular form as his startimg point,

Mills' point is that if the hydrogen atom in it's ground state (i.e.
single hydrogen atoms) can give up energy when forming a molecule (i.e.
mediated by a collision mechanism), then there would appear to be no a
priori restriction on it giving up even more energy in a similar manner.
IOW the "ground state" isn't really a ground state.

>but instead the hydrogen atom - not the ion, not the molecule, just the singlet
>atom which is/must be at ground state if it is to give up 13.6 eV.

The hydrogen atom gives up 13.6 eV *as it forms* from a proton and an
electron infinitely far apart. IOW it enters it's ground state after
having given up the 13.6 eV, not before giving it up.

>
>> The problem with this is that the difference in energy levels between
>> the shrunken states is not a constant 27.2 eV. IOW each shrinkage
>> reaction would need to emit two photons, one at 27.2 eV to perpetuate
>> the chain, and another carrying the energy difference between 27.2 eV
>> and the real energy level differential.
>
>The chain reaction, perhaps it should be called a "virtual chain reaction" is
>not propagated by one photon that stimulates more than one photon (if you buy
>into Mills explanation) 

This isn't Mills explanation. He doesn't say that there are two photons.
However your scenario would necessitate it, because if the process could
be triggered by a photon, with no other atom in the neighbourhood, then
the only place to get rid of the 27.2 eV would be as a photon (which
Mills BTW says is impossible anyway, because neither the "ground state"
hydrogen atom, nor any hydrinos can radiate spontaneously. IOW the first
step as it were, from the stable state, is not allowed to be a radiative
step (i.e. radiative transitions are forbidden), which is precisely why
all the hydrogen atoms in the universe didn't collapse into shrunken
hydrinos shortly after the big bang.
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 17 23:05:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA15001;
	Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:04:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 23:04:47 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 18:04:06 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <aq3b9u8t0net5b8amhiujeqi6n59of8ek6 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer> <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8@4ax.com> <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9@computer> <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t
6ha4bd6r 4ax.com> <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9@computer> <trda9u4p6ol0pk08470o9lal1to75l5t8r@4ax.com> <00f101c1ce1b$57abcbc0$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <00f101c1ce1b$57abcbc0$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA14925
Resent-Message-ID: <"W2bKQ1.0.Ig3.F6Pby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46596
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Sun, 17 Mar 2002 17:22:15 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Consider two magnets held together by some glue. If they are in polar alignment
>they are held more strongly together than if they are in polar oposition but if
>they are in polar opposition they still cannot ovecome the effect of the glue
>and they will stay bound in opposition until the glue fails.  Does the strong
>force ever fail?

Magnets have corners that prevent them from slipping. This is not a
trivial argument. In a -++ arrangement, there is also a strong force
bond between the outer two quarks, which tends to compensate for the
strong force bond between the two ++ quarks (assuming that there is such
a thing as the strong force).
That's what I meant when I said you were trying to balance a marble on a
needle point (no corners).

>
>
>> (Actually, I think the strong force is probably electromagnetic in
>> nature; see http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/checker.ppt ).
>> Take a look at the internal structure of protons presented in this
>> document - it is directly related to this thread.
>
>I can't open this document with Word or Adobe. What is a PPT file?

It's a power point file (effectively a slide show). You can download a
free reader from Microsoft.
In this case I would recommend it. The theory contained therein has much
to argue for it.

>
>For the limited purpose of this argument what is in there that supports your
>argument?
[snip]
Protons are represented as a single central negative quark, with two
positive quarks revolving around it on opposite sides of a circle.
As you can see this is a natural for the +-+ layout, while automatically
precluding anything else.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 00:34:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA12861;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 00:31:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 00:31:52 -0800
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:39:58 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
cc: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: D W Research
In-Reply-To: <B8B8B206.1BE8%editor infinite-energy.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020318033934.5213B-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZxOhO1.0.t83.uNQby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46597
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Is there a URL for DW?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 03:37:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA04894;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:34:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:34:03 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 03:34:00 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: "Vortex-L Eskimo. Com" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
cc: "Freenrg-L Eskimo. Com" <freenrg-l@eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
In-Reply-To: <NFBBJMADALIIAMPEBBELCEGFCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020318032849.7930C-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"CrTDC3.0.9C1.h2Tby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46598
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, xplorer wrote:

> We saw for several moments the clouds pierced by the light of the flare
>  as if the flare had become the source of a rough beam.
> The effect was incredible, and it lasted for minutes at a time,
>  until some few minutes before we found a camera capable of
>  taking night photos, (Aarrgh!) when the effect collapsed.

Sounds like "light columns" effect.  It would require below-freezing
weather with no wind at all, since the illusion is produced by ice
crystals hovering in the air. I've seen this illusion in winters in
upstate New York, where every single streetlight has a fuzzy "beam" 
shooting vertically upwards.  People in airliners see another effect in
daylight which has the same cause: a sun image down within the clouds, as
if the plane was flying over still water, yet the landscape is dry. 

If a region of ice particles moved past, the glowing column would appear
briefly and then vanish again.

But if there were no ice crystals in the air, the illusion cannot exist.

(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    sciclub-list freenrg-L vortex-L webhead-L

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 06:04:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA31318;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 06:01:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 06:01:38 -0800
From: "xplorer" <xplorer indo.net.id>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 21:06:03 +0700
Message-ID: <NEBBJKMNAIODFJGJBFJDGEBKCDAA.xplorer indo.net.id>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020318032849.7930C-100000 eskimo.com>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"RYjE82.0.7f7.2DVby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46599
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


Hi Bill,
 the site is 7 degrees south of the equator, but I suppose the altitude
 the light was seen to be at may have been icy, but at altitude there
 is quite some velocity here these days.

cheers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William Beaty [mailto:billb eskimo.com]
> Sent: 2002 March 18 Monday 18:34
> To: Vortex-L Eskimo. Com
> Cc: Freenrg-L Eskimo. Com
> Subject: Re: Phenomena Observed: Laser?
> 
> 
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2002, xplorer wrote:
> 
> > We saw for several moments the clouds pierced by the light of the flare
> >  as if the flare had become the source of a rough beam.
> > The effect was incredible, and it lasted for minutes at a time,
> >  until some few minutes before we found a camera capable of
> >  taking night photos, (Aarrgh!) when the effect collapsed.
> 
> Sounds like "light columns" effect.  It would require below-freezing
> weather with no wind at all, since the illusion is produced by ice
> crystals hovering in the air. I've seen this illusion in winters in
> upstate New York, where every single streetlight has a fuzzy "beam" 
> shooting vertically upwards.  People in airliners see another effect in
> daylight which has the same cause: a sun image down within the clouds, as
> if the plane was flying over still water, yet the landscape is dry. 
> 
> If a region of ice particles moved past, the glowing column would appear
> briefly and then vanish again.
> 
> But if there were no ice crystals in the air, the illusion cannot exist.
> 
> (((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
> William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
> billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
> EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   science projects, tesla, weird science
> Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    sciclub-list freenrg-L vortex-L webhead-L
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 07:23:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA03045;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:18:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:18:30 -0800
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:10:01 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001101c1ce8e$fa516240$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer>
 <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6 4ax.com>
 <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9 computer>
 <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8 4ax.com>
 <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9 computer>
 <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t6ha4bd6r 4ax.com>
 <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9 computer>
 <trda9u4p6ol0pk08470o9lal1to75l5t8r 4ax.com>
 <00f101c1ce1b$57abcbc0$8837fea9 computer>
 <aq3b9u8t0net5b8amhiujeqi6n59of8ek6 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"XCCNG1.0.Vl.6LWby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46600
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robin

> >Consider two magnets held together by some glue. If they are in polar
alignment
> >they are held more strongly together than if they are in polar oposition but
if
> >they are in polar opposition they still cannot ovecome the effect of the glue
> >and they will stay bound in opposition until the glue fails.  Does the strong
> >force ever fail?
>
> Magnets have corners that prevent them from slipping. This is not a
> trivial argument.

If you assume that the quark is a spherical structure, then then the glued
magnet analogy wouldn't apply very well, but few observers buy into a spherical
visualization.

In the circle-string visualization, the quark is best understood as a "string"
of mass energy encircling around a point in space. I suppose the closest
physical thing to compare it with would be a "hula hoop." A proton is three of
theses string-circles stacked into what could loosely be described as a squat
cylindrical unit. The stong force "glue" the holds the three together, the
gluon, would prevent the - quark in the
-++ arrangement from trading places with the center +quark, even though the
+-+ arrangement would be more stable.

If a significant initial population of -++ can happen at all, even in the big
bang, then the remnant population of -++ protons is the only important question.
It's really a question of present-day percentages. Since our solar system is
"second generation" system, then you have in place one mechanism that would
convert a higher initial population of -++ into the more stable +-+ variety, but
a valid issue exists as to whether there could be as many as several ppm to
several ppb of the less stable variety.

The fact that you have bought into a different visualiztion or theory only means
that the two visualiztions and theories need to be compared side by side for
both their explanatory value AND *predictive significance*. Can your theory
explain the Lamb shift? Can it explain Oppenheiner-Phillips stripping? Can it
explain many of the puzzles of cold fusion and the Mills hydrino as well as
Fred's "stacked circle string" visualization?

Regards,

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 08:33:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23012;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 08:30:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 08:30:25 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020318103105.034b9940 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:33:22 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Abandoned Russian fission TEGs
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"7vVfx.0.Ud5.XOXby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46601
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42294-2002Mar17.html

Makings of a 'Dirty Bomb'
Radioactive Devices Left by Soviets Could Attract Terrorists

QUOTES:

. . . In Georgia, on the Black Sea, a search is underway for at least two 
of the devices, called radiothermal generators, or RTGs, believed to have 
been abandoned and then stolen after the closing of a Soviet military base. 
Just before Christmas, three woodcutters in northwestern Georgia suffered 
massive injuries after stumbling upon a similar device in the middle of a 
forest.

In the far-eastern Russian region of Chukotka, investigators discovered a 
complete breakdown in controls over 85 radiothermal generators placed along 
the arctic coast by the Soviets in the 1960s and '70s. Some of the machines 
had been vandalized for scrap metal, others were literally falling into the 
surf and at least one could not be found, according to Russian government 
documents obtained by The Washington Post. . . .


- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 10:14:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA13496;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:10:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 10:10:43 -0800
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:47:14 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <002101c1ce94$2d17ca20$8837fea9 computer>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer>
 <vhfa9ugm5ke0dgr9jc7bsjeoaitbm68t7a 4ax.com>
 <010901c1ce22$f4f6a7e0$8837fea9 computer>
 <nu1b9u44snqs4mbnq9ngi9qehbrvcp0ujl 4ax.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"k--b2.0.VI3.YsYby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46602
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>

> IOW the "ground state" isn't really a ground state.

If you want to call it "the first non-radiative state" that's all right with me,
but it might well be the "first and only non-radiateve state." Mills should be
careful that he is not inventing a whole new and different form of chemistry and
physics for what may turn out to be, if polar protons exist  (and are the real
culprit here) a minority species that exist in parts-per-million or less. It is
clear that he may have faltered recently and I think it is time for even his
supporters to step back and take a breath of fresh air.

> The hydrogen atom gives up 13.6 eV *as it forms* from a proton and an
> electron infinitely far apart. IOW it enters it's ground state after
> having given up the 13.6 eV, not before giving it up.

If that were true, then PEM fuel cells would operate at much higher potential,
closer to 13.6 volts and not the 1-2 volts that is seen in practice. Since these
are already approaching 70% efficient in the best case scenario, it would be
absolutely impossible to suggest that they are somehow missing this extra
potential energy.

> This isn't Mills explanation. He doesn't say that there are two photons.
> However your scenario would necessitate it, because if the process could
> be triggered by a photon, with no other atom in the neighbourhood, then
> the only place to get rid of the 27.2 eV would be as a photon

No. I made it abundantly clear that the hydrino, not the photon itself is
responsible for the apparent multiplication factor.

> BTW Mills says is impossible anyway, because neither the "ground state"
> hydrogen atom, nor any hydrinos can radiate spontaneously.

This is his theory, but in point of fact, if he measures photon radiation
through spectroscopy, he has absolutely NO way of knowing where the radiation
came from originally.  The radiation can originate from the catalyst or from the
hydrino or from both or from whatever other modality that he may have missed. He
has gone to extreme lengths to justify a flakey theory, when he should have
concentrated on getting a product to market. He invented this phoney-baloney
non-radiative business to cover up for the fact that he can't explain why more
hydrinos don't form naturally in the universe.

Perhaps what he hasn't considered is that the reason more hydrinos don't form in
nature is that they require polar protons to begin with and this may be a very
limited species.

Just an alternative explanation for a complicated issue that is way out of my
league but also way out of Randell Mills' league.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 14:41:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03071;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:36:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 14:36:50 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Polar Protons?
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:36:07 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <bnpc9uolo1cn1vr9j2f70l9drpm08reqf9 4ax.com>
References: <002201c1ccee$b66c05e0$a3b4bfa8 computer> <kvn79uoqd8bnkj64fi8up275k3ca7371b6@4ax.com> <00fb01c1cd4c$4afa22c0$8837fea9@computer> <54v79us2dssq3jni9nchrgpjcdm1s1ctk8@4ax.com> <002301c1cdca$59bf9460$8837fea9@computer> <e00a9usg3r4vkb3eeqicf9550t
6ha4bd6r 4ax.com> <00d501c1cdfb$e81bb5a0$8837fea9@computer> <trda9u4p6ol0pk08470o9lal1to75l5t8r@4ax.com> <00f101c1ce1b$57abcbc0$8837fea9@computer> <aq3b9u8t0net5b8amhiujeqi6n59of8ek6@4ax.com> <001101c1ce8e$fa516240$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <001101c1ce8e$fa516240$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA02984
Resent-Message-ID: <"fNo9N2.0.fl.0mcby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46603
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:10:01 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>If a significant initial population of -++ can happen at all, even in the big
>bang, then the remnant population of -++ protons is the only important question.
>It's really a question of present-day percentages. Since our solar system is
>"second generation" system, then you have in place one mechanism that would
>convert a higher initial population of -++ into the more stable +-+ variety, but
>a valid issue exists as to whether there could be as many as several ppm to
>several ppb of the less stable variety.

Then consider that the mass of the less stable variety would be higher
than that of the stable variety by the energy difference (/c^2). This
difference in mass should show up.


>
>The fact that you have bought into a different visualiztion or theory only means
>that the two visualiztions and theories need to be compared side by side for
>both their explanatory value AND *predictive significance*. 

True.

>Can your theory
>explain the Lamb shift? 

What does the Lamb shift have to do with proton structure?

>Can it explain Oppenheiner-Phillips stripping? 


I have yet to see any evidence that there is anything exceptional about
Oppenheiner-Phillips stripping.

>Can it
>explain many of the puzzles of cold fusion and the Mills hydrino as well as
>Fred's "stacked circle string" visualization?

Since neither this model nor Fred's have anything to do with Mills
Hydrino, I fail to see the relevance of the question. IOW I would expect
either model to coexist equally well with Hydrinos.
(I see Mills theory on proton structure as separate from his hydrino
theory).
As to explaining CF, I agree with your previous statement that CF is
likely to be a catchall for a number of different processes, some of
which may be related, and some not.

One last question for Fred. Does your ring model assume the existence of
a nuclear force, and if so, what is the nature of that force?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 18 23:04:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA13624;
	Mon, 18 Mar 2002 23:01:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 23:01:24 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: The Hydrino and the Mossbauer Effect
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 18:00:46 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <9god9uo9293lgq30kc47p9t8cbco9o4l79 4ax.com>
References: <008301c1c48f$6642b620$8837fea9 computer> <vhfa9ugm5ke0dgr9jc7bsjeoaitbm68t7a@4ax.com> <010901c1ce22$f4f6a7e0$8837fea9@computer> <nu1b9u44snqs4mbnq9ngi9qehbrvcp0ujl@4ax.com> <002101c1ce94$2d17ca20$8837fea9@computer>
In-Reply-To: <002101c1ce94$2d17ca20$8837fea9 computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA13554
Resent-Message-ID: <"pDnbj.0.gK3.39kby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46604
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Jones Beene's message of Mon, 18 Mar 2002 07:47:14 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>but it might well be the "first and only non-radiateve state." Mills should be
>careful that he is not inventing a whole new and different form of chemistry and
>physics for what may turn out to be, if polar protons exist  (and are the real
>culprit here) a minority species that exist in parts-per-million or less. It 

If polar protons are the real culprit here, then you need to explain the
significance of Mills catalysts.

>is
>clear that he may have faltered recently and I think it is time for even his
>supporters to step back and take a breath of fresh air.

I took that step some time ago, however unlike you I haven't thrown the
baby out with the bath water.

>
>> The hydrogen atom gives up 13.6 eV *as it forms* from a proton and an
>> electron infinitely far apart. IOW it enters it's ground state after
>> having given up the 13.6 eV, not before giving it up.
>
>If that were true, then PEM fuel cells would operate at much higher potential,
>closer to 13.6 volts and not the 1-2 volts that is seen in practice.

The voltage of this cell is only indirectly related to the ionisation
energy of hydrogen. The actual voltage depends on the formation energy
of water.
You can check any of hundreds of different sources on the web, to
determine that the ionisation energy of hydrogen (i.e. the energy
required to remove an electron from a ground state hydrogen atom) is
13.6 eV.
The converse of this is that in recombining the resultant proton and
electron, 13.6 eV is released.
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 04:35:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA09567;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 04:31:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 04:31:48 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 07:32:25 -0800
Subject: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18, 2002
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8BC9A06.1CA6%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <3C96984E.B0FEF89B toast.net>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3099367945_2702785"
Resent-Message-ID: <"zESRP3.0.PL2.q-oby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46605
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--B_3099367945_2702785
Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable



http://www.sciam.com/explorations/2002/031802fusion/









MORE EXPLORE FEATURES </explorations>






Sonic Fusion
Scientists have reported that by bombarding a liquid with sound they were
able to produce nuclear fusion in a tabletop apparatus. But their colleague=
s
doubt it.=20
By W. Wayt Gibbs

Image: Courtesy of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Rensselaer Polytechnic
Institute and the Russian Academy of Sciences (Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, J. S.
Cho, C.D. West, R.T. Lahey,Jr., R.I. Nigmatulin and R.C. Block)

SIX-MILLIMETER BUBBLE CLOUD is about to implode in a glass chamber filled
with acetone.=A0The implosion produces light and shock waves.

Donald Kennedy, editor of the prestigious journal Science, knew he was in
for a row if he published the paper. It=92s not that the work was shoddy or
came out of left field. On the contrary, the experiments had been performed
with great care by well-respected senior scientists at Oak Ridge National
Laboratory (ORNL), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) and the Russian
Academy of Sciences.

But what the authors were claiming was just so extraordinary: that nuclear
fusion reactions, of the sort that power stars and hydrogen bombs, had been
created on a lab bench using little more than a vibrating ring, a neutron
gun and a beaker of specially prepared acetone. Add to that the fact,
reported in the Washington Post, that at least three of the experts to whic=
h
the article had been sent for peer review urged Science to reject it. And
finally there was the follow-up study (not yet subjected to peer review) by
another team at Oak Ridge that claimed that the evidence of fusion reaction=
s
disappeared when it repeated the experiment with different sensors and
analyzed the data in a different way.

"It goes without saying that we cannot publish papers with a guarantee that
every result is right," Kennedy hedged in an editorial that accompanied the
article in the March 8, 2002, issue of Science. "What we are very sure of i=
s
that publication is the right option, even=97and perhaps especially=97when ther=
e
is some controversy.

History Repeats?=20

Controversy is the only thing assured to follow an experiment that so
resembles the "cold fusion" fiasco of 1989, when Stanley Pons and Martin
Fleishmann of the University of Utah said that they had discovered
room-temperature reactions; the announcement became headline news but was
soon discredited. There are important differences, however. In this case th=
e
scientists who believe they have found a new route to fusion have suggested
a plausible mechanism by which it could occur. And they have discovered two
genuinely odd anomalies that conventional physics cannot easily explain.

The phenomenon, as described by Rusi Peri Taleyarkhan of ORNL, Richard T.
Lahey of RPI and their coinvestigators, happened when they were studying
sonoluminescence=97light created by sound. German scientists first observed
sonoluminescence in the 1930s, when they immersed sonar loudspeakers in
water baths. But it wasn=92t until the past decade that scientists worked out
many of the details.

