From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  1 00:34:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07946;
	Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:32:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 00:32:57 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b0aba0f6cad72e4 [64.61.199.40]>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 02:33:46 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"9jCO71.0.2y1.uaSwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48409
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Tathacus Resources got into trouble with the Canadian regulators who 
suspended trading on their stock for a while. This file puts it all 
to rest. As I have previously posted, the technology is very similar 
to that of the late Stan Meyer, another one bites the dust!

http://www.tathacus.ca/press_releases/news-2002-11-26.pdf

My friend Ed Anderson, who invested in the Tilley Foundation, has 
posted the latest update on his website at 
http://www.mnglobal.com/energy/ . It appears that Tilley's box is 
capable of pulling several times as much energy out of a battery as 
previous systems, fooled me. There is lots of bad news, and another 
ones gone, and another ones gone, another one bites the dust!

Ed is investigating a new technology, so that is some good news. I'm 
going to sign up for his email list, so I'll keep you posted.

  If you would like to collect other people's lost golf balls, Ed has 
just the tool for you. The same "technology" can be used to find 
gold. see http://www.mnglobal.com .

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  1 08:37:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA28131;
	Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:36:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 08:36:12 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sun, 01 Dec 2002 09:47:39 -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: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
References: <a05111b0aba0f6cad72e4 [64.61.199.40]>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------BAE744C34A612311D20C3091"
Resent-Message-ID: <"LzgNt1.0.Tt6.yfZwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48410
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: A

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------BAE744C34A612311D20C3091
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Here we have an example of a company that invested in a process, based
on electrolysis, which was apparently claimed to produce anomalous
amounts of energy.  Knowledgeable people in the Canadian Securities
Regulation Commission saw the flaw and made the company state what is
conventionally believed to be true, i.e. electrolysis can not produce
anomalous energy.  While this conventional view is correct about normal
electrolysis, we are still in the dark about what happens during
unconventional electrolysis.  Unconventional electrolysis has the
potential to produce anomalous energy by the Pons-Fleischmann effect or
by the Mills effect, to mention only two known processes.  Therefore,
the question that needs an answer is, does the proposed unconventional
method utilize either of these processes?  An answer is very easy to
obtain.  My questions are, why do people making such claims not do their
homework? Why do people believe them without such measurements?

Ed

thomas malloy wrote:

> Tathacus Resources got into trouble with the Canadian regulators who
> suspended trading on their stock for a while. This file puts it all
> to rest. As I have previously posted, the technology is very similar
> to that of the late Stan Meyer, another one bites the dust!
>
> http://www.tathacus.ca/press_releases/news-2002-11-26.pdf
>
> My friend Ed Anderson, who invested in the Tilley Foundation, has
> posted the latest update on his website at
> http://www.mnglobal.com/energy/ . It appears that Tilley's box is
> capable of pulling several times as much energy out of a battery as
> previous systems, fooled me. There is lots of bad news, and another
> ones gone, and another ones gone, another one bites the dust!
>
> Ed is investigating a new technology, so that is some good news. I'm
> going to sign up for his email list, so I'll keep you posted.
>
>   If you would like to collect other people's lost golf balls, Ed has
> just the tool for you. The same "technology" can be used to find
> gold. see http://www.mnglobal.com .

--------------BAE744C34A612311D20C3091
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------BAE744C34A612311D20C3091--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  1 22:49:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA28356;
	Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:47:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2002 22:47:55 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b14ba10ab8963c5 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com>
References: <a05111b0aba0f6cad72e4 [64.61.199.40]>
 <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 00:48:24 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"i71Do.0.uw6.Q8mwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48411
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Ed Storms posted;

>Here we have an example of a company that invested in a process, based
>on electrolysis, which was apparently claimed to produce anomalous
>amounts of energy.  Knowledgeable people in the Canadian Securities
>Regulation Commission saw the flaw and made the company state what is
>conventionally believed to be true, i.e. electrolysis can not produce
>anomalous energy.

The way I read it the tests that they ran confirmed that there was no 
anomolous energy production.

>   While this conventional view is correct about normal
>electrolysis, we are still in the dark about what happens during
>unconventional electrolysis.

What is unconventional electrolysis?

>  Unconventional electrolysis has the
>potential to produce anomalous energy by the Pons-Fleischmann effect or
>by the Mills effect, to mention only two known processes.  Therefore,
>the question that needs an answer is, does the proposed unconventional
>method utilize either of these processes?  An answer is very easy to
>obtain.  My questions are, why do people making such claims not do their
>homework? Why do people believe them without such measurements?

Now that I think of it, they were using alternating current 
electricity to do the electrolysis. Perhaps the proper frequency 
could produce a LENR at the electrodes. I also recall the Piantelli 
Patent which used a vibration to induce LENRs.

This URL just came from Tathacus http://www.tathacus.ca/xogen_apd_ttc.pdf


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 08:12:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA12432;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:10:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:10:42 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 16:10:39 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202105913.02c5bf90 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:10:19 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
In-Reply-To: <a05111b14ba10ab8963c5 [64.61.199.40]>
References: <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com>
 <a05111b0aba0f6cad72e4 [64.61.199.40]>
 <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"axLjw1.0.523.2Ouwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48412
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

thomas malloy wrote:

>The way I read it the tests that they ran confirmed that there was no 
>anomolous energy production.

That is my reading, too. However, they salted their previous publications 
with words and phrases that made it look like they were getting energy out 
of nowhere:

"Xogen has developed a scaleable hydrogen production system that runs on 
free power. If the volume of gas produced by one tank of water and battery 
unit is not sufficient, a second tank and battery can be added to double 
the volume of gas being produced onsite."

This document is a disclaimer saying that is not what they meant.


Ed Storms asked:

"My questions are, why do people making such claims not do their
homework?"

In my experience, they usually do this deliberately, because they are 
committing fraud. Some are just plain crazy, or incredibly stupid.


"Why do people believe them without such measurements?"

Wishful thinking & ignorance, usually. Also, one might ask: Why do people 
believe them without independent replication? This question applies to 
Mills, Shoulders and other semi-legitimate, wannabe scientists. A real 
scientist -- such as Mizuno -- does not fully believe any claim, even his 
own, until others have replicated.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 08:14:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA13203;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:12:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:12:37 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEB785B.434C2684 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 09:12:31 -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: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
References: <a05111b0aba0f6cad72e4 [64.61.199.40]>
	 <3DEA2F0B.E2A3A7B7 ix.netcom.com> <a05111b14ba10ab8963c5@[64.61.199.40]>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------CCCA76E81A88A9CC7F9D8CB5"
Resent-Message-ID: <"qBW6G2.0.DE3.rPuwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48413
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------CCCA76E81A88A9CC7F9D8CB5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



thomas malloy wrote:

> Ed Storms posted;
>
> >Here we have an example of a company that invested in a process, based
> >on electrolysis, which was apparently claimed to produce anomalous
> >amounts of energy.  Knowledgeable people in the Canadian Securities
> >Regulation Commission saw the flaw and made the company state what is
> >conventionally believed to be true, i.e. electrolysis can not produce
> >anomalous energy.
>
> The way I read it the tests that they ran confirmed that there was no
> anomolous energy production.

If this is the case, the method has no use.  Simply making a mixture of H2
and O2, which can not be stored, gives no advantage to solar or wind power.
Making H2+O2 to burn, to make heat that is then turned into electricity is
very inefficient.  On the other hand, making H2 alone , which can be stored,
makes good sense. Why have these people chosen to make the mixture?

>
>
> >   While this conventional view is correct about normal
> >electrolysis, we are still in the dark about what happens during
> >unconventional electrolysis.
>
> What is unconventional electrolysis?

Normal electrolysis uses DC to produce separated H2 and O2.  People have
attempted to use variations on this including AC of various frequencies and
spiked DC, which is equivalent to high frequency AC superimposed on DC.
Application of RF and laser energy has also been tried. As you note below,
some of these variations might induce LENR or hydrino formation.  The
possibility of zero point energy formation must also be considered.

Ed

>
>
> >  Unconventional electrolysis has the
> >potential to produce anomalous energy by the Pons-Fleischmann effect or
> >by the Mills effect, to mention only two known processes.  Therefore,
> >the question that needs an answer is, does the proposed unconventional
> >method utilize either of these processes?  An answer is very easy to
> >obtain.  My questions are, why do people making such claims not do their
> >homework? Why do people believe them without such measurements?
>
> Now that I think of it, they were using alternating current
> electricity to do the electrolysis. Perhaps the proper frequency
> could produce a LENR at the electrodes. I also recall the Piantelli
> Patent which used a vibration to induce LENRs.
>
> This URL just came from Tathacus http://www.tathacus.ca/xogen_apd_ttc.pdf

--------------CCCA76E81A88A9CC7F9D8CB5
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------CCCA76E81A88A9CC7F9D8CB5--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 08:57:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01879;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:55:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 08:55:04 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 16:54:59 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 11:54:58 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Bt-dp1.0.CT.d1vwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48414
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

[This message bounced again! Vortex traffic may be low because people have 
given up trying to send messages.]

Edmund Storms wrote:

> > The way I read it the tests that they ran confirmed that there was no
> > anomolous energy production.
>
>If this is the case, the method has no use.  Simply making a mixture of H2 
>and O2, which can not be stored, gives no advantage to solar or wind power.

A mixture of H2 and O2 generated on site can be used to replace things like 
acetylene cutting torches. You generate the gas and burn it immediately, 
eliminating the need for tanks of explosive gas. Some jobs call for an open 
flame rather than an electric arc.


>On the other hand, making H2 alone , which can be stored,
>makes good sense. Why have these people chosen to make the mixture?

This document does not say. I assume the process cannot produce separate 
streams of O2 and H2 gas, so perhaps it is not electrolysis.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 09:12:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA09201;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:11:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:11:34 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:11:33 -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: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------A4A64FE585246F2EC20C521C"
Resent-Message-ID: <"DbD2a.0.hF2.5Hvwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48415
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------A4A64FE585246F2EC20C521C
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> [This message bounced again! Vortex traffic may be low because people have
> given up trying to send messages.]
>
> Edmund Storms wrote:
>
> > > The way I read it the tests that they ran confirmed that there was no
> > > anomolous energy production.
> >
> >If this is the case, the method has no use.  Simply making a mixture of H2
> >and O2, which can not be stored, gives no advantage to solar or wind power.
>
> A mixture of H2 and O2 generated on site can be used to replace things like
> acetylene cutting torches. You generate the gas and burn it immediately,
> eliminating the need for tanks of explosive gas. Some jobs call for an open
> flame rather than an electric arc.

This is Brown's gas and is already well known and patented when used for flame
cutting or welding.  The unique aspect of the claims was for a way to store
energy obtained from solar.   This use makes no sense.

>
>
> >On the other hand, making H2 alone , which can be stored,
> >makes good sense. Why have these people chosen to make the mixture?
>
> This document does not say. I assume the process cannot produce separate
> streams of O2 and H2 gas, so perhaps it is not electrolysis.

They use AC which produce a mixture of H2 and O2 from both electrodes.  DC
produce the gases at separate electrodes so they can be separated.

Ed

>
>
> - Jed

--------------A4A64FE585246F2EC20C521C
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------A4A64FE585246F2EC20C521C--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 09:32:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA18777;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:30:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 09:30:44 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DEB98D3.146D7AC4 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 19:30:59 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Blacklight Rocket Final Report
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"YPXy11.0.Jb4.3Zvwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48416
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hello,

I contacted A. J. Marchese, Ph.D (http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese) and he informed me the report will be available in his web site within the next few days. 

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 10:38:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17516;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:36:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 10:36:20 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 18:36:09 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202133322.040778f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 13:36:08 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Utah Public Radio interview with McKubre and Beaudette
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"lPm2y1.0.bH4.aWwwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48417
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is an interview with Michael McKubre and Charles Beaudette on Utah 
Public Radio, KUER.org:

http://audio.kuer.org:8000/file/rw112702.mp3

Beaudette describes the explosion in Pons' lab in Feb. 1984 in more detail 
than I have heard elsewhere.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 11:46:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18015;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:44:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 11:44:18 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: FocusFusion
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:00:35 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEGADGAA.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)
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"BuvAB3.0.LP4.IWxwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48418
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi all.

Anyone care to comment about this?

http://lanl.arXiv.org/abs/physics/0205026

http://www.focusfusion.org/

K.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 13:04:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA24133;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:01:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:01:56 -0800
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 12:56:59 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Cc: Frederick Sparber <fjsparber earthlink.net>
Message-id: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_005A_01C29A02.4D625FE0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"84IET.0.-u5.3fywz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48419
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C29A02.4D625FE0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Here is a question for Ed Storms or anyone else who has done mass =
spectrometry on ash from a cold fusion cell. My apology if this question =
has been answered previously. I remember it having been brought up in =
the past, but couldn't find a satisfactory direct answer in searching =
the vortex archives or on LENR-CANR.

Question:  Have experimenters absolutely eliminated the possibility that =
the 4He atom that is found in CF cells, and is usually identified =
through mass spectrometry - and is offered as evidence of D+D fusion - =
could not instead be a tightly bound "below ground state" deuterium =
pair, a.k.a. the di-deuterino molecule?

According to Mills, the first ionization energy of the dihydrino =
molecule is 62.27 eV and IP2 is 65.39 eV which, of course, are far =
higher than D2 and higher than Helium, but IP2 is fairly close.  The =
mass of a di-deuterino molecule would be somewhere between 4He=3D 4.0026 =
amu and that of the  deuteron molecular mass of 4.0280 amu, but exactly =
where is not clear.

AFAIK, Mills doesn't specify that a di-deuterino ionization energy would =
be any different than a di-hydrino, but then again, he seldom mentions =
"below ground state" deuterium at all. I suspect that lack of mention is =
for reasons that relate to protecting his intellectual property.

I know Ed has proposed that the lack of O2 buildup in his closed cells =
is indicative of no deuterinos, and that is a good argument that would =
have to be answered by anyone wishing to equate Mills work with cold =
fusion - but this question relates *only* to mass spectrometry results =
and whether or not the putative di-deuterino has been eliminated.

Regards,

Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C29A02.4D625FE0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Here is a question for Ed Storms or anyone else who has done mass=20
spectrometry on ash from a cold fusion cell. My apology if this question =
has=20
been answered previously. I remember it having been brought up in the =
past, but=20
couldn't find&nbsp;a satisfactory&nbsp;direct answer in searching the =
vortex=20
archives or on LENR-CANR.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Question:&nbsp; Have experimenters absolutely eliminated the =
possibility=20
that the 4He atom that is found in CF cells, and is usually identified =
through=20
mass spectrometry&nbsp;- and is offered as evidence&nbsp;of D+D fusion - =
could=20
not instead be&nbsp;a tightly bound "below ground state" deuterium pair, =
a.k.a.=20
the di-deuterino molecule?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>According to Mills, the first ionization energy of the dihydrino =
molecule=20
is 62.27 eV and IP2 is 65.39 eV which, of course,&nbsp;are far higher =
than D2=20
and higher than Helium, but IP2 is fairly close.&nbsp; The mass of a=20
di-deuterino molecule would be somewhere between 4He=3D 4.0026 amu and =
that of=20
the&nbsp; deuteron molecular mass of 4.0280 amu, but exactly where is =
not=20
clear.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>AFAIK, Mills doesn't specify that a di-deuterino ionization energy =
would be=20
any different than a di-hydrino, but then again, he seldom mentions =
"below=20
ground state" deuterium at all. I suspect that lack of mention is for =
reasons=20
that relate to protecting his intellectual property.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I know Ed has proposed that the lack of O2 buildup in his closed =
cells is=20
indicative of no deuterinos, and that is a good argument that would have =
to be=20
answered by anyone wishing to equate Mills work with cold fusion - but =
this=20
question relates *only* to mass spectrometry results and whether or not =
the=20
putative di-deuterino has been eliminated.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones Beene</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_005A_01C29A02.4D625FE0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 13:35:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07315;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:32:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:32:32 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 21:32:25 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202161022.02ccfd20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:30:52 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
In-Reply-To: <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"f07h7.0.Bo1.m5zwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48420
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Edmund Storms wrote:

> > acetylene cutting torches. You generate the gas and burn it immediately,
> > eliminating the need for tanks of explosive gas. Some jobs call for an open
> > flame rather than an electric arc.
>
>This is Brown's gas and is already well known and patented when used for flame
>cutting or welding.

The Brown's gas generator is patented, but surely not the gas itself. (?) 
Perhaps this new generator is more efficient than Brown's, or safer, or it 
has some other advantage.


>The unique aspect of the claims was for a way to store energy obtained 
>from solar.  This use makes no sense.

Well, many futuristic solar and wind plans call for storing excess energy 
in the form of hydrogen. A mixture of H and O does seem weird, and 
dangerous, but perhaps there would be some merit to it. You could not send 
it through pipelines or fuel cells. I guess it would only be good for 
combustion generation or nearby space heating. Even if the separation 
process was extremely efficient it would still not be very useful as far as 
I can tell.

These business proposals and corporate statements are sometimes irrational. 
Even the ones published by large, established corporations sometimes leave 
you scratching your head, wondering "what on earth are they thinking?" or 
"who would want a thing like that?" Sometimes you fail to see a business 
opportunity, but more often the business proposal author suffers from 
wishful thinking. The best example in recent years were these cash cards 
that combined the disadvantages of both cash & credit cards, and no 
apparent advantages. VISA and others spent tens of millions installing 
vending machines for them in Atlanta during the Olympics. They abruptly 
disappeared a few months later. And people think cold fusion is a risky 
business proposition!

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 13:45:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12087;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:42:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 13:42:25 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBD4B3.AB4151A1 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 13:46:27 -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 <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 29 Nov 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"H3G_y2.0.ny2.0Fzwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48421
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   Friday, 29 Nov 02
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:40:52 -0500
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 29 Nov 02   Washington, DC

1. MISSILE DEFENSE: THE SEARCH FOR STAR WARS II GOES ON.  In a
2001 May Day speech at the National Defense University, President
Bush called for Star Wars II.  The 1972 ABM treaty was swept
aside to make room for the new "layered defense" that was to be
in place by 2004 (WN 4 May 01).  Although tests of a ground-based
missile defense have not gone well (WN 14 Jun 02), we only knew
for certain that the plan was in trouble earlier this year when
the Pentagon urged anyone with a "new and innovative concept" to
write in.  According to a story in the Washington Post, the
Advanced Concepts Office at the Missile Defense Agency is now
going through 194 proposals.  If the ideas violate no more than
two laws of physics, the director of the ACO jokingly told the
Post, they make the first cut.  His example of a suggestion that
violated too many laws of physics was to put X-ray lasers in
orbit.  That, of course, was the idea that inspired Ronald
Reagan's Star Wars I.  So far, the United States has spent more
than $120B in the search for a ballistic missile defense.

2. ALTERNATIVE SCIENCE: INSIGHTS FROM THE HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL. 
The cover story in the Dec 2 issue of Newsweek is The Science of
Alternative Medicine.  That's an oxymoron.  If these alternatives
had a basis in science, they would just be medicine.  Newsweek
calls it "The New Science."  Only the new science turns out to be
the old medicine      thousands of years old in some cases, long
before it was known that blood circulates or germs cause disease. 
The alternatives can be put on a scale that ranges from plausible
to preposterous.  The treatments discussed in Newsweek tend to be
at the plausible end of the spectrum.  They include such things
as music therapy, as though anything that makes us feel better is
now medicine.  There is no mention of such absurd and fraudulent
treatments as magnet therapy, homeopathy and touch therapy, which
are among the most widely used alternatives.   The report also
talks about herbs and vitamins.  Vitamins are alternative?  The
discovery of these essential molecules was a major advance in
scientific medicine.  Vitamins become alternative only when taken
in wild excess.  The report has boxes on alternative treatments
for cancer, osteoarthritis, cardiac disease, back pain, etc.  To
give it credibility, each box is prominently labeled "Insights
from Harvard Medical School."  Is that where this stuff comes
from?  This insight comes from the Maryland Physics Department.

3. PRIVACY: JUST WHAT WE NEED, DOMESTIC DIRTY TRICKS.  Why can't
the FBI be more like the CIA?  The FBI may be OK at catching
criminals, we're told, but we need a homeland intelligence agency
that can figure out who's going to commit a crime before they do
it.  So the CIA is expanding its domestic presence.  Meanwhile, a
federal appeals panel said the expanded wiretap guidelines,
sought by Attorney General Ashcroft under the Patriot Act, do not
violate the Constitution.

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.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 14:08:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA20751;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:01:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:01:26 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBCA19.FB60E485 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 15:01:58 -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: Mass Spec. question
References: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------513AD1F4D68D44671D5A533D"
Resent-Message-ID: <"52zjK1.0.345.rWzwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48422
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------513AD1F4D68D44671D5A533D
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------4D50D56528474196C7A25EF9"


--------------4D50D56528474196C7A25EF9
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Jones Beene wrote:

> Here is a question for Ed Storms or anyone else who has
> done mass spectrometry on ash from a cold fusion cell. My
> apology if this question has been answered previously. I
> remember it having been brought up in the past, but
> couldn't find a satisfactory direct answer in searching
> the vortex archives or on LENR-CANR. Question:  Have
> experimenters absolutely eliminated the possibility that
> the 4He atom that is found in CF cells, and is usually
> identified through mass spectrometry - and is offered as
> evidence of D+D fusion - could not instead be a tightly
> bound "below ground state" deuterium pair, a.k.a. the
> di-deuterino molecule?
>
> Most mass spectrometers used to detect He are able to
> distinguish between He and D2.  In addition, the D2 is
> removed chemically from the gas.  We would have to assume
> that the di-deuterino molecule was not chemically active
> so that it remained in the gas and was mistaken for He.
> In addition, we would have to assume this molecule can be
> ionized to the +1 ion by 70 eV electron bombardment.
>   According to Mills, the first ionization energy of the
> dihydrino molecule is 62.27 eV and IP2 is 65.39 eV which,
> of course, are far higher than D2 and higher than Helium,
> but IP2 is fairly close.  The mass of a di-deuterino
> molecule would be somewhere between 4He= 4.0026 amu and
> that of the  deuteron molecular mass of 4.0280 amu, but
> exactly where is not clear.
>
> I do not understand this argument.  The energy of the
> electrons is not converted to mass, so it would not show
> up as a mass change between normal D2 and a di-deuterino
> molecule.
>
>   AFAIK, Mills doesn't specify that a di-deuterino
> ionization energy would be any different than a
> di-hydrino, but then again, he seldom mentions "below
> ground state" deuterium at all. I suspect that lack of
> mention is for reasons that relate to protecting his
> intellectual property.
>
>
> I suspect he never uses D2, so this issue never comes up.
> If he used D2 he might find nuclear products, which would
> put him in the LENR field, something he tries to avoid.
>   I know Ed has proposed that the lack of O2 buildup in
> his closed cells is indicative of no deuterinos, and that
> is a good argument that would have to be answered by
> anyone wishing to equate Mills work with cold fusion - but
> this question relates *only* to mass spectrometry results
> and whether or not the putative di-deuterino has been
> eliminated.
>
> I think it has been eliminated.  In addition, the amount
> of energy measured during He production equals about 23
> MeV/He atom, in contrast to the much lower energy required
> of deuterino formation.
>
> Regards,
> Ed
>
>
>   Regards, Jones Beene

--------------4D50D56528474196C7A25EF9
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
&nbsp;
<p>Jones Beene wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><style>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</style>
Here
is a question for Ed Storms or anyone else who has done mass spectrometry
on ash from a cold fusion cell. My apology if this question has been answered
previously. I remember it having been brought up in the past, but couldn't
find a satisfactory direct answer in searching the vortex archives or on
LENR-CANR.&nbsp;Question:&nbsp; Have experimenters absolutely eliminated
the possibility that the 4He atom that is found in CF cells, and is usually
identified through mass spectrometry - and is offered as evidence of D+D
fusion - could not instead be a tightly bound "below ground state" deuterium
pair, a.k.a. the di-deuterino molecule?
<p><b>Most mass spectrometers used to detect He are able to distinguish
between He and D2.&nbsp; In addition, the D2 is removed chemically from
the gas.&nbsp; We would have to assume that the di-deuterino molecule was
not chemically active so that it remained in the gas and was mistaken for
He.&nbsp; In addition, we would have to assume this molecule can be ionized
to the +1 ion by 70 eV electron bombardment.</b>
<br><b></b>&nbsp;&nbsp;According to Mills, the first ionization energy
of the dihydrino molecule is 62.27 eV and IP2 is 65.39 eV which, of course,
are far higher than D2 and higher than Helium, but IP2 is fairly close.&nbsp;
The mass of a di-deuterino molecule would be somewhere between 4He= 4.0026
amu and that of the&nbsp; deuteron molecular mass of 4.0280 amu, but exactly
where is not clear.<b></b>
<p><b>I do not understand this argument.&nbsp; The energy of the electrons
is not converted to mass, so it would not show up as a mass change between
normal D2 and a di-deuterino molecule.</b>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;AFAIK, Mills doesn't specify that a di-deuterino ionization
energy would be any different than a di-hydrino, but then again, he seldom
mentions "below ground state" deuterium at all. I suspect that lack of
mention is for reasons that relate to protecting his intellectual property.
<br>&nbsp;
<p><b>I suspect he never uses D2, so this issue never comes up.&nbsp; If
he used D2 he might find nuclear products, which would put him in the LENR
field, something he tries to avoid.</b>
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;I know Ed has proposed that the lack of O2 buildup in his
closed cells is indicative of no deuterinos, and that is a good argument
that would have to be answered by anyone wishing to equate Mills work with
cold fusion - but this question relates *only* to mass spectrometry results
and whether or not the putative di-deuterino has been eliminated.
<p><b>I think it has been eliminated.&nbsp; In addition, the amount of
energy measured during He production equals about 23 MeV/He atom, in contrast
to the much lower energy required of deuterino formation.</b>
<p><b>Regards,</b>
<br><b>Ed</b>
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;
<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;Regards,&nbsp;Jones Beene</blockquote>

</body>
</html>

--------------4D50D56528474196C7A25EF9--

--------------513AD1F4D68D44671D5A533D
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------513AD1F4D68D44671D5A533D--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 14:30:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01166;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:26:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:26:40 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 09:26:02 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <8cnnuucpoo9m5rkctju8htfl290drga674 4ax.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com> <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA@ix.netcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 OAA00902
Resent-Message-ID: <"t2HRy1.0.6I.Wuzwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48423
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:11:33 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>They use AC which produce a mixture of H2 and O2 from both electrodes.  DC
>produce the gases at separate electrodes so they can be separated.
>
>Ed
Couldn't cryogenic separation be used?


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 14:36:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02443;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:28:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:28:20 -0800
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:23:26 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <004a01c29a51$6f1571a0$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0047_01C29A0E.609E4540"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <3DEBCA19.FB60E485 ix.netcom.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"R1fmD3.0.0c.4wzwz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48424
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C29A0E.609E4540
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Ed,
  Most mass spectrometers used to detect He are able to distinguish =
between He and D2.  In addition, the D2 is removed chemically from the =
gas. =20

  Yes. But this wouldn't be relevant to deuterinos, which presumably =
have very different properties

  We would have to assume that the di-deuterino molecule was not =
chemically active so that it remained in the gas and was mistaken for =
He. =20

  That is exactly the argument that might exist in principle. Mills =
believes that the hydrino molecule is chemically inert.

  In addition, we would have to assume this molecule can be ionized to =
the +1 ion by 70 eV electron bombardment.

  =20
  This is getting to the crux of the issue...