What we call sound is really a series of moving pressure fronts. The
pressure at a fixed point swings from low to high and back as the sound wav=
e
sweeps by. If the sound is loud enough and at the right frequency, the
pressure at the trough of the wave will be so low that the fluid will boil,
producing microscopic bubbles. When the high pressure front at the crest of
the sound wave slams into these bubbles, they implode, and shock waves focu=
s
the energy of the implosion to a central region of atomic dimensions. The
temperature at that central point skyrockets above 10,000 degrees Celsius,
the pressure zooms to 10,000 atmospheres and a flash of light emerges for
just a few picoseconds. The bigger the bubble, the more energy in the
implosion, and the hotter and brighter the sonoluminescent flash.

Star in a Jar=20

Standard sonoluminescence experiments use water. Taleyarkhan=92s group used a=
n
organic chemical called acetone, an ingredient in common nail-polish
remover, because it is rich in neutron-absorbing carbon and hydrogen atoms.
The researchers then loaded up the acetone with extra neutrons in two ways.
First, they used acetone made from deuterium, which is hydrogen with an
extra neutron. Second, they put the flask of acetone next to a source of
neutron radiation, in one case a chunk of plutonium-beryllium and in other
cases a neutron pulse gun.

Their hope was that the neutrons shooting into the acetone would collide
with the carbon and hydrogen nuclei, and this would create disturbances tha=
t
would "seed" the bubbles produced by the sound waves. Many more bubbles tha=
n
normal would be formed at once, and on average the bubbles would grow much
larger than usual before they collapsed. Perhaps, the scientists thought,
the bubbles would get so big that their collapse would produce temperatures
near 10 million degrees=97hot enough to cause a few deuterium atoms in the
acetone to fuse into helium or tritium (hydrogen with two extra neutrons).

Image: courtesy of Rusi Taleyarkhan

SOUND OF NEUTRONS. Click here <IMG/SoundofNeutrons.rpt.mov>  to download a
Quicktime Movie showing the nucleation of tiny--smaller than a
molecule--vapor pockets when neutrons from a source strike the nucleus of
atoms of acetone. These vapor bubbles then grow in the "stretched" liquid
(in which the pressure is about minus 250 psi) to a cloud of hundreds of
bubbles about six millimeters in size. The bubbles then collapse when the
pressure turns positive. Collapse speeds reach near 10 kilometers per secon=
d
or so and the final pressures reach to more than 50 million atmospheres upo=
n
which sufficient heat and compression is built up; neutrons and tritium are
emitted.=A0The intense collapse results in shock waves that travel outwards o=
f
the chamber through the glass walls and make an audible sound.

Creating even small numbers of fusing atoms would be a big deal. Fusion
reactions release lots of energy, hence their usefulness for lighting stars
and making mushroom clouds. The energy comes out in the form of neutrons
humming along at 2.5 million electron volts (MeV), fast-moving protons and
hot tritium and helium atoms. When the Taleyarkhan group checked the sample=
s
for tritium, the researchers found that it had indeed increased=97but only in
the deuterium-laced acetone that had been zapped with both sound and
neutrons. Tritium levels didn=92t change significantly in normal acetone put
through the process, nor in deuterated acetone shot just with neutrons or
subjected only to a good ringing.

They also looked for neutrons emerging from the flask after the neutron
gunshot had dissipated and the bubbles had burst. Sure enough, their
scintillation detector started scintillating about twice as fast within a
few microseconds of the strongest sonoluminescent flashes. Working through =
a
complicated set of calculations, the researchers reckoned that they observe=
d
a four-percent increase in 2.5 MeV neutrons just after the onset of bubble
formation. That is certainly not enough to start a chain reaction (thank
goodness), or even enough to produce as much energy as the apparatus
consumes. But if it were confirmed, it would be an entirely new approach to
generating fusion energy.

The Race to Test the Results

Unsurprisingly, many research groups around the world are scrambling to try
this out for themselves. But the only one to make a report so far has
disputed on several technical grounds the evidence that any atoms were
fusing, though the group did allow that something strange was going on. Dan
Shapira and Mike Saltmarsh, the group's leaders, had been asked last May by
science managers at ORNL to check the Taleyarkhan group=92s findings.

Shapira and Saltmarsh brought in a different kind of neutron detector that
is 30 times the size of the scintillator that the first team used. (A bad
idea, Taleyarkhan complained in a rebuttal, because it is more likely to
pick up background radiation and to overload the electronics.) The new
detector system was triggered by a neutron or gamma-ray strike, and then
matched that to any sonoluminescent flash that happened within 10
microseconds before or after the strike. (But that dilutes the signal,
because neutron/gamma hits are much more common than flashes, complains the
Taleyarkhan group, whose detectors worked the other way around.)

Saltmarsh and Shapira did not check the tritium observations. "Those look
like they were handled correctly," Shapira says. He can offer no explanatio=
n
for the apparent increase in tritium levels. So that is one mystery.

A second mystery, Shapira reports, is that "right after the neutrons hit th=
e
acetone, there are light flashes as the bubbles collapse, then there is a
quiet period, and then thousands of flashes=9790 percent of the light=97comes
out after about a millisecond. Why that happens I don=92t know."

Shapira does know what he would do differently to answer the question more
clearly. "For starters I would not use neutrons to create the bubbles=97I
would use a laser or even a charged particle beam, something you can really
control. You cannot guide neutrons." And it would be better, he suggests,
not to set the acetone flask on a steel table, which can reflect neutrons
back toward the detector. Finally, he advises, use a more advanced detector
that uses boron or an ionization chamber. That will filter out gamma rays,
which confounded both his and Taleyarkhan=92s measurements.

With stakes so high and so many reputations on the line, the debate over
this discovery is certain to produce lots of sound and heat=97but perhaps als=
o
a flash of illumination.

RELATED LINKS:=20

Ask the Experts: Can Ultrasound Bubbles in Water Initiate Nuclear Fusion?
</askexpert/physics/physics28.html>

Tabletop Nuclear Fusion Claims Meet with Skepticism </news/030602/1.html>

"Sonoluminescence: Sound into Light," by Seth J. Putterman (Scientific
American, February 1995), is available for purchase from the Scientific
American Archive. <http://www.sciamarchive.com>

Article from Science
<http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/bubble/index.shtml>

Follow up by Shapira and Saltmarsh <http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/SLan5av2.pdf=
>

Sonoluminescence Images
<http://www.fb-chemie.uni-rostock.de/ess/sonochem_image.htm>

ORNL Press Release=20
<http://www.ornl.gov/Press_Releases/current/mr20020305-00.html>

=20

------ End of Forwarded Message


--B_3099367945_2702785
Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML>
<HEAD>
<TITLE>FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18, 2002</TIT=
LE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><BR>
</FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Monaco"><TT><BR>
http://www.sciam.com/explorations/2002/031802fusion/<BR>
<BR>
<HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"95%"></TT></FONT><FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>

</FONT>
<P ALIGN=3DCENTER>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><B>MORE EXPLORE FEATURES &lt;/explorations&gt; <BR>
</B><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<H1>Sonic Fusion<BR>
</H1><H3>Scientists have reported that by bombarding a liquid with sound th=
ey were able to produce nuclear fusion in a tabletop apparatus. But their co=
lleagues doubt it. <BR>
</H3><B>By W. Wayt Gibbs<BR>
</B>
</FONT>
<P>
<FONT FACE=3D"Verdana"><FONT SIZE=3D"1">Image: Courtesy of Oak Ridge National L=
aboratory, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and the Russian Academy of Scien=
ces (Rusi P. Taleyarkhan, J. S. Cho, C.D. West, R.T. Lahey,Jr., R.I. Nigmatu=
lin and R.C. Block)<BR>
</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><B>SIX-MILLIMETER BUBBLE CLOUD</B> is about to implode in a =
glass chamber filled with acetone.=A0The implosion produces light and shock wa=
ves.</FONT> <BR>
<BR>
Donald Kennedy, editor of the prestigious journal <I>Science,</I> knew he w=
as in for a row if he published the paper. It=92s not that the work was shoddy=
 or came out of left field. On the contrary, the experiments had been perfor=
med with great care by well-respected senior scientists at Oak Ridge Nationa=
l Laboratory (ORNL), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) and the Russian =
Academy of Sciences. <BR>
<BR>
But what the authors were claiming was just so extraordinary: that nuclear =
fusion reactions, of the sort that power stars and hydrogen bombs, had been =
created on a lab bench using little more than a vibrating ring, a neutron gu=
n and a beaker of specially prepared acetone. Add to that the fact, reported=
 in the <I>Washington Post,</I> that at least three of the experts to which =
the article had been sent for peer review urged <I>Science</I> to reject it.=
 And finally there was the follow-up study (not yet subjected to peer review=
) by another team at Oak Ridge that claimed that the evidence of fusion reac=
tions disappeared when it repeated the experiment with different sensors and=
 analyzed the data in a different way. <BR>
<BR>
&quot;It goes without saying that we cannot publish papers with a guarantee=
 that every result is right,&quot; Kennedy hedged in an editorial that accom=
panied the article in the March 8, 2002, issue of <I>Science</I>. &quot;What=
 we <I>are</I> very sure of is that publication is the right option, even=97an=
d perhaps especially=97when there is some controversy. <BR>
<BR>
<B>History Repeats?</B> <BR>
<BR>
Controversy is the only thing assured to follow an experiment that so resem=
bles the &quot;cold fusion&quot; fiasco of 1989, when Stanley Pons and Marti=
n Fleishmann of the University of Utah said that they had discovered room-te=
mperature reactions; the announcement became headline news but was soon disc=
redited. There are important differences, however. In this case the scientis=
ts who believe they have found a new route to fusion have suggested a plausi=
ble mechanism by which it could occur. And they have discovered two genuinel=
y odd anomalies that conventional physics cannot easily explain. <BR>
<BR>
The phenomenon, as described by Rusi Peri Taleyarkhan of ORNL, Richard T. L=
ahey of RPI and their coinvestigators, happened when they were studying sono=
luminescence=97light created by sound. German scientists first observed sonolu=
minescence in the 1930s, when they immersed sonar loudspeakers in water bath=
s. But it wasn=92t until the past decade that scientists worked out many of th=
e details. <BR>
<BR>
What we call sound is really a series of moving pressure fronts. The pressu=
re at a fixed point swings from low to high and back as the sound wave sweep=
s by. If the sound is loud enough and at the right frequency, the pressure a=
t the trough of the wave will be so low that the fluid will boil, producing =
microscopic bubbles. When the high pressure front at the crest of the sound =
wave slams into these bubbles, they implode, and shock waves focus the energ=
y of the implosion to a central region of atomic dimensions. The temperature=
 at that central point skyrockets above 10,000 degrees Celsius, the pressure=
 zooms to 10,000 atmospheres and a flash of light emerges for just a few pic=
oseconds. The bigger the bubble, the more energy in the implosion, and the h=
otter and brighter the sonoluminescent flash. <BR>
<BR>
<B>Star in a Jar</B> <BR>
<BR>
Standard sonoluminescence experiments use water. Taleyarkhan=92s group used a=
n organic chemical called acetone, an ingredient in common nail-polish remov=
er, because it is rich in neutron-absorbing carbon and hydrogen atoms. The r=
esearchers then loaded up the acetone with extra neutrons in two ways. First=
, they used acetone made from deuterium, which is hydrogen with an extra neu=
tron. Second, they put the flask of acetone next to a source of neutron radi=
ation, in one case a chunk of plutonium-beryllium and in other cases a neutr=
on pulse gun. <BR>
<BR>
Their hope was that the neutrons shooting into the acetone would collide wi=
th the carbon and hydrogen nuclei, and this would create disturbances that w=
ould &quot;seed&quot; the bubbles produced by the sound waves. Many more bub=
bles than normal would be formed at once, and on average the bubbles would g=
row much larger than usual before they collapsed. Perhaps, the scientists th=
ought, the bubbles would get so big that their collapse would produce temper=
atures near 10 million degrees=97hot enough to cause a few deuterium atoms in =
the acetone to fuse into helium or tritium (hydrogen with two extra neutrons=
). <BR>
<BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"1">Image: courtesy of Rusi Taleyarkhan<BR>
</FONT><BR>
<FONT SIZE=3D"2"><B>SOUND OF NEUTRONS.</B> Click here &lt;IMG/SoundofNeutrons=
.rpt.mov&gt; &nbsp;to download a Quicktime Movie showing the nucleation of t=
iny--smaller than a molecule--vapor pockets when neutrons from a source stri=
ke the nucleus of atoms of acetone. These vapor bubbles then grow in the &qu=
ot;stretched&quot; liquid (in which the pressure is about minus 250 psi) to =
a cloud of hundreds of bubbles about six millimeters in size. The bubbles th=
en collapse when the pressure turns positive. Collapse speeds reach near 10 =
kilometers per second or so and the final pressures reach to more than 50 mi=
llion atmospheres upon which sufficient heat and compression is built up; ne=
utrons and tritium are emitted.=A0The intense collapse results in shock waves =
that travel outwards of the chamber through the glass walls and make an audi=
ble sound. <BR>
</FONT><BR>
Creating even small numbers of fusing atoms would be a big deal. Fusion rea=
ctions release lots of energy, hence their usefulness for lighting stars and=
 making mushroom clouds. The energy comes out in the form of neutrons hummin=
g along at 2.5 million electron volts (MeV), fast-moving protons and hot tri=
tium and helium atoms. When the Taleyarkhan group checked the samples for tr=
itium, the researchers found that it had indeed increased=97but only in the de=
uterium-laced acetone that had been zapped with both sound and neutrons. Tri=
tium levels didn=92t change significantly in normal acetone put through the pr=
ocess, nor in deuterated acetone shot just with neutrons or subjected only t=
o a good ringing. <BR>
<BR>
They also looked for neutrons emerging from the flask after the neutron gun=
shot had dissipated and the bubbles had burst. Sure enough, their scintillat=
ion detector started scintillating about twice as fast within a few microsec=
onds of the strongest sonoluminescent flashes. Working through a complicated=
 set of calculations, the researchers reckoned that they observed a four-per=
cent increase in 2.5 MeV neutrons just after the onset of bubble formation. =
That is certainly not enough to start a chain reaction (thank goodness), or =
even enough to produce as much energy as the apparatus consumes. But if it w=
ere confirmed, it would be an entirely new approach to generating fusion ene=
rgy. <BR>
<BR>
<B>The Race to Test the Results</B> <BR>
<BR>
Unsurprisingly, many research groups around the world are scrambling to try=
 this out for themselves. But the only one to make a report so far has dispu=
ted on several technical grounds the evidence that any atoms were fusing, th=
ough the group did allow that something strange was going on. Dan Shapira an=
d Mike Saltmarsh, the group's leaders, had been asked last May by science ma=
nagers at ORNL to check the Taleyarkhan group=92s findings. <BR>
<BR>
Shapira and Saltmarsh brought in a different kind of neutron detector that =
is 30 times the size of the scintillator that the first team used. (A bad id=
ea, Taleyarkhan complained in a rebuttal, because it is more likely to pick =
up background radiation and to overload the electronics.) The new detector s=
ystem was triggered by a neutron or gamma-ray strike, and then matched that =
to any sonoluminescent flash that happened within 10 microseconds before or =
after the strike. (But that dilutes the signal, because neutron/gamma hits a=
re much more common than flashes, complains the Taleyarkhan group, whose det=
ectors worked the other way around.) <BR>
<BR>
Saltmarsh and Shapira did not check the tritium observations. &quot;Those l=
ook like they were handled correctly,&quot; Shapira says. He can offer no ex=
planation for the apparent increase in tritium levels. So that is one myster=
y. <BR>
<BR>
A second mystery, Shapira reports, is that &quot;right after the neutrons h=
it the acetone, there are light flashes as the bubbles collapse, then there =
is a quiet period, and then thousands of flashes=9790 percent of the light=97com=
es out after about a millisecond. Why that happens I don=92t know.&quot; <BR>
<BR>
Shapira does know what he would do differently to answer the question more =
clearly. &quot;For starters I would not use neutrons to create the bubbles=97I=
 would use a laser or even a charged particle beam, something you can really=
 control. You cannot guide neutrons.&quot; And it would be better, he sugges=
ts, not to set the acetone flask on a steel table, which can reflect neutron=
s back toward the detector. Finally, he advises, use a more advanced detecto=
r that uses boron or an ionization chamber. That will filter out gamma rays,=
 which confounded both his and Taleyarkhan=92s measurements. <BR>
<BR>
With stakes so high and so many reputations on the line, the debate over th=
is discovery is certain to produce lots of sound and heat=97but perhaps also a=
 flash of illumination. <BR>
<BR>
<B>RELATED LINKS:</B> <BR>
<BR>
Ask the Experts: Can Ultrasound Bubbles in Water Initiate Nuclear Fusion? &=
lt;/askexpert/physics/physics28.html&gt; <BR>
<BR>
Tabletop Nuclear Fusion Claims Meet with Skepticism &lt;/news/030602/1.html=
&gt; <BR>
<BR>
&quot;Sonoluminescence: Sound into Light,&quot; by Seth J. Putterman (Scien=
tific American, February 1995), is available for purchase from the Scientifi=
c American Archive. &lt;http://www.sciamarchive.com&gt; &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
Article from Science &lt;http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/hottopics/b=
ubble/index.shtml&gt; <BR>
<BR>
Follow up by Shapira and Saltmarsh &lt;http://www.ornl.gov/slsite/SLan5av2.=
pdf&gt; <BR>
<BR>
Sonoluminescence Images &lt;http://www.fb-chemie.uni-rostock.de/ess/sonoche=
m_image.htm&gt; &nbsp;<BR>
<BR>
ORNL Press Release &lt;http://www.ornl.gov/Press_Releases/current/mr2002030=
5-00.html&gt; &nbsp;<BR>
<HR ALIGN=3DCENTER SIZE=3D"3" WIDTH=3D"100%"NOSHADE> <BR>
<BR>
------ End of Forwarded Message<BR>
</FONT>
</BODY>
</HTML>


--B_3099367945_2702785--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 06:07:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16017;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:04:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 06:04:36 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501b8bcf50d8a15 [12.21.208.191]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 05:08:38 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18, 2002
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id GAA15984
Resent-Message-ID: <"hi6hi3.0.Bw3.pLqby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46606
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:32 AM 3/19/2, Eugene F. Mallove wrote:
>http://www.sciam.com/explorations/2002/031802fusion/
[snip]
>MORE EXPLORE FEATURES </explorations>
[snip]
>A second mystery, Shapira reports, is that "right after the neutrons hit the
>acetone, there are light flashes as the bubbles collapse, then there is a
>quiet period, and then thousands of flashes—90 percent of the light—comes
>out after about a millisecond. Why that happens I don’t know."
[snip]

Sounds like the reaction products, especially the CHARGED reaction
products, are making very BIG bubbles.  To improve the fusion output a
second sonic pulse should be delivered with slightly less than a 1
millisecond delay, timed to maximize the collapse rate of the secondary
bubbles.

Also of interest are the gammas.  If high gamma counts are associted with
the bubble collapses then that is a sign of an anomalous branching ratio,
possibly due to a high incidence of D + D --> He.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 09:18:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA01828;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:15:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 09:15:16 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319115514.03f27e70 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:07:19 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Mike Schaffer comments on Taleyarkhan 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"18_fR1.0.RS.X8tby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46607
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I asked Michael Schaffer to comment on  Taleyarkhan's sonofusion. Here, 
with his permission, are some of his comments.

- Jed

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ed Storms mentioned that the t/n ratio might be lower at temperatures below 
the optimum for plasma fusion. I asked Shaffer how much the branching 
ratios might change. His response:


The data on the D + D = T + p and D + D = He3 + n reaction cross sections 
only goes down to 15 keV energy, which is probably much higher than 
Taleyarkhan et al. had. Kind of interesting, that lower temperatures are so 
uninteresting for thermonuclear fusion that my office references don't have 
any data at all for lower than 15 keV. I am actually surprised.