  According to Mills, the first ionization energy of the dihydrino =
molecule is 62.27 eV and therefore to completely ionize the molecule so =
that your spectrometer reading was showing something closer to mass ~2 =
rather than mass ~4,  it would require considerably more than a 70 eV =
electron bombardment - more like 135 eV.


  Yet, If I understand your response, you are saying that you believe =
that despite this extremely high ionization potential of the deuterino =
molecule (giving Mills the benefit of the doubt), you believe that most =
mass spectrometers would still be able to accurately pick up the minute =
difference between 4.0026 and 4.0280 amu, is that correct?

  Regards,

  Jones

------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C29A0E.609E4540
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>Hi Ed,</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Most mass spectrometers used to =
detect He are=20
  able to distinguish between He and D2.&nbsp; In addition, the D2 is =
removed=20
  chemically from the gas.&nbsp; </B></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>Yes. But this wouldn't =
be relevant=20
  to deuterinos, which presumably have very different =
properties</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><STRONG>We would have to assume that =
the=20
  di-deuterino molecule was not chemically active so that it remained in =
the gas=20
  and was mistaken for He.&nbsp; </STRONG></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B></B>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>That is exactly the =
argument that=20
  might exist in principle. Mills believes that the hydrino molecule is=20
  chemically inert.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>In addition, we would have to =
assume this=20
  molecule can be ionized to the +1 ion by 70 eV electron =
bombardment.</B></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;<BR><FONT size=3D3>This is =
getting to the=20
  crux of the issue...</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>According to Mills, the =
first=20
  ionization energy of the dihydrino molecule is 62.27 eV and therefore =
to=20
  completely ionize the molecule so that your spectrometer reading was =
showing=20
  something closer to mass ~2 rather than mass ~4, &nbsp;it would =
require=20
  considerably more than a 70 eV electron bombardment - more like 135=20
  eV.</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>Yet, If I understand =
your response,=20
  you are saying that you believe that despite this extremely high =
ionization=20
  potential of the deuterino molecule (giving Mills the benefit of the =
doubt),=20
  you believe that most mass spectrometers&nbsp;would still be able to=20
  accurately pick up the minute difference between 4.0026 and 4.0280 =
amu, is=20
  that correct?</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>Regards,</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT size=3D3>Jones</FONT></DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT=20
size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0047_01C29A0E.609E4540--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 14:41:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA07982;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:39:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:39:19 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 22:39:08 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202173234.043f0870 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:39:03 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
In-Reply-To: <8cnnuucpoo9m5rkctju8htfl290drga674 4ax.com>
References: <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com>
 <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"-JU_T3.0.ey1.M4-wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48426
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>Couldn't cryogenic separation be used?

I don't know, but I am sure that would cost a fortune! The energy cost of 
producing cryogenic conditions is high. Any benefit this process might have 
from improved electrolysis efficiency would be erased.

In 1990, conventional electrolysis efficiency was 65%, and it was expected 
to reach 75% in 2020. (PG&E, "Hydrogen and Electricity as Carriers of Solar 
and Wind Energy for the 1990s and Beyond.") So there is significant room 
for improvement.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 14:42:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05599;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:35:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 14:35:12 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBE115.40022830 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 14:39:17 -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: BLP Rocket Engine
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------ED82E9243A665C4CD0B5E65B"
Resent-Message-ID: <"GKcqx.0.PN1.V0-wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48425
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------ED82E9243A665C4CD0B5E65B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dec 02, 2002

Vortex,

Thanks to Hamdi.

The Blacklight Plasma Thruster project at Rowan  U. has nics pics of
their
setup and a 31 page PDF copy of a report made to NASA Institute for
Advanced Concepts (NIAC) Phase 1 Fellows Meeting in Atlanta Georgia in
October 25, 2002. It looks encouraging. The final report is to be
submitted to the NIAC December 91, 2002 (yesterday).
Robert Park may have to eat his remarks on BLP yet.


-ak-

<<http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/blr.html>>
--------------ED82E9243A665C4CD0B5E65B
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii;
 name="blr.html"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="blr.html"

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<head>
   <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
   <meta name="GENERATOR" content="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
   <meta name="Author" content="Anthony Marchese">
   <meta name="KeyWords" content="Entrepreneurship">
   <title>BLR Rocket Engine </title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF" link="#0000EE" vlink="#551A8B" alink="#FF0000">

<hr>
<p style="word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><img SRC="newlogo4.gif" height=143 width=479 align=ABSBOTTOM>
<br>
<hr>
<p><font face="Century Gothic"><b><font size="5">The Black Light Rocket (BLR)
Engine</font></b>
<br><b><font color="#990000" size="3">A
Research Project Funded by the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts</font></b>
</font>
<p><img border="0" src="http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese/pic3.jpg" width="657" height="384"><p><b><font face="Century Gothic" size="5">Principal
Investigator</font></b>
  </p>
<blockquote>
  <p><font face="Century Gothic" size="2"><a href="http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese">Anthony
J. Marchese, Ph.D.</a>
<br>Associate Professor
<br><a href="http://sun00.rowan.edu/programs/mechanical/mechanical.html">Department
of Mechanical Engineering</a>
<br><a href="http://sun00.rowan.edu">College
of Engineering</a>
<br><a href="http://www.rowan.edu">Rowan
University</a>
<br>201 Mullica Hill Road
<br>Glassboro, NJ 08028-1701</font>
  </p>
  <p><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Office: 235 Rowan Hall
<br>Email address: <a href="mailto:marchese rowan.edu">marchese@rowan.edu</a>
<br>Telephone: (856) 256-5343
<br>Fax:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
(856) 256-5241</font>
  </p>
</blockquote>
<p style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 1"><b><font face="Century Gothic" size="5">Project Summary</font></b>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">This research project is a
Phase 1 feasibility study aimed at assessing the potential of BlackLight Process
technology toward the development of high thrust, high specific impulse space
propulsion systems.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The BlackLight
Process is a potentially revolutionary energy technology currently under
development by BlackLight Power, Inc.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp; </span>The
technology is based on experimental evidence of energetic hydrogen mixed gas
plasmas under specific operating conditions.&nbsp; Specifically, researchers
have measured the following phenomena for hydrogen gas
plasmas:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</font></p>
<ul>
  <li>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Preferential
    Doppler line broadening of atomic hydrogen emission spectra,</font></li>
  <li>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Inverted
    populations of hydrogen Balmer series in microwave hydrogen gas mixture
    plasmas,</font></li>
  <li>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Novel
    vacuum ultraviolet (VUV) vibration spectra of hydrogen mixture plasmas,
    and&nbsp;</font></li>
  <li>
    <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Water
    bath calorimetry experiments showing increased heat generation in certain
    gas mixtures.&nbsp;</font></li>
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Prior to the proposed study, however, no attempt has been made to apply
this new energy source toward the development of a rocket engine.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes">&nbsp;
</span>Preliminary calculations suggest that a BlackLight Rocket (BLR) engine
can achieve performance several orders of magnitude greater than chemical rocket
propulsion (e.g. I<sub>sp</sub> &gt; 10,000 s).&nbsp; The Phase I study will
consist of the development of a theoretical model, identification of potential
space mission applications, and development of a bench scale BLR thruster and
thrust stand.&nbsp; The project was awarded to Rowan by the <a href="http://niac.usra.edu">NASA
Institute for Advanced Concepts</a> in April 2002.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">The project was
initiated in April 2002.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">The following report
was presented at the NASA Instituted for Advanced Concepts Phase I Fellows
Meeting in Atlanta, GA on October 25, 2002.&nbsp; Download presentation <a href="http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/finalpres.pdf">here</a>.</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">A final report will be
submitted to NIAC on Dec. 1, 2002.</font><b><font face="Arial" size="3"><span style="mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt"></o:p>
</span></font></b></p>
<b><font face="Century Gothic" size="5">Rowan Project Personnel</font></b>
<blockquote>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0">&nbsp;</p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Anthony
  Marchese, PI</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">John
  Schmalzel, Co-PI</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Peter
  Jansson, Co-PI</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Mike
  Muhlbaier, student</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Kevin
  Garrison, student</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Jennifer
  Demetrio, student</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Tom
  Smith, student</font></p>
  <p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><font face="Century Gothic" size="2">Mike
  Resciniti, '02 (Graduated.&nbsp; Now at University of Michigan.)</font></p>
</blockquote>

<p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><b><font face="Century Gothic" size="5">Test
Firing BLMPT Thruster</font></b>
</p>
<p style="line-height: 100%; word-spacing: 0; margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: 0"><img border="0" src="http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese/pic2.jpg" width="660" height="365"></p>

<hr>
<blockquote><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>Last updated: Nov. 4,
  2002</font></font>
<blockquote>
<blockquote><!--GH_SEARCH--><!--GH_END--></blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</body>
</html>



--------------ED82E9243A665C4CD0B5E65B--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 15:25:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA01995;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:24:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:24:12 -0800
X-Sent: 2 Dec 2002 23:24:09 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202175010.032ec450 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:22:52 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Electrolysis storage versus alternatives
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"hcNbG2.0.vU.Rk-wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48428
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I mentioned that in 1990, electrolysis efficiency was 65%. The same source 
quotes fuel cell efficiency as 40%. Most are still ~40%, but some exotic 
fuel cells reach ~60% by now. Anyway, overall storage & recovery comes to 
~39% best case, which is nothing to shout about. Short term storage in huge 
batteries is much better.

http://www.fuelcellstore.com/products/heliocentris/INTRO.pdf

On a large scale, I believe the best system yet devised is in Switzerland, 
where they use off-peak excess electricity to pump water uphill into 
mountain lakes, and use it later in peak-demand hydroelectricity. (It would 
be better to shut down the generators, but you can't do that with wind or 
fission.) It is ironic that our most efficient energy system is still 
gravity plus water. After human and animal power that is the most ancient 
source of mechanical energy.

Charles Babbage, that great futurist and visionary, advocated the use of 
pressurized water for on-demand power in the home and factory. Water would 
be elevated with large, centralized steam engines, and used on demand in 
small engines on site. This was actually done on a fairly large scale 
before electricity become popular. Water-powered elevators were still in 
use in the 1920s, I believe. It is a shame Babbage never thought to combine 
fluid power with his greatest idea: the computer. "Fluidic" analog 
computers were developed in the 1950s, making a brief appearance in Life 
magazine as I recall. I think they were more practical than the the 
mechanical contraption Babbage designed. That was too demanding for the 
machine tools of his day. (It was recently built, and it works.)

People who think technology moves quickly today should read Babbage's book 
"On the Economy of Machines and Manufactures" (1832): "Machinery for 
producing any commodity in great demand seldom actually wears out; new 
improvements by which the same operations can be executed either more 
quickly or better, generally superseding it long before that period arrives 
. . ." (I wish I could find the entire text of this book.)

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 15:28:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31307;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:21:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:21:47 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBDCF0.B4CA0C00 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:22:29 -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: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com> <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA@ix.netcom.com> <8cnnuucpoo9m5rkctju8htfl290drga674@4ax.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------F637A70BE46B283908C4A6EB"
Resent-Message-ID: <"2PS3M1.0.4f7.Bi-wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48427
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------F637A70BE46B283908C4A6EB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

> In reply to  Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Dec 2002 10:11:33 -0600:
> Hi,
> [snip]
> >They use AC which produce a mixture of H2 and O2 from both electrodes.  DC
> >produce the gases at separate electrodes so they can be separated.
> >
> >Ed
> Couldn't cryogenic separation be used?

Yes, but this is expensive.  Chemical separation is cheaper.  In any case,
handling such a mixture is tricky and potentially dangerous. But what is the
point of such additional complications when DC could be used to generate H2
separate from O2?

Ed

>
>
> Regards,
>
> Robin van Spaandonk
>
> http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/
>
> Competition provides the motivation,
> Cooperation provides the means.

--------------F637A70BE46B283908C4A6EB
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------F637A70BE46B283908C4A6EB--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 15:29:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA05248;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:27:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:27:53 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBDE5F.996618B ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:28:37 -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: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
References: <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com>
	 <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com>
	 <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA ix.netcom.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021202173234.043f0870@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------3B3A7BCA1BAE0596141AD17F"
Resent-Message-ID: <"X0gdA.0.wH1.un-wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48429
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------3B3A7BCA1BAE0596141AD17F
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
> >Couldn't cryogenic separation be used?
>
> I don't know, but I am sure that would cost a fortune! The energy cost of
> producing cryogenic conditions is high. Any benefit this process might have
> from improved electrolysis efficiency would be erased.
>
> In 1990, conventional electrolysis efficiency was 65%, and it was expected
> to reach 75% in 2020. (PG&E, "Hydrogen and Electricity as Carriers of Solar
> and Wind Energy for the 1990s and Beyond.") So there is significant room
> for improvement.

Such efficiencies assume that heat generated in the cell is wasted.  If the
heat in the hot cooling-water were converted to electricity using a Sterling
engine or thermoelectrics, the efficiency would be much higher.  Also the hot
water could be used to heat buildings directly.  Using simple engineering
could make this practical without having to exaggerate or give false promises.

Ed

>
>
> - Jed

--------------3B3A7BCA1BAE0596141AD17F
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------3B3A7BCA1BAE0596141AD17F--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 15:46:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA17502;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:45:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 15:45:16 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEBE26E.2350555D ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:45:57 -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: Mass Spec. question
References: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq>
	 <3DEBCA19.FB60E485 ix.netcom.com> <004a01c29a51$6f1571a0$0a016ea8@cpq>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------81C2AD40F7DD767D807B930F"
Resent-Message-ID: <"msx-93.0.NH4.B2_wz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48430
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------81C2AD40F7DD767D807B930F
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------2D154EEC54D53647F25508A0"


--------------2D154EEC54D53647F25508A0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Jones Beene wrote:

> Hi Ed,
>
>      Most mass spectrometers used to detect He are
>      able to distinguish between He and D2.  In
>      addition, the D2 is removed chemically from the
>      gas.
>
>      Yes. But this wouldn't be relevant to
>      deuterinos, which presumably have very different
>      properties
>
>      We would have to assume that the di-deuterino
>      molecule was not chemically active so that it
>      remained in the gas and was mistaken for He.
>
>      That is exactly the argument that might exist in
>      principle. Mills believes that the hydrino
>      molecule is chemically inert.
>
>      In addition, we would have to assume this
>      molecule can be ionized to the +1 ion by 70 eV
>      electron bombardment.
>
>
>      This is getting to the crux of the issue...
>
>      According to Mills, the first ionization energy
>      of the dihydrino molecule is 62.27 eV and
>      therefore to completely ionize the molecule so
>      that your spectrometer reading was showing
>      something closer to mass ~2 rather than mass
>      ~4,  it would require considerably more than a
>      70 eV electron bombardment - more like 135 eV.
>
>
>      Yet, If I understand your response, you are
>      saying that you believe that despite this
>      extremely high ionization potential of the
>      deuterino molecule (giving Mills the benefit of
>      the doubt), you believe that most mass
>      spectrometers would still be able to accurately
>      pick up the minute difference between 4.0026 and
>      4.0280 amu, is that correct?
>
>      Some conventional mass spectrometers can see the
>      mass difference between He (4.003874) and
>      D2(4.02944).
>
>
>      No they can not see the mass difference as small
>      as you note. However, I see no reason for there
>      to be a mass difference between normal D2 and
>      di-deuterino.  However, you raise an interesting
>      point.  When does energy convert to mass in an
>      atom?  Does energy bonding the electron appear
>      as mass when an atom is weighed?  If that is the
>      case, then the photon should have an easily
>      detectable mass because this is what is emitted
>      when bonding energy changes.  As far as I know,
>      this mass is not detected.
>
>      Regards,
>      Ed
>
>
>
>
>
>      Regards,
>
>      Jones
>
>

--------------2D154EEC54D53647F25508A0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
&nbsp;
<p>Jones Beene wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE><style></style>
Hi Ed,
<blockquote dir=ltr 
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>Most mass spectrometers used to detect
He are able to distinguish between He and D2.&nbsp; In addition, the D2
is removed chemically from the gas.</b></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>Yes. But this wouldn't be relevant
to deuterinos, which presumably have very different properties</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>We would have to assume that the di-deuterino
molecule was not chemically active so that it remained in the gas and was
mistaken for He.</b></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>That is exactly the argument
that might exist in principle. Mills believes that the hydrino molecule
is chemically inert.</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><b>In addition, we would have to assume this
molecule can be ionized to the +1 ion by 70 eV electron bombardment.</b></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;
<br><font size=+0>This is getting to the crux of the issue...</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>According to Mills, the first
ionization energy of the dihydrino molecule is 62.27 eV and therefore to
completely ionize the molecule so that your spectrometer reading was showing
something closer to mass ~2 rather than mass ~4,&nbsp; it would require
considerably more than a 70 eV electron bombardment - more like 135 eV.</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>Yet, If I understand your response,
you are saying that you believe that despite this extremely high ionization
potential of the deuterino molecule (giving Mills the benefit of the doubt),
you believe that most mass spectrometers would still be able to accurately
pick up the minute difference between 4.0026 and 4.0280 amu, is that correct?</font><font size=+0></font>
<p><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0>Some conventional mass spectrometers
can see the mass difference between He (4.003874) and D2(4.02944).</font></font>
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>&nbsp;<font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>
<p><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0>No they can not see the mass difference
as small as you note. However, I see no reason for there to be a mass difference
between normal D2 and di-deuterino.&nbsp; However, you raise an interesting
point.&nbsp; When does energy convert to mass in an atom?&nbsp; Does energy
bonding the electron appear as mass when an atom is weighed?&nbsp; If that
is the case, then the photon should have an easily detectable mass because
this is what is emitted when bonding energy changes.&nbsp; As far as I
know, this mass is not detected.</font></font><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>
<p><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0>Regards,</font></font>
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0>Ed</font></font>
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>&nbsp;
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>&nbsp;
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>&nbsp;
<br><font color="#E0211E"><font size=+0></font></font>&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>Regards,</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial"><font size=+0>Jones</font></div>

<div style="FONT: 10pt arial">&nbsp;</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>

</body>
</html>

--------------2D154EEC54D53647F25508A0--

--------------81C2AD40F7DD767D807B930F
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------81C2AD40F7DD767D807B930F--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 17:41:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA12254;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:35:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:35:46 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: updates on Tathacus and Tilley
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:35:10 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <e92ouuc7qj85un44evpa5bs0e2nb7qsecv 4ax.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202115425.02ccfe68 pop.mindspring.com> <3DEB862A.89A9ADAA@ix.netcom.com> <8cnnuucpoo9m5rkctju8htfl290drga674@4ax.com> <3DEBDCF0.B4CA0C00@ix.netcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DEBDCF0.B4CA0C00 ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 RAA12198
Resent-Message-ID: <"02YH53.0.O_2.of0xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48431
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:22:29 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>> Couldn't cryogenic separation be used?
>
>Yes, but this is expensive.  Chemical separation is cheaper.  In any case,
>handling such a mixture is tricky and potentially dangerous. But what is the
>point of such additional complications when DC could be used to generate H2
>separate from O2?
>
>Ed
[snip]
Sometimes mixed gasses are just the form you get. E.g. radiolysis doesn't allow for separation. Mills' hydrino process may be another such, under some circumstances. Hence the source of the excess energy is already in the fluid,
and the output is in the form of mixed gasses (and possibly heat). That's why I asked about cryogenic separation.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 17:45:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA16170;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:44:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:44:00 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <72.26b11115.2b1d663c aol.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:43:24 EST
Subject: I'm getting more results
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: Scottychubb cs.com, HaraldReissHD@aol.com, haisch@calphysics.org,
        GeorgeHM aol.com, Puthoff@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_72.26b11115.2b1d663c_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"vCre9.0.Vy3.Wn0xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48432
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_72.26b11115.2b1d663c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Way back in about 1989 I put a wave in a box and analyzed it.  I got all 
sorts of answers like a link to special and general realitivity and the 
deBroglie wavelength.  I thank my stars that some of this works was 
published.

 <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/Sourceof.txt">http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/Sourceof.txt

</A>For a number of years I was stuck there.  Then I began to examine the nature 
of the box.   I concluded that the "box formed" when the intensity of the 
wavefunction exceeded the elastic limit of space.  From this analysis I got 
the radius of the proton, the ground state velocity of the hydrogen atom, and 
the Compton wavelength.  A lot of suff from one simple idea. 

I went to witness experiments and concluded that "The constants of the motion 
tend toward those of the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is 
stimulated at a dimesional frequency of one-megahertz-meter."

  <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterc.html">Chapter 11</A>

I was stuck there until tonight.  I felt I was near to a classical 
explaination of the photo electric effect and Planck's constant.



I now have found that when electrons or nucleons jump state that they are 
stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter.  During this 
period the motion constants move and energy is exchanged between the various 
fields.  Wow!  This mega hertz meter constant of mine is general rule of 
nature.  

 <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html">Chapter 10 modified</A>

I believe that we can work directly with it in a Bose condensate.

I hope someone understands this other than me.  I believe that it is really 
improtant.

Frank Znidarsic

--part1_72.26b11115.2b1d663c_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>Way back in about 1989 I put a wave in a box and analyzed it.&nbsp; I got all sorts of answers like a link to special and general realitivity and the deBroglie wavelength.&nbsp; I thank my stars that some of this works was published.<BR>
<BR>
 <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/Sourceof.txt">http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/Sourceof.txt

</A>For a number of years I was stuck there.&nbsp; Then I began to examine the nature of the box.&nbsp;&nbsp; I concluded that the "box formed" when the intensity of the wavefunction exceeded the elastic limit of space.&nbsp; From this analysis I got the radius of the proton, the ground state velocity of the hydrogen atom, and the Compton wavelength.&nbsp; A lot of suff from one simple idea. <BR>
<BR>
I went to witness experiments and concluded that "The constants of the motion tend toward those of the electromagnetic in a Bose condensate that is stimulated at a dimesional frequency of one-megahertz-meter."<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp; <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chapterc.html">Chapter 11</A><BR>
<BR>
I was stuck there until tonight.&nbsp; I felt I was near to a classical explaination of the photo electric effect and Planck's constant.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I now have found that when electrons or nucleons jump state that they are stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter.&nbsp; During this period the motion constants move and energy is exchanged between the various fields.&nbsp; Wow!&nbsp; This mega hertz meter constant of mine is general rule of nature.&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
 <A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html">Chapter 10 modified</A><BR>
<BR>
I believe that we can work directly with it in a Bose condensate.<BR>
<BR>
I hope someone understands this other than me.&nbsp; I believe that it is really improtant.<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part1_72.26b11115.2b1d663c_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 17:48:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA18396;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:47:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 17:47:31 -0800
Message-ID: <001401c29a6d$de3f5340$d7231c43 metrogr.org>
From: "Jeff & Dorothy Kooistra" <dskjdk myexcel.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202175010.032ec450 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Electrolysis storage versus alternatives
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:46:45 -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 5.00.2615.200
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Resent-Message-ID: <"_qkkp2.0.MV4.oq0xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48433
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell said:

> On a large scale, I believe the best system yet devised is in Switzerland,
> where they use off-peak excess electricity to pump water uphill into
> mountain lakes, and use it later in peak-demand hydroelectricity.

There's also one of these systems right here in Michigan.  Water from Lake
Michigan is pumped into this large reservoir instead of mountain lakes--its
fascinating to fly over it.

Kooistra



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 18:09:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA25384;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:03:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:03:22 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 13:02:41 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <1t2ouucs7e2i3ef1i64b4t5lf8iglfh146 4ax.com>
References: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq> <3DEBCA19.FB60E485@ix.netcom.com> <004a01c29a51$6f1571a0$0a016ea8@cpq> <3DEBE26E.2350555D@ix.netcom.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DEBE26E.2350555D ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 SAA25341
Resent-Message-ID: <"OV9OP2.0.TC6.f31xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48434
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In reply to  Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:45:57 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>>      No they can not see the mass difference as small
>>      as you note. However, I see no reason for there
>>      to be a mass difference between normal D2 and
>>      di-deuterino.  However, you raise an interesting
>>      point.  When does energy convert to mass in an
>>      atom?  

When it is converted to potential energy.
(IMO rest mass and potential energy are identical, but for c^2).
The extra relativistic mass that comes with motion is magnetic field energy.


>>      Does energy bonding the electron appear
>>      as mass when an atom is weighed?  

Since the electron bonding energy is negative, this is a measure of the 
mass that was lost when the bond formed. 
IOW even simple chemical compounds actually weigh less than the elements
from which they were formed, by <the energy difference>/c^2.
BTW this is something Bearden forgets when he talks about energy just going around and around (i.e. that sometimes the use to which we put it entails energy being stored as potential energy, and hence becoming temporarily unavailable).

>>      If that is the
>>      case, then the photon should have an easily
>>      detectable mass because this is what is emitted
>>      when bonding energy changes.  As far as I know,
>>      this mass is not detected.

When you consider that most chemical bonds represent a change in energy
of 10 eV or less, compared to a mass of > 900 million eV for even the simple
hydrogen atom, you would be looking at a relative change in mass in the 8th
decimal place. Not surprising that this hasn't been noticed, though it should be borderline possible for the very best mass specs., when comparing the masses of He3+ and He3++ (difference about 30 eV).
[snip]

Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 18:23:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA02283;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:22:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:22:14 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEC14ED.7590EDB8 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 18:20:29 -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: correction re: BLP Rocket Thrust Engine
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Cv_g33.0.bZ.LL1xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48435
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The correct date is Dec.01, 2002.

-ak-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 18:41:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA09795;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:35:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 18:35:30 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 13:33:56 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <4u5ouuoelfodpjin4r3oj3evsvn5m0ud49 4ax.com>
References: <005d01c29a45$5c5fd340$0a016ea8 cpq> <3DEBCA19.FB60E485@ix.netcom.com> <004a01c29a51$6f1571a0$0a016ea8@cpq> <3DEBE26E.2350555D@ix.netcom.com> <1t2ouucs7e2i3ef1i64b4t5lf8iglfh146@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <1t2ouucs7e2i3ef1i64b4t5lf8iglfh146 4ax.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 SAA09767
Resent-Message-ID: <"cjsR11.0.zO2.nX1xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48436
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,
I wrote:
>decimal place. Not surprising that this hasn't been noticed, though it should be borderline possible for the very best mass specs., when comparing the masses of He3+ and He3++ (difference about 30 eV).
>[snip]
Note there is of course also a difference of an electron mass between these two ions.


Regards,

Robin van Spaandonk

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

Competition provides the motivation,
Cooperation provides the means.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  2 21:01:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09157;
	Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:55:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 20:55:08 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: FocusFusion
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2002 23:59:15 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEGADGAA.knagel gis.net>
In-Reply-To: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEGADGAA.knagel gis.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212022359.15726.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id UAA09114
Resent-Message-ID: <"CxugL1.0.-E2.ha3xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48437
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

On Monday 02 December 2002 15:00, Keith Nagel wrote:
> Hi all.
> 
> Anyone care to comment about this?
> 
> http://lanl.arXiv.org/abs/physics/0205026
> 
> http://www.focusfusion.org/
> 
> K.
> 
> 
> 
Hope it works......I really do

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec  3 01:49:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA28942;
	Tue, 3 Dec 2002 01:48:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 01:48:18 -0800
Message-ID: <002301c29aa8$74d08100$5910b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: A Deuteron Isomer (D*), Mills' Hydrino and Cold Fusion
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:46:19 -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: <"cHQ_K1.0.347.Xt7xz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48438
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The proposed Deuteron Isomer (D*) has to have a mass of  2.00130 AMU as opposed to the
lessor mass defect of the 2.0140 MA Deuteron. This could explain the low energy
neutron stripping of the deuteron.

The Reactions:

1, P + e + P + internally created neutrino-antineutrino par ---> D* + neutrino + ~12.0
Mev

2, P + e + D + internally created neutrino-antineutrino pair ---> Neutron (thermal) +
D* + neutrino + ~ 12.0 Mev

3, D + e + D + internally created neutrino-antineutrino pair ---> 2 Neutrons + D* +
neutrino + ~12.0 Mev

4, D* + D* ---> D*2 + Heat (Mistaken for He4?)

5, D* + Neutron  (Mistaken for Tritium?)

Reaction (1 ) could be Mills' "Hydrino Hydride"

Reactions 2, 3, and 4, could be what is occurring in Les Case's Cell and other "Cold
Fusion" reactions.

Fred

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec  3 09:41:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA08578;
	Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:30:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 09:30:43 -0800
X-Sent: 3 Dec 2002 17:30:36 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021203122954.00b0f1f8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2002 12:30:14 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: LENR-CANR.org activity is encouraging
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"deLdW1.0.u52.2fExz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48439
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

[This message bounced! Boing!]

Activity on LENR-CANR.org fell during the Thanksgiving holiday, but it has 
recovered nicely:

Week, Downloads, Visitors
10/12/2002, 373, 331
10/19/2002, 433, 472
10/26/2002, 574, 395
11/2/2002, 532, 359
11/9/2002, 738, 792
11/16/2002, 1,111, 573
11/23/2002, 1,146, 670
11/30/2002, 1,022, 696

Recent daily totals:

Date, Downloads, Visitors
12/1, 117, 151
12/2, 545, 249
12/3, 503, (unknown)

The total for this week is 1,165, which already exceeds any previous week. 
We are back on track to pulling even with Scientific American's newsstand 
distribution by April 2003. (Sci. Am. sells 36,000 newsstand issues per 
week, which they claim is the largest circulation of any scientific 
magazine or journal). As I explained to a group of cold fusion researchers 
the other day:

"If the present growth of LENR-CANR continues, we will reach the newsstand 
circulation of the Scientific American four to six months from now. It will 
be as if every issue of the Scientific American includes a positive paper 
about cold fusion. Try to imagine the impact that would have."

We have distributed 7,200 papers in the last two months. There is no 
telling how many downloaded copies have been e-mailed to other people. 
Sooner or later, all these copies floating around the world are bound to 
have a positive effect.

I have prepared papers by Arata, Ohmori, Mizuno and Dash for uploading. I 
am waiting for corrections and proofreading by the authors.

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec  3 13:04:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17973;
	Tue, 3 Dec 2002 13:01:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 13:01:29 -0800
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 16:02:17 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
cc: Vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: FocusFusion
In-Reply-To: <200212022359.15726.rockcast net-link.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1021203155853.5260H-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"iNR9m3.0.iO4.ekHxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48440
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



	Dear YS,

	I have read the documentation.

	A)	I find no great fault with the experimental set up.
	B)	All aspects appear to be workable to arrive at a useful
power source.
	C)	I have written to these folks but have not gotten a reply
yet.  If anyone has please let me know the correct E mail
	D)	It is entirely possible those expert in plasma high power
or high density can design a method that will prove out this general
precent for less than 500 K to 1 million USD.

	E)	I think the work should be lobbied for, conducted and
documented as well as this initial work made public more effectively.

					JH

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Yakov Smirnoff wrote:

> On Monday 02 December 2002 15:00, Keith Nagel wrote:
> > Hi all.
> > 
> > Anyone care to comment about this?
> > 
> > http://lanl.arXiv.org/abs/physics/0205026
> > 
> > http://www.focusfusion.org/
> > 
> > K.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> Hope it works......I really do
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec  3 14:50:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA13544;
	Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:44:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 14:44:13 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: A Deuteron Isomer (D*), Mills' Hydrino and Cold Fusion
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 09:43:36 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <4fbquu45odkaudjtfkplavf5t49eqbjo4k 4ax.com>
References: <002301c29aa8$74d08100$5910b83f computer>
In-Reply-To: <002301c29aa8$74d08100$5910b83f computer>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 OAA13477
Resent-Message-ID: <"0sOja1.0.YJ3.yEJxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48441
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In reply to  Frederick Sparber's message of Tue, 3 Dec 2002 02:46:19 -0600:
Hi Fred,
[snip]

>The proposed Deuteron Isomer (D*) has to have a mass of  2.00130 AMU as

This appears to be half of a He4 nucleus. It is extremely unlikely that such a particle would exist, because much of the binding energy of the helium nucleus is due to the cross attraction forces between the 4 nucleons, which 
is of necessity absent, when there are only two nucleons present.
[snip]
Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec  3 22:32:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA24984;
	Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:26:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:26:02 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2002 22:25:59 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
In-Reply-To: <3DEBE26E.2350555D ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0212032218250.12659-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"30ies.0.466.w_Pxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48442
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Edmund Storms wrote:

> >      However, you raise an interesting
> >      point.  When does energy convert to mass in an
> >      atom?

When the energy of the atom increases.

> >      Does energy bonding the electron appear
> >      as mass when an atom is weighed?

Yes.

> >      If that is the
> >      case, then the photon should have an easily
> >      detectable mass because this is what is emitted
> >      when bonding energy changes.

Nothing that moves at the speed of light has mass.

> >      As far as I know,
> >      this mass is not detected.

This chemical mass change is very small. Consider that an electron has a
mass of about 500 thousand electron Volts, and is considered very light,
and your dealing with masses of a few eV, less than1/10,000 of the mass of
an electron.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 01:38:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA26177;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:37:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 01:37:41 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b1aba13642a1cca [64.61.199.40]>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 03:38:57 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"JaqjP1.0.xO6.apSxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Unidentified subject!
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48443
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell Posted;

People who think technology moves quickly today should read Babbage's 
book "On the Economy of Machines and Manufactures" (1832): "Machinery 
for producing any commodity in great demand seldom actually wears 
out; new improvements by which the same operations can be executed 
either more quickly or better, generally superseding it long before 
that period arrives . . ." (I wish I could find the entire text of 
this book.)

I agree Jed. That book sounds like an excellent discussion of natural 
philosophy. Have you contacted British used book stores?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 03:06:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA22302;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 03:05:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 03:05:21 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba138a967750 [12.110.74.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 03:19:29 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"VVgO11.0.JS5.n5Uxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48444
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sorry, I can not resist esposing the unconventional view.

Though the responses quoted below after the dotted line (in standard
internet posting format) are closely aligned with the conventional view of
the energy/mass relationship, I would like to point out some apparent
inconsistencies.

It does seem reasonable that potential energy has mass, as Robin states.
That is because potential energy is due to the energy stored in the fields
generated by two or more bodies.   The more the potential energy, the more
the energy stored in the field generated by the bodies.  As potenial energy
dwindles the field energy dwindles due to field geometry changing, but
kinetic energy is increased.  The reverse situation works similarly.  A
logical conclusion is that:

   1. Fields have a mass equavalent to the potential energy they represent.

>From the principle of conservation of energy we can conclude the correlary:

   2. Fields have a mass equivalent to the energy required to create the field
      in the ratio E/m = c^2.

This should not be surprising in that we know that electromagnetic and
other fields can carry momentum.

Given that photons consist entirely of electromagnetic fields, we can
deduce from 2. that:

   3. Photons have a mass equivalent to their energy in the ratio E/m = c^2.

This seems entirely reasonable because the (successive) fields of a photon,
in a manner similar to the medium disruption of ordinary matter waves, do
not move with the wave itself, but are rather localized disruptions that
self-propigate to become neighboring disruptions (fields).  Why should the
EM fields of the photon differ from static or sub-light-speed EM fields?
Further, if a photon is slowed by a medium, at what speed(s) do its EM
fields take on mass?  To me the only logical answer is that those fields
have mass at all times in the ratio E/m = c^2.  It is only the velocity of
propigation that changes, or that actually reaches c in a vacuum. There is
nothing about this discussion thus far that necessarily indicates that
something having a finite rest mass actually moves at velocity c in the
vacuum, even though such mass does occupy successive loci at successive
times on the path of the photon.  It is only the propigation rate that
necessarily reaches c.  However, if static EM fields have mass, then the
propigation rate for changes to such fields must be c, so we are in a sense
back where we started, with the problem of mass moving at velocity c.  If
two magnets in close proximity are rotated from an attracting position to a
repelling position, for example, there is a change in their combined field
that propigates through all space at a rate appropriate to the local
medium.  In a vacuum that rate is c.  So, if potential energy has mass,
static and dynamic EM fields have mass, and that mass, or at least local
changes to that mass, can propigate through the vacuum at velocity c.
There is thus no reason to expect photons to not have mass, or for their
mass to change as they change velocity due to changes in the local medium.

Anthing wrong with this reasoning?


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
At 1:02 PM 12/3/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Edmund Storms's message of Mon, 02 Dec 2002 16:45:57 -0600:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>>      No they can not see the mass difference as small
>>>      as you note. However, I see no reason for there
>>>      to be a mass difference between normal D2 and
>>>      di-deuterino.  However, you raise an interesting
>>>      point.  When does energy convert to mass in an
>>>      atom?
>
>When it is converted to potential energy.
[snip]

At 10:25 PM 12/3/2, Stephen Lajoie wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Edmund Storms wrote:
>
>> >      However, you raise an interesting
>> >      point.  When does energy convert to mass in an
>> >      atom?
>
>When the energy of the atom increases.
>
>> >      Does energy bonding the electron appear
>> >      as mass when an atom is weighed?
>
>Yes.
>
>> >      If that is the
>> >      case, then the photon should have an easily
>> >      detectable mass because this is what is emitted
>> >      when bonding energy changes.
>
>Nothing that moves at the speed of light has mass.
[snip]

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 06:55:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA08059;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:47:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 06:47:58 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <158.185b9754.2b1f6f6e aol.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:47:10 EST
Subject: check this I'm prowd
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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"Toq3X2.0.jz1.TMXxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48445
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

http://www.newenergytimes.com/who_results.asp?Name=Frank+Znidarsic

Frank Znidarsic

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 07:20:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA18674;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:13:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:13:33 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Dec 2002 15:13:15 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204100635.031f4608 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:13:15 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
In-Reply-To: <v01530501ba138a967750 [12.110.74.106]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"49RHj1.0.iZ4.SkXxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48446
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>Sorry, I can not resist esposing the unconventional view. . . .
>
>It does seem reasonable that potential energy has mass, as Robin states.

That part is conventional, as far as I know. The textbooks say potential 
energy has mass -- or it *is* mass, to be exact. It is difficult to imagine 
how a rock gains mass when you pick it up and place it on a shelf, 
increasing its potential energy, but I gather that is what happens.

A recent article in Sci. Am. described a similar aspect of relativity. 
Advanced atomic clocks have become so good, they are measurably affected by 
the change in gravitational field produced by moving them up or down a few 
meters. It is becoming impossible to synchronize two atomic clocks, which 
makes you wonder what constitutes a "clock."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 07:37:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA30244;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:36:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 07:36:10 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Dec 2002 15:36:03 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204102541.032b99b0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 10:35:36 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! - indeed, harrumph.
In-Reply-To: <a05111b1aba13642a1cca [64.61.199.40]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"scYRr1.0.NO7.f3Yxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48447
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

thomas malloy wrote:

>I agree Jed. [Babbage's] book sounds like an excellent discussion of 
>natural philosophy. Have you contacted British used book stores?

What?!? Are you suggesting I should purchase a book on paper? You want me 
to pay money for an artifact printed with ink? How quaint! I suppose you 
would have me make ink out of walnut shells and vinegar, and use a feather 
pen to write a paper "cheque" for this "book."

Sorry, but when a book is out of copyright, I insist it be provided 
instantly, over the Internet, or no cost, or I won't bother to read it. 
Like the younger generation, anything not on the Internet does not exist as 
far as I am concerned.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 08:12:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14778;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:06:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:06:19 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEE27AB.1020302 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:04:59 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! - indeed, harrumph.
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204102541.032b99b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"vIQiO.0.lc3.xVYxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48448
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell wrote:

>
> What?!? Are you suggesting I should purchase a book on paper? You want 
> me to pay money for an artifact printed with ink? How quaint! I 
> suppose you would have me make ink out of walnut shells and vinegar, 
> and use a feather pen to write a paper "cheque" for this "book."
>
> Sorry, but when a book is out of copyright, I insist it be provided 
> instantly, over the Internet, or no cost, or I won't bother to read 
> it. Like the younger generation, anything not on the Internet does not 
> exist as far as I am concerned.


You must not be holding your mouth right when you google:

http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/babbage/index.html

Looks like the complete text.

BTW, sorry I haven't been available lately to help with word processing 
those LENR documents.  Work interferes with my hobbies of late.

Terry


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 08:31:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22845;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:25:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 08:25:11 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Dec 2002 16:25:08 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204112225.02c77080 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 11:24:58 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! - indeed, harrumph.
In-Reply-To: <3DEE27AB.1020302 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204102541.032b99b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"aoLqO1.0.sa5.dnYxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48449
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>You must not be holding your mouth right when you google:
>
>http://socserv2.socsci.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/babbage/index.html
>
>Looks like the complete text.

Great! The truth is out there. Thanks. I love the Preface to this book. It 
sounds like Martin Fleischmann:

"In two months from the publication of the first edition of this volume, 
three thousand copies were in the hands of the public. Very little was 
spent in advertisements; the booksellers, instead of aiding, impeded its 
sale . . ."

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 09:09:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA06921;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:02:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:02:44 -0800
Message-ID: <003a01c29bb7$2e5c0c20$239dcbc1 pc>
From: "Noel Whitney" <quantum iol.ie>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021202175010.032ec450 pop.mindspring.com> <001401c29a6d$de3f5340$d7231c43@metrogr.org>
Subject: Re: Electrolysis storage versus alternatives
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:04:16 -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 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Resent-Message-ID: <"pflO83.0.3i1.qKZxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48450
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

We have one here in Ireland ( County Wicklow) called Tourlogh Hill - named
after the Chief Engineers son - and the power station is Buried in the
mountain and cannot be seen. The lake is very lonely on top of the hill vbut
the system works very well.
----- Original Message -----
From: Jeff & Dorothy Kooistra <dskjdk myexcel.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 1:46 AM
Subject: Re: Electrolysis storage versus alternatives


> Jed Rothwell said:
>
> > On a large scale, I believe the best system yet devised is in
Switzerland,
> > where they use off-peak excess electricity to pump water uphill into
> > mountain lakes, and use it later in peak-demand hydroelectricity.
>
> There's also one of these systems right here in Michigan.  Water from Lake
> Michigan is pumped into this large reservoir instead of mountain
lakes--its
> fascinating to fly over it.
>
> Kooistra
>
>
>
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 09:21:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA13991;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:18:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 09:18:22 -0800
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 09:11:19 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <003701c29bb8$2a4d6c40$0a016ea8 cpq>
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
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0212032218250.12659-100000 eskimo.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA13904
Resent-Message-ID: <"nrkFa3.0.RQ3.UZZxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48451
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Stephen Lajoie" <lajoie eskimo.com>

> Nothing that moves at the speed of light has mass.

This is the conventional view, of course. But it could be misleading, if not inaccurate, unless it is qualified or limited to the local reference plane.

I think the more correct verbalization is that "nothing which moves at the speed of light will possess 'apparent mass' in any  reference plane (local three-space) until the moment that it interacts in that space."

At the moment of interaction, but not before, a single photon may "express" a mass-equivalent that far exceeds that of any one hadron that can exist in the local space normally. For instance, there have been recorded instances (well recorded) in our three-space of *single* photons with the mass equivalent of 4 Uranium atoms, and perhaps even cosmic hadrons that travel at lightspeed!!

Now for the segue.

Rather than wait for anyone to express doubts about this outlandish utterance, and, in hopes of lightening up the discussion, I will enclose a reworded speculative essay that was posted to another forum some weeks ago.


Is the Cygnet a hydrino cross-dresser?

A very strange and powerful alien has arrived on earth at the speed of light from the direction of the constellation Cygnus, the Swan.

The extraordinary cosmic particle, formerly known as the "Cygnon," now known as the "Cygnet" (as the editors of Physical Review have decreed - most likely unwittingly confusing it with the enormous Schwannstecker ;-) was a hot cosmology topic in the mid-80s and might have faded from view were it not for the elephantine memory of the internet. 

When the "fat lady" sings, and Dr. Randell Mills proves the reality of the hydrino, his "below ground-state" hydrogen atom, that occasion might also be the swan-song of another twenty year old mystery. The following is a little bit light-hearted, but not entirely half-hearted reminiscence of an unfinished chapter in particle physics. 

Is it even remotely possible that the Cygnet can now be identified as a maximally shrunken hydrino, or if the Cygnet is even beyond the pale of Dr. Mills' controversial theory, then can it be identified as the ultimate hydrino-like stable neutral particle, moreover a hadron that can be accelerated to lightspeed?...  

That is to say, if one accepts the reality of a "below ground-state hydrogen" that becomes more "neutral" the more it shrinks, then where does the progression end? Where indeed. Moreover, in some remote cosmic furnace can the hydrino be built from the ground up, rather than forming later from top down?

Some of the following preliminary information has been paraphrased from an interesting copyrighted piece form John Cramer:
<http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw12.html>
with further string-theory analysis from Frederick Sparber. 

Another reference is "Cygnons" M. M. Waldrop, Science 228, 1298 (1985).

Mt. Blanc is the largest mountain in the Alps, and through it goes a tunnel which connects France with Italy. In a side room near the tunnel midpoint, normally in total darkness, resides a complex instrument containing many photomultiplier tubes, inappropriately named NUSEX, which was designed to observe the predicted decay of the proton. OK, maybe it is an appropriate name, if one happens to be the grad student stuck in there for weeks on end just to keep things plugged in. 

Although NUSEX saw no proton decays (another great theory bites the dust) and has now been upgraded for neutrino detection, for a decade or more it did detect something very strange and very powerful coming from the direction of the constellation Cygnus, the Swan.

This remarkable particle has been dubbed the cygnon, or cygnet. It is hadron-like, meaning it looks like its got a few quarks of its own.

Cygnets have truly enormous kinetic energy: thousands of times more than particles from the largest earthly accelerators. Gamma rays from Cygnus have the right energy, but produce only 1/300 of the µ-mesons observed in cygnon events. Cygnets must have no electric charge because they travel in a straight bee-line path which is not curved by the magnetic field of the galaxy. Because cygnets create so many µ-mesons in the atmosphere, it is likely that they are strongly interacting particles (like protons) rather than photons or neutrinos. 

The problem with cygnets being hadrons is they go too fast. Cygnus X-3 is a binary star system on the other side of our galaxy, with a neutron-star orbiting a normal star which feeds it hydrogen. The system has an orbital period of only 4.79 hours. The period can be used as a sort of "fingerprint" to tag radiation from Cygnus, which should change with this characteristic period - and indeed the cygnets do fluctuate on exactly the same 4.79 hour period. Not only is this confirming evidence of where they come from, it also means that they travel at essentially the speed of light; otherwise a large spread of lower speeds would wash out the time variations. But the variations are distinct and that just can't be correct, can it?

To summarize the important properties of the Cygnet. 
(1) It is has no electric charge (and most varieties of neutral atoms can be eliminated because the "empty space" between Earth and Cygnus contains enough interstellar hydrogen to strip away electrons from energetic neutral atoms, but possibly not from highly shrunken hydrinos).
(2) it has a substantial rest mass that has been roughly estimated to be a fair fraction of a proton mass - but that estimate was made working backwards on assumptions of just how close to light speed any such particle could travel
(3) it is a strongly interacting particle; and 
(4) It must be stable or have a long half-life. 

The variants of particle theory provide us with a menagerie of predicted but largely unobserved particles: Higgs bosons, axions, gravitinos, monopoles, squarks, etc. but so far as I know, even R. Mills hasn't ventured to cast the Cygnet particle as a highly shrunken hydrino. But he's probably got a few other pressing problems. 

The string circle particle model treats a proton as two "up or positive (+q) quarks" and one "down or negative (-q) quark" energy circles with a radius R = kq^2/E which each originally contained 1/2 of the energy of the progenitor photon going in a circle at velocity c with a wavelength "lambda" of 2(pi)R.

Thus a proton can be a stable triad of three ~312 Mev "quarks-circles" made from two pairs of "K Mesons" of ~ 560 Mev made from a "big bang" photon of 1.12 Gev, the odd -man-out negative K meson decayed to the external electron:
n* 1.02Mev/alpha = 8.00*1.02e6*137 = 1.12 Gev

The Antiproton is a stable Triad of two "down or negative quarks" and one "up or positive quarks" with the odd-man-out positive K meson decaying to the external positron. In either case the bound quarks have an energy of ~312 Mev each with the 560 Mev - 312 Mev = 248 Mev going into their Binding Energy.

The Proton:

-----> +
<------ -
-------> + net spin + 1/2, net charge +q

The Neutron:

------> +
<------ -
-------> +
0 <------- neutrino
<------ - 

Net spin - 1/2 net charge 0.00. Unstable when unbound. 



The Cygnon (or highly shrunken Hydrino?)

------> +
<----- -
-------> +
<------ - originally a negative 6.8 ev lepton, one or more
------> + originally a positive 6.8 ev lepton, one or more
<------ - the original external hydrogen electron

Net charge 0.00, net spin 0.00, Stable Unbound.

Why the importance of some kind of real or virtual 6.8eV lepton pair (and by extension, their ultimate "incarnation" as Mills' 27.2 eV magic energy hole)?  

6.8 ev = 1.02e6/(8.0 * 137^2) which is one of the numerous 6.8 ev light leptons which are the proven decay products of positronium - not 'positronium annihilation' but virtual positronium ionization. These leptons are being made on a continuous basis in the vicinity of bare protons from virtual positronium and perhaps the reason for this (in quantum theory) is that it is ultimately necessary to keep a lepton "cushion" in there between the nucleus (shades of Mills' orbitsphere) and of course, we have to get "alpha" involved ;-}  The continuous generation of these leptons near a bare proton can be hypothesized to be a logical extension of the theory of quantum electrodynamics, in which the electromagnetic interaction itself is quantitized such as  into the effects which cause the Lamb shift. The Lamb shift then *is* a 6.8 eV "haze" that is seen around protons.

Since mcr = hbar the mass (m) can decrease as radius r increases and vice versa allowing the "quarks" to exchange energy/mass and radius while conserving energy and momentum. In K electron capture where energies less than 1.0 mev is given off, the captured electron is shrunk down to a radius corresponding to more than 60 Mev - which may or may not correspond to the *minimum stable hydrino orbitsphere* which I have not heard Dr. Mills specify exactly, but which is a somewhat logical extension of maximum shrinkage.

Logical, that is, except for two minor points - it hasn't been seen at CERN or anywhere else and it gives us a *stable neutron* that is almost identical to a normal neutron except in its stability and lack of spin. Having stability and no spin, it is even less likely to have been noticed, so I don't have a problem with its not having been seen yet in earthly accelerator events as there aren't too many that put out multi-teravolt energies on a regular basis. But if it is real then there should be so many of these around (which were formed in the big bang) that they would populate the universe with dark neutral matter, perhaps in a ratio of 10-1. Imagine that.

Well this is a half-baked attempt at tying the Cygnet (proven particle) to the ultimate hydrino (way unproven), and it is far, far from a "grand" theory just yet, but we need a continuing mystery, and a little provocative humor, to keep things interesting...or at least slightly more interesting than Oprah (was that a sexist comment?).

Oh yes, to add to the lingering mystery, Cygnus X-3 "switched off" in 1996. 

Kaput. 

Had not a lot of effort and documentation gone in to understanding the particle, prior to that time, it would be easy for the skeptic to write off the Cygnet as science fiction, kind of like Mills' hydrino... 

- or is it the same thing? 

Jones Beene


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 11:40:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06725;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:37:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 11:37:41 -0800
X-Sent: 4 Dec 2002 19:37:30 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204143701.02c77080 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 14:37:29 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Interesting new traffic graphs at LENR-CANR.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"D5AEq3.0.ve1.4cbxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48452
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://lenr-canr.org/Features.htm#Visitors


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 16:14:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA00868;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:13:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:13:11 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba143c26edb2 [12.110.74.101]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:27:14 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"POcWJ.0.UD.Mefxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48453
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:11 AM 12/4/2, Jones Beene wrote:
>From: "Stephen Lajoie" <lajoie eskimo.com>
>
>> Nothing that moves at the speed of light has mass.
>
>This is the conventional view, of course. But it could be misleading, if
>not inaccurate, unless it is qualified or limited to the local reference
>plane.
>
>I think the more correct verbalization is that "nothing which moves at the
>speed of light will possess 'apparent mass' in any  reference plane (local
>three-space) until the moment that it interacts in that space."


Lightspeed photons or any other lightspeed particle must, according to GR,
follow the appropriate path in a space warped by gravity.  In this sense
they exhibit "apparent mass".  The unknown (in my opinion) is whether the
photon or other light speed particles warp space themselves.  If they do
warp space according to their energy/mass, then there exists an equal but
opposite force on the primary (slow speed) gravity generating body, and it
may then be said without conflict that the lightspeed particle has mass.
The same arguments apply to graviton exchange models.



>
>At the moment of interaction, but not before,

This "not before" assertion is not experimentally proven, AFAIK.


>
>Since mcr = hbar the mass (m) can decrease as radius r increases and vice
>versa allowing the "quarks" to exchange energy/mass and radius while
>conserving energy and momentum. In K electron capture where energies less
>than 1.0 mev is given off, the captured electron is shrunk down to a
>radius corresponding to more than 60 Mev - which may or may not correspond
>to the *minimum stable hydrino orbitsphere* which I have not heard Dr.
>Mills specify exactly, but which is a somewhat logical extension of
>maximum shrinkage.
[snip]
>
>Jones Beene


I have posted here on vortex some years ago calculations showing what I
consider to be a fundamenal flaw in Mills' theory, and which this statement
somewhat highlights.  The electron de Broglie wavelength is too large by
far to fit into the hydrino orbital radius.  This fact requires an
explanation from Mills as to how the orbital can be formed in the first
place by an electron which is much larger than the orbital itself.
However, more to the point here, is the fact that the probability of the
electron being involved in electron capture is diminished by the electron
de Broglie wavelength being too large, larger than the orbital.  You can
not simply use the anticipated (Mills') orbital radius to compute the
probability of the weak interaction.

The background calculations I have cut and pasted from prior vortex posts
now follow.  I hope I cut and pasted the correct calculations!  Here
goes...

The kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is given by:

   K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

So speed v is:

   v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5

and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:

   p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5

Given that the radius is quantized to:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
so:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n)

and thus:

   v ~ 1/n

The lower the Mills quantum state (i.e. n being a fraction less than 1),
the smaller the radius, and the higher the kinetic energy and momentum.

When an ordinary excited atom radiates, the electron drops from a high
potential to low potential.  Half the potential change is radiated, the
other half is converted into orbital electron kinetic energy.  If  the
process is reversed in ordinary atoms, and a photon absorbed, then a change
in potential of twice the photon energy is involved, half coming from the
photon, and half in the reduction in kinetic energy of the electron.

In hydrino formation, if the (external) energy hole is filled is 27.2 eV,
then, twice that energy might be involved in the external hole, 27.2 eV
being absorbed, and 27.2 ev coming from the change in kinetic enery of the
external atom's electron(s).  However, this point is moot, in that what
happens to the external energy hole is likely unimportant.