. . . The neutron producing reaction is a little more probable than 50-50 
at high energies and the tritium producing one a little more probable than 
50-50 at the low energies, over the range for which I have data. There are 
theoretical and empirical extrapolation formulas for lower temperatures, 
but the formulas disagree so strongly among themselves, that I hesitate to 
tell you if the branching ratio differs GREATLY from 50-50 at still lower 
energies or not.

The data are reasonably suggestive of fusion in the ORNL cavitation 
experiments, but I do not think they are good enough, yet, to draw any more 
detailed conclusions.

Mike

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Schaffer said earlier that he thinks this is probably a plasma fusion 
reaction rather than some form of cold fusion. I agree, tentatively. That 
is my gut feeling. I asked him whether he could justify this conclusion in 
greater detail. He responded:


I do not have proof, of course, that Taleyarkhan et al. is thermonuclear 
fusion and nothing else. More precisely and correctly stated, it is my 
present hypothesis that their experiment produced a small amount of 
thermonuclear fusion. In a situation like this, where the experiment 
attempted to produce a tiny volume of plasma at conditions similar to those 
of thermonuclear fusion, and where it looks like they might have
succeeded at achieving those conditions, this is the most obvious 
hypothesis. . . . Until the tritium and neutron products data have been 
reproduced in ways that the experts in both kinds of measurements agree are 
conclusive, I think it is premature to look at neutron/tritium ratios and 
try to draw still more detailed conclusions.

I have not yet read or otherwise heard of a serious challenge to the 
tritium measurements. Taleyarkhan et al. describe in their paper the 
controls they used. Their tritium experimental method looks good to me. It 
looks like tritium generation by the reaction n + D = T would be very much 
smaller than is measured. However, I have never done more than routine 
measurements of either tritium or neutrons, so I am not an expert in these 
matters.

I downloaded and read the "download supplement" by Nigmatulin, Lahey and 
Taleyarkhan on their computer modeling of their cavitation and plasma 
dynamics from

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/295/5561/1868/DC1

This url is Ref. 25 of the paper. I am not expert enough on the properties 
of materials at ultra high pressures to evaluate the model fully, but I do 
know something about the subject. I think their equation for the thermal 
conductivity is the equation for a gas, not a plasma. Also, I do not see 
where they included power radiated from the plasma. A plasma conducts heat 
faster than a gas, and the carbon and oxygen in an acetone plasma at around 
a million degrees kelvin (about 100 eV) will radiate away lots of energy as 
UV into the surrounding liquid. Both processes reduce the peak temperature 
attained in cavitation collapse. They calculate about 2 million kelvin (200 
eV) peak from their model. For the reasons cited, I suspect that their 
calculation is optimistic. There are, of course, classified codes that 
calculate this kind of stuff with great realism and detail (thermonuclear 
weapons codes). I have heard that no one has yet gotten code results to 
indicate that cavitation fusion is possible. Of course, I have no way of 
verifying the hearsay. But I know that the national labs have already 
worked at trying to figure out how do cavitation fusion.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I asked about the estimates of temperatures within the bubbles. Most people 
agree that these estimates are very rough, so I do not understand why 
skeptics claim the temperature must be too low for plasma fusion. (Some 
cold fusion researchers have jumped to the same conclusion.) He responded:


Sonoluminescent and sono/cavitation fusion experiments are almost 
impossible to diagnose. The object (bubble at instant of maximum 
compression) is tiny, and it is surrounded by several cm of condensed 
matter (liquid acetone). Very little useful information gets out through 
the acetone---just visible light, gammas and neutrons. So, until people 
have the time and money to develop some clever diagnostic techniques, I 
think we will not know the temperature, density and pressure in these 
experiments at all.

Robert Park was stupid to denounce the Taleyarkhan et al. results without 
even having read their paper. Now, everyone should see how badly he 
behaves. He brings shame to the physics community.

Mike Schaffer

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 11:29:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA00766;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:25:55 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319142240.00b1ef78 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 14:24:44 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Mike Schaffer comments on Taleyarkhan 
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319115514.03f27e70 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hOJyY3.0.kB.33vby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46608
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>Ed Storms mentioned that the t/n ratio might be lower at temperatures 
>below the optimum for plasma fusion.

Meant higher. More tritium, fewer neutrons. It is not clear whether the 
ratio could be as high as 10:1, or 100:1.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 12:20:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA23754;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:16:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:16:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319151038.03f27e70 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:16:32 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Electricity and lighting in the third world
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"dh1pV.0.vo5.fovby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46609
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Cold fusion (or some other anomalous energy) might not have a dramatic 
impact on the lifestyles of Americans and Europeans, but it sure would help 
elsewhere. Two billion people worldwide do not have electricity, including 
80% of the population in Sub-Saharan Africa. The World Bank thinks that 
alternative sources such as wind or solar energy will help, but frankly I 
doubt it. They will remain expensive for a long time to come. See:

http://www.worldbank.org/fandd/english/0697/articles/020697.htm

http://195.178.164.205/IAEEL/iaeel/newsl/1999/tva1999/NatGlob_a_2_99.html

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 12:44:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01240;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:39:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:39:12 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503b8bd4dc16137 [12.21.209.149]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 11:43:25 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18, 2002
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA01189
Resent-Message-ID: <"EQ7JA3.0.FJ.l7wby" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46610
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:32 AM 3/19/2, Eugene F. Mallove wrote:
>http://www.sciam.com/explorations/2002/031802fusion/
[snip]
>MORE EXPLORE FEATURES </explorations>
[snip]
>A second mystery, Shapira reports, is that "right after the neutrons hit the
>acetone, there are light flashes as the bubbles collapse, then there is a
>quiet period, and then thousands of flashes—90 percent of the light—comes
>out after about a millisecond. Why that happens I don’t know."
[snip]

I wrote: "Sounds like the reaction products, especially the CHARGED
reaction products, are making very BIG bubbles.  To improve the fusion
output a second sonic pulse should be delivered with slightly less than a 1
millisecond delay, timed to maximize the collapse rate of the secondary
bubbles."

I would like to amend that remark.  It appears that the secondary bubbles
may in fact not be significantly different from the primary bubbles.  In
Fig. 2 of the Talyarkhan report it was noted that the both the light pulses
and neutron pulses persisted for up to 5 milliseconds!  The Talyarkhan PZT
drive frequency was 19.3 kHz, giving a cycle time of 52 microseconds, as
did the Shapira drive.  This means a very slow decay of secondary reactions
over that relatively long 5 msec, and that about 100 generations of
secondaires occurred.  Since Shapira's decay occurred over 1 ms, and
Talyarkhan's decayed over 5 ms, it might be concluded that there was a
signifcant difference in the nuclear yield of the two experiments.  The
long decay of pulses may be evidence for a nuclear reaction with the
charged secondaries initiating further bubbles, or it may be an indication
that the old bubble locations can seed secondary bubbles, or some
combination of the two.  That a "bubble chain reaction" can occur if fusion
is present is evident from the fact that fusion typically produces at least
two secondary particles, the new nucleus plus either a neutron or proton.
The charged products should be far more efficient at producing local
bubbles, so a branching ratio of about 1.5 would be expected.  Since the
ratio observed is less than 1, with decay in 20 to 100 generations, not all
the bubbles must produce fusion products, or at least not fusion products
nucleate further bubble sites.

There is a practical aspect to this observation.  The frequency of the
piezo drive may be crucial to maintaining the bubble chain reaction.  If
the cycle time is slightly longer than 50 microseconds, or slightly
shorter, then the timing may increase the yield of productive secondary
bubbles, and thus sustain the process.  However, it appears the 19.3 kHz
frequency must be very close to the right number, and it makes one wonder
if they tuned to that frequency somewhat based on bubble formation and not
based on accuostic resonance.  Ideally the device needs to be designed so
as to bring the two frequencies into agreement, and this can likely best be
done by changing the size of the resonant chamber.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 13:05:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17673;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:01:32 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319155405.00b04050 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 16:01:23 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18,
  2002
In-Reply-To: <v01530503b8bd4dc16137 [12.21.209.149]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"1RQAX3.0.1K4.gSwby" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46611
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>Since Shapira's decay occurred over 1 ms, and
>Talyarkhan's decayed over 5 ms, it might be concluded that there was a
>signifcant difference in the nuclear yield of the two experiments.

It was the same cell and piezo gadget. It seems unlikely the yield would be 
different, assuming it was fairly consistent in Talyarkhan's tests. More 
likely the method used to detect the decay onset was 4 ms late using 
Shapira's method. Wasn't their electronics different, along with the detector?

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 19:58:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA04226;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 19:50:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 19:50:57 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8bd853167ad [12.21.209.149]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 15:39:43 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18,	  2002
Resent-Message-ID: <"G60jP2.0.t11.XS0cy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46612
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:01 PM 3/19/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>>Since Shapira's decay occurred over 1 ms, and
>>Talyarkhan's decayed over 5 ms, it might be concluded that there was a
>>signifcant difference in the nuclear yield of the two experiments.
>
>It was the same cell and piezo gadget. It seems unlikely the yield would be
>different, assuming it was fairly consistent in Talyarkhan's tests. More
>likely the method used to detect the decay onset was 4 ms late using
>Shapira's method. Wasn't their electronics different, along with the detector?
>
>- Jed

Well, I don't see how Shapira's method could be 4 ms late.  He is detecting
neutrons after within 27 MICRO seconds after the bubble collapses, which
themselves take about 25 MICROseconds.  It seems to me that millisecond
delays are just not possible.  I was careful to note that the Talyarkhan
article did use us [the u being a mu] to denote microseconds, not ms.  It
could have been a misprint, but it does not look that way at the moment.
If Talyarkhan's run actually did decay at a much longer (5 times) rate than
Shapira's then that, to me, indicates a longer bubble chain and thus a
higher fusion yield for Talyarkhan.  Perhaps the two teams tuned up the
device slightly differently - one on bubble formation and one on accoustic
resonance?  Or maybe tuning was not that important and thus variable.

I see that Shapirah's neutron pulse rate was about 5 ms, with a pulse width
of 12 us.  He blocked all pulses for 20 usec after the neutron pulse.  His
clock was a 1 MHz clock, so plenty accurate for this purpose.

It is notable that the bubble formation should tend to get out of synch
with the original neutron pulse because the delay time between bubble
collapse and secondary bubble formation is finite and variable.  If
blanking is applied to the secondary events then the neutron rate will drop
significantly or may even disappear.  I have not had time to reread the
articles with this new perspective, so I could be all wrong.  This is all
merely off the top of the head speculation.

I am going out of town shortly, so may not be in touch for a bit.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 19 20:25:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA26538;
	Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:23:13 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 20:23:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 23:31:11 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Horace Heffner <hheffner mtaonline.net>
cc: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: FW: Scientific American: Explore!: Sonic Fusion: March 18,   2002
In-Reply-To: <v01530500b8bd853167ad [12.21.209.149]>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1020319232516.24020C-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"j6r67.0.ZU6.lw0cy" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46613
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Dear Horace and Vo.,


	The two "sonic fusion" experiments have very different detector
set ups and very different specifications of rise time, pulse height,
pulse descrimination, analysis and so on.

	I do not... yet... know enough about the specialized terminology.

	Do you know, or do you know anyone who can either point us to a
reference or tell us what the time histories of the pulse analysis is for
the two experiments?

	Further, do we know how to find the time constants of the
detectors and the parts of the detectors

	AND

	The 3 cm of "cooling" materials interposed between the detector
and the test area part of the experiment in one case is not even present
in the other case!

	These just do not seem to be replications... not matter how you
cut the loaf.


			

	

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 20 06:51:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30691;
	Wed, 20 Mar 2002 06:49:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 06:49:13 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020320092531.03f77058 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 09:46:29 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Electricity and lighting in the third world - good news too
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020319151038.03f27e70 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ar4Er3.0.CV7.e5Acy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46614
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>The World Bank thinks that alternative sources such as wind or solar 
>energy will help, but frankly I doubt it.

That isn't fair. I should say wind & solar will not be enough to supply 
everyone on earth with electricity. There has been great progress, and the 
World Bank and others deserve credit for it. I expect problems will crop up 
with the last 20% or 30% of the population, as it has in Mexico. Perhaps 
even CF would be too expensive for them. I predict it will be cheaper than 
alternatives because it will be optimized for low cost, whereas other 
energy sources are optimized for efficiency.

Yesterday a friend of mine returned from Africa where he is helping 
coordinate the vaccination program funding by the Gates philanthropic fund, 
with help from the CDC. It sounds like the program is going well, and 
having a large impact. Gates may be a jerk in business, and his software is 
mediocre, but he is a great humanitarian.

My daughter knows a college age, white woman who speaks different languages 
and was visiting Africa a few years ago. When she came into a village one 
day a little girl saw her, screamed and hid behind her mother crying. The 
young woman heard the mother comforting the child, saying, "there, there 
Dear, don't worry. She isn't going to give you a shot."

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 20 12:07:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA01517;
	Wed, 20 Mar 2002 12:03:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 12:03:41 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020320150231.00b0c3c8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 15:03:37 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: North Magnetic Pole leaving Canada?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-qYS22.0.aN.TiEcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46615
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/03/20/north.pole/index.html

North Magnetic Pole could be leaving Canada


By Richard Stenger

CNN

(CNN) --The North Magnetic Pole could soon abandon Canada, migrate north of 
Alaska and eventually wind up in Russia, according to a Canadian scientist.

The magnetic pole, which has steadily drifted for decades, has picked up 
its pace in recent years and could exit Canadian territory as soon as 2004, 
said Larry Newitt of the Geological Survey of Canada.
If the pole follows its present course, it will pass north of Alaska and 
arrive in Siberia in a half century, but Newitt cautioned that such 
predictions could prove wrong.

"Although it has been moving north or northwest for a hundred years, it is 
not going to continue in that direction forever. Its speed has increased 
considerably during the past 25 years, and it could just as easily decrease 
a few years from now," the geophysicist said.

The erratic pole can jump around considerably each day, but migrates on 
average about 10 kilometers to 40 kilometers each year. . . .

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 20 14:49:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA18978;
	Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:43:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:43:18 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9910EC.F8339FF ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:45:00 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: A New Form of Matter]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"bAmzj1.0.Oe4.32Hcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46617
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: A New Form of Matter
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 15:12:01 -0600
From: NASA Science News <snglist snglist.msfc.nasa.gov>
Reply-To: "NASA Science News" <snglist snglist.msfc.nasa.gov>
To: "NASA Science News" <snglist snglist.msfc.nasa.gov>

NASA Science News for March 20, 2002 3:00:00 PM

Scientists have created a new kind of matter: It comes in waves and
bridges the gap between the everyday world of humans and the
micro-domain
of quantum physics.

FULL STORY at

<<http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/20mar_newmatter.htm?list486329>>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 20 14:54:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA17486;
	Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:40:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 14:40:24 -0800
Message-ID: <3C990F9E.B0F0EFC8 bellsouth.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 17:39:26 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: NASA Patent
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"8VeAa2.0.pG4.J_Gcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46616
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>From a message on the Hydrino list comes a reference to this
patent (6317310B1):

http://l2.espacenet.com/dips/bnsviewer?CY=ep&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=US6317310&ID=US+++6317310B1+I+

It would appear that NASA has patented the Biefield/Brown effect
(assymetrical capacitor thrustor).

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 20 18:39:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03028;
	Wed, 20 Mar 2002 18:36:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 18:36:50 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: NASA Patent
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:36:09 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <8lgi9uo93qk482sodd5akk81hp3d80m4dg 4ax.com>
References: <3C990F9E.B0F0EFC8 bellsouth.net>
In-Reply-To: <3C990F9E.B0F0EFC8 bellsouth.net>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id SAA02945
Resent-Message-ID: <"gmwFL1.0.qk.0TKcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46618
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Wed, 20 Mar 2002 17:39:26 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>From a message on the Hydrino list comes a reference to this
>patent (6317310B1):
>
>http://l2.espacenet.com/dips/bnsviewer?CY=ep&LG=en&DB=EPD&PN=US6317310&ID=US+++6317310B1+I+
>
>It would appear that NASA has patented the Biefield/Brown effect
>(assymetrical capacitor thrustor).
>
>Terry
There is also a very interesting article in Alexander Frolov's latest
offering, on page 36, wherein the statement is made that elliptical
motion can produce an anomalous force.

If so, then one could induce the atoms of a substance to follow an
elliptical path at high velocity, by using two ultrasound generators
operating at the same frequency to induce standing ultrasonic waves in
the material (probably a solid) perpendicular to one another.
If the amplitude of the ultrasound waves is much larger than the thermal
motion of the atoms, then the thermal motion will be largely irrelevant.
The two ultrasound waves should be phased at 90º to one another such
that the atoms vibrate in a circle. This can then be converted to an
ellipse by ensuring that the amplitude of one of the waves is larger
than that of the other.

Control over strength and direction or the resultant force can be
achieved by varying relative and absolute amplitudes, as well as
frequency and relative phase angle.

The Biefield/Brown effect may in fact be based upon a similar principle,
if the thermal motion of atoms in a dielectric is distorted by the
electric field.

Furthermore, Keely's flying platform that he is alleged to have
demonstrated to the army would also be easily explained, as he is famous
for having experimented with resonant sound.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 21 13:37:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA04342;
	Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:34:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:34:13 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020321162942.03ddc770 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:33:40 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Interesting info on ZPE, space travel etc. from Haisch et al.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"lUsUy3.0.X31.H7bcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46619
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.calphysics.org/index.html

- JR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 06:49:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA19805;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 06:46:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 06:46:24 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020322094423.03d72be0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 09:45:36 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Wind energy news
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KOXU41.0.Gr4.-Eqcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46620
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

A lot has happened in wind power in the last few months. There is a 
political battle in Denmark, and the U.S. extended the Production Tax 
Credit. See:

http://www.windpower.org/news/index.htm

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 07:18:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30955;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:15:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:15:18 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020322101358.03dd1cd8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 10:15:03 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Coal interests fight wind power
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hGnjK.0.ZZ7.5gqcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46621
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Politics as usual. CF is not the only alternative facing unfair propaganda. 
See:

http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/emaa/pubs/ceed/ceed.html

- JR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 12:18:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10214;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:54:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:54:25 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9B8BCC.EADCA9A bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:53:48 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: NASA Patent
References: <3C990F9E.B0F0EFC8 bellsouth.net> <8lgi9uo93qk482sodd5akk81hp3d80m4dg@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"2bvps3.0.TV2.mlucy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46623
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> There is also a very interesting article in Alexander Frolov's latest
> offering, on page 36, wherein the statement is made that elliptical
> motion can produce an anomalous force.

Very interesting.  Is this on the web?

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 12:21:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10167;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:54:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 11:54:19 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9B8BBA.890E11E bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:53:30 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Russia Still Believes in Potapov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"M9sjE2.0.iU2.glucy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46622
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

How can you doubt "Truth"?  From Pravda:

http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/03/18/27035.html

12:40 2002-03-18   
UKRAINIAN KNIGHT OF SCIENCE DISPROVES EINSTEIN AND PREPARES
HIMSELF FOR SOLVING GRAVITATION'S MYSTERY

Well known scientist and inventor from the city of Cherkassy,
member of Russian Academy of Science Leonid Fominsky has been
awarded for his contribution to science with Russian
inter-academy prize - Knight of Science order. The ceremony of
decorating was carried out in Moscow, in All-Russian Exhibition
Centre, where Fominsky arrived to participate in conversion
exhibition Products and Technologies of Double Purpose. 

As L.Fominsky reported to PRAVDA.Ru correspondent, the exhibition
had been organized by Russian Defence Ministry, Rosaviakosmos
agency, Russian Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology,
Russian Ammunition Agency, Russian Academy of Science and other
respectable institutions. The subject of the exhibition is really
impressive: nanotechnology, robotics, materials with specified
characteristics, aircosmic systems, laser technologies,
non-traditional energy. With the latter subject, the Cherkassy
inventor is directly connected. 