Now, looking at the hydrino formation, if we have:

   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...

then we have an electron velocity of:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

   v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

and kinetic energy of the hydrino electron of:

   Ke = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

     = 2.179874x10^-18 J  [1/n]

     = 13.605698 eV  [1/n],  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

so the full potential change for hydrino formation is:

   Kp = 2 * 13.605698 eV  [1/n],  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

      = 27.21140 eV   [1/n],  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

At this point it would superficially appear the first hydrino state
requires a 54.5 eV energy exchange, not a 27.2 eV exchange.  However, as
with the ordinary atom, an explanation is that only the 27.2 eV is taken by
the hole in making the first hydrino state. The rest comes from the change
in state of the hydrino electron, which drops 54.5 ev in potential energy,
but only retains 27.2 in eV kinetic energy.  Only 27.2 eV need be taken by
the hole, as Mills says.  However, if this is the case, there is no energy
left over for trapping a photon inside the hydrino. It makes no sense that
there is a photon in there.  That further makes no sense because there is
no room for a low energy photon inside the hydrino.  Not by a log shot,
because the (minimum) 47 keV is not available to make the photon that is
small enough to fit in there, as we shall see.

If you assume the photon involved is trapped inside the hydrino, its
wavelength lambda must be less than r:

   lambda <  r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),

                                    for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


   lambda <  (n) 5.291773x10^-11 m,   for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


so, by Plank's equation:

   Ep = h*nu = (h*c)/lambda

   lambda = h*c/E <  r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),

                                    for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

and we see that the size of the hydrino decreases as n increases, i.e. 1/n
decreases.   We now have the energy of the photon Ep:


    Ep > (h*c)/[(5.291773x10^-11 m)  (n)],   for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

    Ep > 23,429.6 eV  (1/n),   for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


So, for the first state to contain a photon, the photon energy must be
about 47,000 eV!  It gets worse as the state numbers get smaller.

Now to consider the de Broglie wavelength of the Mills' orbital electron,
and compare it to the orbital radius.  Assuming the electron kintic energy
in a hydrino is:

   v = 2.1876914x10^6 m/s  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

and given deBroglie's:

   lambda = h/p

we have the electron wavelength in a hydrino given by:

   lambda_e = h/(m*v)

   lambda_e = 3.324914x10^-10 m [n^0.5],  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

but this seems to conflict with:

   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


     = (n) 5.291773x10^-11 m,   for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

Taking even the first hydrino state, n = 1/2:

   lambda_e = 2.351069x10^-10 m

but:

   r = 2.645887x10^-11 m

a ratio of 8.885.  The problem gets worse as n gets smaller, because r ~ n
and lambda_e ~ n^0.5, so:

   r/lambda_e = n/n^0.5 = n^0.5

and r shrinks in proportion to lambda as n gets smaller.

How does that big electron fit into that little hydrino?  I think no matter
how you cut it, the electron waveform is not going to fit into a sub-ground
state hydrogen atom, and a photon of less than keV energy is way way too
big to fit inside the orbital.

Of further interest is that electron capture probabilites can be based upon
de Broglie wavelength alone, since that wavelength is much larger than the
Mills orbital.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 16:44:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11341;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:38:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:38:41 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DEEA037.1B7446C6 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 02:39:19 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Blacklight Rocket Final Report
References: <3DEB98D3.146D7AC4 verisoft.com.tr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"FODnr.0.1n2.G0gxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48454
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

The report is available! http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/blr.html

I did a fast look to the report. I got an impression that there are something remained between the lines.


hamdix verisoft.com.tr wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I contacted A. J. Marchese, Ph.D (http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese) and he informed me the report will be available in his web site within the next few days.
> 

Regards,
 
hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 17:00:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA17415;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:54:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:54:10 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505ba14549ead89 [12.110.74.101]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:08:24 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"dh6yE2.0.1G4.oEgxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48455
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

There is a seeming paradox regarding the notion of a cygnet being a
hydrino.  For that matter, the paradox applies to hydrinos in general.  I
earlier showed that the electron de Broglie wavelength is too large for the
hydrino to form.  However, this was from the nucleus frame of reference.
In the case of the ultra-fast cygnet, the de Broglie wavelength of the
electron and nucleus are to us the earth observers about zero.  This oculd
account for the cygnet having a nearly  arbitrarily small radius, and thus
a low probability of the electron being stripped by collision that does not
involve the nucleu itself.  Further, the relativistically slowed clock of
the signet could account for a greatly diminished probability of a weak
reaction, i.e. electron capture.  However, this does not give an
explanation of how the hydrino forms in the first place, at least from the
hydrino nucleus frame of reference.   How strange that an event, hydrino
formation, is feasible in one reference frame while not in another!  One
could say the assumption of the hydrino existence leads to an absurdity,
thus is logically impossible.  However, we have seen numerous apparent
paradoxes resolved before in physics!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec  4 18:03:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA07450;
	Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:57:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:57:43 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <hamdix verisoft.com.tr>
Cc: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Blacklight Rocket Final Report
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 21:14:00 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEHBDGAA.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
In-Reply-To: <3DEEA037.1B7446C6 verisoft.com.tr>
Resent-Message-ID: <"ni2KF1.0.Kq1.NAhxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48456
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Hamdi.

Yes, the missing element is the measurement of the exhaust plume velocity.

It's fair to say from my quick read of the paper that they bit off
WAY more than $75,000 is going to chew. I'm surprised they got as far
as they did on that; although that peculiar form of slavery known
as grad/undergrad student helps.

They should have focused on the calorimetry; a much easier thing
to nail down than the thrust experiment. $75,000 might have just
done that part right.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr [mailto:hamdix@verisoft.com.tr]
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 7:39 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Blacklight Rocket Final Report


Hi,

The report is available! http://engineering.eng.rowan.edu/~marchese/blr.html

I did a fast look to the report. I got an impression that there are
something remained between the lines.


hamdix verisoft.com.tr wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I contacted A. J. Marchese, Ph.D (http://engineering.rowan.edu/~marchese)
and he informed me the report will be available in his web site within the
next few days.
>

Regards,

hamdi ucar


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 07:56:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA17768;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 07:48:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 07:48:06 -0800
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 07:42:39 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001701c29c74$f1671800$0a016ea8 cpq>
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
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530502ba143c26edb2 [12.110.74.101]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA17733
Resent-Message-ID: <"L4Pq51.0.YL4.sKtxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48457
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>

> I have posted here on vortex some years ago calculations showing what I
> consider to be a fundamenal flaw in Mills' theory, and which this statement
> somewhat highlights.  The electron de Broglie wavelength is too large by
> far to fit into the hydrino orbital radius.  This fact requires an
> explanation from Mills as to how the orbital can be formed in the first
> place by an electron which is much larger than the orbital itself.

Hi Horace,

He has explained it!

Have you read Mills' logic for this? He has an entire mathematical premise for NONradiative states. It looks like you are trying to apply criteria (radiative) that he specifically rejects and explains why he rejects it in the first part of his CQM which is now available online in a more readable form (in PDF) at:
http://www.blacklightpower.com/bookdownload.shtml

Please look at Chapts. 1-4.  Mills chose the physical boundary condition of nonradiation of the bound electron to be imposed on the solution of the wave equation for the charge density function of the electron. The condition for radiation by a moving point charge given by Haus is that its spacetime Fourier transform possesses components that are synchronous with waves traveling
at the speed of light.  For non-radiative states, the current-density function must NOT possess spacetime Fourier components that are synchronous with waves traveling at the speed of light.... 

I think most of the objections to CQM such as yours and Peter Zimmerman are related to this nonradiative condition, and I doubt that many of us are equiped to defend Mills on every point like this gigantic jump in understanding. But the fact that he not only has test results that are becoming independently verified now (unlike the situation of a year ago) and moreover, now that he has sent out hydrino compounds to independent labs, the actual physical thingies, the hadrons themselves, it is getting to be real hard to deny his contentions - and not to respect the power of an intellect that may overshadow the entire traditional physics establishment, much to the chagrin of thousands of entrenched Phds. like Park, Zimmerman and so forth who really poo-pooed him at the start, but are now grudgingly having to acknowledge the fact that he just might be on to something...

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 09:27:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA24295;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:21:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 09:21:19 -0800
X-Sent: 5 Dec 2002 17:21:15 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021205122104.02b9d270 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 12:21:21 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Frascati web page in English
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"5hIpN3.0.Vx5.Eiuxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48458
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This message bounced twice, Boing, Booooing!

See:

http://www.frascati.enea.it/nhe/sito%20web%20inglese/default

We just received the ICCF-8 paper by McKubre et al. in electronic format. I 
will Acrobat it and upload it soon.

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 11:29:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA21989;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:23:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:23:25 -0800
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:18:24 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Fuel Cell Technology
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0016_01C29C50.06F484C0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"nO7Bf1.0.VN5.iUwxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48459
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C29C50.06F484C0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

 Fuel Cell Technology finally coming to the mass market

http://www.airgen.com/

Now... if only someone can provide a robust CF electrolysis cell to hook =
up to this baby...with a COP of only about 2 (elec > H2+O2 eq.), one =
could go self-powered and silence all of the skeptics, once and for =
all...
------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C29C50.06F484C0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>&nbsp;Fuel Cell Technology finally coming to the mass market</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A href=3D"http://www.airgen.com/">http://www.airgen.com/</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Now... if only someone can provide a robust CF electrolysis cell to =
hook up=20
to this baby...with a COP of only about 2 (elec &gt; H2+O2 eq.), one =
could go=20
self-powered and silence all of the skeptics, once and for=20
all...</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0016_01C29C50.06F484C0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 11:46:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28846;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:39:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:39:24 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba1552ddc77d [12.21.208.39]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 11:53:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"h5c2X.0.b27.ijwxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48460
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:42 AM 12/5/2, Jones Beene wrote:
>From: "Horace Heffner" <hheffner mtaonline.net>
>
>> I have posted here on vortex some years ago calculations showing what I
>> consider to be a fundamenal flaw in Mills' theory, and which this statement
>> somewhat highlights.  The electron de Broglie wavelength is too large by
>> far to fit into the hydrino orbital radius.  This fact requires an
>> explanation from Mills as to how the orbital can be formed in the first
>> place by an electron which is much larger than the orbital itself.
>
>Hi Horace,
>
>He has explained it!
>
>Have you read Mills' logic for this? He has an entire mathematical premise
>for NONradiative states.


Nothing I have said has anything to do with radiative vs non-radiative
states other than the implied (Mills) premise that 1) an electron can
occupy an orbital many times smaller than itself, and the stated premise
(AFAIK) that 2) a photon is trapped inside the orbital.


>It looks like you are trying to apply criteria (radiative)


Not at all.  To the electron I am applying criteria of size only.  I could,
however, extend that argument to the imbalance in required energy, and thus
momentum, to achieve the implied small electron wavelength size, by
application of the Heisenberg principle.  The energy discrepancy of the
trapped photon seems self evident.  The glaring discrepancies appear to
cause a host of physical laws to tumble one by one like dominoes.  Not that
this is impossible, of course, but in my mind it throws doubt on EITHER or
BOTH Mills' theory and/or existing physical theory.



>that he specifically rejects and explains why he rejects it in the first
>part of his CQM which is now available online in a more readable form (in
>PDF) at:
>http://www.blacklightpower.com/bookdownload.shtml
>
>Please look at Chapts. 1-4.  Mills chose the physical boundary condition
>of nonradiation of the bound electron to be imposed on the solution of the
>wave equation for the charge density function of the electron. The
>condition for radiation by a moving point charge given by Haus is that its
>spacetime Fourier transform possesses components that are synchronous with
>waves traveling
>at the speed of light.  For non-radiative states, the current-density
>function must NOT possess spacetime Fourier components that are
>synchronous with waves traveling at the speed of light....
>
>I think most of the objections to CQM such as yours and Peter Zimmerman
>are related to this nonradiative condition, and I doubt that many of us
>are equiped to defend Mills on every point like this gigantic jump in
>understanding. But the fact that he not only has test results that are
>becoming independently verified now (unlike the situation of a year ago)
>and moreover, now that he has sent out hydrino compounds to independent
>labs, the actual physical thingies, the hadrons themselves, it is getting
>to be real hard to deny his contentions - and not to respect the power of
>an intellect that may overshadow the entire traditional physics
>establishment, much to the chagrin of thousands of entrenched Phds. like
>Park, Zimmerman and so forth who really poo-pooed him at the start, but
>are now grudgingly having to acknowledge the fact that he just might be on
>to something...
>
>Regards,
>
>Jones


It is important to separate the theory from the results.  Mills' theory
like any other theory could be entirely or partly wrong and still lead
towards finding some supporting evidence which is anomalous to present
theory.  This is especially true regarding theories developed to explain
known anomalies that are being used to investigate those very anomalies.

What I have pointed out are merely some simple and glaring discrepancies
with existing theory, based on statements made here.  I have no time or
interest at this point in becoming a student of Mills' theory or in
discussions beyond the issues discussed here on vortex.  Further, I have
seen Mills' work as something not worthy of or needing amateur (at least
mine) support in that he has PhD's, significant legal and staff support,
patents,  and apparently plenty of money.  I am of course interested to see
if any commercial products are developed or significant aspect of his
theory is finally recognized.  Further, my present work is not even
scientific, so I am pretty much out of this ball game altogether for now
due to lack of money and time.

That said, it is always fun and interesting to read your speculations and
theories on Mills and other unusual things.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 12:35:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15844;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:28:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:28:44 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Fuel Cell Technology
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 07:28:07 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <lidvuu81alrtp0ngss6tlgfj4c1fpc5bhg 4ax.com>
References: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq>
In-Reply-To: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 MAA15808
Resent-Message-ID: <"yfPpk2.0.Ut3.xRxxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48461
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 Thu, 05 Dec 2002 11:18:24 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

> Fuel Cell Technology finally coming to the mass market
>
>http://www.airgen.com/

... and ONLY $6000 for 1 kW capacity! (not including fuel).

Not good enough Ballard, try again.


Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 12:59:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA27307;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:57:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 12:57:54 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEFBD84.3060309 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 15:56:36 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Fuel Cell Technology
References: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq> <lidvuu81alrtp0ngss6tlgfj4c1fpc5bhg@4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"FYL19.0.Vg6.Itxxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48462
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>... and ONLY $6000 for 1 kW capacity! (not including fuel).
>
>Not good enough Ballard, try again.
>
>  
>

And at $0.15/ft^3 for bottled H2, power costs $2.44/kWhr plus the cell cost.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 13:06:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA28409;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:00:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:00:07 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 07:59:32 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <opevuu4ebri5fi8561hjhdkbnffrthv86t 4ax.com>
References: <v01530502ba143c26edb2 [12.110.74.101]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530502ba143c26edb2 [12.110.74.101]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 NAA28367
Resent-Message-ID: <"pRjiu3.0.ox6.Nvxxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48463
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 Wed, 4 Dec 2002 16:27:14 -0800:
Hi Horace,
[snip]
>I have posted here on vortex some years ago calculations showing what I
>consider to be a fundamenal flaw in Mills' theory, and which this statement
>somewhat highlights.  The electron de Broglie wavelength is too large by
>far to fit into the hydrino orbital radius.  

Mills assumes that as the Hydrino shrinks, the central charge increases.
This increases the attractive force on the electron, allowing it to speed up, and with the increase in speed comes a decrease in the De Broglie wavelength,
which allows it to fit into a smaller orbital, so he avoids the problem you present.

Personally I think he has overlooked something, but that's another story.

Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 13:17:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA32074;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:09:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:09:57 -0800
Message-ID: <3DEFC058.2020605 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 16:08:40 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Fuel Cell Technology
References: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq> <lidvuu81alrtp0ngss6tlgfj4c1fpc5bhg@4ax.com> <3DEFBD84.3060309@rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"6AQv82.0._q7.b2yxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48464
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

> Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>> ... and ONLY $6000 for 1 kW capacity! (not including fuel).
>>
>> Not good enough Ballard, try again.
>>
>>  
>>
>
> And at $0.15/ft^3 for bottled H2, power costs $2.44/kWhr plus the cell 
> cost.


Oops!  That was at half-load : . the cost is $4.88/kWhr.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec  5 13:33:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07349;
	Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:27:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 13:27:08 -0800
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 13:22:08 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Fuel Cell Technology
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <000501c29ca4$5e369440$0a016ea8 cpq>
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
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <001901c29c93$15ea5700$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <lidvuu81alrtp0ngss6tlgfj4c1fpc5bhg 4ax.com> <3DEFBD84.3060309@rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA07318
Resent-Message-ID: <"dgvq62.0.lo1.iIyxz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48465
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


> >... and ONLY $6000 for 1 kW capacity! (not including fuel).

> >Not good enough Ballard, try again.
 
> And at $0.15/ft^3 for bottled H2, power costs $2.44/kWhr plus the cell cost.


It wasn't that long ago that a lot of geeks were real pleased at finding a '386 with 64 kB of RAM for $4,500...  value today=0

We can only hope that the equivalent of Moore's Law will take
hold in hydrogen technology, although a two year doubling of 
price/performance will probably be most unlikely.

According to Intel 
http://www.intel.com/research/silicon/mooreslaw.htm
that kind of change would  result  in  about a 20,000,000:1 improvement
over the next 30 years....if we're around then maybe we will be thanking Ballard (and P&F) and electricity will finally be "too cheap to meter" (haven't we heard that somewhere before?)

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 00:43:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA11266;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:35:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:35:01 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba1610494898 [12.21.209.125]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:49:01 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"FQR8S2.0.yl2.q46yz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48466
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:59 AM 12/6/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>Mills assumes that as the Hydrino shrinks, the central charge increases.
>This increases the attractive force on the electron, allowing it to speed
>up, and with the increase in speed comes a decrease in the De Broglie
>wavelength,
>which allows it to fit into a smaller orbital, so he avoids the problem
>you present.
>
>Personally I think he has overlooked something, but that's another story.

I agree.  If energy is conserved then an increase in charge causes the
radius to reduce even further:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)

This is true whether q_e and q_p are the same magnitude or not.  If they
differ in magnitude the above is simply:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q_e q_p)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)

So we see that as q_p increases r diminishes in proportion, similar to the
fact that v increases in proportion to q_p:

   v = [(q_e q_p)/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n)

Thus r, v, p, and the de Broglie wavelength lambda all remain in constant
proportion to each other as charge changes (ignoring relativistic effects,
which are small at near ground state quantum numbers.)

Further, additional energy is required for the increased charge (unless we
throw that principle out the window also), which corresponds to mass, and
that energy requirement is huge.  The energy (computation) for hydrino
formation is then all out of whack.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 07:58:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA01173;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:50:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 07:50:03 -0800
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 07:44:49 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001b01c29d3e$6977fe80$0a016ea8 cpq>
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
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530500ba1610494898 [12.21.209.125]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id HAA01104
Resent-Message-ID: <"x4MrP.0.FI.hSCyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48467
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

Again I think you guys are overlooking the importance of the Fourier transforms of the charge density function mentioned in the previous post. Mills considers the trapped photon to function in exactly the same manner as a gluon in the nucleus. In fact he uses this analogy. AFAIK, here is NO increase in actual nuclear charge on shrinkage.

> >Mills assumes that as the Hydrino shrinks, the central charge increases.
> >This increases the attractive force on the electron, allowing it to speed
> >up, and with the increase in speed comes a decrease in the De Broglie
> >wavelength,

The nuclear charge itself doesn't increase. The resonant trapped photon(s) increases the EFFECTIVE nuclear charge

> >which allows it to fit into a smaller orbital, so he avoids the problem
> >you present.

> >Personally I think he has overlooked something, but that's another story.

Can you be more specific about what has been overlooked.
 
> I agree.  If energy is conserved then an increase in charge causes the
> radius to reduce even further:

Yes, Mills states that the process can be autocatalytic.

The electron orbitsphere is a resonator cavity which traps electromagnetic radiation of discrete frequencies. The photon electric field functions
are solutions of Laplace's equation. In an excited state of hydrogen, trapped photons decrease the effective nuclear charge or nuclear charge factor Zeff to 1 / n and increase the radius of the orbitsphere to naH. In shrinkage, the process operates effectively in reverse to change the deBroglie wavelength.

> Thus r, v, p, and the de Broglie wavelength lambda all remain in constant
> proportion to each other as charge changes (ignoring relativistic effects,
> which are small at near ground state quantum numbers.)
 
> Further, additional energy is required for the increased charge (unless we
> throw that principle out the window also), which corresponds to mass, and
> that energy requirement is huge. 

If you consider the increased *effective* charge to be a function of trapped photon energy (and wavelength), as does Mills, the energy requirement is not huge as the radial component has been eliminated.

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 11:30:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA22911;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:23:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:23:48 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba16a43b0b1a [12.21.209.226]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 11:37:43 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"1UHcR.0.jb5.3bFyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48468
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:44 AM 12/6/2, Jones Beene wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Again I think you guys are overlooking the importance of the Fourier
>transforms of the charge density function mentioned in the previous post.
>Mills considers the trapped photon to function in exactly the same manner
>as a gluon in the nucleus. In fact he uses this analogy. AFAIK, here is NO
>increase in actual nuclear charge on shrinkage.


A trapped photon in a space that small requires at least 47 keV energy. If
there is an increase in radial force the energy to create such a field must
come from somewhere, and it is large, and there is NO source for such
energy given the energies of hydrino formation.


>
>> >Mills assumes that as the Hydrino shrinks, the central charge increases.
>> >This increases the attractive force on the electron, allowing it to speed
>> >up, and with the increase in speed comes a decrease in the De Broglie
>> >wavelength,
>
>The nuclear charge itself doesn't increase. The resonant trapped photon(s)
>increases the EFFECTIVE nuclear charge


Effective nuclear charge or not, the formulas I posted for v and r remain
valid, true?  The increased force required to reduce de Broglie wavelength
further redues the radius, which then create a (then unmatchable)
requirement for further reduction in de Broglie wavelength.  The
implication of this is 1) violation of COE, or 2) violation of Heisenberg,
or 3) no such orbital feasible.


>
>> >which allows it to fit into a smaller orbital, so he avoids the problem
>> >you present.
>
>> >Personally I think he has overlooked something, but that's another story.
>
>Can you be more specific about what has been overlooked.
>
>> I agree.  If energy is conserved then an increase in charge causes the
>> radius to reduce even further:
>
>Yes, Mills states that the process can be autocatalytic.


I think you missed the point here.  The de Broglie wavelength and orbital
can never be brought into synch because their ratio remains constant as
charge (or effective charge for that matter) changes.  The only way such a
process could be "autocatalytic" would be if there were an infinite supply
of energy available to drive the radius to zero or near zero and to
relativistic energies.  In that case v would be driven to c as a bound.


>
>The electron orbitsphere is a resonator cavity which traps electromagnetic
>radiation of discrete frequencies. The photon electric field functions
>are solutions of Laplace's equation. In an excited state of hydrogen,
>trapped photons decrease the effective nuclear charge


This part (Mill's theory as applied to the known hydrogen orbitals) is a
complicated issue and I feel discussion of this would only divert attention
away from the more glaring and fundamental problems I outlined.


>or nuclear charge factor Zeff to 1 / n and increase the radius of the
>orbitsphere to naH. In shrinkage, the process operates effectively in
>reverse to change the deBroglie wavelength.


>
>> Thus r, v, p, and the de Broglie wavelength lambda all remain in constant
>> proportion to each other as charge changes (ignoring relativistic effects,
>> which are small at near ground state quantum numbers.)
>
>> Further, additional energy is required for the increased charge (unless we
>> throw that principle out the window also), which corresponds to mass, and
>> that energy requirement is huge.
>
>If you consider the increased *effective* charge to be a function of
>trapped photon energy (and wavelength), as does Mills, the energy
>requirement is not huge as the radial component has been eliminated.


What does this mean: "the radial component has been eliminated?"  The
electrostatic force (effective or not) is ONLY radial.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 13:07:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30703;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:00:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:00:11 -0800
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 12:54:59 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <005101c29d69$be01a160$0a016ea8 cpq>
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
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <v01530500ba16a43b0b1a [12.21.209.226]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA30651
Resent-Message-ID: <"xaJ8O.0.eV7.R_Gyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48469
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>

> A trapped photon in a space that small requires at least 47 keV energy. If
> there is an increase in radial force the energy to create such a field must
> come from somewhere, and it is large, and there is NO source for such
> energy given the energies of hydrino formation.

You are assuming here that the photon would be trapped in a 2D plane, no?

I think this is where Robin's lissajous analogy works to explain how the longer wavelength is captured as the orbitsphere itself rotates orthagonally in resonance.

> Effective nuclear charge or not, the formulas I posted for v and r remain
> valid, true?  

No. I guess this is where normally one would direct you to Mills' assumptions and formulae on p.46-49 of the online doc. But I can appreciate the fact that you don't want to invest a lot of time in this pursuit, however, I am not a competent enough spokesman for veralizing how and why the orbitshpehere is so very different from standard physics. Perhaps Robin can explain it better.

Regards,

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 15:11:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20211;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:08:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:08:02 -0800
Message-ID: <3DF12EC0.4240DC72 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 15:12:00 -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   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"bgHwL.0.ix4.ItIyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48471
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   Friday, 6 Dec 02
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 16:00:14 -0500
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 6 Dec 02   Washington, DC

1. GLOBAL WARMING: NOW HERE'S THE PLAN   WE STUDY THE PROBLEM. 
The Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are crumbling, the
sea level is rising, glaciers are fast disappearing and all but a
handful of climate scientists insist that human greenhouse gas
emissions are a major cause of global warming.  Three UN studies
in the last ten years and a National Academy of Sciences report
to the President just last year, confirm this picture.  But this
week, a climate conference called by the Administration dealt
more with adapting to a warmer world than reducing emissions. The 
White House science advisor, physicist Jack Marburger, cautioned
that we must be careful not to harm the economy; before we can
decide to go beyond the voluntary emission reductions called for
by President Bush, we're going to need a lot more data.  That, of
course, will take a lot more money and time.  The Administration
estimates the critical questions can be answered in four years. 
But skeptical scientists at the conference warned that without a
clear goal, the Administration can string it out indefinitely. 
                              
2. FALL HOUSECLEANING: WHITE HOUSE ECONOMIC TEAM IS SACKED.  With
the unemployment rate rising to 6%, the highest in nine years,
Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and White House economic advisor
Larry Lindsey today announced their resignations.  Lindsey, a
former Harvard economics professor, was in trouble for predicting
publically that a war in Iraq might cost $200B.  The outspoken
O'Neill, former Alcoa CEO, once observed that "Three Mile Island
and Chernobyl aside, the safety record of nuclear power is good."

3. MUSIC THERAPY: GETTING IN TUNE WITH THE UNIVERSE.  Last week,
in discussing the Newsweek report on alternative medicine (WN 29
Nov 02), WN cited music therapy as an example of something that
might be nice, but didn't have much to do with medical science. 
Boy did we get straightened out.  Music therapy, one therapist
patiently explained, induces resonance and harmonies in the body
that restore the proper balance of chi, allowing the body to
enter a healing process.  Well sure, that's what we meant to say.

4. HYDRINO ROCKETS: BLACKLIGHT IS STILL LOOKING FOR APPLICATIONS.
Alas, NASA's troubled Breakthrough Propulsion Project never
managed to break through anything.  But the NASA Institute for
Advanced Concepts in Atlanta thinks maybe a thruster based on
BlackLight Power's method of persuading hydrogen to enter a
hydrino state, below the ground state, could achieve performance
orders of magnitude greater than chemical rocket propulsion.  So
NIAC contracted with the Mechanical Engineering Department at
Rowan University in Atlanta, to test the idea.  Well, they just
issued the final report for the 6-month Phase I study.  They
"successfully test fired" the thruster.  "However, due to time
and cost constraints successful measurements of the exhaust
velocity have not been completed."  Not to worry.  "These
concepts will be proposed for an ongoing Phase II study."

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.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 15:11:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA20159;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:07:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:07:58 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <d.3d9395a.2b22879c aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:07:08 EST
Subject: BlackLight news
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 10512
Resent-Message-ID: <"SV14B2.0.uw4.EtIyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48470
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All - 

Just a heads up that late tonight the Village Voice (www.villagevoice.com) is 
publishing my article about the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts study of 
plasmas made by BlackLight Power Inc.  Also, you might be pleasantly 
surprised to learn that the Journal of Applied Physics is publishing a paper 
by Mills and BlackLight staff researchers in the Dec. 15 edition.

The Voice article has interviews with Mills, the NASA-funded researcher, the 
editor of the Journal of Applied Physics, the publisher of Skeptic Magazine, 
and the director of NIAC.  Lots of surprising statements.

Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to 
hydrio.org.  The editor says others are currently under review.

Best regards,

Erik Baard

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 15:33:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA27171;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:28:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:28:20 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <50.157e4fff.2b228c63 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 18:27:31 EST
Subject: Re: BlackLight news
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_50.157e4fff.2b228c63_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10512
Resent-Message-ID: <"jUpcs3.0.Me6.JAJyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48472
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


--part1_50.157e4fff.2b228c63_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/6/02 6:11:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
Erikbaard aol.com writes:


> Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to 
> hydrio.org.  The editor says others are currently under review.
> 
> 

Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to 
hydrino.org.  The editor says others are currently under review.

I mistyped "hydrio.org" for hydrino.org.  Sorry.

--part1_50.157e4fff.2b228c63_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/6/02 6:11:23 PM Eastern Standard Time, Erikbaard aol.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to <BR>
hydrio.org.&nbsp; The editor says others are currently under review.<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to <BR>
hydrino.org.&nbsp; The editor says others are currently under review.<BR>
<BR>
I mistyped "hydrio.org" for hydrino.org.&nbsp; Sorry.<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_50.157e4fff.2b228c63_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 15:42:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA31154;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:38:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:38:02 -0800
X-Sent: 6 Dec 2002 23:37:52 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021206182527.02cb8168 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 18:37:55 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
In-Reply-To: <3DF12EC0.4240DC72 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"lTAFB2.0.ic7.QJJyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48473
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Robert Park wrote:

>The Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets are crumbling, the sea level 
>is rising, glaciers are fast disappearing and all but a handful of climate 
>scientists insist that human greenhouse gas emissions are a major cause of 
>global warming.

It is a little odd that Park is so convinced global warming is real. There 
is a disconnect here between his usual skepticism and his endorsement of 
this claim. However much we might need good data, large-scale environmental 
data is bound to be sketchy at best. It is nowhere near as definitive as 
cold fusion. You cannot perform a two-week long, lab-bench experiment on 
the entire earth's atmosphere.

It is typical of him that he thinks the issue should be decided by vote: 
"all but a handful of climate scientists . . ." As Einstein said then Nazis 
paraded professors who ridiculed him, it would take only professor to prove 
he is wrong. Numbers have nothing to do with it. But perhaps that applies 
only to physics, and in a field like climatology or biology we do have to 
go with the majority opinion. It is fuzzy, and sketchy, as I said.

I too believe global warming is real, and I think the evidence for it has 
increased quite a lot in the past few years, but I cannot be a certain as 
Park is. I guess I am more skeptical in nature.

I agree with Park's statements about the Star Wars program. That makes me 
worry I may be missing something, and perhaps Star Wars really does have 
merit. But he is bound to be correct about some things, after all. Even a 
stopped (analog) clock is right twice a day.


>They "successfully test fired" the thruster.  "However, due to time
>and cost constraints successful measurements of the exhaust velocity have 
>not been completed."  Not to worry.  "These concepts will be proposed for 
>an ongoing Phase II study."

This is disappointing. I expect Mills' supporters will agree with Keith 
Nagel that the original $75,000 budget was not enough. I cannot judge, but 
most projects of this nature cost much more than anyone anticipated.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 15:57:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04753;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:53:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 15:53:10 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 10:52:26 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <gsc2vu0h11dohffiea39cqrj1fvpht48mk 4ax.com>
References: <v01530500ba1610494898 [12.21.209.125]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500ba1610494898 [12.21.209.125]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 PAA04625
Resent-Message-ID: <"RHoD3.0.v91.aXJyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48474
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 Fri, 6 Dec 2002 00:49:01 -0800:
Hi Horace,
[snip]

>I agree.  If energy is conserved then an increase in charge causes the
>radius to reduce even further:
>
>   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
>                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
>
>This is true whether q_e and q_p are the same magnitude or not.  If they
>differ in magnitude the above is simply:
>
>   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q_e q_p)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
>                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
>

I'm afraid I don't have time right now to redo the math for this (or check yours), but will try to get back to it later.

>So we see that as q_p increases r diminishes in proportion, similar to the
>fact that v increases in proportion to q_p:
>
>   v = [(q_e q_p)/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n)
>
>Thus r, v, p, and the de Broglie wavelength lambda all remain in constant
>proportion to each other as charge changes (ignoring relativistic effects,
>which are small at near ground state quantum numbers.)
>
>Further, additional energy is required for the increased charge (unless we
>throw that principle out the window also), which corresponds to mass, and
>that energy requirement is huge.  The energy (computation) for hydrino
>formation is then all out of whack.

On this I largely agree with you, and it's also where Mills and I part company.

If you are interested enough to find the time, you will find a relativistically corrected, completely energy consistent model on my web page 
at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/New-hydrogen.html.
The sole difference between this model and the model you used for your calculations above, is the fact the you have demanded that the De Broglie
wavelength be exactly equal to a single orbit length (necessary for it to be in phase after completing an orbit). I have relaxed this requirement, allowing it to make multiple orbits before once again being in phase.
When Steve first proposed this relaxation of the requirements, I opposed it because I thought that the De Broglie wave would be out of phase with itself
before it ever got into phase. However over the following months I came to realise that in a Lissajous figure, phase can be reestablished after multiple passes. In essence, this makes use of the multiple dimensionality of 3D
space to allow out of phase components of the De Broglie wave to avoid one
another, hence ensuring that they don't cancel. When the 'ends' do meet again, they are in phase.


Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 20:09:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA18920;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:07:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:07:39 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1724bd3c48 [12.21.208.113]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:21:45 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"h_N4x.0.Xd4.AGNyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48475
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:52 AM 12/7/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>If you are interested enough to find the time, you will find a
>relativistically corrected, completely energy consistent model on my web
>page
>at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/New-hydrogen.html.
>The sole difference between this model and the model you used for your
>calculations above, is the fact the you have demanded that the De Broglie
>wavelength be exactly equal to a single orbit length (necessary for it to
>be in phase after completing an orbit). I have relaxed this requirement,
>allowing it to make multiple orbits before once again being in phase.


I think this squeezing of the electron, i.e. rolling it up to fit into a
more compact volume, requires energy which is not available.  This energy
is required by the Heisenberg principle. The smaller the reqion a particle
is confined to, the more the uncertainty on its energy.  If the uncertainy
is large, that means you can sample such particles and on average take a
large amount of energy from them.  There must be an antecedent to the
energy, or COE is violated.  There is no such antecedent, even on a
statistical basis, in that the energy is already all accounted for.  The
uncertainty grows to hugely disproportionate values compared to the energy
of the electron in its orbital. The following calculation hopefully
demonstrates this fact.

To review, the kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is
given by:

   K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

So speed v is:

   v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5

and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:

   p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5

Given that the radius is quantized to:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
we have:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n) = [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

Uncertainty of momentum (delta mv) for a particle (electron) constrained by
distance delta x is given by Heisenberg as:

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)

but 2r acts as our delta x because the electron is contained within the
orbitsphere, so we have (substituting 2r for delta x in the above):

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi [ 2 (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)) ] )

   delta mv = [h (q^2)(m)] / [4 (n^2)(h^2)(e0)]

   delta mv = (q^2)(m) / [4 (n^2)(h)(e0)]

and an uncertainty in velocity delta v:

   delta v = (q^2) / (4 (n^2)(h)(e0))

So now the question is how does delta v compare to v?  That is to say is
the uncertainty on v small in comparison to v?  To see, let's look at the
ratio:

   (delta v)/v = [ (q^2) / (4 (n^2)(h)(e0)) ] / [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

   (delta v)/v = [(q^2)(2)(e0)(h)(n)] / [(4)(n^2)(h)(e0)(q^2)]

   (delta v)/v = [(2)(n)] / [4 (n^2)]

   (delta v)/v = 1 / (2n)

which for the first Mills orbital n=1/2 gives an uncertainty in velocity
equal to the velocity.  This might be tolerable, but as n goes to
increasingly lower values, i.e. 1/x as x gets large, we have

   delta v = (x/2) v

which places the velocity in a higly unknown range.  To make this possible,
there must be energy supplied, because the electron kinetic energy K =
(1/2) m v^2 varies over an increasingly large range also.   There is no
source for this huge amount of energy when n is small.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 23:36:27 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA14437;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:34:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:34:30 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b2bba175378ded0 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204102541.032b99b0 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021204102541.032b99b0 pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 01:35:35 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Unidentified subject! - indeed, harrumph.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"KlaIU2.0.VX3.5IQyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48476
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Jed Rothwell posted;



>What?!? Are you suggesting I should purchase a book on paper? You 
>want me to pay money for an artifact printed with ink? How quaint! I 
>suppose you would have me make ink out of walnut shells and vinegar, 
>and use a feather pen to write a paper "cheque" for this "book."
>
>Sorry, but when a book is out of copyright, I insist it be provided 
>instantly, over the Internet, or no cost, or I won't bother to read 
>it. Like the younger generation, anything not on the Internet does 
>not exist as far as I am concerned.
>
Hum, I just took delivery on Things to Come, an eschatology text by 
Dwight Pentacost. I just ordered a copy of Issiac Newton's book on 
Daniel. Oldies, but goodies. They are both written on paper, and I 
did pay for them with a check.

I may have pointed out that Newton wrote far more texts on alchemy 
and eschatology than he did on physics. I've been wondering if 
reading one of the books on alchemy would give some insights into 
LENR's.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec  6 23:54:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA19759;
	Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:53:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 23:53:10 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba1759609a3f [12.110.74.22]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:07:22 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"me2D23.0.eq4.bZQyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48477
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following includes some corrections to my prior post, but which do not
change the fundamental nature of the assertion.

At 10:52 AM 12/7/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>If you are interested enough to find the time, you will find a
>relativistically corrected, completely energy consistent model on my web
>page
>at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/New-hydrogen.html.
>The sole difference between this model and the model you used for your
>calculations above, is the fact the you have demanded that the De Broglie
>wavelength be exactly equal to a single orbit length (necessary for it to
>be in phase after completing an orbit). I have relaxed this requirement,
>allowing it to make multiple orbits before once again being in phase.


I think this squeezing of the electron, i.e. rolling it up to fit into a
more compact volume, requires energy which is not available.  This energy
is required by the Heisenberg principle. The smaller the reqion a particle
is confined to, the more the uncertainty on its energy.  If the uncertainy
is large, that means you can sample such particles and on average take a
large amount of energy from them.  There must be an antecedent to the
energy, or COE is violated.  There is no such antecedent, even on a
statistical basis, in that the energy is already all accounted for.  The
uncertainty grows to hugely disproportionate values compared to the energy
of the electron in its orbital. The following calculation hopefully
demonstrates this fact.

To review, the kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is
given by:

   K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

So speed v is:

   v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5

and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:

   p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5

Given that the radius is quantized to:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
we have:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n) = [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:

   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...

so we then we have an electron velocity of:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


Uncertainty of momentum (delta mv) for a particle (electron) constrained by
distance delta x is given by Heisenberg as:

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)

but 2r acts as our delta x because the electron is contained within the
orbitsphere, so we have (substituting 2r for delta x in the above):

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi [ 2 (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)) ] )

   delta mv = [h (q^2)(m)] / [4 (n)(h^2)(e0)]

   delta mv = (q^2)(m) / [4 (n)(h)(e0)]

and an uncertainty in velocity delta v:

   delta v = (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0))

So now the question is how does delta v compare to v?  That is to say is
the uncertainty on v small in comparison to v?  To see, let's look at the
ratio:

   (delta v)/v = [ (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0)) ] / [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n^0.5))]

   (delta v)/v = [(q^2)(2)(e0)(h)(n^0.5)] / [(4)(n)(h)(e0)(q^2)]

   (delta v)/v = [(2)(n^0.5)] / [4 (n)]

   (delta v)/v = 1 / (2n^0.5)

which for the first Mills orbital n=1/2 gives an uncertainty in velocity
roughly equal to the velocity, delat v = .7076 v.  This might be tolerable,
but as n goes to increasingly lower values, i.e. 1/x as x gets large, we
have

   delta v = (1/2) (x^0.5) v

which places the velocity in a higly unknown range.  To make this possible,
there must be energy supplied, because the electron kinetic energy K =
(1/2) m v^2 varies over an increasingly large range also.   There is no
source for this large amount of energy when n is small. As n gets small
delta E approaches E/n.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 00:40:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA00300;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:39:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:39:06 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b2dba1763a1ab64 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021206182527.02cb8168 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021206182527.02cb8168 pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 02:40:27 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"mVttt3.0.q_7.gERyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48478
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Rothwell posted on Parksie's latest newsletter. I bit my tongue 
and ignored his attack on Chi energy. Just because you can photograph 
living energy is no reason to suppose that it is real.

I have been told that glaciers in the high mountains are growing in 
size, as is the Antartic iceshelf, which would explain the edges 
being pushed out faster.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 09:55:55 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA01581;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:53:42 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 09:53:42 -0800
Message-ID: <008501c29e32$8a10b7a0$d956ccd1 asus>
From: "Mike Carrell" <mikec snip.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021206182527.02cb8168 pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:51:56 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"_w8os1.0.TO.bMZyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48479
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jed Said:

<snip>
> I too believe global warming is real, and I think the evidence for it has
> increased quite a lot in the past few years, but I cannot be a certain as
> Park is. I guess I am more skeptical in nature.

A few decades ago people were worrying about a coming ice age. "Global
Warming" is politically loaded, for the implicit premise is that if it
exists, it is due to human activity which should therefore curtailed, and
the US as the biggest energy user should especially be curtailed or made to
pay. The subsidiary claim is that since the big bad US is causing the
warming, potentially harming all of humanity, the US should pay all of
humanity. Note that the chairman of the recent Global Warming conference
came from a small Pacific island. Little is said of the brown cloud of
pollution overhanging India and China, caused by the increasing use of
polluting fuels by low-tech vehicles and burners. The cloud is of such
magnitude as to be a climate-maker. Still further back, landlocked nations
were claiming that the mineral wealth on the ocean seabed were the property
of all humanity, and therefore they should get a portion of any wealth
derived therefrom. No mention was made of contributing to the investment in
technology and effort to harvest this mineral wealth.

> I agree with Park's statements about the Star Wars program. That makes me
> worry I may be missing something, and perhaps Star Wars really does have
> merit. But he is bound to be correct about some things, after all. Even a
> stopped (analog) clock is right twice a day.

On strictly technical grounds, many doubts can be raised about
missile-intercept technology. But doubt is also raised in the minds of those
who would contemplate attacking the US, and that doubt has strategic and
tactical value. SDI was part of what pushed the USSR into collapse.
Psychology is the issue. The actual physical and economic damage done
directly by 9/11 is trivial on the scale of the US economy. 3000+ people
killed, but 30,000+ are killed every year in automobile accidents in he US.
The towers could be rebuilt with pocket change. But the impact in terms of
making people feel safe against a diffuse threat is immensely greater.

> >They "successfully test fired" the thruster.  "However, due to time
> >and cost constraints successful measurements of the exhaust velocity have
> >not been completed."  Not to worry.  "These concepts will be proposed for
> >an ongoing Phase II study."
>
> This is disappointing. I expect Mills' supporters will agree with Keith
> Nagel that the original $75,000 budget was not enough. I cannot judge, but
> most projects of this nature cost much more than anyone anticipated.

Jed pointedly does not understand what Mills is doing, nor does he
understand the import of the report, or the structure of Phase 1 - Phase 2
studies.

I have read both reports and I had the opportunity to talk with Dr. Peter
Jansson, #2 man on the project. Phase 1 is to establish background
information, show competency, and determine if further investment is
justified. The Rowan team performed superbly. It is clear from the final
report that the Rowan team observed or performed experiments confirming key
parts of Mills' claims. They spent money well, including buying a very
expensive bit of high vacuum hardware cheap on eBay. Despite all that, they
ran out of money before they could make the in-vacuum thruster tests.

Having done R&D and seen other such projects, I can agree with Jed that such
work costs much more than anyone anticipates.

Park, of course, does not understand what he reads.

Mike Carrell




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 12:56:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31832;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:55:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 12:55:03 -0800
X-Sent: 7 Dec 2002 20:54:54 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021207155504.02cb6040 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 15:55:07 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"btIW22.0.In7.d0cyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48480
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Mike Carrell wrote:

>On strictly technical grounds, many doubts can be raised about
>missile-intercept technology. But doubt is also raised in the minds of 
>those who would contemplate attacking the US, and that doubt has strategic 
>and tactical value.

I do not think anyone is contemplating an attack on the U.S. with missiles. 
The only countries capable of doing it are China and Russia, and neither is 
likely to do it. Any other country or organization would bring the nuclear 
weapon in by ship or automobile. This is far easier, cheaper and more 
reliable, and it is impossible to trace back to the origin. Stars wars is 
huge expense to reduce an extremely unlikely threat -- I would put at no 
more than one chance in a million. Star Wars is so expensive it takes money 
away from programs that might prevent weapons being smuggled in, which I 
suppose might be one chance in 10,000. Therefore, Star Wars reduces 
security and increases the likelihood of a nuclear attack.


>  SDI was part of what pushed the USSR into collapse.

I do not think so. I have read a good deal of modern Russian history. The 
Soviet Union survived the external pressure of the Nazi invasion and 20 
million deaths. Pressure from U.S. economic and military competition was 
*nothing* compared to that. I think the collapse of the USSR was entirely 
caused by internal social forces.


> > This is disappointing. I expect Mills' supporters will agree with Keith
> > Nagel that the original $75,000 budget was not enough. I cannot judge, but
> > most projects of this nature cost much more than anyone anticipated.
>
>Jed pointedly does not understand what Mills is doing . . .

Yes, that is what I said. "I cannot judge but . . ."


>Phase 1 is to establish background information, show competency, and 
>determine if further investment is justified. The Rowan team performed 
>superbly.

Perhaps they did, but they say there were unable to complete the job as 
planned. That is a shame.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 13:27:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09841;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:25:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:25:14 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 08:24:38 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <3jp4vu8bfpck53each1n17nkgde0rc89d1 4ax.com>
References: <v01530500ba1759609a3f [12.110.74.22]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500ba1759609a3f [12.110.74.22]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 NAA09807
Resent-Message-ID: <"_KHQ42.0.gP2.wScyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48481
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 Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:07:22 -0800:
Hi Horace,
[snip]
>However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:
>
>   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...
>
>instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:
>

Did you take into account that in Mills case 'q' is also a function of n?
(perhaps you did, I have only scanned this briefly, and haven't yet had a chance to study it thoroughly).

Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 13:28:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10105;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:26:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:26:09 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sun, 08 Dec 2002 08:25:34 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <cqp4vuovsu8kc87dub78v3btopqmsmlpau 4ax.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021206182527.02cb8168 pop.mindspring.com> <a05111b2dba1763a1ab64@[64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <a05111b2dba1763a1ab64 [64.61.199.40]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 NAA10065
Resent-Message-ID: <"MxDRY.0.kT2.mTcyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48482
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 Sat, 7 Dec 2002 02:40:27 -0600:
Hi,
[snip]
>I have been told that glaciers in the high mountains are growing in 
>size, as is the Antartic iceshelf, which would explain the edges 
>being pushed out faster.

Actually this would be sign of global warming. As most of the planet warms
evaporation increases, and has to go somewhere, so one would also expect
condensation to increase. When condensation occurs in regions where the temperature rarely if ever gets above freezing, you would expect the ice deposition rate to increase there.


Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 13:29:01 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10285;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:26:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 13:26:44 -0800
Message-ID: <00ef01c29e37$532c5780$6601a8c0 Marshall>
From: "Ron Marsahll" <marshall.ron attbi.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530500ba1759609a3f [12.110.74.22]>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 15:26:37 -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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"I94gK3.0.dW2.JUcyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48483
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>>I think this squeezing of the electron, i.e. rolling it up to fit into a
more compact volume, requires energy which is not available.  This energy
is required by the Heisenberg principle. The smaller the reqion a particle
is confined to, the more the uncertainty on its energy.  If the uncertainy
is large, that means you can sample such particles and on average take a
large amount of energy from them.  There must be an antecedent to the
energy, or COE is violated.  There is no such antecedent, even on a
statistical basis, in that the energy is already all accounted for.  The
uncertainty grows to hugely disproportionate values compared to the energy
of the electron in its orbital. The following calculation hopefully
demonstrates this fact.

To review, the kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is
given by:

   K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

So speed v is:

   v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5

and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:

   p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5

Given that the radius is quantized to:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
we have:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n) = [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:

   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...

instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...

so we then we have an electron velocity of:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


Uncertainty of momentum (delta mv) for a particle (electron) constrained by
distance delta x is given by Heisenberg as:

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)

but 2r acts as our delta x because the electron is contained within the
orbitsphere, so we have (substituting 2r for delta x in the above):

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi [ 2 (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)) ] )

   delta mv = [h (q^2)(m)] / [4 (n)(h^2)(e0)]

   delta mv = (q^2)(m) / [4 (n)(h)(e0)]

and an uncertainty in velocity delta v:

   delta v = (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0))

So now the question is how does delta v compare to v?  That is to say is
the uncertainty on v small in comparison to v?  To see, let's look at the
ratio:

   (delta v)/v = [ (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0)) ] / [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n^0.5))]

   (delta v)/v = [(q^2)(2)(e0)(h)(n^0.5)] / [(4)(n)(h)(e0)(q^2)]

   (delta v)/v = [(2)(n^0.5)] / [4 (n)]

   (delta v)/v = 1 / (2n^0.5)

which for the first Mills orbital n=1/2 gives an uncertainty in velocity
roughly equal to the velocity, delat v = .7076 v.  This might be tolerable,
but as n goes to increasingly lower values, i.e. 1/x as x gets large, we
have

   delta v = (1/2) (x^0.5) v

which places the velocity in a higly unknown range.  To make this possible,
there must be energy supplied, because the electron kinetic energy K =
(1/2) m v^2 varies over an increasingly large range also.   There is no
source for this large amount of energy when n is small. As n gets small
delta E approaches E/n.

Regards,

Horace Heffner <<

Since Mills claims that the Heisenberg principle is invalid using the
Heisenberg principle to disprove his work seems like a circular argument.
However I do not thinks Mills or any one else I can think of has claimed the
energy will not be conserved. If you can argue against his work on
conservation of energy, then this is a serious challege to his work.

Ron Marshall



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 14:33:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA32525;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:31:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 14:31:46 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 17:35:52 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <v01530500ba1759609a3f [12.110.74.22]> <00ef01c29e37$532c5780$6601a8c0@Marshall>
In-Reply-To: <00ef01c29e37$532c5780$6601a8c0 Marshall>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212071735.52072.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA32476
Resent-Message-ID: <"9FY1Q3.0.2y7.IRdyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48484
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Saturday 07 December 2002 16:26, Ron Marsahll wrote:
> >>I think this squeezing of the electron, i.e. rolling it up to fit into a
> more compact volume, requires energy which is not available.  This energy
> is required by the Heisenberg principle. The smaller the reqion a particle
> is confined to, the more the uncertainty on its energy.  If the uncertainy
> is large, that means you can sample such particles and on average take a
> large amount of energy from them.  There must be an antecedent to the
> energy, or COE is violated.  There is no such antecedent, even on a
> statistical basis, in that the energy is already all accounted for.  The
> uncertainty grows to hugely disproportionate values compared to the energy
> of the electron in its orbital. The following calculation hopefully
> demonstrates this fact.
> 
> To review, the kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is
> given by:
> 
>    K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)
> 
> So speed v is:
> 
>    v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5
> 
> and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:
> 
>    p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5
> 
> Given that the radius is quantized to:
> 
>    r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
>                                       (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
> we have:
> 
>    v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n) = [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]
> 
> However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:
> 
>    r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...
> 
> instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:
> 
>    r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
> 
> so we then we have an electron velocity of:
> 
>    v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...
> 
> 
> Uncertainty of momentum (delta mv) for a particle (electron) constrained by
> distance delta x is given by Heisenberg as:
> 
>    delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)
> 
> but 2r acts as our delta x because the electron is contained within the
> orbitsphere, so we have (substituting 2r for delta x in the above):
> 
>    delta mv = h/(2 Pi [ 2 (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)) ] )
> 
>    delta mv = [h (q^2)(m)] / [4 (n)(h^2)(e0)]
> 
>    delta mv = (q^2)(m) / [4 (n)(h)(e0)]
> 
> and an uncertainty in velocity delta v:
> 
>    delta v = (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0))
> 
> So now the question is how does delta v compare to v?  That is to say is
> the uncertainty on v small in comparison to v?  To see, let's look at the
> ratio:
> 
>    (delta v)/v = [ (q^2) / (4 (n)(h)(e0)) ] / [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n^0.5))]
> 
>    (delta v)/v = [(q^2)(2)(e0)(h)(n^0.5)] / [(4)(n)(h)(e0)(q^2)]
> 
>    (delta v)/v = [(2)(n^0.5)] / [4 (n)]
> 
>    (delta v)/v = 1 / (2n^0.5)
> 
> which for the first Mills orbital n=1/2 gives an uncertainty in velocity
> roughly equal to the velocity, delat v = .7076 v.  This might be tolerable,
> but as n goes to increasingly lower values, i.e. 1/x as x gets large, we
> have
> 
>    delta v = (1/2) (x^0.5) v
> 
> which places the velocity in a higly unknown range.  To make this possible,
> there must be energy supplied, because the electron kinetic energy K =
> (1/2) m v^2 varies over an increasingly large range also.   There is no
> source for this large amount of energy when n is small. As n gets small
> delta E approaches E/n.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Horace Heffner <<
> 
> Since Mills claims that the Heisenberg principle is invalid using the
> Heisenberg principle to disprove his work seems like a circular argument.
> However I do not thinks Mills or any one else I can think of has claimed the
> energy will not be conserved. If you can argue against his work on
> conservation of energy, then this is a serious challege to his work.
> 
> Ron Marshall
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
but if equipment purportedly using this process works, then the whole 
discussion devolves to why it works, not why it 'should not'.  Else the
debate is akin to that of engineers in the 1950's who stated in elegant
papers why bumblebees could not possibly fly.  Hope none of them
ever run over a bumblebee hole in their yard with a lawn mower and
could'nt run ..........fast!

Yakov 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec  7 21:44:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA18484;
	Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:42:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 21:42:00 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 00:46:06 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021207155504.02cb6040 pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021207155504.02cb6040 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212080046.06062.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id VAA18461
Resent-Message-ID: <"uRLDl3.0.kW4.ekjyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48485
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Saturday 07 December 2002 15:55, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Mike Carrell wrote:
> 
> >On strictly technical grounds, many doubts can be raised about
> >missile-intercept technology. But doubt is also raised in the minds of 
> >those who would contemplate attacking the US, and that doubt has strategic 
> >and tactical value.