L.Fominsky together with Moldavian inventor Yury Potapov
participated in working out of vortical heat-generator producing
three times more energy than it consumes electric power. For a
very long time, such high effectiveness has been a mystery for
the developers themselves, though the answer was found in
Fominsky's theoretical works.  Latest modification of the
heat-generator was presented at the exhibition as a project of
International Scientific and Technical Centre of Space Objects'
Paying Loads for which L.Fominsky works. The heat-generator
awarded Big Gold Medal of All-Russian Exhibition Centre. At the
moment, two Russian Works (in the city of Kovrov and in the city
of Istra) serialize the heat-generator of Potapov. Fominsky
states that such high effectiveness of his plant could be
explained with processes of cold nuclear synthesis (theoretical
basis of the heat-generator's work was expounded by him in some
scientific works published in Ukraine). Leonid Fomisky expressed
regret because of some troubles he ran into while trying to
serialize of the heat-generator in Ukraine. "While the subject of
energy supply is very important for our country, - he said. -
Because installation of such generators in houses allows to
refuse from heating systems and two times decreases expenses for
heating. Though, either authorities or private capital in Ukraine
have not expressed yet their interest in realization of this
project." 

Ukraine did not pay attention to one more project. It seems to be
far from space technologies, and looks like an ordinary small
stove. Though, at the conversation exhibition this stove was
awarded with a gold medal as well. "It is a very effective energy
settling, - Fominsky explains. - It weights 28 kg and consumes 4
kg of firewood a day, actually four logs, while it heats a
50-square-metre room! Imagine, if in a private house such a stove
is used, only two cubic metres of wood are necessary for the
whole winter. There are also other modifications, for example,
for baths. Such stove needs already two cubic metres of wood a
day. It is a necessary thing for regions without heating systems.
Are these heating systems really necessary? It is, probably, more
actual to work out and to introduce nuclear energy settlings." 
Apropos, among settlings of International Science and Technical
Centre of Space Objects' Paying Loads, there are quantum heating
generators, quantum thermoelectric power stations, wind-electric
stations, quantum engines, solar concentrators of radiant energy.
All of them are reserved with Russian patents. Leonid Fominsky
supposes that most of these things could have an "Ukrainian
patent and serve for Ukraine." Though, before view on science
should be changed in Ukraine. 

The scientist intends not to stop on what was achieved. In his
book "Wonder of Fall", Fominsky continues to search for
Einstein's mistakes and finds them. For example, he regards as a
mistake Einstein's derivation of the formula of gravitation
parallax of spectral light lines, he also assumes that there is
"extra-metagalaxy velocity of light" (which must be much bigger
than earth velocity of light in vacuum. He writes about movement
within time ("…time axis is only a mathematical method,
reflecting only internal rotatory movement of matter in
fundamental particles") and presents "fragmentary drafts"
gravitation theory. "There is no main conclusion about what it is
- gravitation, - Fominsky writes. - though acceleration of the
clock's course and of all periodic processes in gravity field is
enough to cause many publications on the subject." Whether this
theoretical investigations will be practically realized or not,
let us see.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 13:32:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA23016;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:29:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:29:09 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020322162605.04019898 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 16:28:53 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. . . . a feisty company
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"gAXyh1.0.Td5.a8wcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46624
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is insane, but interesting:

http://www.atomicengines.com/index.html

"Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. is a feisty company with a couple of governing 
thoughts." "A couple of governing thoughts" means they are obsessed, like 
CF fanatics, only they want to use uranium fission.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 14:37:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27065;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:34:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:34:28 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9BB1DB.5D04CC30 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:36:11 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 22, 2002]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Jqd_R.0.pc6.p5xcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46625
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: What's New for Mar 22, 2002
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:07:32 -0500 (EST)
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
To: aki ix.netcom.com

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 22 Mar 02   Washington, DC

WHAT'S NEW will not appear this week.  Bob Park is recovering
from major surgery related to his encounter with a tree in the
fall of 2000.  This is expected to be the final surgery, and he
will be back tormenting the Philistines next week.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 22 14:59:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA08993;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:57:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:57:20 -0800
Message-ID: <3C9BB6A9.96669E24 bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 17:56:41 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 22, 2002]
References: <3C9BB1DB.5D04CC30 ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"tpgOT3.0.GC2.FRxcy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46626
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Akira Kawasaki wrote:
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: What's New for Mar 22, 2002
> Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 13:07:32 -0500 (EST)
> From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
> To: aki ix.netcom.com
> 
> WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 22 Mar 02   Washington, DC
> 
> WHAT'S NEW will not appear this week.  Bob Park is recovering
> from major surgery related to his encounter with a tree in the
> fall of 2000.  

Tree . . . fall . . .

someone has a macabre sense of humor.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 23 07:23:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA31394;
	Sat, 23 Mar 2002 07:21:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 07:21:05 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020323101940.00a8f948 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 10:21:00 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: How to build a fusion starship
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"vcS681.0.Sg7.Xr9dy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46627
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a message to Bernard Haisch regarding this article:

http://www.calphysics.org/articles/merc2000a.html

Regarding your article "Prospects for an Interstellar Mission," I hope you 
don't mind me saying this, but I think you came up a little short in 
imagination. I think you underestimate the power that mankind will someday 
control. Here is what you need for a starship:

1 fusion or fission powered ship capable of carrying people.
1 self replicating, solar powered autonomous space borne robot. In other 
words, a Von Neumann machine.
A great deal of mass and solar power. The ability to transmute elements 
using solar energy would be handy.

Suppose your robot is capable of finding materials in an asteroid and 
reproducing itself in 10 days. After one year you have 60 billion robots. 
You set them to work building one million small throwaway fusion powered 
rockets, which can be ganged together to push your man-carrying ship. You 
bring aboard 1 copy of the robot, and blast off for Alpha Centuri.

Halfway there, the throwaway rockets have exhausted almost all their fuel. 
You unhook from them, and use the fuel in your man-carrying rocket to 
decelerate. The one million small rockets are directed to aim for Alpha 
Centuri itself (the star). They plunge into the star and are vaporized. 
This is a safety precaution to prevent them from crashing into a planet in 
the distant future. Meanwhile, your man carrying rocket has decelerated and 
gone into orbit. Your dispatch your robot to produce a million new 
throwaway rockets and fuel for your main rocket, and you spend a year or 
two exploring before returning to earth.

This would not deplete any resources on the earth. The cost of doing this 
would be the cost of building one man carrying rocket ship, and one robot. 
The resources used might exceed all of the aluminum, steel, plastic and 
energy on earth, but so what? The cost would be zero. The energy available 
from the sun is enough to vaporized the planet Earth in a minute or two. If 
you borrowed a substantial fraction of it, no one would notice or care. You 
would not intercept the solar energy aimed for earth or any of the planets. 
You would not disrupt anything on earth or cost anyone any money.

If ganging up one million small spacecraft proves unwieldy, you could 
perhaps have them convert solar energy to laser or particle beams and 
launch your rocket with a large sail. If one million small spacecraft is 
not enough, you could make it a billion or a trillion.

- Jed 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 23 08:29:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28010;
	Sat, 23 Mar 2002 08:26:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 08:26:05 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020323112529.00b03d10 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 11:25:55 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Handy chemical energy conversion factors
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"B9uZ23.0.Vr6.ToAdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46628
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 23 13:31:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA03935;
	Sat, 23 Mar 2002 13:29:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 13:29:22 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Magnet round a wire
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 08:28:48 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <f2sp9u0s48udn3gtfab5eh572ij4v6lodo 4ax.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA03911
Resent-Message-ID: <"AWd_k2.0.Pz.nEFdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46629
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This is a thought experiment designed to elucidate the nature of
magnetic fields.

First consider that two magnets oriented such as to attract one another.
If released they will spontaneously move toward one another. Conclusion,
magnets in a magnetic field move if free to.

Now consider a long straight vertical piece of wire passing through the
centre of a horizontal tub of water. A heavy current passes through the
wire, resulting in almost circular field lines around the wire, in the
tub.
Also in the tub, is a little boat carrying a magnet, attached by a
plastic arm with a slip ring to the central wire, such that the boat is
free to move around the wire, but not get any closer or further away.

Now the question: Does the boat follow the circular magnetic field
forever chasing its tail, or does it come to a halt as a consequence of
the not quite perfect circular uniformity of the circle, and end up
aligning itself with the overall field created by the real loop through
which the current passes? 

(And if it goes around forever, and the central current carrier is in
fact part of a giant superconducting loop, then where does the energy
for the boat come from?)


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 23 16:14:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA06756;
	Sat, 23 Mar 2002 16:12:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 16:12:01 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: NASA Patent
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2002 11:58:01 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <8ikn9ugc8bv9d90ct93ll8famd3rfenulk 4ax.com>
References: <3C990F9E.B0F0EFC8 bellsouth.net> <8lgi9uo93qk482sodd5akk81hp3d80m4dg@4ax.com> <3C9B8BCC.EADCA9A@bellsouth.net>
In-Reply-To: <3C9B8BCC.EADCA9A bellsouth.net>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id QAA06727
Resent-Message-ID: <"WJWMG2.0.Uf1.HdHdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46630
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Terry Blanton's message of Fri, 22 Mar 2002 14:53:48 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]

>Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>> There is also a very interesting article in Alexander Frolov's latest
>> offering, on page 36, wherein the statement is made that elliptical
>> motion can produce an anomalous force.
>
>Very interesting.  Is this on the web?
>
>Terry
The home page of the magazine is at http://www.faraday.ru/ , but the
actual article isn't there. It does however provide a mean of
subscribing to the magazine.

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 24 08:52:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23390;
	Sun, 24 Mar 2002 08:49:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 08:49:35 -0800
From: Keasy aol.com
Message-ID: <107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e aol.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:48:46 EST
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 256
Resent-Message-ID: <"x1fN-2.0.Mj5.TEWdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46631
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/23/02 1:58:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:


> Now the question: Does the boat follow the circular magnetic field
> forever chasing its tail, or does it come to a halt as a consequence of
> the not quite perfect circular uniformity of the circle, and end up
> aligning itself with the overall field created by the real loop through
> which the current passes? 
> 

   My comments would be that the boat will definitely stop.  And while it 
probably will end up aligning itself with the real loop, that is not the 
reason.  You could specifiy that the center wire is part of a coaxial 
configuration, in which there is no field from the outer conductor.
   It stops because for a magnet to move in a field, as opposed to simply 
twisting to align itself, there must be a field gradient, and movement must 
result in a change in the field energy.  In this case when the boat moves (if 
it were to move) the fields do not really change, so there is no tendency to 
move.
                                                                              
       Ken

--part1_107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 3/23/02 1:58:12 PM Pacific Standard Time, rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Now the question: Does the boat follow the circular magnetic field<BR>
forever chasing its tail, or does it come to a halt as a consequence of<BR>
the not quite perfect circular uniformity of the circle, and end up<BR>
aligning itself with the overall field created by the real loop through<BR>
which the current passes? <BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; My comments would be that the boat will definitely stop.&nbsp; And while it probably will end up aligning itself with the real loop, that is not the reason.&nbsp; You could specifiy that the center wire is part of a coaxial configuration, in 
which there is no field from the outer conductor.<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; It stops because for a magnet to move in a field, as opposed to simply twisting to align itself, there must be a field gradient, and movement must result in a change in the field energy.&nbsp; In this case when the boat moves (if it were to m
ove) the fields do not really change, so there is no tendency to move.<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ken</
FONT></HTML>

--part1_107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 24 10:08:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA26866;
	Sun, 24 Mar 2002 10:05:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 10:05:51 -0800
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500b8c3c2157bb8 [12.21.211.187]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 09:10:06 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
Resent-Message-ID: <"uDCnJ1.0.bZ6.-LXdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46632
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 8:28 AM 3/24/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>This is a thought experiment designed to elucidate the nature of
>magnetic fields.
>
>First consider that two magnets oriented such as to attract one another.
>If released they will spontaneously move toward one another. Conclusion,
>magnets in a magnetic field move if free to.
>
>Now consider a long straight vertical piece of wire passing through the
>centre of a horizontal tub of water. A heavy current passes through the
>wire, resulting in almost circular field lines around the wire, in the
>tub.
>Also in the tub, is a little boat carrying a magnet, attached by a
>plastic arm with a slip ring to the central wire, such that the boat is
>free to move around the wire, but not get any closer or further away.
>
>Now the question: Does the boat follow the circular magnetic field
>forever chasing its tail, or does it come to a halt as a consequence of
>the not quite perfect circular uniformity of the circle, and end up
>aligning itself with the overall field created by the real loop through
>which the current passes?
>
>(And if it goes around forever, and the central current carrier is in
>fact part of a giant superconducting loop, then where does the energy
>for the boat come from?)


The boat comes to a stop.  If the boat were free to move closer to the
wire, then of course it would.  Two magnets free to move align their
magnetic fields so as to give the superpositined field the least energy,
and this position is with the boat bumping against the wire, even if the
wire is "infinitely long" with no return current loop.

Back to your question, the boat will stop when aligned with the RETURN path
of the current loop.  You can imagine a permanent magnet to be its
"Amperian current", a ring of current around its periphery.  Two planar
rings of current will automatically align in the same plane (if free to do
so), with their fields reversed.  If free to move laterally, the rings will
come together at an edge.  The permanent magnet will act similarly.  These
motions reduce the energy present in the net field.  Moving them away from
a lowest energy position requires energy to "rebuild" the field, which has
an energy content.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 25 08:14:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18988;
	Mon, 25 Mar 2002 08:11:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 08:11:37 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020325110929.03c069d8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:11:15 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: How to build a fusion starship
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ay1RR2.0.Le4.tmqdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46633
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: A

Bernard Haisch responded to my message with this comment:

>I sure hope it winds up being simpler than that!

My response to him:

Actually, this method would be very simple, and it would require no 
important resources or manpower, just a lot of mass and solar energy. The 
solar system has unthinkable quantities of both.

Under the conditions I described, it would not be a waste, and it would not 
be awkward or unthinkable. Consider this scenario. Suppose astronomers 
wanting to study the sun decide to drop a meteor the size of Mount Everest 
(1.2 billion tons) into it. They bury instruments at various levels in the 
rock and have them transmit back data as the meteor ablates. No one would 
call this a waste of resources.

Now, suppose another group of scientists wants to study Alpha Centauri. 
They develop a fusion rocket that can produce 1 g thrust for one year, 
after which the fuel is 9/10 depleted. I believe that is feasible. At that 
thrust, taking into account relativistic effects, it would take 8.4 years 
to reach Alpha Centauri. They find another meteor the size of Mt Everest, 
or a pile of rocks from the moon, or what-have-you. They build one Von 
Neumann machine robot and set it to work on the meteor. A few years later 
it has converted the material into 100 million fusion rockets. Only one 
carries a useful payload. The rockets blast off at 1 g and after one year 
the remaining fuel from 90 million rockets is transferred to 10 million, 
and the 90 million are jettisoned. A year later 9 million are jettisoned, 
and so on. After 8 years they have 1 rocket left, weighing 1/100,000,000 
the mass of Mount Everest, or 12 tons. As I said earlier, for safety's 
sake, the other rockets would be directed to fly into the Alpha Centauri 
when they arrive (some earlier, some later than the payload).

This is really no different from dropping the meteor into the sun for the 
purposes of a scientific experiment, except it would be another sun. Even 
today, it would not be difficult to make instruments & computers that could 
last 8 years, and experiments worth doing in this time frame.

Perhaps this is so far in the distant future they can intercept 0.01% of 
the light from the sun and convert it back to mass, in various convenient 
elements. In that case they could collect enough mass to launch a 12 ton 
payload in 3 minutes. The world's largest cruise ship, the Voyager of the 
Seas, weighs 142,000 tons, and carries 3114 people. Assuming food and air 
recycling is perfect, you could send it to Alpha Centauri with a mere 
1.4E13 tons of mass. You could collect and assemble that in 27 days. That 
is far less time that it took us to build the present day Voyager of the 
Seas. It is roughly the time required to build a yacht. In the year 5000, 
any reasonably wealthy person who feels like doing this might construct a 
ship of this size and move to the nearest star. With a few orders of 
magnitude improvement in thrust and the percent of the light from the sun 
intercepted, it would not be difficult to dispatch the entire human race to 
another star, should the need arise. (For example if the sun showed signs 
of turning into a supernova.)

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 25 11:51:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA32145;
	Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:47:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:47:31 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 11:47:28 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: New FE company: Steve Greer
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020325110929.03c069d8 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020325114138.13934A-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"x74Dm.0.5s7.Ixtdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46634
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Maybe this is old news, but I just heard that Steve Greer (of the ufo
Disclosure Project) has a FE company and a website: 

  Space Energy Access Systems
  http://seaspower.com/StrategicOverview.htm


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    sciclub-list freenrg-L vortex-L webhead-L

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 25 12:48:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03078;
	Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:45:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 12:45:31 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 15:46:19 -0800
Subject: Excellent cold fusion article in www.sfgate.com and San Francisco
	Chronicle
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <B8C4F6CB.1DDC%editor infinite-energy.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"_dsn63.0.xl.hnudy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46635
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

All,

An excellent, tell-it-like-it-is article on cold fusion, hot off the press
from a very perceptive and persistent journalist, Hal Plotkin:

http://www.sfgate.com/technology/beat/

The article is also promoted on page 2 of today's San Francisco Chronicle
and a link and summary of it appears on the homepage of www.SFgate.com, the
homepage of the San Francisco Chronicle.

Infinite Energy magazine and Eugene Mallove are mentioned, as well as the
scandal of the 1989 MIT hot fusion lab data fudging against cold fusion.

The article focuses on the recent Science magazine article on table-top
fusion (March 8) and efforts to suppress it before publication. But it also
draws appropriate links to the cold fusion history of which the Science
article is a part.

Sincerely,

Dr. Eugene F. Mallove
Editor-in-Chief, Infinite Energy Magazine
Director, New Energy Research Laboratory
PO Box 2816
Concord, NH 03302-2816
   editor infinite-energy.com
   www.infinite-energy.com
Ph: 603-228-4516
Fx: 603-224-5975

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 25 15:00:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA29984;
	Mon, 25 Mar 2002 14:57:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 14:57:55 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020325174151.05b771f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 17:57:54 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: New FE company: new company, same old nonsense
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020325114138.13934A-100000 eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020325110929.03c069d8 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA29929
Resent-Message-ID: <"NYhMq1.0.GK7.njwdy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46636
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

William Beaty wrote:

>Maybe this is old news, but I just heard that Steve Greer (of the ufo
>Disclosure Project) has a FE company and a website:
>
>   Space Energy Access Systems
>   http://seaspower.com/StrategicOverview.htm

That is an interesting document. It is a good example of the "Inventor's 
Disease." It says:


"Our review of now-obscure technological breakthroughs show that these 
inventions have been suppressed or seized by the following broad categories 
of actions:

·       Acquisition of the technology by 'front' companies whose intent 
have been to 'shelve' the invention and prevent the device from coming to 
market.
·       Denial of patents and intellectual property protection by 
systematic action by the US and other patent offices. . . .

[bla, bla, bla, . . . .]

A small inventor or company can in no way overcome such obstacles."

Nonsense! ALL small inventors and companies ALWAYS overcome such obstacles. 
Whether you sell a new kind of shoe polish or the latest high tech 
software, competitors and vested interests always attempt to stop you with 
tactics like the ones listed here. Patents, for example, are seldom granted 
for software. They were not allowed until recently, and they remain pretty 
much useless in the real world. Violence and corruption were endemic in 
business up until the 1930s, with protection money, gangsters and police 
all demanding a cut of the profits. It is somewhat rarer today but in the 
1960s start up computer hardware companies reportedly lost their inventory 
to arson.

Corruption and influence buying is still a major problem, as revealed in 
the Enron scandal and countless others described in the back pages of the 
newspaper Business section.

There are tried and true ways to overcome these obstacles. According to the 
mythology and the stories floating around, dozens, perhaps hundreds of 
people have invented anomalous energy devices. Yet it seems that not a 
single one of them had as much common sense as a pushcart vendor in New 
York City! Frankly, I don't believe that.


"Therefore, a strategic plan and capability commensurate with these 
barriers must be devised and executed in order for these new technologies 
to succeed."

Only if you know nothing about history and you are determined to reinvent 
the wheel. Anyone else would use an off-the-shelf strategic plan, by hiring 
an experienced business manager or marketer who would work around these 
problems in a few months. People do that thousands of times a year. Of 
course, many small businesses fail to overcome such barriers, but most fail 
because they are stupid or they refuse to learn from history.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Mar 25 23:11:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA24199;
	Mon, 25 Mar 2002 23:09:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2002 23:09:13 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 18:08:26 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <2b60auo2dpq4fhhpduop65eg7adm2kladj 4ax.com>
References: <107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e aol.com>
In-Reply-To: <107.f0eacfe.29cf5d6e aol.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id XAA24057
Resent-Message-ID: <"vkGiD3.0.1w5.Pw1ey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46637
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Keasy aol.com's message of Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:48:46 EST:
Hi,
[snip]
>   It stops because for a magnet to move in a field, as opposed to simply 
>twisting to align itself, there must be a field gradient, and movement must 

I did consider field gradients, but I wasn't sure whether a field
gradient would result in a force, or a gradient in the force. I suspect
the latter.