Far better is to use the ABL....the airborne laser.  Something that can pot an
artillery shell out of the air would be something I would trust my safety to 
far easier than some fat cat contractors' 10 million dollar missile that 
could
fail;  and the laser would be able to shoot again after a short recharge 
period.  Missiles cannot do that.  Besides, if one arranged  to create an
X-ray laser....oops...somebody did that already.   But then if two or three of 
them were arranged in an array, one quarter wavelength apart with computer
control of the intersection point in three dimensions and at the location of
the moving target.......oops can't have a phaser now could we...  somebody
might accuse us of trying to imitate Star Trek

> 
> I do not think anyone is contemplating an attack on the U.S. with missiles. 
> The only countries capable of doing it are China and Russia, and neither is 
> likely to do it.

.....Unless they could use a surrogate like North Korea.....or Pakistan.  Just 
ask Mr LK Advani, the Indian Foreign Minister, how much he trusts the good
intentions of the man wh deposed the former Pak President Nawaz Sharif
for not using the bomb on India over the Kargill Affair.  Or maybe ask the
present or former commander of the Shenyang Military District, as if he would
tell you the truth, about the agreements made with the sister of Kim Chong-Il
in the 90's concerning promises to send 'volunteers' to help the NKPA in
event of a war with South Korea.  Some folks are asking now about a certain
C-130 given to Pakistan as a reward for 'helping to combat terrorism'.  Seems
it was observed in possible involvement in a trade deal of Pakistani bombs to
North Korea in exchange for North Korean ICBM's for Pakistan.  Now the
TaePoDong II, 3 stage rocket is not quite an ICBM......yet.  Just give them
time.  The UN will.      Just maybe somebody will tell me how North Korea
suddenly and unaccountably gained 6 million in adult population within a few
months in a certain year in the 1990's.   Maybe China's Li Peng knows
a big fat stork.

 Any other country or organization would bring the nuclear 
> weapon in by ship or automobile. This is far easier, cheaper and more 
> reliable, and it is impossible to trace back to the origin. 

Especially since we let the enemy in and handed him a living on a silver
plate.  Did you know that there are 50,000 Iraqis living in Detroit, Michigan.
Bet they work in car plants, defense plants, nuclear plants, insecticide 
factories,  biological research facilities......     Wonder how many have 
pics of their fearless 'gauleiter' in their wallets reminding them who has
agents in the home of their daughters back in good old Iraq.  Yeah, some
of 'dem tings' now probably in basements already.  Maybe some been
in basements for over 30 years and have been sold back and forth like
house deeds.

Stars wars is 
> huge expense to reduce an extremely unlikely threat -- I would put at no 
> more than one chance in a million. Star Wars is so expensive it takes money 
> away from programs that might prevent weapons being smuggled in, which I 
> suppose might be one chance in 10,000. Therefore, Star Wars reduces 
> security and increases the likelihood of a nuclear attack.
>
Gonna have that scene anyway sooner or later.  Better to have it sooner
before even worse weapons get developed.  Real answer is a single world
government.  Worst case scenario is what we have now, and unstable balance
of power with many small unsustainable would be nations helping to manipulate
parts of the situation to their advantage.   I do not think that it is so much 
a grim lottery.  Soon we will have to go with our military into space.  We 
will have to, as I would really hate for my grandchildren to be forced to 
learn Mandarin Chinese and watch as my great grandchildren either 
exterminated or force bred with Chinese colonists like happened in Tibet
in the early 1950's.   The skillful use of fear to control populations is an 
old trick.  Works too.  Look at how much we pay for energy today because
we listened to fearmongering traitors selling us an empty bill of goods on
nuclear waste's overblown dangers.  One time I went to a prof when I was
at university with a proposal to utilize that waste for enery production.  I 
was told that the weighted average half life of the vast majority of it was 
less than 5 minutes.  Those populations that would attack us have feelings
too, and fears;  maybe we should turn the same propaganda tool back on
them.
> 
> >  SDI was part of what pushed the USSR into collapse.  
> 
> I do not think so. I have read a good deal of modern Russian history. The 
> Soviet Union survived the external pressure of the Nazi invasion and 20 
> million deaths. Pressure from U.S. economic and military competition was 
> *nothing* compared to that. I think the collapse of the USSR was entirely 
> caused by internal social forces.

very true.  When the hardliners lost their majority in the Central Committee,
the jig was up.  The Communist 'religion' just lost its force with the passing 
of the generations.  When M Kaganovich the soul of the party, died and his 
body was carried out to its end wrapped like a mummy and transported on a 
refrigerator dolly, that was an omen. And when Boris Yeltsin persuaded the 
army central command in Kaliningrad not to support Khrushkov and company,
the rats that could no longer hang together tried to run separately to
Kyrgyzia (of all places) only to get caught before they even got to 
Venukovo Airport outside Moscow.
> 
> 
> > > This is disappointing. I expect Mills' supporters will agree with Keith
> > > Nagel that the original $75,000 budget was not enough. I cannot judge, 
but
> > > most projects of this nature cost much more than anyone anticipated.
> >
> >Jed pointedly does not understand what Mills is doing . . .
> 
> Yes, that is what I said. "I cannot judge but . . ."
> 
> 
> >Phase 1 is to establish background information, show competency, and 
> >determine if further investment is justified. The Rowan team performed 
> >superbly.
> 
> Perhaps they did, but they say there were unable to complete the job as 
> planned. That is a shame.
> 
> - Jed
> 
Not to worry.  The money will be there.  As soon as the Chinese launch
an astronaut and say a few more things about lunar military bases, then
watch us run.  I remember how we ran after the Russians launched 
Sputnik.  Sputnik was the size of a basketball and all it did was say
'beep......beep......beep'.
> 
> 
> 


Nevertheless, this may just be a good stop gap for a local area exploration
rocket until the arrival of the mirror fusion engine as a practical device.
Still envision a system ship that we as a race will have to construct:
Podkletnov's gravity modifiers developed by Dr Ning Li or somebody
used in pairs to generate artificial gravity and intertial force shielding;
either Mills Black Light engines in a massive configuration or a pair of
100 meter nacells housing mirror fusion rockets strong enough to drive
the ship with a delta V in the thousands of G's.  Hey if you're going to 
dream..........dream BIG.   As for Einstein, there is a Dr Carazzani that
has something to say about him.  Right or wrong, the man did say one
thing:  ".....the universe is stranger than we can imagine!".

Yakov

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 06:27:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30204;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:26:55 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:26:55 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:41:12 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Resent-Message-ID: <"jNCic2.0.sN7.kQryz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48487
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:25 AM 12/8/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  thomas malloy's message of Sat, 7 Dec 2002 02:40:27 -0600:
>Hi,
>[snip]
>>I have been told that glaciers in the high mountains are growing in
>>size, as is the Antartic iceshelf, which would explain the edges
>>being pushed out faster.
>
>Actually this would be sign of global warming. As most of the planet warms
>evaporation increases, and has to go somewhere, so one would also expect
>condensation to increase. When condensation occurs in regions where the
>temperature rarely if ever gets above freezing, you would expect the ice
>deposition rate to increase there.


I think this glaciation at high altitudes and at other cold inland arctic
locations has been shown to be a sign of ocean warming, which could be an
indicator of and/or consequence of global warming.  An ice age, or at least
the initial stage of one is oddly one consequence of global warming, but
can also be caused by undersea volcanism or any other causes of ocean
warming.  However, if the methane trapped in the tundra and in ocean
hydrates is released before glaciation can prevent such, and such methane
release is a process going on now, then this ice age may never come to full
fruition before global warming becomes runaway.  Methane is a much stonger
greenhouse gas than CO2.

Global warming has been shown by modelling to have the largest effect in
the arctic.  BTW, I live in Palmer, AK, about 50 miles north of Anchorage,
AK.  We have no accumulated snow this year so far.  The ground is not
frozen.  A neighbor was out mowing his lawn in the dark (at about 6 PM) a
few days ago.  We only have about 5 hours of daylight now.  I may mow my
lawn soon.  It is still green.  We had a year like this a while ago.  When
I first came here in 1976, it snowed around October 1st, and the snow and
ice stayed on the ground until "breakup" in the spring.  It was nice that
we did not go into freeze/thaw cycles regularly, as we do now. That is hard
on vehicles and roofs, etc.  This is only an anecdotal observation, but
this kind of life experience tends to make for a believer in global
warming.

Another consequence of global warming, predicted by modelling, is increased
weather variation worldwide, due to increased wind and jet stream activity.
That certainly seems to be happening too.  Its wierd to see reports of
weather more severe than south-central Alaska all the way from Minnesota to
South Carolina.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 06:27:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30177;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:26:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:26:52 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba19035ee3dd [12.21.209.203]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:41:09 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"4GVPU.0.RN7.iQryz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48486
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:24 AM 12/8/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Sat, 7 Dec 2002 00:07:22 -0800:
>Hi Horace,
>[snip]
>>However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:
>>
>>   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...
>>
>>instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:
>>
>
>Did you take into account that in Mills case 'q' is also a function of n?
>(perhaps you did, I have only scanned this briefly, and haven't yet had a
>chance to study it thoroughly).


No.  For q to be a function of n we have to have a photon trapped insired
radius r.  Since that requires a 47 keV photon even for n = 1/2, how can we
accept this theory of q as a function of n?  We are violating Heisenberg,
and now have to throw out any concept of magnetic pressure and Plank's law
as well.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 06:55:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07985;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:54:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:54:43 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba190cf9257c [12.21.209.112]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:09:01 -0800
To: rockcast net-link.net, vortex-l@eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"BzHtD2.0.hy1.oqryz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48489
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 5:35 PM 12/7/2, Yakov Smirnoff wrote:

>but if equipment purportedly using this process works, then the whole
>discussion devolves to why it works, not why it 'should not'.  Else the
>debate is akin to that of engineers in the 1950's who stated in elegant
>papers why bumblebees could not possibly fly.  Hope none of them
>ever run over a bumblebee hole in their yard with a lawn mower and
>could'nt run ..........fast!


If Hydrinos exist, then many existing laws will be violated, in my
opionion.  It will likely mean a significant reworking of physics, which I
think is much more than deciding why hydrinos exist or special
spectroscopic lines might be observed.  In the case of the bumble bee it
was simply a matter of opinion as to how the laws of physics should be
applied, and the overlooking of vortex creation by the nearly closed wing
configuration at the beginning of the power stroke.  In the case of the
hydrino, fundamental laws of physics are at stake.  None of this is to say
that the experimental efforts in this arena will not force a crises in
physics.  However, it is also possible that Mills has it wrong too, and
that the correct theory is "none of the above."  That also does not mean
that Mills' theory can not yield practical or unexpected results in some
cases.  This is especially true of any theory created to explain an
anomaly. I think it still may be useful to examine where discrepancies and
paradoxes may exist and to attempt to resolve them, especially when they
are so blatantly apparent.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 06:55:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07927;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:54:39 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:54:39 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba190aa59990 [12.21.209.112]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:08:57 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"sLPht3.0.jx1.lqryz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48488
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:26 PM 12/7/2, Ron Marsahll wrote:

>Since Mills claims that the Heisenberg principle is invalid using the
>Heisenberg principle to disprove his work seems like a circular argument.
>However I do not thinks Mills or any one else I can think of has claimed the
>energy will not be conserved. If you can argue against his work on
>conservation of energy, then this is a serious challege to his work.
>
>Ron Marshall

First let me say that Heisenberg *is* an issue of energy. It states:

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)

but since:

   KE = 1/2 m v^2 = 1/(2 m) {delta mv)^2

   delta KE = 1/(2 m) (h/(2 Pi delta x))^2

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

so energy distribution is a function of position constraint.  As far as I
know, no experiments outside Mills' regime has failed to support
Heisenberg.   If Heisenberg is valid in this case too, then it should be
possible to sample the hydrino electron energy via hydrino ionization and
get more energy out than what is required to create a balanced energy
situation.  One might be able to balance the energy equation by showing the
comressed size of the orbital is instumental in tapping high frequency ZPE
energy.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 07:09:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA13769;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:09:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:09:00 -0800
Message-ID: <018001c29ecb$92694f40$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 09:07:33 -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: <"uU08E3.0.1N3.B2syz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48490
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> Global warming has been shown by modelling to have the largest effect in
> the arctic.  BTW, I live in Palmer, AK, about 50 miles north of Anchorage,
> AK.  We have no accumulated snow this year so far.  The ground is not
> frozen.  A neighbor was out mowing his lawn in the dark (at about 6 PM) a
> few days ago.  We only have about 5 hours of daylight now.  I may mow my
> lawn soon.  It is still green.  We had a year like this a while ago.  When
> I first came here in 1976, it snowed around October 1st, and the snow and
> ice stayed on the ground until "breakup" in the spring.  It was nice that
> we did not go into freeze/thaw cycles regularly, as we do now. That is
hard
> on vehicles and roofs, etc.  This is only an anecdotal observation, but
> this kind of life experience tends to make for a believer in global
> warming.

But you can't use this as an indication of Global Warming. Regional climates
are controlled by various 'states' of the Earth's atmosphere. What
meterologists are doing now is looking at various 'states' of the Earth's
atmosphere and comparing them to years past when such states were also in
the same phase and degree. These states include global climate patterns
like:

The Pacific Enso Oscillation, (El Nino)
The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (which should be warming up the arctic and
antarctic waters right now, http://tao.atmos.washington.edu/pdo/)
The Pacific Southern Oscillation
The North Atlantic Oscillation
The Arctic Oscillation
Solar Flux

Check out this comparison between the month's of November 1969 and November
2002. Based on a comparison of climate states in early November, it was
predicted by Joe D'Aleo of Intellicast.com that this winter 'should' most
closely resemble the winters of 1957-58 and 1969-70. Now after the first
month, the comparison to the year 1969/70 is uncanny.

http://www.intellicast.com/DrDewpoint/Library/1361/

Moreover, global warming MUST become evident in the upper atmosphere. So
far, the only evidence for global warming appears to be from ground-based
observations, which over the course of the past 100 years, or so, is quite
questionable in accuracy. The global atmospheric temperature being measured
by satellites, shows nothing.

http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/msusci.html

The question of global warming will probably be resolved within the next ten
years. Several 'states' of the atmosphere have now changed in such a way
that the winter climate of North America and Europe should begin to cool in
the next few years. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation has turned to its 'cool'
phase in 1997, and this last solar cycle displayed a noticeable reduction in
activity and duration. If North American winters become cooler again, then a
lot of this questionable 'evidence' of global warming will be dispelled. If
the winters do NOT become cooler, and this theory of climate 'state'
analysis is dispelled, then perhaps with the other work being done, maybe
global warming can be confirmed more definitively.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 08:01:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA00717;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:01:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:01:02 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba191a9758a9 [12.21.208.105]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:15:18 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Resent-Message-ID: <"J3asX.0.7B.zosyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48491
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:07 AM 12/8/2, Craig Haynie wrote:
>> Global warming has been shown by modelling to have the largest effect in
>> the arctic.  BTW, I live in Palmer, AK, about 50 miles north of Anchorage,
>> AK.  We have no accumulated snow this year so far.  The ground is not
>> frozen.  A neighbor was out mowing his lawn in the dark (at about 6 PM) a
>> few days ago.  We only have about 5 hours of daylight now.  I may mow my
>> lawn soon.  It is still green.  We had a year like this a while ago.  When
>> I first came here in 1976, it snowed around October 1st, and the snow and
>> ice stayed on the ground until "breakup" in the spring.  It was nice that
>> we did not go into freeze/thaw cycles regularly, as we do now. That is
>hard
>> on vehicles and roofs, etc.  This is only an anecdotal observation, but
>> this kind of life experience tends to make for a believer in global
>> warming.
>
>But you can't use this as an indication of Global Warming.

Well of course!  That is why I qualified my remark as anecdotal.  This in
no way changes the fact that events here in Alaska still tend to make one a
believer!  Especially the recent glacial activity, wherein many glaciers
that have been stable for 10,000 years have either gone rogue or are
disappearing.

I suspect the atmospheric states observed will be unprecidented if the
amount of methane released becomes significant, or the amount of high
altitude water vapor becomes significant.

[snip]
>Check out this comparison between the month's of November 1969 and November
>2002. Based on a comparison of climate states in early November, it was
>predicted by Joe D'Aleo of Intellicast.com that this winter 'should' most
>closely resemble the winters of 1957-58 and 1969-70. Now after the first
>month, the comparison to the year 1969/70 is uncanny.
[snip]

The weather may well match those periods, but then how does this account
for the fact that glacial activity all over the world is dramatically
changing in unprecidented ways?  To discount global warming (or cooling for
that matter), it is not sufficient to say the states are all identifiable
if the frequency of such states change.  Long term averaging indicators
like glaciers seem to me to be better inciators of long term change.
Further, if overall equilibrium is shifting toward a new regime, the old
states may suddenly be replaced with new ones when comparatively small but
yet catastrophic events, like re-routing of ocean currents, occur due to
long term factors.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 12:22:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA26573;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:21:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 12:21:22 -0800
Message-ID: <002c01c29ef7$5bc14a20$6601a8c0 Marshall>
From: "Ron Marsahll" <marshall.ron attbi.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]> <018001c29ecb$92694f40$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:21:14 -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 6.00.2800.1106
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Resent-Message-ID: <"xEx352.0.0V6.2dwyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48492
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

[snip]
>>Moreover, global warming MUST become evident in the upper atmosphere. So
far, the only evidence for global warming appears to be from ground-based
observations, which over the course of the past 100 years, or so, is quite
questionable in accuracy. The global atmospheric temperature being measured
by satellites, shows nothing.

http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/msusci.html

The question of global warming will probably be resolved within the next ten
years. Several 'states' of the atmosphere have now changed in such a way
that the winter climate of North America and Europe should begin to cool in
the next few years. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation has turned to its 'cool'
phase in 1997, and this last solar cycle displayed a noticeable reduction in
activity and duration. If North American winters become cooler again, then a
lot of this questionable 'evidence' of global warming will be dispelled. If
the winters do NOT become cooler, and this theory of climate 'state'
analysis is dispelled, then perhaps with the other work being done, maybe
global warming can be confirmed more definitively.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)<<

A cooling trend in the upper atmoshere based on satellite data was used by
global warming sceptics for a few years.  It turned out this data was
incorrect because the satellites had dropped to a lower altitude than
expected. The corrected data showed an upper atmosphere warming trend.  The
temperature of the oceans is probably more significant than the temperature
of the upper atmosphere because of the heat capacity of the oceans.
Satellite data shows the earth retaining more heat than is radiated away to
space.

Some one said there are two undisputed facts in the global warming debate.
One,  carbon dioxide absorbs heat, and two, the concentration of carbon
dioxide is increasing.  Given these facts the only mitigating factor is that
clouds formed by water vapor reflect heat.  Form basic physics you would
expect more water vapor to be put in the atmosphere resulting in floods and
heavy snow storms.  In areas without water vapor you would expect an area of
high pressure to form supporting a drought condition. You would expect the
temperatue of the ocean to rise and kill coral along the equator. You would
expect storms to become stronger and more violent.  You would expect more
tornados and stronger hurricances. All this seems to be exactly what is
happening.  You would expect things to get worse over time. To be sure these
effects will be mitigated or amplified by the ocean weather oscillation
cycles like El Nino.  However El Nino's have gotten stronger and more
frequent which is what you would expect from rising ocean temperatures.

Ron Marshall







From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 13:28:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA15869;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:27:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 13:27:35 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:27:01 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <u4e7vukt39mscj5k6467pi8eaev92fgjgg 4ax.com>
References: <v01530502ba190aa59990 [12.21.209.112]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530502ba190aa59990 [12.21.209.112]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 NAA15845
Resent-Message-ID: <"fX2Ij2.0.tt3.6bxyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48493
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 Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:08:57 -0800:
Hi Horace,
[snip]
>   KE = 1/2 m v^2 = 1/(2 m) {delta mv)^2

Here you appear to be equating the kinetic energy to a function of the uncertainty in the momentum?
[snip]

Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 14:37:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA02985;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:34:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:34:50 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba197b3e0dc9 [12.21.209.42]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:48:59 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Resent-Message-ID: <"NKXRO3.0.Vk.9ayyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48494
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 2:21 PM 12/8/2, Ron Marsahll wrote:

>
>Some one said there are two undisputed facts in the global warming debate.
>One,  carbon dioxide absorbs heat, and two, the concentration of carbon
>dioxide is increasing.  Given these facts the only mitigating factor is that
>clouds formed by water vapor reflect heat.

Though clouds do increase the earth's albedo (reflectiveness) high altitude
water vapor actually increases the greenhouse effect.  An increase in
atmospheric water vapor and stratocumulus clouds ultimately will increase
the greenhouse effect.  If memory serves, a significant part of the
greenhouse effect on venus was found to be due to high altitude water
vapor.  Even though venus is completely cloud covered, the greenhouse
effect prevails there due to composition of the high altitude gasses.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 14:44:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA05386;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:42:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:42:56 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba197db1a152 [12.21.208.142]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 14:57:12 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"9sddC3.0.4K1.lhyyz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48495
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 8:27 AM 12/9/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>In reply to  Horace Heffner's message of Sun, 8 Dec 2002 07:08:57 -0800:
>Hi Horace,
>[snip]
>>   KE = 1/2 m v^2 = 1/(2 m) {delta mv)^2
>
>Here you appear to be equating the kinetic energy to a function of the
>uncertainty in the momentum?


I am saying that an uncertainty in momentum results in a corresponding
uncertainty in energy.  If momentum (velocity) is uncertain to some degree,
then energy is uncertain as the square of the velocity uncertainty.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 18:39:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA20153;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:37:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 18:37:53 -0800
Message-ID: <01e901c29f2b$cdb0ee90$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]> <018001c29ecb$92694f40$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com> <002c01c29ef7$5bc14a20$6601a8c0@Marshall>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 20:36:39 -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: <"ah1np.0.jw4.180zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48496
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/msusci.html

> A cooling trend in the upper atmoshere based on satellite data was used by
> global warming sceptics for a few years.  It turned out this data was
> incorrect because the satellites had dropped to a lower altitude than
> expected. The corrected data showed an upper atmosphere warming trend.
The
> temperature of the oceans is probably more significant than the
temperature
> of the upper atmosphere because of the heat capacity of the oceans.
> Satellite data shows the earth retaining more heat than is radiated away
to
> space.

They disagree with that conclusion. Go to the website.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec  8 21:36:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA10114;
	Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:35:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 21:35:20 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 00:51:44 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMGEIBDGAA.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: <5.1.0.14.2.20021207155504.02cb6040 pop.mindspring.com>
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"46nI9.0.yT2.Nk2zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48497
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi.

>>Phase 1 is to establish background information, show competency, and
>>determine if further investment is justified. The Rowan team performed
>>superbly.

>Perhaps they did, but they say there were unable to complete the job as
>planned. That is a shame.
- Jed

Yes, it is a shame. The research that was done was good, and the Rowan team
are certainly resourceful workers. This is the kind of thing NASA is
supposed to be doing, IMHO. It's hard to believe that people like Bob Parks
will
put up such a stink over a few hundred thousand dollars when billions
are spent on -->insert your favorite boondoggle here<--.

It will be interesting to see if they get the next phase contract.
Any other workers out there familiar with NIAC and what it
looks for in contractors?

K.





From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 01:13:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA01689;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:23 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b34ba19f4a311c1 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <200212080046.06062.rockcast net-link.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021207155504.02cb6040 pop.mindspring.com>
 <200212080046.06062.rockcast net-link.net>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 03:13:41 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"-Omhl3.0.EQ.tv5zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48498
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net posted;

>On Saturday 07 December 2002 15:55, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>>  Mike Carrell wrote:
>>
>>  >On strictly technical grounds, many doubts can be raised about
>  > >missile-intercept technology.


>Far better is to use the ABL....the airborne laser.  Something that can pot an
>artillery shell out of the air would be something I would trust my safety to
>far easier than some fat cat contractors' 10 million dollar missile that
>could
>fail;  and the laser would be able to shoot again after a short recharge
>period.  Missiles cannot do that.  Besides, if one arranged  to create an
>X-ray laser....oops...somebody did that already.

I agree. I saw a cartoon with such a system which was built in a 747, 
a assume that they are working on building a prototype.

>  >
>>  I do not think anyone is contemplating an attack on the U.S. with missiles.
>>  The only countries capable of doing it are China and Russia, and neither is
>  > likely to do it.
>

>I agree, They are making too much money trading with us to destroy 
>us, for the moment anyway. I have reason to believe that Russia will 
>destroy America in a first strike. At the moment all three of us 
>have a common enemy who wants to take over the entire world.


>Especially since we let the enemy in and handed him a living on a silver
>plate.  Did you know that there are 50,000 Iraqis living in Detroit, Michigan.

And all it takes is a few fanatics.

>Stars wars:
>  Star Wars reduces
>  > security and increases the likelihood of a nuclear attack.

I don't follow your logic. OTOH, I don't think that Star Wars, as 
proposed will work.

>  >
>Gonna have that scene anyway sooner or later.  Better to have it sooner
>before even worse weapons get developed.  Real answer is a single world
>government.

Unfortunately that is what is prophecized to be coming.

>Worst case scenario is what we have now, and unstable balance
>of power with many small unsustainable would be nations helping to manipulate

We now have a common enemy, fundamentalist Islam.


>  >
>>  >  SDI was part of what pushed the USSR into collapse. 
>>
>  > I do not think so.

I agree, the Russians have continued to fund their defense establishment.

>
>  > > > This is disappointing. I expect Mills' supporters will agree with Keith
>>  > > Nagel that the original $75,000 budget was not enough. I cannot judge,
>but
>  > > > most projects of this nature cost much more than anyone anticipated.

Especially when you're doing research.
>
>  > >Phase 1 is to establish background information, show competency, and
>>  >determine if further investment is justified. The Rowan team performed
>  > >superbly.

I missed that one, what did the Rowan team develop?

>
>Not to worry.  The money will be there.  As soon as the Chinese launch
>an astronaut and say a few more things about lunar military bases, then
>watch us run.  I remember how we ran after the Russians launched
>Sputnik.  Sputnik was the size of a basketball and all it did was say
>'beep......beep......beep'.

This reminds me of the people who claim that we never went to the 
Moon. I would have ignored this, were it not for Wayne Green siding 
with them
>
>Nevertheless, this may just be a good stop gap for a local area exploration
>rocket until the arrival of the mirror fusion engine as a practical device.

What do you think of Inertial Drives like Robert Cook, 
www.forceborne.com has proposed? The big problem is getting into 
orbit. As I understand it the proposed BLP rocket would be of no use 
in this problem.

>Still envision a system ship that we as a race will have to construct:
>Podkletnov's gravity modifiers developed by Dr Ning Li or somebody
>used in pairs to generate artificial gravity and intertial force shielding;

Has anyone replicated Podkletnov's work been independently 
replicated? The last I heard about it, NASA was unable to replicate 
it.

>  As for Einstein, there is a Dr Carazzani that
>has something to say about him.  Right or wrong, the man did say one
>thing:  ".....the universe is stranger than we can imagine!".
>
>Yakov

Have you ever heard of the Recriprocal Universe as proposed by Dewey 
B Larson? We had one of the advocates of that system posting on 
Vortex for a while. What is your background Yakov?

What do you think of Tom Bearden's claims of beam weapons? I'm 
wondering if it is possible to use some other type of wave, of a 
nonorthogonal nature.