So perhaps the problem might be better stated as:

Does a magnet experience a force along the field lines of a uniform
magnetic field, in which it is immersed, when it's own magnetic axis is
aligned with the field?

>and movement must 
>result in a change in the field energy.

...though I must admit that this is a very persuasive argument :)

Perhaps there is not such thing as a uniform magnetic field.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 05:55:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA23400;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 05:53:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 05:53:16 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500b8c62d04500e [12.21.211.178]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 04:57:32 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
Resent-Message-ID: <"Mab62.0.Tj5.Br7ey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46638
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:08 PM 3/26/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Keasy aol.com's message of Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:48:46 EST:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>   It stops because for a magnet to move in a field, as opposed to simply
>>twisting to align itself, there must be a field gradient, and movement must
>
>I did consider field gradients, but I wasn't sure whether a field
>gradient would result in a force, or a gradient in the force. I suspect
>the latter.

No, the mutual field gradients of two dipoles results in a mutual force
which approaches a 1/r^4 relation at long distances.


>
>So perhaps the problem might be better stated as:
>
>Does a magnet experience a force along the field lines of a uniform
>magnetic field, in which it is immersed, when it's own magnetic axis is
>aligned with the field?


No - theoretically (see below.)


>
>>and movement must
>>result in a change in the field energy.
>
>...though I must admit that this is a very persuasive argument :)
>
>Perhaps there is not such thing as a uniform magnetic field.


Only if you have an infinite current sheet, or infinite solenoid, etc.  All
real  magnetic fields are the result of dipoles, which result in a 1/r^3
field, thus there is no perfect gradient free magnetic field, only
approximations, and some very good.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 10:37:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA08709;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:35:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:35:00 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020326133214.03423d98 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 13:34:53 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Nuclear reactor corrosion reported
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA08629
Resent-Message-ID: <"qdGH81.0.l72.HzBey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46639
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/national/26NUKE.html

New York Times

U.S. Orders Checks for Corrosion at Nuclear Reactors

QUOTES:

WASHINGTON, March 25 — Nuclear reactor operators have been ordered to check 
their reactor vessels after the discovery that acid in cooling water had 
eaten a hole nearly all the way through the six-inch-thick lid of a reactor 
at a plant in Ohio. The corrosion left only a stainless-steel liner less 
than a half-inch thick to hold in cooling water under more than 2,200 
pounds of pressure per square inch.

At the 25-year-old Ohio plant, Davis-Besse, near Toledo, the stainless 
steel was bent by the pressure and would have broken if corrosion had 
continued, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, where officials 
were surprised by the discovery. They said they had never seen so much 
corrosion in a reactor vessel.

. . .

If the liner had given way in the Ohio reactor, experts say, there would 
have been an immediate release of thousands of gallons of slightly 
radioactive and extremely hot water inside the reactor's containment building.

The plants have pipe systems that are meant to pump water back into a 
leaking vessel, but some experts fear that if rushing steam and water 
damaged thermal insulation on top of the vessel, the pipes could clog. In 
that event, the reactor might have lost cooling water and suffered core 
damage — possibly a meltdown — and a larger release of radiation, at least 
inside the building. . . .



- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 10:52:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA19626;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:51:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 10:51:28 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:57:39 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Nuclear reactor corrosion reported
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020326133214.03423d98 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"dX94M3.0.To4.lCCey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46640
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is one of the great issues that is routinely not reported to the public by
the government.  Such corrosion has been seen many times in the past and can be
expected to occur more often as the plants age.  Just like the FAA that ignored
the real terrorist threat, like the INS that can not keep track of dangerous
people, like the FBI that can not even identify a spy successfully, like the DOE
that can not clean up the nuclear waste, the NRC will eventually be shown as an
incompetent organization when one of the old reactors springs a giant leak, one
too large to hide.  If I lived down wind from a nuclear plant, I would think
about moving.  Just how many failures of government agencies must occur before
public outrage is noticed?

Ed Storms

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> See:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/national/26NUKE.html
>
> New York Times
>
> U.S. Orders Checks for Corrosion at Nuclear Reactors
>
> QUOTES:
>
> WASHINGTON, March 25 — Nuclear reactor operators have been ordered to check
> their reactor vessels after the discovery that acid in cooling water had
> eaten a hole nearly all the way through the six-inch-thick lid of a reactor
> at a plant in Ohio. The corrosion left only a stainless-steel liner less
> than a half-inch thick to hold in cooling water under more than 2,200
> pounds of pressure per square inch.
>
> At the 25-year-old Ohio plant, Davis-Besse, near Toledo, the stainless
> steel was bent by the pressure and would have broken if corrosion had
> continued, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, where officials
> were surprised by the discovery. They said they had never seen so much
> corrosion in a reactor vessel.
>
> . . .
>
> If the liner had given way in the Ohio reactor, experts say, there would
> have been an immediate release of thousands of gallons of slightly
> radioactive and extremely hot water inside the reactor's containment building.
>
> The plants have pipe systems that are meant to pump water back into a
> leaking vessel, but some experts fear that if rushing steam and water
> damaged thermal insulation on top of the vessel, the pipes could clog. In
> that event, the reactor might have lost cooling water and suffered core
> damage — possibly a meltdown — and a larger release of radiation, at least
> inside the building. . . .
>
> - Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 11:41:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18221;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:38:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:38:59 -0800
From: JNaudin509 aol.com
Message-ID: <8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a aol.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:38:18 EST
Subject: The Tom Bearden's MEG IS PATENTED 
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows FR sub 512
Resent-Message-ID: <"CK4oT2.0.DS4.HvCey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46641
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear ALL,

GOOD NEWS !!!!

The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator
from Tom Bearden is now PATENTED
US 6362718 granted on March 26, 2002

<A HREF="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=6362718&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=ft00">US Patent 6,362,718</A> :  Motionless Electromagnetic Generator ( MEG )

Abstract An electromagnetic generator without moving parts includes a 
permanent magnet and a magnetic core including first and second magnetic 
paths. A first input coil and a first output coil extend around portions of 
the first magnetic path, while a second input coil and a second output coil 
extend around portions of the second magnetic path. The input coils are 
alternatively pulsed to provide induced current pulses in the output coils. 
Driving electrical current through each of the input coils reduces a level of 
flux from the permanent magnet within the magnet path around which the input 
coil extends. In an alternative embodiment of an electromagnetic generator, 
the magnetic core includes annular spaced-apart plates, with posts and 
permanent magnets extending in an alternating fashion between the plates. An 
output coil extends around each of these posts. Input coils extending around 
portions of the plates are pulsed to cause the induction of current within 
the output coils. 

Inventors:    Patrick; Stephen L. (2511 Woodview Dr. SE., Huntsville, AL 
35801); Bearden; Thomas E. (2211 Cove Rd., Huntsville, AL 35801); Hayes; 
James C. (16026 Deaton Dr. SE., Huntsville, AL 35803); Moore; Kenneth D. 
(1704 Montdale Rd., Huntsville, FL 35801); Kenny; James L. (925 Tascosa Dr., 
Huntsville, AL 35802)    

Appl. No.:    656313    
Filed:    September 6, 2000    

For some technical info see my web site at : <A HREF="http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm">
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm</A>

Best Regards
Jean-Louis Naudin
Email: <A HREF="mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A>
Main Web site : <A HREF="http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://jlnlabs.org</A>
Site France : <A HREF="http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/">http://jlnlabs.multimania.com</A>

--part1_8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">Dear ALL,<BR>
<BR>
<P ALIGN=CENTER></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"><B>GOOD NEWS !!!!</B><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"><B>The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator<BR>
from Tom Bearden is now PATENTED<BR>
US 6362718 granted on March 26, 2002</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"><BR>
<P ALIGN=LEFT></B><BR>
<B><A HREF="http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2Fsearch-bool.html&r=0&f=S&l=50&TERM1=6362718&FIELD1=&co1=AND&TERM2=&FIELD2=&d=ft00">US Patent <I>6,362,718</A></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-
COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"> </I>:&nbsp; </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000080" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">M</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" S
IZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">otionless </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000080" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">E</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSE
RIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">lectromagnetic </FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000080" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1">G</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#ff0000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Aria
l" LANG="1">enerator</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"></B> <B>( MEG )</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=3 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG=
"1"></B><BR>
</FONT><FONT  COLOR="#000000" style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="1"><BR>
<B>Abstract</B> An electromagnetic generator without moving parts includes a permanent magnet and a magnetic core including first and second magnetic paths. A first input coil and a first output coil extend around portions of the first magnetic path, whil
e a second input coil and a second output coil extend around portions of the second magnetic path. The input coils are alternatively pulsed to provide induced current pulses in the output coils. Driving electrical current through each of the input coils r
educes a level of flux from the permanent magnet within the magnet path around which the input coil extends. In an alternative embodiment of an electromagnetic generator, the magnetic core includes annular spaced-apart plates, with posts and permanent mag
nets extending in an alternating fashion between the plates. An output coil extends around each of these posts. Input coils extending around portions of the plates are pulsed to cause the induction of current within the output coils. <BR>
<BR>
Inventors:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <B>Patrick; Stephen L.</B> (2511 Woodview Dr. SE., Huntsville, AL 35801); <B>Bearden; Thomas E.</B> (2211 Cove Rd., Huntsville, AL 35801); <B>Hayes; James C.</B> (16026 Deaton Dr. SE., Huntsville, AL 35803); <B>Moore; Kenneth 
D.</B> (1704 Montdale Rd., Huntsville, FL 35801); <B>Kenny; James L.</B> (925 Tascosa Dr., Huntsville, AL 35802)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Appl. No.:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <B>656313</B>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
Filed:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <B>September 6, 2000</B>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
For some technical info see my web site at : <A HREF="http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm">http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm</A><BR>
<BR>
Best Regards<BR>
Jean-Louis Naudin<BR>
Email: <A HREF="mailto:jnaudin509 aol.com">JNaudin509@aol.com</A><BR>
Main Web site : <A HREF="http://go.to/jlnlabs/">http://jlnlabs.org</A><BR>
Site France : <A HREF="http://jlnlabs.multimania.com/">http://jlnlabs.multimania.com</A></P></P></FONT></HTML>

--part1_8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 11:50:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26906;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:49:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:49:31 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020326135613.03476760 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 14:47:10 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Nuclear reactor corrosion reported
In-Reply-To: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020326133214.03423d98 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"y_iiw2.0.Ha6.A3Dey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46642
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>This is one of the great issues that is routinely not reported to the 
>public by the government.

I think reactor safety and status reports have been reported publicly since 
TMI, whenever they have been discovered by regulators. Lately they have 
been posted on the net. Perhaps the government is not looking for problems 
diligently, but it does report what it finds.


>Just like the FAA that ignored the real terrorist threat . . .

That seems a little unfair. Before Sept. 11, no one imagined kamikaze 
lunatics armed with box cutters might kill 3,000 people. FAA officials have 
done a good job reducing conventional hijacking.


>, like the INS that can not keep track of dangerous people, like the FBI 
>that can not even identify a spy successfully, like the DOE that can not 
>clean up the nuclear waste, the NRC will eventually be shown as an 
>incompetent organization when one of the old reactors springs a giant 
>leak, one too large to hide.

This one will spring a leak soon if the operator proceeds as planned: "The 
plant owner, FirstEnergy Corporation, is hoping to patch the hole, an 
irregular opening about 4 by 5 inches. But the commission is skeptical 
about whether this is possible."

That illustrates a problem. The government is not the only party at fault. 
The operating company and the public share the blame. The operating company 
wants to patch over the problem with a half baked scheme, and the public 
wants cheap electricity, even at the risk of a nuclear catastrophe or 
environmental destruction from coal. People say they want clean energy, but 
they pressure the Senate to reject CAFE standards. It is no secret that 
coal fired plants kill thousands of people a year, and the problem could 
easily be corrected with a minor increase in your power bill, but the 
Administration, the Congress and the public prefer things as they are. 
People are willing to massacre their neighbors to save a few pennies per 
kWh. Actually, the only people free from blame lately have been government 
regulators such as Eric Schaeffer, head of the agency's Office of 
Regulatory Enforcement. He resigned in protest after the Administration 
blocked a settlement and gave the power company a green light to continue 
killing people.


>If I lived down wind from a nuclear plant, I would think about 
>moving.  Just how many failures of government agencies must occur before 
>public outrage is noticed?

The legal responsibility is mainly assigned to the power company. The 
public is morally responsibility. In a democracy, we get the government we 
are entitled to. Ultimately, the voters are responsible for everything. 
Will the public demand that all nuclear and coal plants be replaced with 
wind power, even if this raises the cost of electricity 1 or 2 cents per 
kWh? I doubt it! Will the public do its homework, find out that cold fusion 
is real, and demand that research be allowed? Perhaps, but it is not 
likely! If it did, the DoE and the APS would instantly shut up and follow 
orders, just as they did when the public demanded research in AIDS and 
other social problems.

The nuclear industry would be repaired or closed down in ten years, if the 
public demanded action. And who knows . . . perhaps it will. I hope it does 
not wait until after a catastrophe.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 12:08:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA05864;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:05:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 12:05:21 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020326145001.034299a0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 15:05:06 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: The Tom Bearden's MEG IS PATENTED 
In-Reply-To: <8f.195ec3ef.29d2282a aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"sGzrA1.0.QR1._HDey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46643
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

JNaudin509 aol.com wrote:

>Dear ALL,
>
>GOOD NEWS !!!!
>
>The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator
>from Tom Bearden is now PATENTED

Several other anomalous energy machines have been patented. And yet Steve 
Greer claimed that, "Denial of patents and intellectual property protection 
by systematic action by the US and other patent offices. . . ."

The P.O. fights all efforts to patent all types of inventions. That is part 
of its job. That's a good thing. Many undeserving patents have been granted 
in the past, which held back innovation. The public & industry would be ill 
served if the P.O. were to hand out patents without challenging applicants.

Greer and others see the normal challenges that any business confronts, 
such as the P.O.'s standard treatment, and unfair competition. They think 
these challenges are directed at them alone. They are like King Lear raging 
against the rain.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Mar 26 16:18:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA28838;
	Tue, 26 Mar 2002 16:15:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 16:15:12 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Energy Policy documents.
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 19:26:39 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEHNDCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"D9OxD2.0.K27.EyGey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46644
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Ed.

Your comments seem well founded, if a bit naive. It should be apparent
to all that the current government is uninterested in citizen opinions
or wishes, so no amount of public outrage will change policy. Consider
the recent ( heavily redacted ) energy documents released.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16943-2002Mar25.html

"Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham met with 36 representatives
of business interests and many campaign contributors while
developing President Bush's energy policy, and he held no
meetings with conservation or consumer groups,
documents released last night show."

Is this a surprise to anyone?

K.

PS: The agencies you mentioned are designed to work the way they
do, they are not incompetent or ineffective. A better question to
ask is, "who benefits from the actions and methods of these agencies?"





-----Original Message-----
From: Edmund Storms [mailto:storms2 ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 12:58 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Nuclear reactor corrosion reported


This is one of the great issues that is routinely not reported to the public
by
the government.  Such corrosion has been seen many times in the past and can
be
expected to occur more often as the plants age.  Just like the FAA that
ignored
the real terrorist threat, like the INS that can not keep track of dangerous
people, like the FBI that can not even identify a spy successfully, like the
DOE
that can not clean up the nuclear waste, the NRC will eventually be shown as
an
incompetent organization when one of the old reactors springs a giant leak,
one
too large to hide.  If I lived down wind from a nuclear plant, I would think
about moving.  Just how many failures of government agencies must occur
before
public outrage is noticed?

Ed Storms

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> See:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/26/national/26NUKE.html
>
> New York Times
>
> U.S. Orders Checks for Corrosion at Nuclear Reactors
>
> QUOTES:
>
> WASHINGTON, March 25 — Nuclear reactor operators have been ordered to
check
> their reactor vessels after the discovery that acid in cooling water had
> eaten a hole nearly all the way through the six-inch-thick lid of a
reactor
> at a plant in Ohio. The corrosion left only a stainless-steel liner less
> than a half-inch thick to hold in cooling water under more than 2,200
> pounds of pressure per square inch.
>
> At the 25-year-old Ohio plant, Davis-Besse, near Toledo, the stainless
> steel was bent by the pressure and would have broken if corrosion had
> continued, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, where officials
> were surprised by the discovery. They said they had never seen so much
> corrosion in a reactor vessel.
>
> . . .
>
> If the liner had given way in the Ohio reactor, experts say, there would
> have been an immediate release of thousands of gallons of slightly
> radioactive and extremely hot water inside the reactor's containment
building.
>
> The plants have pipe systems that are meant to pump water back into a
> leaking vessel, but some experts fear that if rushing steam and water
> damaged thermal insulation on top of the vessel, the pipes could clog. In
> that event, the reactor might have lost cooling water and suffered core
> damage — possibly a meltdown — and a larger release of radiation, at least
> inside the building. . . .
>
> - Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 07:02:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07780;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 06:59:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 06:59:35 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:59:32 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Energy Policy documents.
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEHNDCAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"eMNxn1.0.Uv1.MvTey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46645
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>Your comments seem well founded, if a bit naive. It should be apparent
>to all that the current government is uninterested in citizen opinions
>or wishes, so no amount of public outrage will change policy. Consider
>the recent ( heavily redacted ) energy documents released.

I disagree. It seems to me, the people who voted for Bush & Cheney wanted 
this energy policy. Everyone understood -- or should have understood -- 
that voting for them was tantamount to putting Big Oil in charge of our 
energy policy. B&C both worked for oil companies, earning millions of 
dollars, and they endorsed oil drilling, and dismissed conservation. Cheney 
called it a "personal virtue, but . . . not a sufficient basis for a sound, 
comprehensive energy policy."

If you elected me president, you would know in advance that I would put CF, 
wind power, conservation and other alternative energy advocates in charge 
of energy policy. I would be more even-handed than B&C, giving the oil 
interests a little input. That would be my choice as president, not 
something the constitution, laws or custom compel. Bush chooses to 
implement the policy he said he would implement, and he chooses to ignore 
the opposition. That is his right. It is his style of governing. Voters who 
do not like it can reject him in 2004.

By the way, even the redacted documents are interesting!


>PS: The agencies you mentioned are designed to work the way they
>do, they are not incompetent or ineffective. A better question to
>ask is, "who benefits from the actions and methods of these agencies?"

Exactly right! The DoE and the NRC are mainly intended to promote nuclear 
energy. They defend the nuclear industry from legal challenges and public 
opinion. They save it from having to assume normal liability. and ruinous 
insurance costs. They shelter it from competition from wind power and other 
cheaper, safer sources of energy, and they force the public to pay R&D 
costs. If you don't like that policy, you should vote for congressmen and 
presidential candidates who favor other policies. Tell your representative 
you oppose extending the Price - Anderson act. It has been in place since 
1953, which is long enough.

Also, let's give credit where it is due. The FAA was told to drastically 
reduce conventional hijacking at a minimum cost, without inconveniencing 
travelers. They did that quite well from the early 1960s until September 
11, 2001.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 07:28:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA21713;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 07:21:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 07:21:55 -0800
From: Keasy aol.com
Message-ID: <187.58e7b11.29d33d6d aol.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:21:17 EST
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_187.58e7b11.29d33d6d_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 256
Resent-Message-ID: <"-W-sV.0.BJ5.JEUey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46646
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_187.58e7b11.29d33d6d_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 3/25/02 11:11:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, 
rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:


> Does a magnet experience a force along the field lines of a uniform
> magnetic field, in which it is immersed, when it's own magnetic axis is
> aligned with the field?
> 

   If the magnet is symmetric the answer is, unfortunately, no.  The question 
would be, in which field direction might it move, in the direction of the B 
field or opposite to the B field?  So far as I know, there is no reason to 
expect it to move one way instead of the other.
                                                                              
 Ken  

--part1_187.58e7b11.29d33d6d_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0">In a message dated 3/25/02 11:11:47 PM Pacific Standard Time, rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Does a magnet experience a force along the field lines of a uniform<BR>
magnetic field, in which it is immersed, when it's own magnetic axis is<BR>
aligned with the field?<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp; If the magnet is symmetric the answer is, unfortunately, no.&nbsp; The question would be, in which field direction might it move, in the direction of the B field or opposite to the B field?&nbsp; So far as I know, there is no reason to expect
 it to move one way instead of the other.<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ken&nbsp; </FONT></HTML>

--part1_187.58e7b11.29d33d6d_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 09:32:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA00917;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:29:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 09:29:37 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Energy Policy documents.
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:41:08 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEIBDCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Resent-Message-ID: <"TExXz3.0.FE.16Wey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46647
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Jed.