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 01:13:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA01738;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:29 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b35ba19fad88745 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]>
References: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 03:13:41 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"lSOXu.0.4R.zv5zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48499
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>At 8:25 AM 12/8/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>>In reply to  thomas malloy's message of Sat, 7 Dec 2002 02:40:27 -0600:
>>Hi,
>>[snip]
>>>I have been told that glaciers in the high mountains are growing in
>>>size, as is the Antartic iceshelf, which would explain the edges
>>>being pushed out faster.
>>
>>Actually this would be sign of global warming. As most of the planet warms
>>evaporation increases, and has to go somewhere, so one would also expect
>>condensation to increase. When condensation occurs in regions where the
>>temperature rarely if ever gets above freezing, you would expect the ice
>>deposition rate to increase there.
>
>
>I think this glaciation at high altitudes and at other cold inland arctic
>locations has been shown to be a sign of ocean warming, which could be an
>indicator of and/or consequence of global warming.  An ice age, or at least
>the initial stage of one is oddly one consequence of global warming, but
>can also be caused by undersea volcanism or any other causes of ocean
>warming.

That's what I've heard, under sea volcanos are increasing.

>  However, if the methane trapped in the tundra and in ocean
>hydrates is released before glaciation can prevent such, and such methane
>release is a process going on now, then this ice age may never come to full
>fruition before global warming becomes runaway.  Methane is a much stonger
>greenhouse gas than CO2.

That's what I've heard. The permafrost contains vast amounts of a 
methane hydrate that will be released as it thaws.

>
>Global warming has been shown by modelling to have the largest effect in
>the arctic.  BTW, I live in Palmer, AK, about 50 miles north of Anchorage,
>AK.  We have no accumulated snow this year so far.  The ground is not
>frozen.  A neighbor was out mowing his lawn in the dark (at about 6 PM) a
>few days ago.

I'm in Minneapolis, and the ground is frozen. However, since you are 
near the ocean,  this warming is attributable to an increase in ocean 
temperature, which follows from an increase in under sea volcanos.

>Another consequence of global warming, predicted by modelling, is increased
>weather variation worldwide, due to increased wind and jet stream activity.
>That certainly seems to be happening too.  Its wierd to see reports of
>weather more severe than south-central Alaska all the way from Minnesota to
>South Carolina.
>
>Regards,
>
>Horace Heffner

later Craig Haynie posted;

The question of global warming will probably be resolved within the next ten
years. Several 'states' of the atmosphere have now changed in such a way
that the winter climate of North America and Europe should begin to cool in
the next few years.

IMHO, if human activity is responsible for the phenomena, there's 
nothing short of our committing mass suicide that we can do to change 
it.

Thomas Malloy

>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 01:13:15 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA01787;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 01:12:36 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b36ba1a00bce9b6 [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530503ba190cf9257c [12.21.209.112]>
References: <v01530503ba190cf9257c [12.21.209.112]>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 03:13:41 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"L0APT2.0.rR.3w5zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48500
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


>At 5:35 PM 12/7/2, Yakov Smirnoff wrote:
>
>>but if equipment purportedly using this process works, then the whole
>>discussion devolves to why it works, not why it 'should not'.  Else the
>>debate is akin to that of engineers in the 1950's who stated in elegant
>>papers why bumblebees could not possibly fly.  Hope none of them
>>ever run over a bumblebee hole in their yard with a lawn mower and
>>could'nt run ..........fast!
>

and Horace Heffner responded;

If Hydrinos exist, then many existing laws will be violated,
>in my
opinion.  It will likely mean a significant reworking of physics,

and I added

That's my understanding of Mill's claims too. The existing paradigm 
is incapable of explaining things like LENR, and reactionless drives. 
This is a classic case of a paradigm revolution waiting to happen.

I'm really pleased that you people are discussing this. I'd love to 
read Mills' book, but baring my seeing an economic opportunity to be 
had, I'm just too busy.

Have any of you people, Ed Storms in particular, looked over his 
chemistry claims?

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 05:00:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id EAA04988;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 04:59:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 04:59:31 -0800
Message-ID: <00b301c29f82$b7ada2d0$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
From: "Craig Haynie" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <v01530501ba191a9758a9 [12.21.208.105]>
Subject: Global Warming
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:58:47 -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: <"NRBbC1.0.sD1.pE9zz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48501
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> >But you can't use this as an indication of Global Warming.
>
> Well of course!  That is why I qualified my remark as anecdotal.  This in
> no way changes the fact that events here in Alaska still tend to make one
a
> believer!  Especially the recent glacial activity, wherein many glaciers
> that have been stable for 10,000 years have either gone rogue or are
> disappearing.

Hello!

I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and the other scientists on
this list. I am not a scientist, but rather a computer programmer by
profession. However, I have to take exception here, because this statement
bothers me. Warm weather in Alaska cannot be evidence for global warming and
shouldn't make anyone a believer. The Noth Pole is still producing cold air.
The cold air is still there; it's simply not blowing your way. Take a look
at the Pacific Decadal Oscillation:

http://tao.atmos.washington.edu/pdo/

It's a thirty-year cycle. The last time we've seen this cycle was in the
1930s and 1940s. Notice, that of the 31 record high days recorded in
Anchorage, 12 of them occurred in the 1930s and 1940s.

http://pafc.arh.noaa.gov/climate.php?climstn=PAFC&climmo=12&climyr=2002

There is even a record high of 47 degrees F which occurred on December 20,
1969.

However, I am curious about melting glaciers. How do you know that the
glaciers which are melting now, were stable for the past ten thousand years?
Is it not true that the Earth has seen warmer and cooler climates in the
past ten thousand years? Wasn't there a recorded 'Mini Ice Age' in Europe
and North America, in the 1800s, which spawned these glaciers which we now
see melting? Wasn't there also a warm period about one thousand years ago
which saw wine being grown in parts of England and North America which are
now too cold for this activity? Any references to melting glaciers would be
appreciated, since I can certainly see how they would indicate a long-term
tend.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 06:18:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03396;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:17:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 06:17:28 -0800
Sender: jack granger.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3DF4A4E4.6E44AB2D centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 14:12:52 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11 centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
References: <v01530501ba191a9758a9 [12.21.208.105]> <00b301c29f82$b7ada2d0$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xc"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xc"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ErWZU3.0.vq.uNAzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48502
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Craig Haynie  wrote:

Warm weather in Alaska cannot be evidence for global warming and
shouldn't make anyone a believer.

Hi All,

Agreed!  Something happened about 12,000 thousand years
ago which caused the demise of the Wisconsin ice sheet
(it was at least one mile thick over Cleveland, Ohio).
The simplest (Occam's Razor) explanation of any perceived
century-long warming is the "warm room effect" of
whatever it was that happened 12,000 years ago.

The interglacial we are in could last from 10,000 years
to 30,000 years, based on the evidence of the past few
million years.  The long-term trend is toward an ice-ball
Earth:  The Himalayan rock face continues to expand,
exposing fresh minerals to react with the CO2 in the
air, forming carbonates which are eventually sequested
at the bottom of the oceans as shells.

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 08:08:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14070;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:06:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:06:48 -0800
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:00:59 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Breakthrough or BS?
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <003901c29f9c$2ab33f60$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0036_01C29F59.1C3471E0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"h0_V93.0.lR3.O-Bzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48503
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C29F59.1C3471E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://www.genesisworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm

Press Release from yesterday:

"Scientific Breakthrough Liberates Energy Users from Fossil Fuel =
Dependence"

"Technology breakthrough harnesses energy from the molecular structure =
of water"
------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C29F59.1C3471E0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.genesisworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm">http://www.genes=
isworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Press Release from yesterday:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Scientific Breakthrough Liberates Energy Users from Fossil Fuel=20
Dependence"</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Technology breakthrough harnesses energy from the molecular =
structure of=20
water"</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0036_01C29F59.1C3471E0--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 08:21:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18714;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:18:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:18:50 -0800
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 08:13:40 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Genesis project details
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004C_01C29F5A.E1FCA860"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"pbrkG2.0.Da4.f9Czz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48504
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C29F5A.E1FCA860
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>From the site:


The gCell Process

The gCell is the fundamental component to the technology where three =
processes occur simultaneously.=20

In the first of these processes, water is passed over catalytic =
reactants to produce an electrical voltage that excites the hydrogen and =
oxygen molecules.=20

At the same time, a thermo, electro-catalytic reaction creates an effect =
similar to that of magnets with opposing polarities, separating the =
molecules into pure hydrogen and oxygen gases.=20

In the third process, some of the hydrogen and oxygen molecules are =
reattached to generate additional electrical current that subsidizes the =
gas generation process - thus making the process self-sustaining. Since =
water is recovered and reused in the reattachment, gCells require only a =
few ounces of water per day.

A single gCell stack, which is no bigger than a car battery, is capable =
of producing hundreds of cubic feet of customer usable gas per day. By =
comparison, the average American home in cold climate areas consumes =
approximately five cubic feet of gas per day.

Market Ready

The Genesis Project has developed two market ready models of the Edison =
Device: a residential version and a commercial version. The residential =
model is capable of producing up to 30 total kilowatts of combined gas =
and electrical power per day (a typical home uses between five to six =
kilowatts), and the commercial model can generate up to 100 total =
kilowatts of energy. For heavier commercial requirements, multiple =
Edison Devices can be linked together.

The design of the Edison Device has proven that less is more. The =
energy-generating portion of the device has no moving parts - in fact, =
the only "mechanical" aspects of the Edison Device are the small =
circulation pumps and micro-valves that control the flow of water and =
gases. As a result, maintenance is limited to the occasional replacement =
of inexpensive water filters that can easily be accomplished by =
consumers themselves, while water usage is minimal over the device's =
projected 20+ years of service life!

To receive detailed licensing information, contact World Energy =
Management, the exclusive worldwide licensing representative for Genesis =
World Energy.

Priority given to developing countries. END=20

If this is Dennis Lee type fraud, then it is the most elaborate one that =
has been put forth to date...
------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C29F5A.E1FCA860
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>From the site:</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The gCell Process</DIV>
<DIV><BR>The gCell is the fundamental component to the technology where =
three=20
processes occur simultaneously. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In the first of these processes, water is passed over catalytic =
reactants=20
to produce an electrical voltage that excites the hydrogen and oxygen =
molecules.=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>At the same time, a thermo, electro-catalytic reaction creates an =
effect=20
similar to that of magnets with opposing polarities, separating the =
molecules=20
into pure hydrogen and oxygen gases. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In the third process, some of the hydrogen and oxygen molecules are =

reattached to generate additional electrical current that subsidizes the =
gas=20
generation process - thus making the process self-sustaining. Since =
water is=20
recovered and reused in the reattachment, gCells require only a few =
ounces of=20
water per day.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A single gCell stack, which is no bigger than a car battery, is =
capable of=20
producing hundreds of cubic feet of customer usable gas per day. By =
comparison,=20
the average American home in cold climate areas consumes approximately =
five=20
cubic feet of gas per day.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Market Ready</DIV>
<DIV><BR>The Genesis Project has developed two market ready models of =
the Edison=20
Device: a residential version and a commercial version. The residential =
model is=20
capable of producing up to 30 total kilowatts of combined gas and =
electrical=20
power per day (a typical home uses between five to six kilowatts), and =
the=20
commercial model can generate up to 100 total kilowatts of energy. For =
heavier=20
commercial requirements, multiple Edison Devices can be linked =
together.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The design of the Edison Device has proven that less is more. The=20
energy-generating portion of the device has no moving parts - in fact, =
the only=20
"mechanical" aspects of the Edison Device are the small circulation =
pumps and=20
micro-valves that control the flow of water and gases. As a result, =
maintenance=20
is limited to the occasional replacement of inexpensive water filters =
that can=20
easily be accomplished by consumers themselves, while water usage is =
minimal=20
over the device's projected 20+ years of service life!</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>To receive detailed licensing information, contact World Energy =
Management,=20
the exclusive worldwide licensing representative for Genesis World =
Energy.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Priority given to developing countries. END </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If this is Dennis Lee type fraud, then it is the most elaborate one =
that=20
has been put forth to date...</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C29F5A.E1FCA860--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 08:30:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA22679;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:29:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 08:29:15 -0800
X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 16:29:11 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209111547.032aaff8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 11:29:27 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Breakthrough or BS?
In-Reply-To: <003901c29f9c$2ab33f60$0a016ea8 cpq>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"RO84C1.0.EY5.QJCzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48505
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is yet another Meyer-type claim, that electrolysis can be tweaked to 
output more energy than it takes. I expect this is BS, but the only way to 
know is to perform independent experiments on the devices at several 
different labs. If history is any guide, such tests will never be performed 
and we will never know the truth.

This statement from the web site is hilarious:

"The project team was very large, consisting of more than 400 visionaries 
representing a wide array of scientific, technological and engineering 
disciplines. Working in task force groups throughout the US, team members 
themselves did not know the identities of other Genesis Project members 
outside their own group, or the totality of the project's goals."

That part is BS, for sure! Any expert working on any aspect of such a 
project would understand the "totality of the project's goals" instantly, 
without being told. It would be like asking an expert in 1942 to work on 
radioactive isotope separation and expecting he will not understand this is 
a project to build an atomic bomb. Every physicist who learned a few facts 
about the Manhattan project understood instantly what it was about, 
including some Japanese physicists who somehow learned a few details about 
it. That does not mean any physicist in 1942 would instantly figure out you 
need implosion with Pu, or how much U is needed. Heisenberg and the others 
at Farm Hall badly miscalculated the latter, when they first heard about 
the bomb.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 11:49:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA10464;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:44:50 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:44:50 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1a987911a0 [12.21.208.132]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:58:57 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"NMC5L.0.PZ2.oAFzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48506
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:58 AM 12/9/2, Craig Haynie wrote:

>
>I have a tremendous amount of respect for you and the other scientists on
>this list.


I am not a scientist.  I'm an amateur physicist, and not much of one lately.


>I am not a scientist, but rather a computer programmer by
>profession.

DITTO, retired.


>However, I have to take exception here, because this statement
>bothers me. Warm weather in Alaska cannot be evidence for global warming and
>shouldn't make anyone a believer. The Noth Pole is still producing cold air.
>The cold air is still there; it's simply not blowing your way. Take a look
>at the Pacific Decadal Oscillation:
>
>http://tao.atmos.washington.edu/pdo/
>
>It's a thirty-year cycle. The last time we've seen this cycle was in the
>1930s and 1940s. Notice, that of the 31 record high days recorded in
>Anchorage, 12 of them occurred in the 1930s and 1940s.


I think it is not record highs that mean much, but rather mean annual
temperature. What gives a stange feeling is the protacted periods of warm
weather here of late.  Again, I know there is nothing sicentific about it,
but it certainly does give one a predisposition, a significant bias.


>
>http://pafc.arh.noaa.gov/climate.php?climstn=PAFC&climmo=12&climyr=2002
>
>There is even a record high of 47 degrees F which occurred on December 20,
>1969.
>
>However, I am curious about melting glaciers. How do you know that the
>glaciers which are melting now, were stable for the past ten thousand years?


Many local glaciers have been dated at over 10,000 years.  That is
determined by core samples.

What is disturbing and for me part of the local convincing (though
anecdotal) experience is that glaciers that were favorites of mine to see
have now receeded to the point of no longer being visible from the original
or even convenient vantage points.  When I first drove into Alaska there
was a spectacular view of the Matanuska Glacier.  Clear views of blue ice
and cravasses from the Glenn Highway.  Now the area is now principly black
glacial morain.   The portage glacier could be seen calving etc. from
shore, but now requires a boat trip to see close up.  There was a wonderful
glacier easily accesable from the highway which goes from Glenallen to
Valdez, which you could drive right up to and climb on.  You can still get
to it, but there is a small hike involved now.  It has receeded in large
proportion and likely will disappear in my kids' lifetime.  This is true
even though there is typicaly more than 10 feet of snow accumulation in the
area in winter.  Many unnamed small glaciers have disappeared or nearly so.
The Columibia Glacier, which is about the size of Rhode Island, could be
approached at close quarter from the ferry, and the whistle was blown to
try to create calving.  It has now receeded significantly and is no longer
approachable by boat.  There is about 2 miles of calved glacier (small ice
bergs) in front of Columbia.  It would not be surprising at all to see
Columbia go rogue and block off Valdez harbor with ice bergs.  This would
cut off the Aleyeska Pipeline oil shipments from Alaska.

The bird population seems to be changing now too.  We see a lot more
robins, starlings and pidgeons.   There are lots of small anecdotal type
things which seem to happen often that make you think about global warming
and the ozone holes.



>Is it not true that the Earth has seen warmer and cooler climates in the
>past ten thousand years? Wasn't there a recorded 'Mini Ice Age' in Europe
>and North America, in the 1800s, which spawned these glaciers which we now
>see melting? Wasn't there also a warm period about one thousand years ago
>which saw wine being grown in parts of England and North America which are
>now too cold for this activity?

>Any references to melting glaciers would be
>appreciated, since I can certainly see how they would indicate a long-term
>tend.


I don't have any handy but there are numerous published and ongoing studies
of this, especially in North and South America.  A web search on "glacial
retreat" or "rogue glaciers", etc., on google will find a lot of stuff.
You may find the Ohio State studies interesting, as they cover a number of
continents.  The University of Alaska has done a lot of work too, but I
don't know that the findings are published yet.  There is occasional
coverage in the local news regarding conferences etc., but that's probably
of no help to you.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 12:01:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15848;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:57:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:57:35 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba1aa6ab6771 [12.21.208.132]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:11:44 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"f6WbM3.0.Yt3.lMFzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48507
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:12 AM 12/9/2, Taylor J. Smith wrote:
>Craig Haynie  wrote:
>
>Warm weather in Alaska cannot be evidence for global warming and
>shouldn't make anyone a believer.
>
>Hi All,
>
>Agreed!


I have not said warm weather in Alasaka is scientific evidence (and in fact
anecdotal evidence is of course the worst kind of evidence, which is why I
stated it was anecdotal) only that it is personally "convincing."
Scientifically speaking, it is not sufficient evidence, but it *is*
necessary evidence.  Weather modelling shows the effects in the arctic than
will be about double those in the temperate zones.

If I were forced to bet on the truth of global warming, I would of course
bet on it affirmatively.  To do otherwise would be to flaunt evidence I see
on a regular basis, all of which is on the side of unprecedented long term
warming.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 12:50:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA32211;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:47:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:47:06 -0800
X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 20:46:56 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:46:46 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <v01530502ba1aa6ab6771 [12.21.208.132]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"xiQxM2.0.8t7.A5Gzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48508
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>I have not said warm weather in Alasaka is scientific evidence (and in 
>fact anecdotal evidence is of course the worst kind of evidence . . .

Not necessarily. If it is convincing enough it can be quite good. Seeing a 
flying saucer land on your lawn and watching non-human aliens emerge from 
it would be entirely convincing.


>. . . which is why I stated it was anecdotal) only that it is personally 
>"convincing." Scientifically speaking, it is not sufficient evidence, but 
>it *is* necessary evidence.

If glaciers world-wide are all observed shrinking, I think this is about 
the best evidence of global warming we can expect, short of New York City, 
Venice and most of Florida being inundated. I believe glaciers everywhere 
are rapidly shrinking, but I have not examined the evidence carefully, 
because it is such a depressing subject.


>bet on it affirmatively.  To do otherwise would be to flaunt evidence I 
>see on a regular basis, all of which is on the side of unprecedented long 
>term warming.

Even if the evidence for warming becomes overwhelming that will not prove 
the warming is caused by human activity, and even if (somehow) that is 
established beyond reasonable dispute, it will still not prove that the 
human activity in question is CO2 production. As Mike Carrell pointed out, 
the Chinese and others are producing much more "brown air" type pollution 
than the U.S., although the U.S. produces much more CO2 than the Chinese, 
Indians and all other third world countries combined. Carrell wrote:

"The subsidiary claim is that since the big bad US is causing the
warming, potentially harming all of humanity, the US should pay all of
humanity."

It should be made clear that present day anti-global warming policies are 
not based on an anti-American bias, but rather on the hypothesis that 
warming is caused by CO2. If that is so, the U.S., Europe and Japan are to 
blame, not China or India. The developed nations could make minor changes 
to automobile efficiency and insulation which would do more to prevent 
global warming than the Chinese & Indians could accomplish if they stopped 
using fire and electricity completely. On the other hand, if global warming 
is caused by something else, or by a combination of factors including brown 
air pollution, then the Chinese and Indians are in a position to do more to 
prevent it. See:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/tableh1.html

Year 2000 totals:

U.S., 1,571 million metric tons carbon
Western Europe, 1,000 million
Japan, 313 million
China, 775 million
India, 253 million

It should be noted that China has reduced emissions 49 million tons (5%) 
from 1997 to 2000, despite a growing economy, by improving efficiency. In 
that same period the U.S. increased emissions by 69 million tons. The U.S. 
increase was nearly as great as the increases from all other countries on 
earth combined.

The only argument for putting more effort into reducing China's CO2 
emission are that their efficiency is still very poor compared to the U.S., 
so on machine-by-machine basis, using current technology, you can reduce 
more CO2 by replacing some classes of Chinese equipment than you can by 
replacing U.S. equipment. For example, money spent replacing Chinese steam 
locomotives with U.S. and Japanese diesel and electric models would reduce 
CO2 and pollution more than any similar dollar amount invested in the U.S. 
However, considering technology-wide investments in R&D, it makes more 
sense to develop new automobile models for U.S. consumers, because overall 
the combined horsepower, CO2 and pollution from U.S. automobiles far 
outweighs the combined horsepower and pollution from all Chinese railroad 
locomotives combined.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 13:01:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA03934;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:58:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:58:26 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:02:28 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212091602.28347.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA03894
Resent-Message-ID: <"iYRMC2.0.Oz.oFGzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48509
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Monday 09 December 2002 15:46, Jed Rothwell wrote:
> Horace Heffner wrote:
> 
> >I have not said warm weather in Alasaka is scientific evidence (and in 
> >fact anecdotal evidence is of course the worst kind of evidence . . .
> 
> Not necessarily. If it is convincing enough it can be quite good. Seeing a 
> flying saucer land on your lawn and watching non-human aliens emerge from 
> it would be entirely convincing.
> 
> 
> >. . . which is why I stated it was anecdotal) only that it is personally 
> >"convincing." Scientifically speaking, it is not sufficient evidence, but 
> >it *is* necessary evidence.
> 
> If glaciers world-wide are all observed shrinking, I think this is about 
> the best evidence of global warming we can expect, short of New York City, 
> Venice and most of Florida being inundated. I believe glaciers everywhere 
> are rapidly shrinking, but I have not examined the evidence carefully, 
> because it is such a depressing subject.
> 
> 
> >bet on it affirmatively.  To do otherwise would be to flaunt evidence I 
> >see on a regular basis, all of which is on the side of unprecedented long 
> >term warming.
> 
> Even if the evidence for warming becomes overwhelming that will not prove 
> the warming is caused by human activity, and even if (somehow) that is 
> established beyond reasonable dispute, it will still not prove that the 
> human activity in question is CO2 production. As Mike Carrell pointed out, 
> the Chinese and others are producing much more "brown air" type pollution 
> than the U.S., although the U.S. produces much more CO2 than the Chinese, 
> Indians and all other third world countries combined. Carrell wrote:
> 
> "The subsidiary claim is that since the big bad US is causing the
> warming, potentially harming all of humanity, the US should pay all of
> humanity."
> 
> It should be made clear that present day anti-global warming policies are 
> not based on an anti-American bias, but rather on the hypothesis that 
> warming is caused by CO2. If that is so, the U.S., Europe and Japan are to 
> blame, not China or India. The developed nations could make minor changes 
> to automobile efficiency and insulation which would do more to prevent 
> global warming than the Chinese & Indians could accomplish if they stopped 
> using fire and electricity completely. On the other hand, if global warming 
> is caused by something else, or by a combination of factors including brown 
> air pollution, then the Chinese and Indians are in a position to do more to 
> prevent it. See:
> 
> http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/tableh1.html
> 
> Year 2000 totals:
> 
> U.S., 1,571 million metric tons carbon
> Western Europe, 1,000 million
> Japan, 313 million
> China, 775 million
> India, 253 million
> 
> It should be noted that China has reduced emissions 49 million tons (5%) 
> from 1997 to 2000, despite a growing economy, by improving efficiency. In 
> that same period the U.S. increased emissions by 69 million tons. The U.S. 
> increase was nearly as great as the increases from all other countries on 
> earth combined.
> 
> The only argument for putting more effort into reducing China's CO2 
> emission are that their efficiency is still very poor compared to the U.S., 
> so on machine-by-machine basis, using current technology, you can reduce 
> more CO2 by replacing some classes of Chinese equipment than you can by 
> replacing U.S. equipment. For example, money spent replacing Chinese steam 
> locomotives with U.S. and Japanese diesel and electric models would reduce 
> CO2 and pollution more than any similar dollar amount invested in the U.S. 
> However, considering technology-wide investments in R&D, it makes more 
> sense to develop new automobile models for U.S. consumers, because overall 
> the combined horsepower, CO2 and pollution from U.S. automobiles far 
> outweighs the combined horsepower and pollution from all Chinese railroad 
> locomotives combined.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 
> 
     Aren't we forgetting a few countries.........like Brazil and Argentina.  
Those two countries are not small.  While their pollutions contributions
are unknown to me, I do think that they should be considered in the 
mix.   And while we are at it, we should consider the other Asian tigers
in the ASEAN.  Just look in your computer and you will see many
products from these little dragons on the world economic scene.

Yakov.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 13:18:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10649;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:16:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:16:29 -0800
X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 21:16:19 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209160624.032ab8a0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 16:16:16 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <200212091602.28347.rockcast net-link.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"SQUdz2.0.Jc2.jWGzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48510
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Yakov Smirnoff wrote:

>      Aren't we forgetting a few countries.........like Brazil and 
> Argentina.
>Those two countries are not small.

See:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/iea/tableh1.html

Argentina, 36 million tons
Brazil, 95 million tons

Central and South America total: 269 million tons; 9% of the total for the 
U.S., Europe and Japan.


>And while we are at it, we should consider the other Asian tigers
>in the ASEAN.