Yes, I think B&C sincerely believe they are doing the right
thing. I tried to bring this issue up last year when the
elections were happening, as there was substantial support
on Vo. for the Republican ticket. It surprised me, considering
how detrimental their policy positions were to alt-energy
researchers. No one responded at the time. Perhaps now?

>Also, let's give credit where it is due. The FAA was told to drastically 
>reduce conventional hijacking at a minimum cost, without inconveniencing 
>travelers. They did that quite well from the early 1960s until September 
>11, 2001.

Indeed. I think the airlines are at fault for the hijaakings,
not the FAA. The airlines were responsible for airport security,
at least until recently. The recent flap about the INS is also
a bit of a red herring, as the approval for the visas occurred
before the hijaakings. What was sent to Huffman Aviation was
simply a paper receipt of that approval. If the receipt hadn't
been sent they would be attempting to cover up their approval.
No doubt they should not have approved the applications to begin
with, but why does it take a pseudo-scandal like this to
make it an issue? I mean, common sense told you there was
a problem back in Sept. 

My problem with the Energy Policy documents is not the advocacy,
but the secrecy. My own experiences with the Gov. and policy
might be instructive in this regard. The SEC was in the process
of modernizing their EDGAR electronic filing system. A request
was made of the general public for comments and proposals concerning
modernization. Our company drafted a proposal, and it was published
along with the rest of them in a public forum. Did this prevent
us from advocating a position strongly favorable to our company?
Hardly. But everyone knew that was our position. No surprises there.
Transparency is a pretty fundamental part of a functioning democracy.

Same for Mobil, Exxon, etc. etc. There's nothing wrong with them
saying, "Yes oil is the way to go, nothing else will work". If
they are ashamed to say this in public, then clearly it's a position
which they need reconsider. If the current admin feels that private
meetings will get them better comments, they should consider the
effect that policy had on Hillary Clinton and her attempt to reform
health care. 

K.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 10:43:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA06906;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:40:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 10:40:09 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Energy Policy documents.
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 13:51:35 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEICDCAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Resent-Message-ID: <"5jAoA2.0.ih1.98Xey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46648
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Oh yeah, here's some more relevant info regarding the
energy policy debate.

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/energy_task_force/index.asp

Notice the subtle trend here?

K.

PS: My apologies to the group for posting what some may
consider political posts, but I think if like me you
do research in the field you need to keep abreast of
the political situation w/ regards to energy policy.
If this stuff is considered offtopic please tell me so.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 11:16:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA26465;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:13:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:13:45 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327140150.03635e10 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 14:10:28 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: RE: Energy Policy documents.
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEIBDCAA.knagel gis.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"BcAtU.0.QT6.edXey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46649
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>. . . as there was substantial support on Vo. for the Republican ticket. 
>It surprised me, considering how detrimental their policy positions were 
>to alt-energy researchers. No one responded at the time. Perhaps now?

Most environmentalist organizations opposed Bush. His policies surprised no 
one. I do not know what the consensus was here. I do not think that Gore 
would have helped CF any more than Bush would. He probably would have given 
more support to wind energy and conservation.


>My problem with the Energy Policy documents is not the advocacy,
>but the secrecy. . . .

>Same for Mobil, Exxon, etc. etc. There's nothing wrong with them
>saying, "Yes oil is the way to go, nothing else will work". If
>they are ashamed to say this in public . . .

They are not ashamed, and they are not covering up their role in making 
this policy. The administration is trying to cover up, not the oil 
companies. Months ago, at the request of the New York Times and the OMB, 
the oil companies provided a list of people they sent to meet with Cheney, 
and copies of the memos they gave him. They said that apart from the energy 
policy discussions they have not met with or actively lobbied the 
administration much because it already agrees with them.

In a way, this "secrecy scandal" is a tempest in a teapot. Anyone familiar 
with the public relations literature from the oil companies and Enron will 
see that the administration's energy policy was copied from that 
literature. It was obvious who influenced the policy, and who did not.


>If the current admin feels that private
>meetings will get them better comments, they should consider the
>effect that policy had on Hillary Clinton and her attempt to reform
>health care.

Yes, it is inept politics, but not unethical in my opinion. The president 
and v.p. have a right to keep meetings secret.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 11:57:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA27742;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 11:53:56 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3CA21693.11AD1425 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:59:56 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Energy Policy documents.
References: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"jOlI53.0.Mn6.GDYey" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46650
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



> Keith Nagel wrote:
>
> >Your comments seem well founded, if a bit naive. It should be apparent
> >to all that the current government is uninterested in citizen opinions
> >or wishes, so no amount of public outrage will change policy. Consider
> >the recent ( heavily redacted ) energy documents released.
>
> I disagree. It seems to me, the people who voted for Bush & Cheney wanted
> this energy policy. Everyone understood -- or should have understood --
> that voting for them was tantamount to putting Big Oil in charge of our
> energy policy. B&C both worked for oil companies, earning millions of
> dollars, and they endorsed oil drilling, and dismissed conservation. Cheney
> called it a "personal virtue, but . . . not a sufficient basis for a sound,
> comprehensive energy policy."
>
> If you elected me president, you would know in advance that I would put CF,
> wind power, conservation and other alternative energy advocates in charge
> of energy policy. I would be more even-handed than B&C, giving the oil
> interests a little input. That would be my choice as president, not
> something the constitution, laws or custom compel. Bush chooses to
> implement the policy he said he would implement, and he chooses to ignore
> the opposition. That is his right. It is his style of governing. Voters who
> do not like it can reject him in 2004.
>
> By the way, even the redacted documents are interesting!
>
> >PS: The agencies you mentioned are designed to work the way they
> >do, they are not incompetent or ineffective. A better question to
> >ask is, "who benefits from the actions and methods of these agencies?"
>
> Exactly right! The DoE and the NRC are mainly intended to promote nuclear
> energy. They defend the nuclear industry from legal challenges and public
> opinion. They save it from having to assume normal liability. and ruinous
> insurance costs. They shelter it from competition from wind power and other
> cheaper, safer sources of energy, and they force the public to pay R&D
> costs. If you don't like that policy, you should vote for congressmen and
> presidential candidates who favor other policies. Tell your representative
> you oppose extending the Price - Anderson act. It has been in place since
> 1953, which is long enough.
>
> Also, let's give credit where it is due. The FAA was told to drastically
> reduce conventional hijacking at a minimum cost, without inconveniencing
> travelers. They did that quite well from the early 1960s until September
> 11, 2001.

While I may be naive, I propose that most people who vote are ignorant and
their vote is based on an emotional reaction to the issues and candidate, as
manipulated by the Media.   A certain fraction of the population will vote
straight Republican or Democrat no matter who runs. A larger fraction will
vote for or against a narrow issue, like abortion.  A still larger fraction
votes for the person who makes them feel good, the Reagonites for example.
Only a very small fraction of the population seriously considers the general
implications of their vote.  For example, practically none of the population
cares about the energy issues or even knows where the energy comes from.  This
is why our government agencies do such a poor job.

Although I agree with Jed that most government agencies are designed to
protect certain businesses, my outrage is directed toward their repeated
failure to do even this job properly.  They do the minimum they can get away
with and only change when they screw-up really badly.  This approach worked
well enough in the past.  However, increasingly in the modern world, screw-ups
have very serious consequences.  If we as a country are going to use nuclear
energy, genetic engineering, or be the world's leader, we can not afford to
screw-up like some two-bit third-world country.  Even if the agencies are only
following the self-interest of business, I would hope they would not want to
jeopardize these interests by incompetence.  For example, let one nuclear
reactor have another serious accident and the nuclear industry well soon be
out of business.  Let another "shoe bomber" bring down a plane, and the
aircraft industry will be in even greater trouble.  None of us can afford such
incompetence, least of all the affected industry.

I might note that the methods used by the FAA do not stop hijacking.
Hijacking stopped because there was no where for the plane to go where the
hijackers could be safe.  Once Cuba started putting the hijackers in jail,
hijacking stopped.  The FAA knew that a plane could be crashed into a
building, but they did not believe that people having the necessary
willingness to die actually existed.  Once this happened and knives were used,
the response was to confiscate anything sharp, including nail clippers.  Then
when someone made a bomb out of his shoes, they now examine everyone's shoes.
As has been pointed out repeatedly, the methods now being used are a joke
because incompetence has not yet been eliminated from the system.  Of course,
better methods are in the pipeline so the future will be better, but only
because the FAA screwed-up.

Ed



>
>
> - Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 12:43:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08393;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:42:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:42:42 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327152057.00a9b510 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 15:38:10 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Energy Policy documents.
In-Reply-To: <3CA21693.11AD1425 ix.netcom.com>
References: <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"IVNsf3.0.y22.1xYey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46651
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

>While I may be naive, I propose that most people who vote are ignorant and 
>their vote is based on an emotional reaction to the issues and candidate, 
>as manipulated by the Media.

Perhaps that is true, but surely the people themselves are to blame. A 
person has free will. He can choose to educated, or ignorant. He can choose 
to ignore the media, or let himself be manipulated. Most people realize 
that ignorance is dangerous and television advertisers and politicians 
often lie.


>For example, practically none of the population cares about the energy 
>issues or even knows where the energy comes from.  This is why our 
>government agencies do such a poor job.

Right. To fix this, millions of people have to start taking their 
responsibility as voters and citizens seriously. People seldom do that, 
except in a crisis. It is a conundrum.


>For example, let one nuclear reactor have another serious accident and the 
>nuclear industry well soon be out of business.  Let another "shoe bomber" 
>bring down a plane, and the aircraft industry will be in even greater 
>trouble.  None of us can afford such incompetence, least of all the 
>affected industry.

It is hard for me to imagine what I would do if someone put me in charge of 
the FAA or the FBI. How can you anticipate every possible crazy terrorist 
scheme? There must be countless ways suicidal people can wreck havoc with 
airplanes, oil refineries, tunnels and other vulnerable high-tech machines. 
The police cannot think of everything. They did storm in on the terrorists 
red handed, at the very moment they were mixing explosives to blow up the 
New York tunnels. (They had been watching them for months.) They caught 
hundreds of others. It is a shame they are not perfect, but I doubt anyone 
could do better.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 12:45:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08448;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:42:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:42:45 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327153826.036537e8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 15:42:38 -0500
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothwell infinite-energy.com>
Subject: Re: Energy Policy documents.
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020327093046.0329ec68 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMMEHNDCAA.knagel gis.net>
 <3CA0B676.A67C2553 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"INJyz1.0.q32.4xYey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46652
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>Exactly right! The DoE and the NRC are mainly intended to promote nuclear 
>energy. They defend the nuclear industry from legal challenges and public 
>opinion.

By the way, that was not cynical. The original charter of the AEC (the NRC 
and DoE forerunner) was to promote nuclear power, and to regulate it. These 
conflicting responsibilities have been a problem from the start. The jobs 
were supposed to be assigned to different agencies after TMI, but I do not 
think they have been effectively separated.

This part:

>They save it from having to assume normal liability. and ruinous insurance 
>costs. They shelter it from competition from wind power and other cheaper 
>. . .

. . . is cynical.

- Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Mar 27 12:58:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA14864;
	Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:57:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:57:41 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501b8c7e15bf820 [12.21.209.110]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 12:02:00 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
Resent-Message-ID: <"h2xVn2.0.7e3.39Zey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46653
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:21 AM 3/27/2, Keasy aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 3/25/02 11:11:47 PM Pacific Standard Time,
>rvanspaa bigpond.net.au writes:
>
>
>> Does a magnet experience a force along the field lines of a uniform
>> magnetic field, in which it is immersed, when it's own magnetic axis is
>> aligned with the field?
>>
>
>   If the magnet is symmetric the answer is, unfortunately, no.  The question
>would be, in which field direction might it move, in the direction of the B
>field or opposite to the B field?  So far as I know, there is no reason to
>expect it to move one way instead of the other.
>
> Ken
>

It doesn't matter whether the magnet is symmetric or not.  The only way to
obtain a uniform field is the case where the field is infinite ro the
source of the filed is infinite.  If an imposed field is from one or more
dipoles, then it is not infinite and it is not uniform througout all space.
The field from the magnet permeates all space.  The imposed field must
therefore be uniform througout all space to qualify as uniform, or have
source current elements that are infinite, thus the suggested conditions
are only theoretically possible. However, assuming such a uniform field
theoretically exists, then the magnet can not experience a net force from
the infinite and uniform field because no motion in any direction produces
a change in the superpositioned field energy.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 28 02:02:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA30604;
	Thu, 28 Mar 2002 01:59:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 01:59:32 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: cyllene.uwa.edu.au: Host lab74.pd.uwa.edu.au [130.95.157.74] claimed to be jwnew
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20020328180733.007e0890 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 18:07:33 +0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: John Winterflood <jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
In-Reply-To: <v01530501b8c7e15bf820 [12.21.209.110]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"RYa-Z.0.0U7.4ckey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46654
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace wrote:
>...The only way to
>obtain a uniform field is the case where the field is infinite or the
>source of the field is infinite.  If an imposed field is from one or more
>dipoles, then it is not infinite and it is not uniform througout all space.
>The field from the magnet permeates all space.  The imposed field must
>therefore be uniform througout all space to qualify as uniform, or have
>source current elements that are infinite, thus the suggested conditions
>are only theoretically possible. However, assuming such a uniform field
>theoretically exists, then the magnet can not experience a net force from
>the infinite and uniform field because no motion in any direction produces
>a change in the superpositioned field energy.

A uniform field over a small volume is easy to generate.  The Helmholtz
coil arrangement is the standard approach.  If you want a larger volume,
just make the coils bigger.  However Helmholtz coils are only a very
good approximation for a relatively small volume near the centre of the
pair.  A perfectly uniform field is theoretically possible (if I remember
correctly) by adding more and more coils in between and outside of the
Helmholtz pair until you have built a complete spheroid of coils - ie
a spheroidal current sheet produces a perfectly uniform field within
its entire volume.  The same is true of a homogeneous magnetized material
- such as a lump of ferrite - if it is made into a speroidal shape then
the internal *demagnetizing* field is perfectly uniform!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 28 08:05:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA23050;
	Thu, 28 Mar 2002 08:03:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 08:03:01 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA33E7B.6FE3CCD7 bellsouth.net>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:02:03 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: BEC Presentation
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"IyAqP1.0.4e5.rwpey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46655
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

There's a good presentation by Dr. Wolfgang Ketterle on his work
with Bose Einstein Condensates at:

http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/ketterle/

RealPlayer is required to hear the audio; but, the slides may be
viewed by any browser.

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 28 11:59:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA01927;
	Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:56:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:56:24 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505b8c918400382 [12.21.211.198]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 11:00:38 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Magnet round a wire
Resent-Message-ID: <"cnoAJ1.0.zT.dLtey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46656
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:07 PM 3/28/2, John Winterflood wrote:

>A uniform field over a small volume is easy to generate.  The Helmholtz
>coil arrangement is the standard approach.  If you want a larger volume,
>just make the coils bigger.

This is common physics course pablum.  Anyone who has done an FEA of a
Helmholtz field knows how bad it really is.  The field from a Helmholtz
coil is dramatically non-uniform, especially radially.  Only in the very
center of the coils for very small objects does it approach uniformity, but
even there it is pretty bad compared to the center of a very long solenoid.
It is merely an easy way to get a very rough approximation.  It certainly
does not approach the theoretical perfection which is our subject.



>However Helmholtz coils are only a very
>good approximation for a relatively small volume near the centre of the
>pair.  A perfectly uniform field is theoretically possible (if I remember
>correctly) by adding more and more coils in between and outside of the
>Helmholtz pair until you have built a complete spheroid of coils - ie
>a spheroidal current sheet produces a perfectly uniform field within
>its entire volume.  The same is true of a homogeneous magnetized material
>- such as a lump of ferrite - if it is made into a speroidal shape then
>the internal *demagnetizing* field is perfectly uniform!

There is no perfectly uniform magnetic field in practice.  All magnetic
fields are from dipoles and thus non-uniform.  The uniformity of the
spherical solenoid field depends upon achieving an infinite numer of turns
per inch (a perfect current sheet, which has its own infinities upon
approach) and also perfect closure of the sphere.  However, I restate:

At 4:57 AM 3/26/2, Horace Heffner wrote:
>  All
>real  magnetic fields are the result of dipoles, which result in a 1/r^3
>field, thus there is no perfect gradient free magnetic field, only
>approximations, and some very good.

I quote the above simply to point out that I DID say some are very good.
The solenoid, and the Helmholtz coils, the spherical coil, and any other
arrangements only approximate a uniform field in some small local volume.
The emphasis there should be on "small volume", though "approxiamte" is
still true and important in its own right.  My point main point was that
the interacting "boat" of the original problem, any interacting set of
magnetic dipoles that is, interacts with energy of the ENTIRE field of the
set of dipoles about it, not just the local field they impose on the boat's
volume.  The ENTIRE field of any set of dipoles is of course non-uniform
and approaches a 1/r^3 field at a distance.  The energy involved in making
a force involves the entire fields of the dipoles, not just the localized
fields.  (Don't be confused by Faraday!)  If this is not true, then of
course energy is not conserved because a dipole cancelling a distant
magnetic field to some degree without a corresponding force upon itself
results in a net loss of energy, and field reinfocing similarly results in
a gain.  However, I will conceed that this may be a circular argument in
that the objective with the boat seems to be to create unlimited energy
from nothing.  What I am saying is only obviously true if energy is
conserved.  It is also only obviously true for static situations, but I
think it is extendable to the dynamic as well.

I should also mention that the force between two magnetic dipoles, i.e.
circular currents, can be computed by looking at only the flux linking the
two, but, this is merely focusing on the complimentary part of the fields,
the inifinite part is also involved in the energy balance; the more that is
linked the less that is not as you consider the rest of the field to an
infinite distance.  The some of the linked and non-linked energy of a
constant strength dipole is constant. They are complimentary volmes and
complimentary energies. The energy density in a magnetic or electric field
depends on its intensity and on what other fields are superpositioned.
This is true throughout the field, not just in some locality of the field
generator.  The energy of the entire system, considering the fields of all
the field generators, must be brought into balance or conservation of
energy is not valid.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 28 16:08:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA31681;
	Thu, 28 Mar 2002 16:05:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 16:05:29 -0800
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 00:04:34 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BEC Presentation
Message-ID: <20020329000434.GD95784 genius.tao.org.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>,
	vortex-l eskimo.com
References: <3CA33E7B.6FE3CCD7 bellsouth.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3CA33E7B.6FE3CCD7 bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Resent-Message-ID: <"Pymvj2.0.ok7.8_wey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46657
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 11:02:03AM -0500, Terry Blanton wrote:
> There's a good presentation by Dr. Wolfgang Ketterle on his work
> with Bose Einstein Condensates at:
> 
> http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/ketterle/
> 
> RealPlayer is required to hear the audio; but, the slides may be
> viewed by any browser.

Excellent. Thanks for the link Terry.  Good stuff.

Joe

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Mar 28 16:17:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA05735;
	Thu, 28 Mar 2002 16:16:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 16:16:35 -0800
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 00:15:37 +0000
From: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BEC Presentation
Message-ID: <20020329001537.GE95784 genius.tao.org.uk>
Mail-Followup-To: Josef Karthauser <joe tao.org.uk>,
	vortex-l eskimo.com
References: <3CA33E7B.6FE3CCD7 bellsouth.net> <20020329000434.GD95784@genius.tao.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020329000434.GD95784 genius.tao.org.uk>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
Resent-Message-ID: <"FJiVq3.0.MP1.X9xey" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46658
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, Mar 29, 2002 at 12:04:34AM +0000, Josef Karthauser wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2002 at 11:02:03AM -0500, Terry Blanton wrote:
> > There's a good presentation by Dr. Wolfgang Ketterle on his work
> > with Bose Einstein Condensates at:
> > 
> > http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/plecture/ketterle/
> > 
> > RealPlayer is required to hear the audio; but, the slides may be
> > viewed by any browser.
> 
> Excellent. Thanks for the link Terry.  Good stuff.

I didn't realise before, but at http://www.itp.ucsb.edu/talks/ and
http://www.itp.ucsb.edu/activities/public/ there are loads of
lectures, all on line.

Do any other universities do this does anyone know?

Joe

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 07:09:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA06616;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:04:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:04:32 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA4823F.236C8363 bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 10:03:27 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Bearden MEG in Production???
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"-pxmf1.0.Hd1._98fy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46659
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

From:

http://www.rense.com/general21/free.htm

MEG Scalar Energy Device
Patented - Production Starts Next Year
>From Bill Morgan wmorgan nycap.rr.com
3-28-2

A patent was granted on March 26, 2002 for "The Motionless
Magnetic Generator," MEG) US Patent 6,362,718, which is likely to
become the first commercially available free energy device in
history in about one year from now. The machine will provide free
electricity from the vacuum, for the life of the device, which
should be a very long life since it has no moving parts. You can
see a picture of scientist Jean-Pierre Naudin's MEG replication
model at: 

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm>http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm.

It has strong magnets, coils, and a controller unit with the
electronics. Naudin made the announcement to the MEG-builder's
Yahoo group. The announcement has significance since the patent
office has always been skeptical of devices which seem to
get-something-for-nothing." But according to the new science of
scalar electromagnetics, the MEG does not break the law of
conservation of energy. It's just that the energy is conserved in
the fourth dimension, time, and not our 3-space world. 

The MEG provides electrical energy by tapping the longitudinal
electromagnetic (EM) waves which exist in almost infinite
abundance in the vacuum of space. This ocean of energy which
permeates everything is sometimes called the "zero point" energy,
since it remains there even at absolute zero temperature. 

Four inventors are listed: Stephen L. Patrick, Thomas E. Bearden,
James C. Hayes, Kenneth D. Moore. 

Tom Bearden has explained the operation of the MEG on his website
Cheniere.org, and also speaks about the new fearful weapons that
can and have been made using the same "longitudinal waves" of the
vacuum. 

The complicated physics of how the MEG works is explained in the
paper "The Motionless Electromagnetic Generator: Extracting
Energy from a Permanent Magnet with Energy Replenishment from the
Active Vacuum," which can be found at Tom Bearden's website: 

cheniere.org.(http://www.help4all.de/energy/MEGpaper.pdf> 

   The first MEG units to be produced for sale will output 2.5
kilowatts of free electricity. Forever. They should be in
production about a year from now. Facilities for manufacturing
the device are being set up in an unnamed "friendly nation." 

This free electricity will flow indefinitely, without much, or
any maintenance. The units may be hooked together to provide more
wattage, so four of them would provide 10 kilowatts. After some
production experience units will be made which output 10
kilowatts each. With a couple of those units a house could get
off the electrical grid. 

Tom Bearden, one of the inventors has said "I will admit that the
chief scientist of an important experimental group in a large
company was rather stunned at the type of output we were able to
obtain. The MEG may look like just a transformer, but it is not.
It is a completely different breed of cat." This cat, it would
seem, is out of the bag now. The ordinary EM waves we are
familiar with are called "transverse" waves, to distinguish them
from the new "longitudinal" EM waves of the vacuum. 

Bearden has explained in depth on his website cheniere.org that
wherever there is a dipole (battery, generator, magnet) there is
an unseen flow of longitudinal EM waves in that local vacuum, the
only problem is in tapping that energy and "transducing" it to
electricity. Bearden says that the problem with all the
electrical circuits we have is that they are two-wire circuits, a
loop by which half the energy goes back to destroy the dipole. In
the MEG that closed loop is never made. So the dipole is not
being destroyed. 

Patents are not granted on devices which do not work, so in a
sense this announcement proclaims a new era. The MEG device
itself proclaims and proves that energy is bundantly available
everywhere, for free. We only have to build the devices to tap
it. MEG type devices could be put into a car with an electric
engine to make a truly fuel-less automobile. Electricity can be
available in very remote places. People will be able to get off
our very terrorist-vulnerable power grids. In an era of terrorism
a highly dispersed power system would be most desirable rather
than our centralized systems. 

What is somewhat astonishing to me is the discovery by Bearden
et. al. that time itself is actually compressed energy, and that
this free energy is actually coming from the time domain, the
ocean of longitudinal EM waves which fill the empty vacuum of
spacetime. In fact, time is energy compressed by the same factor
that matter is compressed energy: the speed-of-light squared.
Thus there is a new companion to Einstein's E=mc2. Can you say "E
equals delta-tee-cee-squared?" The "tee" is time and delta-tee is
change in time. 

A company has been set up to manufacture the MEG called Magnetic
Energy Limited. 

The ramifications of free energy are enormous. The oil wars are
not necessary. If we threw as much money at this technology as we
are spending on the oil wars we would be free of the need for oil
in less than a decade. With fuel-less cars air pollution will be
greatly lessened. Third world nations can raise their standard of
living eventually. And the energy is free. And it never runs out. 

I have put together a kind of "Bearden for Beginners" article
which explains some of the basic concepts of the current state of
scalar technology. 

The granting of the MEG patent is the herald of the new era of
scalar electromagnetics, and the free energy which flows forever
and never runs out. 

<end>

Well, I guess we'll soon find out!

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 07:21:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA15916;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:21:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:21:09 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501b8ca370e3246 [12.21.208.195]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 06:25:10 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Bearden MEG in Production???
Resent-Message-ID: <"L6Tgm1.0.Nu3.ZP8fy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46660
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:03 AM 3/29/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
>From:
>
>http://www.rense.com/general21/free.htm

>
>Patents are not granted on devices which do not work, so in a
>sense this announcement proclaims a new era.

This is of course complete nonsense!  The PTO does not have an obligation
to determine with certainty that any proposed device works, nor does it
provide any warranty.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 07:43:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA26423;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:41:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 07:41:15 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA48AE4.F4450822 bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 10:40:20 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Bearden MEG in Production???
References: <v01530501b8ca370e3246 [12.21.208.195]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gsfqS.0.gS6.Ri8fy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46661
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
> At 10:03 AM 3/29/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
> >From:
> >
> >http://www.rense.com/general21/free.htm
> 
> >
> >Patents are not granted on devices which do not work, so in a
> >sense this announcement proclaims a new era.
> 
> This is of course complete nonsense!  The PTO does not have an obligation
> to determine with certainty that any proposed device works, nor does it
> provide any warranty.

I certainly agree with your comment; however, this is a
misconception of the author.  IF the rest of the story is true,
this will be a world changing event.  Tom reports:

http://www.cheniere.org/megstatus.htm

"Magnetic Energy Limited is in intense negotiations with several
large financial enterprises, for the capitalization necessary to
get on with it and finish the research for production
engineering. We will continue until the capital is successfully
raised. A major financial group has spent more than a hundred
thousand dollars in verifying us and technically verifying the
device and the process. We have passed through three rigorous and
independent technical assessments, quite successfully. As a point
of wry humor, one of the problems is that this technology is
"disruptive" technology, and so any large financial institute
with large amounts of committed capital in the normal power
field, e.g., has a serious internal struggle and a major problem
in considering financing this. I'm understating the problem
there! This peculiarity that a large enterprise could "shoot
itself in the foot" by investing in this "disruptive technology"
ironically has emerged as the single biggest problem in our
negotiations. There is no problem in technically proving the
system; we have to do that repeatedly in all our negotiations."

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 12:32:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA22705;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:29:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:29:29 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 11:33:47 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Bearden MEG in Production???
Resent-Message-ID: <"eHPXd3.0.cY5.ewCfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46662
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

At 10:40 AM 3/29/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
>Horace Heffner wrote:
>>
>> At 10:03 AM 3/29/2, Terry Blanton wrote:
>> >From:
>> >
>> >http://www.rense.com/general21/free.htm
>>
>> >
>> >Patents are not granted on devices which do not work, so in a
>> >sense this announcement proclaims a new era.
>>
>> This is of course complete nonsense!  The PTO does not have an obligation
>> to determine with certainty that any proposed device works, nor does it
>> provide any warranty.
>
>I certainly agree with your comment; however, this is a
>misconception of the author.


For sure!  I hoped quoting your quote would make sure I was not criticising
the authro and not your position, but I see now that is not at all clear
the way I did it.  Yes - a misconception of the author and, unfortunately,
many an investor too.  It's a good formula for a scam - patent and try to
liscence.  I will say it is very much in Bearden's favor that it looks that
he is trying to do the manufacturing, which is what patenting is really all
about - protecting the maufacturer from competition.  This is assuming the
inventor(s) are not paid significantly for getting the product to market
until it makes a profit.



>IF the rest of the story is true,
>this will be a world changing event.  Tom reports:
>
>http://www.cheniere.org/megstatus.htm
>
>"Magnetic Energy Limited is in intense negotiations with several
>large financial enterprises, for the capitalization necessary to
>get on with it and finish the research for production


Uh... Oh Oh!  Finish the research?  So it is still vaporware?


>engineering. We will continue until the capital is successfully
>raised. A major financial group has spent more than a hundred
>thousand dollars in verifying us and technically verifying the
>device and the process. We have passed through three rigorous and
>independent technical assessments, quite successfully. As a point
>of wry humor, one of the problems is that this technology is
>"disruptive" technology, and so any large financial institute
>with large amounts of committed capital in the normal power
>field, e.g., has a serious internal struggle and a major problem
>in considering financing this. I'm understating the problem
>there! This peculiarity that a large enterprise could "shoot
>itself in the foot" by investing in this "disruptive technology"
>ironically has emerged as the single biggest problem in our
>negotiations. There is no problem in technically proving


I wonder if this means they demo a working model, or merely provide
"theoretical proof".  If "theoretical proof is all they have, then I have
some "gadgets" that will knock your socks off!   Ahhem .. of course there
will be significant cost for production engineering and testing!  ;^)
Since I have had numerous such schemes that did not pan out, I am of course
not banking on any of the many such "theoretically provable" schemes I
presently have in mind.  BTW, one of such schemes that did not prove out
experimentally was VERY VERY similar to the MEG.


> the
>system; we have to do that repeatedly in all our negotiations."


It is true that "lynchpin technology" is hard to sell and often not
profitable even if feasible.  However, energy is not hard to sell, and if
you can make it you can sell it, espcially if you can make it in small
portable packages.  I find it difficult to believe big energy companies
would not be interested in investing in a non-depletable source of energy.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 12:39:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27961;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:38:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:38:24 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505b8ca81c58d5a [12.110.74.10]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 11:42:39 -0900
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Bearden MEG in Production???
Resent-Message-ID: <"JYjiQ3.0.kq6._2Dfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46663
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 10:40 AM 3/29/2, Terry Blanton wrote:

>I certainly agree with your comment; however, this is a
>misconception of the author.


I wrote: "For sure!  I hoped quoting your quote would make sure I was not
criticising the authro and not your position, but I see now that is not at
all clear the way I did it.  Yes - a misconception of the author and,
unfortunately, many an investor too."

That should have said:"For sure!  I hoped quoting your quote would make
sure I was criticising the author and not your position, but I see now that
is not at all clear the way I did it.  Yes - a misconception of the author
and, unfortunately, many an investor too."

Some days I can't get anything right!  8^)

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 12:44:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31786;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:44:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:44:14 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA4D1ED.10FBA414 bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:43:25 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
Organization: .
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Bearden MEG in Production???
References: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"_wrz_3.0.Vm7.T8Dfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46664
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

> I wonder if this means they demo a working model, or merely provide
> "theoretical proof".  

According to Bearden's web page, they have working models.  A
similar device is shown at:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/meg.htm

with a very simple explanation of how it works at:

http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/megdsqth.htm

I think Bearden's reference to "research for production" involves
the practical aspects of bringing a device to market, a
formidable task since he will need things like UL approval to
install in a home.  There are also safety aspects in one wishes
to remain connected to the power grid, like lockouts to prevent
backfeeding the power company's transformer - a problem faced by
solar power sources.

Happy Easter,

Terry

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 14:22:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA23870;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:19:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:19:28 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA4E749.862C5D58 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:14:33 -0800
From: Akira Kawasaki <aki ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en]C-CCK-MCD NSCPCD472  (Win95; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: What's New for Mar 29, 2002]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"dyXpF.0.uq5.mXEfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46665
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: What's New for Mar 29, 2002
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:17:26 -0500 (EST)
From: "What's New" <whatsnew aps.org>
To: aki ix.netcom.com

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 29 Mar 02   Washington, DC
                                                                 
1. ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE: THE CLINTON COMMISSION'S CATCH-22. 
Created by Bill Clinton two years ago, the White House Commission
on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Policy has delivered a
massive final report (WN 8 Mar 02), but there's a catch.  What
the Commissioners want is respect: they want to be licensed by
the state and reimbursed by health-insurance plans; they want to
see CAM courses at prestigious medical schools and programs to
educate the public.  In short, they want CAM to be treated just
like real medicine.  Good plan!  Under it's new director, Stephen
Straus, the NIH Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine
has already begun doing just what the Commissioners call for:
applying the same standards to CAM that are routinely required of
medical research.  In 1998, the New England Journal of Medicine
pointed out the catch-22: "There cannot be two kinds of medicine,
conventional and alternative.  There is only medicine that has
been adequately tested and medicine that has not, medicine that
works and medicine that may or may not work."  In other words, if
some CAM treatment survived rigorous testing, it would no longer
be CAM, it would simply be medicine.  So, is CAM making the
transition?  Uh, no.  The most popular CAM therapies survived for
centuries simply because they were never subjected to randomized,
double-blind trials.  It is certainly possible that important
medical advances will emerge from the gaggle of CAM therapies,
but so far, under rigorous testing, not one has been demonstrated
to be efficacious, while several herbal supplements appear to be
dangerous.  "'That's some catch, that Catch-22,' Yossarian
observed.  'It's the best there is,' Doc Daneeka agreed."   

2. ALTERNATIVE PUBLISHING: COMMUNICATING SCIENCE BY FULL-PAGE AD.
Scientists going through the March 17 Sunday New York Times were
startled to find a paper titled "The Collapse of the Big Bang and
the Gaseous Sun," by Pierre-Marie Robitaille, published as a full
page ad.  A professor in Radiology at Ohio State, Robitaille had
built the first 8 Tesla MRI.  But this paper/ad was outside his
field, cost a bundle (about $125 thousand) and didn't have a
clear target audience   the public couldn't read it, but neither
was it in the mathematical language of physics.  On the other
hand, Robitalle didn't have to put up with peer review and he had
full control over timing.  The timing raised eyebrows.  Ohio is
in the midst of a heated debate over a move to put Intelligent
Design on an equal footing with Darwinism in the classroom (WN 15
Feb 02).  ID is the fallback position of the creationists, who
hate the Big Bang as much as they hate Darwin.  Their strategy
has been to portray the Big Bang as a divisive issue, with a
powerful science establishment seeking to suppress dissenting
viewpoints.  Robitaille, who did not return our calls, seems to
cast himself in the role of a lonely defender of truth who must
spend a year's salary to get his side of the story out. 

THE UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND and THE AMERICAN PHYSICAL SOCIETY
Opinions are the author's and are not necessarily shared by the
University or the American Physical Society, but they should be.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 14:58:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA11798;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:56:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:56:24 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:56:19 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Podkletnov/NASA device in LA times
In-Reply-To: <3CA4E749.862C5D58 ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020329145552.6902B-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"GrxZo3.0.Fu2.O4Ffy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46666
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



  Up, Up, and Away
  http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-000021224mar24.story?coll=la-news-science


(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    sciclub-list freenrg-L vortex-L webhead-L

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 15:02:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA14958;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:02:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:02:09 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 15:02:06 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Bearden's MEG works?
In-Reply-To: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020329145634.6902C-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"vYp2Q3.0.ef3.m9Ffy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46667
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Fri, 29 Mar 2002, Horace Heffner wrote:
> >"Magnetic Energy Limited is in intense negotiations with several
> >large financial enterprises, for the capitalization necessary to
> >get on with it and finish the research for production
> 
> Uh... Oh Oh!  Finish the research?  So it is still vaporware?

Free-energy inventors typically need to do a bit more work before their OU
device can function.  This is equivalent to a gold prospector needing to
check a few more map locations before striking it rich.


Did Bearden ever announce that he had "closed the loop?"    Forget the
2.5KW, has anyone heard about a five-watt "toy MEG" in stand-alone
operation yet?



(((((((((((((((((( ( (  (   (    (O)    )   )  ) ) )))))))))))))))))))
William J. Beaty                            SCIENCE HOBBYIST website
billb eskimo.com                            http://amasci.com
EE/programmer/sci-exhibits   science projects, tesla, weird science
Seattle, WA  206-789-0775    sciclub-list freenrg-L vortex-L webhead-L

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Mar 29 21:15:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA04011;
	Fri, 29 Mar 2002 21:12:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 21:12:48 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20020329224314.00a26410 pop.mail.yahoo.com>
X-Sender: cjford1 pop.mail.yahoo.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 22:53:42 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Bearden's MEG works?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020329145634.6902C-100000 eskimo.com>
References: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"EEix-3.0.X-.FbKfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46668
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

At 03:02 PM 3/29/02 -0800, you wrote:


>Did Bearden ever announce that he had "closed the loop?"    Forget the
>2.5KW, has anyone heard about a five-watt "toy MEG" in stand-alone
>operation yet?

Honestly you would think with an efficiency of 500% they would stick a 
resister into an old toy steam engine and run a 
generator.....   But....   IF the power is not usable then is it relay there?


Charlie Ford

KC5-OWZ
cjford1 yahoo.com
cjford1 swbell.net


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free  yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 30 09:27:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA03356;
	Sat, 30 Mar 2002 09:24:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 09:24:26 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: billb owned process doing -bs
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 09:24:23 -0800 (PST)
From: William Beaty <billb eskimo.com>
To: Oystein Lande <oeysland online.no>
cc: JNaudin509 aol.com
Subject: my Lifter calc wrong!  air too fast.
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.1020330091135.9705D-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"3EIZD1.0.Lq.AJVfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46669
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


You're right!   I calculated half the lifter area, then forgot to multiply
by two afterwards.  This error made my value for air velocity be 1.4x too
large ( too large by sqrt(2) ).   The air SHOULD move at 2mph, not 3mph.

Duh.   Any other mistakes?  (I can't see 'em.)


Original values:

 Area of jet      .078 meter^2
 Mass of lifter   .016 kg
 Weight of lifter 9.81*.016 = 0.156 Nt
 density of air   1.2 kg/meter^3 (  sea level)
 air velocity  sqrt(weight/area/density) = 1.30 meters/sec (2.91 mph)

Corrected values:

 Area of jet      .156 meter^2
 Mass of lifter   .016 kg
 Weight of lifter 9.81*.016 = 0.156 Nt
 density of air   1.2 kg/meter^3 (  sea level)
 air velocity  sqrt(weight/area/density) = .916 meters/sec (2.06 mph)




---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 14:52:15 -0800
From: Oystein Lande <oeysland online.no>
To: billb eskimo.com
Subject: Comments from billb amform

--- url ---
http://jnaudin.free.fr/html/lifteriw.htm, ION WIND Calculation

--- comments ---
Hi!

Regarding your Ion Wind calculation on JLN lifter V3.0, I believe you
calculated wrong area (too small). Otherwise I agree on your formulas
used. My calculation goes like this: 

If the ion wind covers the whole lifter device, with lifter beeing
60*60*60 cm triangle the area is, A= 0,6*0,5*sqrt(3) * 0,6*0,5=0,16m2

(you used 0,3*0,5 on the base).

The necessary ion wind for lifting would then be approx. 0,9 m/s.

regards
Oystein

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Mar 30 18:20:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA00961;
	Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:17:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 18:17:44 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <e6.25a003e2.29d7cba4 aol.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 21:17:08 EST
Subject: the APS meeting in Indianapolus
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 118
Resent-Message-ID: <"-nzpf.0.qE.87dfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46670
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Did anyone attend?  How did it go?

Frank Z

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 01:53:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04154;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:26 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100300b8cc4cbe4e6a [63.233.227.249]>
In-Reply-To: <3CA4D1ED.10FBA414 bellsouth.net>
References: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
 <3CA4D1ED.10FBA414 bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:40:30 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: My conversation with Alexander Frolov
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"jZg2V2.0.q01.Pnjfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46671
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

As you know Alexander is the director of Faraday.ru . I visited their 
website and read the synopsis of last year's articles. I noted with 
interest that among them were reports of a replication of J R 
Searle's machine and an article by Olag Griskavitch about his 
generator. Both of these machines are of interest to me because they 
would be scalable to what ever size. I wrote Alexander a letter 
inquiring about the availability of machines. One would assume that a 
poor country would be itching to export finished machines. In his 
reply he basically ignored my suggestion that we could both profit if 
he could arrange for me to import machines. He attempted to sell me a 
copy of his book of course. We have this science fiction book story 
in this town, it's called Uncle Hugo's. It's just so difficult to 
find someone with a working machine for sale.
-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 01:53:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04415;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:58 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100305b8cc645fdbd7 [63.233.227.249]>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020330113924.00c4e398 padrak.com>
References: <3.0.32.20020330113924.00c4e398 padrak.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:40:30 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: AG News and Gravity Research in LA Times
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"4LKYu3.0.n41.wnjfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46674
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>From: jim cox
>Subject: Re: AG News and Gravity Research in LA Times!
>
>--- Harvey Fiala <hefiala attbi.com> wrote:
>
>March 24, 2002   Talk about it  E-mail story
>
>Up, Up and Away
>Defying the shackles of gravity is a dream enshrined in myth and the human
>psyche.
>Now NASA will test a machine to determine if it is also real science.
>
>Times Headlines 
>
>Up, Up and Away
>
>What the Fed Has Wrought
>
>Why Excuse Some Steel Dumpers?
>
>Economic Salvation Through the Internet
>
>The Only Hope for Peace
>
>By MARGARET WERTHEIM
>
>Margaret Wertheim is curating a show on the work of "outsider physicist"
>James Carter, at the Santa Monica Museum of Art, opening April 20. In
>Carter's theory of physics, gravity does not exist at all
>
>Laws are made to be broken. Or so the National Aeronautics and Space
>Administration seems to think. After an almost two-year wait, the agency's
>Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala., is poised to take
>delivery of a machine that proponents hope will counteract the laws of
>gravity.
>
>At the heart of the device is a purported effect so radical it could change
>the way we interact with one of nature's most fundamental forces. We're
>talking revolution, not evolution. A revolution in spaceships would be just
>one spinoff. Back here on Earth, the internal combustion engine could
>become an endangered species, replaced by gravity-powered cars, planes and
>elevators.
>
>The dream of defying gravity has a long and ignoble history. From Icarus
>on, the road is littered with failed attempts to unbind our feet from the
>shackles of nature's most seemingly inexorable force. But the team behind
>the NASA project say they are basing their efforts on real science, and
>NASA has paid almost $600,000 to have the machine custom-built by
>Ohio-based Superconductive Components, Inc. (SCI), a company that
>specializes in high-tech ceramics and superconducting materials. Says SCI
>Vice President James R. Gaines Jr.: "If it works, what a hoot!" Revolutions
>are usually bloody affairs, and this one is no exception. Many physicists
>believe the whole project is a waste of time based on unsubstantiated
>research of dubious origin. Gravity, they contend, is in no danger of
>diminution--the only thing they see at stake is NASA's credibility.
>
>The story begins soberly enough, in the pages of the respected science
>journal Physica C. There, in 1992, Russian physicist Evgeny Podkletnov
>published the results of an experiment in which he claimed to have
>discovered a "gravity-shielding" effect. According to the article,
>Podkletnov had managed to reduce the force of gravity on a small object by
>up to 2%--in effect, he had reduced its weight. Now 2% may not sound like
>much, but to the physics community, it was like a bomb blast. The law of
>gravity is one of science's most sacrosanct principles; any breaching of
>its walls would represent a major threat to the current theoretical
>framework. If verified, such a finding would bag its discoverer a Nobel Prize.
>
>But here's the rub: Podkletnov's paper was hazy on the details. He worried
>that his ideas would be taken by others, that he would not be given proper
>credit, and he refused to allow anyone into his lab to see his apparatus.
>Incomplete disclosure, coupled with the outlandish nature of the claim
>itself, left most physicists scoffing with derision. As a result,
>Podkletnov was thrown out of his job at the Tampere University of
>Technology in Finland.
>
>Since his paper appeared a decade ago, Podkletnov says, many people have
>successfully replicated his results, but if so, they have yet to report
>them in a peer-reviewed journal. All those who have published have failed
>to detect any clear results. One of them is Marshall Space Flight Center
>researcher Ron Koczor, who spent two years investigating various aspects of
>Podkletnov's experiments, and eventually gave up. But Podkletnov insists
>the gravity-shielding effect only occurs when all the experimental
>conditions are precisely right. Koczor decided it was a job for the
>professionals, and in 1999 he persuaded NASA to commission SCI to build a
>facsimile of Podkletnov's original apparatus.
>
>The details might be sketchy, but the basic idea behind the device is
>fairly simple. It begins with a disc, about six inches in diameter and a
>quarter of an inch thick, made out of a superconducting material whose
>recipe Podkletnov has carefully kept secret. The disc is cooled to below
>-233 degrees centigrade and levitated using a magnetic field. Then an
>electric field is applied to make the disc spin. So far, all we have is a
>variation on an electric motor, but Podkletnov claims that when the disc
>rotates at more than 5,000 revolutions per minute, an object placed above
>it begins to lose weight. Somehow, he says, the force of gravity is being
>counteracted--the trick is, you have to get the setup exactly right.
>
>"I wish it was as simple as baking a cake," says SCI's Gaines. Even with
>the company's expertise it has not been easy. Indeed, the project is a year
>behind schedule. But Gaines says his team are almost there, and they should
>be handing over the device to NASA soon.
>
>Will it work? Gaines' technicians are not gravity experts; their field is
>materials science. They have simply built the machine to agreed
>specifications. But, of course, they would be thrilled if it did work;
>success would ensure an enormous boost to superconducting research. Testing
>of the device will be NASA's responsibility, and he awaits their results
>with great expectation.
>
>Personally, I am thrilled to hear my tax dollars are hard at work
>subverting the laws of nature. Or attempting to, at any rate. Who knows
>what conceptual mountains we might demolish if our imaginations aim high
>enough? Johannes Kepler, the founding father of modern astrophysics, saw
>science as a form of play--empirical data set an irrevocable boundary to
>this play, but within its arena the imagination must be free to roam.
>
>This is not NASA's first attempt to look for the Podkletnov effect. Last
>year, Marshall Space Flight Center funded a different experiment in which a
>very sensitive Cavendish balance was used to try and detect a change of
>weight in a superconducting apparatus. Results of that study were
>"inconclusive."
>
>Randall Peters, a physicist at Mercer University in Macon, Ga., was a
>consultant to that project--he helped to customize the balance for this
>unorthodox use. "My own position," Peters says, "is that I'd be greatly
>surprised if the effect being sought was actually found." Like most
>physicists, he feels confident that gravity will withstand the Podkletnov
>test. Nonetheless, he adds that "physics is full of surprises," and he
>believes that scientists need to maintain an open mind. Gaines agrees,
>defending NASA's willingness to go out on such a speculative limb: "The
>upside potential is so huge, they really couldn't afford to miss out if it
>is true."
>
>NASA's interest in circumventing gravity is not theoretical. The agency is
>reaching for the stars. Literally. Even in the zero-gravity environment of
>outer space, you still need to accelerate a ship to extremely high speeds
>to get to the stars in any viable framework, something that cannot be done
>with conventional rocket technology. The Podkletnov effect suggests it may
>be possible to effectively reduce the mass of the ship, thereby reducing
>the overall energy needed for acceleration.
>
>The authors of the July paper introduced their experimental analysis with a
>wistful discussion on the limitations of rocket propulsion. "Using current
>rocket technology," they note, "a trip to the next star would easily
>consume the mass-energy equivalent of a planet in order to arrive within a
>reasonable lifetime." Technologies like nuclear fission and fusion offer
>some hope, "but still will not support the 'Star Trek' vision of space
>exploration." In short, if we are serious about space travel, we need a
>quantum leap forward in propulsive power.


-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 01:53:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04338;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:47 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100304b8cc61a938bc [63.233.227.249]>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.20020330111803.00a7b478 padrak.com>
References: <3.0.32.20020330111803.00a7b478 padrak.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:40:30 -0600
To: Vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"lYAu71.0.i31.lnjfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46673
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
>
>
>"The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
>http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/analysis.htm
>
>by J.  R.  Nyquist
>
>March 26, 2002
>
>On Thursday, March 21, WorldNetDaily posted an article from STRATFOR, a
>well-connected private intelligence firm. The title of the article was
>"Crisis looming between U.S., Russia."
>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID= 26920 STRATFOR's
>article deals with CIA Director George Tenet's March 19 testimony before
>the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. According to Tenet, Russia is
>hardly a reliable partner in the "war against terror." Instead, Russia is
>"the first choice of proliferant states seeking the most advanced
>technology and training," said Tenet.
>
>What the CIA director could not say, and perhaps what makes President
>George W. Bush so desperately eager to wipe out the regime of Saddam
>Hussein, is that Russia may have given red mercury fusion technology to
>Saddam. According to one of my sources, Iraq possesses "s- megaton"
>micro-nuclear warheads. These are softball-sized two-megaton fusion bombs
>triggered by an irradiated and compressed compound of mercury antimony
>oxide. This device doubles the nuclear yield with a hundredfold reduction
>of weight. Using heavy hydrogen instead of uranium or plutonium to fuel its
>explosive reaction, this hand- held nuclear weapon cannot be detected by
>U.S. sensors.

Does anybody know if this is B S? I've never heard of Hg and antimony 
doing something like this.

>


-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 01:54:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04205;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 01:52:33 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05100301b8cc4fc203cc [63.233.227.249]>
In-Reply-To: <3CA4D1ED.10FBA414 bellsouth.net>
References: <v01530502b8ca794d9001 [12.21.208.195]>
 <3CA4D1ED.10FBA414 bellsouth.net>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:40:30 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: the nature of nucleons
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Ehifi2.0.Y11.Vnjfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46672
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

There has been discussion on Vortex-L recently about the nature of 
nucleons. Someone posted a URL about the Bose-Einstein Condensate. On 
the website there were pictures of a wave. As I understand it, The 
nucleon consists of three quarks in a string. As I understand it 
quarks come in various spins, colors, flavors and with or without 
charm. There was also some discussion about changing the spin of a 
nucleon by means of photonic bombardment. Changing this spin resulted 
in nuclear fusion. I find this very interesting. Paul Brown, of 
globalatomics.com his reported accelerated radioneuclide decay 
following what I assume is a similar process. Similar, although not 
as impressive results have been reported following combustion with 
Brown's Gas. I'm wondering if with the proper treatment I could cause 
Hg to fuse with a neutron and then undergo decay to a radioactive 
form of Au, which would decay to Pt, A similar reaction starting with 
Ag, and then decaying to Rh or Pd, would also have economic 
significance.
-- 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 07:58:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA07235;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:55:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:55:59 -0800
Message-ID: <20020331155556.88672.qmail web20610.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 07:55:56 -0800 (PST)
From: harvey norris <harvich yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <a05100304b8cc61a938bc [63.233.227.249]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Tb3fB1.0.vm1.E6pfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46675
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com> wrote:
> >FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury
> Nightmare"
> >
> >
> >"The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury
> Nightmare"
>
>http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/analysis.htm
> >
> >by J.  R.  Nyquist
> >
> >March 26, 2002
> >
> >On Thursday, March 21, WorldNetDaily posted an
> article from STRATFOR, a
> >well-connected private intelligence firm. The title
> of the article was
> >"Crisis looming between U.S., Russia."
>
>http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=
> 26920 STRATFOR's
> >article deals with CIA Director George Tenet's
> March 19 testimony before
> >the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee. According
> to Tenet, Russia is
> >hardly a reliable partner in the "war against
> terror." Instead, Russia is
> >"the first choice of proliferant states seeking the
> most advanced
> >technology and training," said Tenet.
> >
> >What the CIA director could not say, and perhaps
> what makes President
> >George W. Bush so desperately eager to wipe out the
> regime of Saddam
> >Hussein, is that Russia may have given red mercury
> fusion technology to
> >Saddam. According to one of my sources, Iraq
> possesses "s- megaton"
> >micro-nuclear warheads. These are softball-sized
> two-megaton fusion bombs
> >triggered by an irradiated and compressed compound
> of mercury antimony
> >oxide. This device doubles the nuclear yield with a
> hundredfold reduction
> >of weight. Using heavy hydrogen instead of uranium
> or plutonium to fuel its
> >explosive reaction, this hand- held nuclear weapon
> cannot be detected by
> >U.S. sensors.
> 
> Does anybody know if this is B S? I've never heard
> of Hg and antimony 
> doing something like this.
> 
Dont know either, but would make comments on these
compounds. Worked in the plastic processing industry
for 17 years. Antimony oxide is an  very common
additive often used as a fire retardent. When a PVC
material is processed through extrusion or whatever 
it needs to have materials in it that will keep it
from oxidizing, and this also lowers the end
temperature where a material will ignite.These folks
always used recipes where other things like
stabilizers were added. The various compounds are
mixed together in a mixing chamber called a banbury.
With hypalon rubber compound mixtures, lead compounds,
may also be used, where red lead is fairly common. I
do not understand the color properties of these lead
compunds, but a very bright yellow one is also made.
Sometimes chromium and lead compounds are used for
colorant. Historically candy makers used lead
compounds to make the candy in attractive colors! This
was of course before the toxic propeties were known.

All of that stuff is fairly toxic, but the antimony
oxide always caused me problems. For some reason it
has a small percentage of arsenic in it, because of
the way it is found  or mined in nature. Some people,
including me, have a skin allergy to it, where the
condition of antimony measles is reffered to what it
does to the skin. Glad to be out of that industry as
this condition was problematic for me during long
manufacturing runs where I weighed the antimony.

Sorry I cant be relevant towards the topic, but I
thought folks would like to hear some commercial
purposes used for the substances. HDN


=====
Tesla Research Group; Pioneering the Applications of Interphasal Resonances http://groups.yahoo.com/group/teslafy/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for Easter, Passover
http://greetings.yahoo.com/

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 10:30:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA09971;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 10:27:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 10:27:51 -0800
From: "Matthew Rogers" <matt accelnet.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. . . . a feisty company
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 10:28:00 -0800
Message-ID: <000801c1d8e1$c9fc2230$7009fea9 bear>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020322162605.04019898 pop.mindspring.com>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"gbmud3.0.jR2.dKrfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46676
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Vor,
	After reading this web page, its articles and links, I can only
conclude,
Hurrah, finally somebody who knows what their talking about.

This seems to be an accurate portrayal of the technology needed to make
things safe, and not insane.



Matthew Rogers



-----Original Message-----
From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothwell infinite-energy.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:29 PM
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
Subject: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. . . . a feisty company

This is insane, but interesting:

http://www.atomicengines.com/index.html

"Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. is a feisty company with a couple of
governing 
thoughts." "A couple of governing thoughts" means they are obsessed,
like 
CF fanatics, only they want to use uranium fission.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 12:45:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03335;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 12:42:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 12:42:40 -0800
Message-ID: <3CA76810.CA4E6316 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 13:48:46 -0600
From: Edmund Storms <storms2 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.5 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en,pdf
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. . . . a feisty company
References: <000801c1d8e1$c9fc2230$7009fea9 bear>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"gdrK23.0.1q._Itfy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46677
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Matthew, I agree with you, nuclear energy is better in many respects
compared to fossil fuel.  If the US had adopted a safe and efficient
reactor design like France and Canada, if we had made a competent effort
to process the fuel rods and dispose of the resulting radioactive
material, if we had done this using the philosophy that the job needed to
be done right rather than cheap, I would also argue for more nuclear
energy.   However, this was not done and, as a result, we have a very
dangerous mess.  Furthermore, the philosophy applied by business in this
country will guarantee that any new technology will always result in a
mess, which will only be cleaned up after a sufficient fraction of the
population is killed or injured.  This being the situation, I think that
any further development of nuclear energy in the US, no matter how well
argued or how good the design looks on paper, would be very unwise.
Instead, we should look to conservation and renewable sources of energy as
our salvation, not the least of which is cold fusion and zero-point
energy.  The very fact that the US has fought these latter energy sources
demonstrates that we as a country are not wise enough to handle something
so dangerous as fission energy.

Ed

Matthew Rogers wrote:

> Vor,
>         After reading this web page, its articles and links, I can only
> conclude,
> Hurrah, finally somebody who knows what their talking about.
>
> This seems to be an accurate portrayal of the technology needed to make
> things safe, and not insane.
>
> Matthew Rogers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothwell infinite-energy.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 22, 2002 1:29 PM
> To: vortex-L eskimo.com
> Subject: Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. . . . a feisty company
>
> This is insane, but interesting:
>
> http://www.atomicengines.com/index.html
>
> "Adams Atomic Engines, Inc. is a feisty company with a couple of
> governing
> thoughts." "A couple of governing thoughts" means they are obsessed,
> like
> CF fanatics, only they want to use uranium fission.
>
> - Jed

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 14:21:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA06713;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 14:19:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 14:19:08 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: [OFF TOPIC]Re: FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 08:18:33 +1000
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <7g2fau8trgmb5bjv0tcf38gnn06171rj86 4ax.com>
References: <3.0.32.20020330111803.00a7b478 padrak.com> <a05100304b8cc61a938bc@[63.233.227.249]>
In-Reply-To: <a05100304b8cc61a938bc [63.233.227.249]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.9/32.560
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA06666
Resent-Message-ID: <"vYXo2.0.ke1.Rjufy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46678
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  thomas malloy's message of Sun, 31 Mar 2002 03:40:30 -0600:
Hi,
>>FWD:  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
>>
>>
>>"The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
>>http://www.financialsense.com/stormwatch/geo/analysis.htm
>>
>>by J.  R.  Nyquist
>>
>>March 26, 2002
>>
[snip]

A snippert from further down in the article:

"If Vreeland's information is reliable, we might have a handle on why
the United States is threatening Russia with nuclear strikes. Like a
trapped animal the U.S. realises the mistake it has made. Disarming
after our alleged Cold War victory was an error. Now the U.S. must make
terrible threats and take drastic action to restore the nuclear balance.
To do this the United States must hold Russia directly responsible for
Russian-supported and Iraqi-directed nuclear terrorism against the
American homeland. By doing this, and by mopping up Iraq, the United
States might reestablish that same "balance of terror" that kept the
peace during the Cold War."

This appears to be a typical example of an old tactic. When you want to
start a war, make the other guy look like the bad guy first, so that you
can justify it to your own people.

The real reason for this war is simple. Certain entities in the US want
total control of middle eastern oil supplies.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/

....Put the "bottom line" at the top!

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Mar 31 22:27:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA22220;
	Sun, 31 Mar 2002 22:24:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 22:24:47 -0800
Message-ID: <020601c1d945$f93a4180$0201a8c0 m>
From: "Michael Randall" <vrand01 earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [OFF TOPIC] New map of the Middle East was  "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury Nightmare"
Date: Sun, 31 Mar 2002 22:25:09 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200
Resent-Message-ID: <"vDBYg1.0.6R5.kq_fy" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/46679
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 31, 2002 2:18 PM
Subject: [OFF TOPIC]Re: FWD: "The Balance of Terror and the Red Mercury
Nightmare"

Hi Robin,
>>
> This appears to be a typical example of an old tactic. When you want to
> start a war, make the other guy look like the bad guy first, so that you
> can justify it to your own people.
>
> The real reason for this war is simple. Certain entities in the US want
> total control of middle eastern oil supplies.
>

The cartoon map came out a couple of weeks after Sept. 11, 2001.
http://www.webpost.net/do/Don/MiddleEastMap.jpg

Regards,
Michael Randall