All of Asia minus Japan and China: 881 million tons

CO2 is overwhelmingly caused by first-world, developed nations. 
Fortunately, CO2-reduction technologies developed in the U.S. or Europe are 
likely to be implemented in other markets as well.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 13:19:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10776;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:16:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:16:46 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Fwd: WHAT'S NEW   Friday, 6 Dec 02]
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 16:20:53 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <v01530501ba1904461a67 [12.21.209.203]> <018001c29ecb$92694f40$6601a8c0@houston.rr.com>
In-Reply-To: <018001c29ecb$92694f40$6601a8c0 houston.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212091620.53022.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id NAA10741
Resent-Message-ID: <"DCr1s2.0.Ie2.zWGzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48511
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sunday 08 December 2002 10:07, Craig Haynie wrote:
> > Global warming has been shown by modelling to have the largest effect in
> > the arctic.  BTW, I live in Palmer, AK, about 50 miles north of Anchorage,
> > AK.  We have no accumulated snow this year so far.  The ground is not
> > frozen.  A neighbor was out mowing his lawn in the dark (at about 6 PM) a
> > few days ago.  We only have about 5 hours of daylight now.  I may mow my
> > lawn soon.  It is still green.  We had a year like this a while ago.  When
> > I first came here in 1976, it snowed around October 1st, and the snow and
> > ice stayed on the ground until "breakup" in the spring.  It was nice that
> > we did not go into freeze/thaw cycles regularly, as we do now. That is
> hard
> > on vehicles and roofs, etc.  This is only an anecdotal observation, but
> > this kind of life experience tends to make for a believer in global
> > warming.
> 
> But you can't use this as an indication of Global Warming. Regional climates
> are controlled by various 'states' of the Earth's atmosphere. What
> meterologists are doing now is looking at various 'states' of the Earth's
> atmosphere and comparing them to years past when such states were also in
> the same phase and degree. These states include global climate patterns
> like:
> 
> The Pacific Enso Oscillation, (El Nino)
> The Pacific Decadal Oscillation (which should be warming up the arctic and
> antarctic waters right now, http://tao.atmos.washington.edu/pdo/)
> The Pacific Southern Oscillation
> The North Atlantic Oscillation
> The Arctic Oscillation
> Solar Flux
> 
> Check out this comparison between the month's of November 1969 and November
> 2002. Based on a comparison of climate states in early November, it was
> predicted by Joe D'Aleo of Intellicast.com that this winter 'should' most
> closely resemble the winters of 1957-58 and 1969-70. Now after the first
> month, the comparison to the year 1969/70 is uncanny.
> 
> http://www.intellicast.com/DrDewpoint/Library/1361/
> 
> Moreover, global warming MUST become evident in the upper atmosphere. So
> far, the only evidence for global warming appears to be from ground-based
> observations, which over the course of the past 100 years, or so, is quite
> questionable in accuracy. The global atmospheric temperature being measured
> by satellites, shows nothing.
> 
> http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/msusci.html
> 
> The question of global warming will probably be resolved within the next ten
> years. Several 'states' of the atmosphere have now changed in such a way
> that the winter climate of North America and Europe should begin to cool in
> the next few years. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation has turned to its 'cool'
> phase in 1997, and this last solar cycle displayed a noticeable reduction in
> activity and duration. If North American winters become cooler again, then a
> lot of this questionable 'evidence' of global warming will be dispelled. If
> the winters do NOT become cooler, and this theory of climate 'state'
> analysis is dispelled, then perhaps with the other work being done, maybe
> global warming can be confirmed more definitively.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Craig Haynie (Houston)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
    Everybody check that site for Pacific Decadal Oscillation.  It shows a
period of about 50 years peak to peak, with high to low in about 25 years
or so in the graph on the site.  That graph also shows a disturbing downward
trend.  If that graph holds, the winters of 2015 will be cold indeed for 
northern north America.  The warmer spots on the McKenzie bay in upper
Canada and in Hudson's Bay bode for increased snow production in those
areas.  Snow that will probably fall on places from Winnipeg to Pittsburgh.
Just hope that those petunias in Alaska in December don't mean snowblowers
on the fourth or July in Chicago.  On the bright side, maybe my favorite
crab, the Dungeness, might make a serious enough comeback that I
might entertain delicious fantasies about having some for dinner.

With some Inglenook white estate wine from Napa Valley.

yakov

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 14:25:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA03354;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:21:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 14:21:51 -0800
From: Keasy aol.com
Message-ID: <f.41b4173.2b267153 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 17:21:07 EST
Subject: Re: Breakthrough or BS?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_f.41b4173.2b267153_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 256
Resent-Message-ID: <"L3sMs.0.Eq.-THzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48512
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_f.41b4173.2b267153_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/9/02 8:08:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
jonesb9 pacbell.net writes:

http://www.genesisworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm

> Press Release from yesterday:
>  
> "Scientific Breakthrough Liberates Energy Users from Fossil Fuel 
> Dependence"
>  
> "Technology breakthrough harnesses energy from the molecular structure of 
> water"
> 

I vote for BS as most likely.  If you read the article you may notice whoever 
wrote it does not know the difference between power and energy (kilowatts per 
day).  For someone claiming to have a free-energy design that is not a good 
sign.

                                                                     Ken

--part1_f.41b4173.2b267153_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 12/9/02 8:08:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, jonesb9 pacbell.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.genesisworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Press Release from yesterday:<BR>
 <BR>
"Scientific Breakthrough Liberates Energy Users from Fossil Fuel Dependence"<BR>
 <BR>
"Technology breakthrough harnesses energy from the molecular structure of water"<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
I vote for BS as most likely.&nbsp; If you read the article you may notice whoever wrote it does not know the difference between power and energy (kilowatts per day).&nbsp; For someone claiming to have a free-energy design that is not a good sign.<BR>
<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;&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_f.41b4173.2b267153_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 15:17:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA28200;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:15:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 15:15:22 -0800
X-Sent: 9 Dec 2002 23:15:14 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209174304.032a76b8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2002 18:15:00 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <v01530502ba1aa6ab6771 [12.21.208.132]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"vsV4y3.0.Vu6.AGIzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48513
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

>The only argument for putting more effort into reducing China's CO2 
>emission are that their efficiency is still very poor compared to the 
>U.S., so on machine-by-machine basis, using current technology, you can 
>reduce more CO2 by replacing some classes of Chinese equipment than you 
>can by replacing U.S. equipment.

That is the only argument vis-a-vis global warming, according to present 
day theory. Of course there are many other good reasons for reducing 
Chinese emissions! The pollution in China is horrible. It makes people 
miserable and shortens lives. Pollution is wasted resources and 
inefficiency, meaning desperately poor people are throwing away money. 
Fortunately, the Chinese people recognize these problems, and they are 
rapidly improving efficiency. The new capitalist ruling class does not care 
how much it pollutes, but it hates to waste money. The same is true in 
Russia. The situation in both countries is improving rapidly thanks to 
market forces, and the availability of efficient machinery from the U.S. 
and Japan.

Actually, worldwide, for the past decade, only the U.S. has been 
stagnating. Other countries are rapidly addressing the global warming 
issue. Germany now generates 2.5% of its electricity from wind. There is 
now a mad rush in Europe to cash in on wind power, with construction now 
planned for the equivalent of two nuclear reactors every year for the next 
decade, mainly offshore. They plan to install 40 GW nameplate capacity over 
the next 6 years. Adjusting nameplate to actual capacity in a typical 
European offshore installation (actual = 30% to 40% of nameplate), that is 
roughly equivalent to building 14 average U.S. nuclear power plants (actual 
average = .98 GW). They already have 20 GW nameplate installed. See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/08/international/europe/08WIND.html

Unfortunately, the U.S. is by far the largest producer of CO2, so if it 
does nothing -- or worse if it continues to increase emissions faster than 
the Chinese reduce theirs -- and the theory is correct, the U.S. will drag 
the rest of the world into a catastrophe no matter what.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec  9 21:07:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA16135;
	Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:01:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:01:11 -0800
Message-ID: <20021210050037.70588.qmail web40403.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 21:00:37 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"4vrYV1.0.wx3.NKNzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48514
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Ok folks..

It's reality check time.

Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
The cause   Fact or speculation?

The cure   Possible?  or not  ?

Have any of you ever taken a class in "Problem solving"?

Lets face it the problem is still proving it.  The "Perponderance of
evidence" is quite lean and much of it has been tampered with.

Have you noticed that descussion only gets fired up durring El nino
events?  Does anybody remember how HOT it was back in 84...  80...  72...
    1909???   We only have records of the measurements of surface air
temperature to work with are these reliable?  did anybody measure solar
radiation 100 years back?   200 years back?

I gues what I am trying to say (with a question or two) look closely
first at the evidence   rather then the popular vote.

 

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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 12:39:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28246;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:30:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:30:49 -0800
X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 20:30:31 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021210152648.032afb20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:30:22 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Szpak & Mosier-Boss papers on LENR-CANR.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"QDRnv.0.Gv6.vxazz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48515
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

James Salsman provided a Navy report in electronic format with a collection 
of 13 papers by Szpak & Mosier-Boss today. I uploaded the report as one 
file, and I also broke out the individual papers into 13 files. Breaking 
them out enhances the bibliography and makes it easier for people with slow 
connections. The big file is:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/SzpakSanomalousb.pdf

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 12:39:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA28382;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:30:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:30:54 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:30:13 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f 4ax.com>
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
In-Reply-To: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 MAA28223
Resent-Message-ID: <"48JVv1.0.Hx6.zxazz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48516
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, 09 Dec 2002 08:13:40 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>Device: a residential version and a commercial version. The residential model is capable of producing up to 30 total kilowatts of combined gas and electrical power per day (a typical home uses between five to six kilowatts), and the commercial model can generate up to 100 total kilowatts of energy. 
[snip]
Snake-oil salesmen rarely manage to get the units right. ;)


Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 13:05:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA09530;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:02:54 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:02:54 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DF65678.9F29E527 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 23:02:48 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: BlackLight news
References: <d.3d9395a.2b22879c aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"B9_HD.0.hK2.zPbzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48517
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

http://villagevoice.com/issues/0250/baard.php

Regards,

hamdi ucar


Erikbaard aol.com wrote:
> 
> Hi All -
> 
> Just a heads up that late tonight the Village Voice (www.villagevoice.com) is
> publishing my article about the NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts study of
> plasmas made by BlackLight Power Inc.  Also, you might be pleasantly
> surprised to learn that the Journal of Applied Physics is publishing a paper
> by Mills and BlackLight staff researchers in the Dec. 15 edition.
> 
> The Voice article has interviews with Mills, the NASA-funded researcher, the
> editor of the Journal of Applied Physics, the publisher of Skeptic Magazine,
> and the director of NIAC.  Lots of surprising statements.
> 
> Luke has, in the meantime, posted the Journal of Applied Physics paper to
> hydrio.org.  The editor says others are currently under review.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Erik Baard

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 13:12:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10143;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:03:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:03:57 -0800
X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 21:03:44 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021210154349.03a3c440 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:03:40 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <20021210050037.70588.qmail web40403.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"OaxNj1.0.IU2.yQbzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48518
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Charles Ford wrote:

>Ok folks..
>
>It's reality check time.
>
>Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
>The cause   Fact or speculation?
>
>The cure   Possible?  or not  ?
>
>Have any of you ever taken a class in "Problem solving"?

You should add one thing more to this list of imponderables: The Big 
Picture, a.k.a. a sense of perspective, or the full accounting of the 
advantages and disadvantages of a course of action.

Suppose we go to the trouble of reducing CO2 and 100 years from now we 
learn that we did not need to do so, because global warming wasn't real 
after all. Or it was real but it was not caused by CO2. What, then, have we 
sacrificed? Not much, as it turns out. Most of the steps we take to reduce 
CO2 benefit us in other ways. They reduce pollution, reduce the cost of 
fuel, create jobs, and alleviate human suffering in countless ways. Most of 
these steps would be good policy even if there is no global warming.

There are a few exceptions: for example, sequestering carbon from generator 
plants under the ocean floor would serve no purpose if CO2 not a problem. 
But sequestering would be expensive and problematic, and there are many 
alternatives steps that would actually save money overall, such as building 
wind generators, so I doubt sequestering will  catch on. We could eliminate 
CO2 emissions without it.

We might spend a terrific amount of money on impractical, expensive schemes 
like sequestering, thereby diverting money from more cost-effective schemes 
that would have multiple benefits. That would be a mistake. I hope that we 
rely on free market competition to solve the problem, in which case such 
schemes will go nowhere. The best solutions are a creative combination of 
free-market and regulation, such as the "cap-and-trade" programs. 
Tremendous progress has been made controlling pollution by auctioning off 
the right to pollute under these programs. (Do-gooder type people even buy 
up the rights as birthday presents, to retire them instead of using them.)

Of course, I *really* hope CF comes along and makes the whole question 
moot, but we cannot depend on that happening.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 13:44:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29063;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:37:02 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:37:02 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3DF65E27.5020904 zipworld.com.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:35:35 +1100
From: Alan Schneider <alansch zipworld.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.2b) Gecko/20021016
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq> <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f@4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"eINsU1.0.167.wvbzz" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48519
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

 > Snake-oil salesmen rarely manage to get the units right. ;)

That's cuz they're trying to baffle people with bullshit
by slinging as many impressive sounding buzzwords as
possible as quickly as possible rather than dazzling
them with legitimate science.

As the Romans might have said...
Semper Taurum Excretae Cerebrum Vincit.

<grin>

Another critical warning sign is the scale of the claims.
Big numbers, carefully designed to impress. FAR more
convincing would be a small, easily replicable and
testable device that delivers just a watt or two - a
proof of principle.

I wish it were true... but so far it sounds too much
like just another scam.

Cheers,
Alan


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 13:53:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA29769;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:44:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:44:57 -0800
Message-ID: <3DF66009.9060908 rtpatlanta.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:43:37 -0500
From: "Terry Blanton" <blantont rtpatlanta.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq> <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f@4ax.com> <3DF65E27.5020904@zipworld.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"KkpJ_.0.3H7.O1czz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48520
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Alan Schneider wrote:

>
> Another critical warning sign is the scale of the claims.
> Big numbers, carefully designed to impress. FAR more
> convincing would be a small, easily replicable and
> testable device that delivers just a watt or two - a
> proof of principle.


And PICTURES!  

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 14:02:01 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA03792;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:55:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 13:55:38 -0800
X-Sent: 10 Dec 2002 21:55:31 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021210165336.032afb20 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 16:55:29 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
In-Reply-To: <3DF66009.9060908 rtpatlanta.com>
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f 4ax.com>
 <3DF65E27.5020904 zipworld.com.au>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"luLvb2.0.sw.QBczz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48521
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Terry Blanton wrote:

>And PICTURES!

Got 'em! The device is shown in the Dilbert comic strip yesterday and today.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 14:19:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15707;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:17:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:17:30 -0800
Message-ID: <3DF667D4.4040508 zipworld.com.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:16:52 +1100
From: Alan Schneider <alansch zipworld.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq> <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f@4ax.com> <3DF65E27.5020904@zipworld.com.au> <3DF66009.9060908@rtpatlanta.com>
In-Reply-To: <3DF66009.9060908 rtpatlanta.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"kQoqE1.0.Hr3.wVczz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48522
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Terry Blanton wrote:
> Alan Schneider wrote:
> 
>>
>> Another critical warning sign is the scale of the claims.
>> Big numbers, carefully designed to impress. FAR more
>> convincing would be a small, easily replicable and
>> testable device that delivers just a watt or two - a
>> proof of principle.
> 
> 
> 
> And PICTURES! 
> 
Nah! Pictures are too easily faked - either with
realistic looking props or digital photomanipulation.
Let's face it - you can't check for hidden wires and
batteries in a photo.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 14:44:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA27627;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:43:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:43:11 -0800
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:37:57 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001d01c2a09c$ca0baba0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f 4ax.com> <3DF65E27.5020904@zipworld.com.au>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id OAA27603
Resent-Message-ID: <"wM2wu2.0.Yl6._tczz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48523
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Alan Schneider" <alansch zipworld.com.au>
> Another critical warning sign is the scale of the claims.
> Big numbers, carefully designed to impress. FAR more
> convincing would be a small, easily replicable and
> testable device that delivers just a watt or two - a
> proof of principle.

Not to mention the rather important little fact that if you do a Google search for the two principals who are mentioned by name, Nejhla Shaw and Charles Shaw, you will come up very disappointed.

No publications, no references, no awards, almost nothing of consequence...

As for those other 400 "visionaries" who are they? frat brothers, neighbors, a few pages of the Boise phone directory... and how did two no-bodies with no credentials attract these 400 so-called visionaries to create, design and get to market a breakthrough product in total secrecy?

Almost laughable...

OTOH, When Mark Twain said, "truth is stranger than fiction," he could have been referring to another home-grown improbability that sprang up form  the potato fields near Boise Idaho - Micron Technology, the company started in the basement of a dentist's office in 1978, grew to become one the world's largest suppliers of computer memory chips thanks to a simple farmer, named err... Simplot..Heb Caen would have loved it ("names that work")...

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 14:56:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA30330;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:50:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 14:50:18 -0800
Message-ID: <3DF66196.DAE8D218 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:50:27 -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: Global Warming
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com> <5.1.0.14.2.20021210154349.03a3c440@pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------7F99401DD2E9120ECF97D022"
Resent-Message-ID: <"bs9Vr2.0.lP7.g-czz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48524
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------7F99401DD2E9120ECF97D022
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Here is a good article giving some of the facts.  These observations simply
can not be brushed aside.  The earth is showing long term warming. The only
issue is how much of this is caused by man.  As Jed notes, it costs us nothing
to error on the side of caution.  The problem now rests on the limited
imagination of mankind, not on the observed facts.

Of course local areas will show variations, sometimes higher than normal and
sometimes lower than normal.  However, ice-melt integrates this trend over a
long time.  Plants located all over the world that move their habitat to
higher elevations also integrate this trend.  These effects are real and need
to be acknowledged.  Rather than fighting the facts, would it not be better to
debate what needs to be done?  Bush may be correct when he asserts that
nothing can be done because the problem is too big.  If this is true, you
people living near the coast had better think of moving.

Ed

By ANDREW BRIDGES, AP Science Writer

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - The northernmost reaches of the Earth are
warming, reducing the sea ice across the Arctic Ocean, melting the
ice sheet in Greenland and spreading shrubs into the Alaskan tundra,
scientists said Saturday.

Taken individually, the changes only suggest the region's climate is
undergoing a warming trend. Together, they provide dramatic evidence
the change is real, a panel of scientists said during at a meeting
of the American Geophysical Union.

"If you look at all the data sets together, they do provide
compelling evidence something is changing over a great area," said
Larry Hinzman, of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

Natural variability may be behind the changes, but human activity
might also be to blame, scientists said.

A new five-year research plan presented this week by scientists and
government officials meeting in Washington, D.C., asserts that
people clearly are agents of environmental change, though it is
still unclear how much human activity contributes.

President Bush (news - web sites) wants industry to voluntarily cut
smokestack and tailpipe emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-
trapping gases that scientists believe are leading to a global rise
in temperatures.

Evidence of the rise can be seen across the Arctic already,
scientists said Saturday.

Greenland is experiencing a warm spell unseen since the 1930s.
Satellite data show the greatest area of melt across its mammoth ice
sheet in 24 years of measurements occurred this year.

Since 1979, the melt area has grown by 16 percent and is affecting
higher and higher elevations.

Across the Arctic Ocean, the floating mantle of ice that covers it
throughout much of the year shrank to record levels this summer,
said Mark Serreze, also of the University of Colorado. In September,
sea ice extent was 4 percent lower that that seen in any previous
September since monitoring began in 1978.

Changes in Arctic atmospheric and marine circulation patterns are
partly responsible, but depletion of the ozone layer due to
pollution may also play a role, Serreze said.

On land, too, scientists note changes that suggest temperatures are
rising. Shrubs are pushing farther northward, growing in areas of
tundra that were void of trees as little as 50 years ago, said F.
Stuart Chapin III of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

"The real question is, is this recent trend unusual, is this recent
trend cause for concern that we are having an effect? The answer
seems to be yes," Serreze said.


_____________________

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Charles Ford wrote:
>
> >Ok folks..
> >
> >It's reality check time.
> >
> >Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
> >The cause   Fact or speculation?
> >
> >The cure   Possible?  or not  ?
> >
> >Have any of you ever taken a class in "Problem solving"?
>
> You should add one thing more to this list of imponderables: The Big
> Picture, a.k.a. a sense of perspective, or the full accounting of the
> advantages and disadvantages of a course of action.
>
> Suppose we go to the trouble of reducing CO2 and 100 years from now we
> learn that we did not need to do so, because global warming wasn't real
> after all. Or it was real but it was not caused by CO2. What, then, have we
> sacrificed? Not much, as it turns out. Most of the steps we take to reduce
> CO2 benefit us in other ways. They reduce pollution, reduce the cost of
> fuel, create jobs, and alleviate human suffering in countless ways. Most of
> these steps would be good policy even if there is no global warming.
>
> There are a few exceptions: for example, sequestering carbon from generator
> plants under the ocean floor would serve no purpose if CO2 not a problem.
> But sequestering would be expensive and problematic, and there are many
> alternatives steps that would actually save money overall, such as building
> wind generators, so I doubt sequestering will  catch on. We could eliminate
> CO2 emissions without it.
>
> We might spend a terrific amount of money on impractical, expensive schemes
> like sequestering, thereby diverting money from more cost-effective schemes
> that would have multiple benefits. That would be a mistake. I hope that we
> rely on free market competition to solve the problem, in which case such
> schemes will go nowhere. The best solutions are a creative combination of
> free-market and regulation, such as the "cap-and-trade" programs.
> Tremendous progress has been made controlling pollution by auctioning off
> the right to pollute under these programs. (Do-gooder type people even buy
> up the rights as birthday presents, to retire them instead of using them.)
>
> Of course, I *really* hope CF comes along and makes the whole question
> moot, but we cannot depend on that happening.
>
> - Jed

--------------7F99401DD2E9120ECF97D022
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------7F99401DD2E9120ECF97D022--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 15:15:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA05264;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:09:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:09:30 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <b7.2b3b1756.2b27cdeb aol.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:08:27 EST
Subject: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
CC: FZNIDARSIC aol.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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"LJ7vA.0.6I1.eGdzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48525
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

any comments.  The exponents will not text in this email.  The subscirpts 
also texted wrong.  The ideas still come through.



THE ELASTIC LIMIT OF SPACE AND THE QUANTUM CONDITION

by Frank Znidarsic
fznidarsic aol.com
http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/index.html

                                                                              
 

ABSTRACT 


Bohr and  Einstein believed that there was a classical explanation for the 
quantum
condition.  Schrodinger, in his famous work, computed the intensity of the 
spectral lines
through the incorporation Bohr's quantum condition.  Rutherford searched for 
answers,
gave up, and began his work with the nucleus. Over one hundred years have 
passed since 
this classical connection was sought.   None of the great scientists has ever 
discovered  a
classical explanation for the quantum condition.  The mystery remains today 
and is
expressed by the duality of particles and waves. This author has discovered a 
classical
link to the quantum condition.  The link is the elastic limit of space.



INTRODUCTION

The spring constant K in a mechanical system is conceptually equivalent to 
the
reciprocal of the capacitance "1/C" in an electrical system.  This 
relationship is exhibited
by equations one and two.


    force = (the spring constant)( displacement)      Equation #1


    voltage = (1/capacitance)(charge)                      Equation #2




The material elastic limit is conceptually equivalent to a minimum or quantum 
of
capacitance.  This author has universally applied the concept of  an elastic 
limit to all
fields.   The phenomena, as applied, is associated with space (not field). 




The elastic limit and the electron's energy of formation 

The relationship between energy E, voltage V, and capacitance C is given by 
equation
three.


    E = (1/2) C Vexp2                                              Equation 
#3


The relationship between capacitance C, charge Q, and voltage V is given by 
equation
four.


    Q = C V                 Equation #4


Substituting equation four into equation three yields equation five.


    E= (1/2) Qexp2/C                                      Equation #5



The energy E is the rest energy of the electron.  The solution of equation 
five gave the
quantum of capacitance Cq.   This quantum expresses the elastic limit of 
space.
                                              
    Cq =  1.56 x 10 exp-25 Farads            Equation #6

The elastic limit of space was derived. This elastic limit is expressed in 
units of
capacitance.  Matter forms when the energy intensity of space exceeds the 
elastic limit of
that space.  An analogy can be made between the matter wavefunction and a 
stuck wave
on a broken spring. 


 The elastic limit and the universe 

Size is a relative measure when it comes to most things.   No general  
principle of
relativity applies to the size of the universe and to the size of elementary 
particles.   The
sizes of  these entities can only be the unique values that they are.    In 
order to estimate
the stiffness of the universe, this analysis considered the universe to be a 
giant spherical
capacitor. The electrical capacitance  Cu of a sphere with a radius  of  13.4 
 billion light
years is given by Equation #7. 1
    
                                                                          
     4 p e0 r   =   1.4   x 10exp 16 Farads              Equation #7          
          

     
 The universe contains an equal number of positive and negative charges.  The 
net
electrical  field produced by these opposing charges is zero.  An isolated 
electrical charge
experiences no force.  The only force experienced by an isolated particle is 
the force of
gravity.  The gravitational force between a proton and an electron is 2.27 x 
10exp 39 times
weaker than the electrical  force between them.  The elastic limit of space 
can be
determined by adjusting the capacitance of a sphere to account for the 
weakness of the
gravitational force. This was done in eight  by dividing the capacitance of a 
sphere as
large as the universe by the gravitational coupling constant. Equation eight 
derived the
quantum of capacitance with this technique.


    Cq  =  Cu   /  [(2p) exp2  2.27 x 10exp 39]            Equation #8

     Cq =  1.5 x 10 exp-25 Farads                          Equation #9

p is 3.14 in this email

The factor of  (2p)exp 2 is empirical.   The gravitational force and the 
geometry of the
universe determine the stiffness of space.  The elastic limit of space ties 
quantum
properties to the size of the universe.



 The elastic limit of space and the nucleus 

The radius of the proton rp is also determined by the elastic limit of space. 
 Electrical
forces tend to expand the proton.  The process continues until the 
compressive elastic
limit of space is reached.  The elastic limit is expressed by the quantum of 
capacitance. 
Equation ten expresses the relationship between the quantum of capacitance 
and the
capacitance of an isolated sphere.

    4p eo r = 1.56 x 10exp-25  Farads                           Equation #10


Solving equation number ten for r yields equation eleven the radius of the 
proton.

    r = 1.4 x 10exp-15  meters             Equation #11

The radius of the proton has been derived from a technique employing the 
elastic limit of
space.


The elastic limit of space and the Compton frequency of the electron

The compressive force exerted by a the electric charge at the elastic limit 
of space is
given in equation twelve.

Force = Qexp2 / ( 8 p eo  r )  =  29 newtons         Equation #12

The 29 newton force limit was applied to the field of the electron.  The 
expansive
displacement of the electron at the elastic limit of space equals the 
diameter ( 2 rh ) of
the hydrogen atom. The elastic constant K of the electron  was determined in 
equation
thirteen.

 29 newtons / (2 r ) =  5.48 x 10exp11 newton/meter       Equation #13


The Compton frequency of the electron was then determined from the elastic 
constant K
and the mass of the electron me.


 (1/2p) (K /me)exp1/2  =  1.24 x 10exp 20 Hertz     Equation #14


The Compton frequency of the electron has been derived from a technique 
employing the
elastic limit of space.
 


The elastic limit of space and the zero point radii of the atoms 


The stiffness of a material is determined by its mass and force constant. The 
velocity of a
wave in a material is in turn determined by the stiffness of that material.  
A maximum of
stiffness determines the ground state velocities of the atoms.  The 
relationship between
frequency and wavelength is expressed by equation  fifteen.


velocity = frequency x wavelength       Equation #15


The electron's frequency is the Compton frequency Fc. The compressive 
displacement
length, for the electric field, at the elastic limit of space, equals the 
diameter of a proton
(2 rp).  An additional  factor of 2 was introduced to account for the 
combined stiffness of
two interacting charges.  The  circumferential velocity of the hydrogen's 
ground state
electron was derived in equations sixteen and seventeen.

velocity = 4p  Fc  r                        Equation #16

velocity  =  2.18 x 10exp6  meters/second               Equation #17    


The velocity of the electron in the ground state orbit of hydrogen has been 
determined. 
The stiffness of multiple charges is additive. The ground state velocities of 
the other
elements are integer multiples of this value.  The velocity of the zero point 
orbits of the 
atoms has been determined with a technique employing the elastic limit of 
space.


The elastic limit of space  and the photo-electric effect 

The analysis considers the energy of the atom to be contained on charged 
capacitive
spheres.   The electrical capacitance of a sphere is given by equation seven.

The capacitance  Cr of a sphere one meter in diameter is given in equation 
number
eighteen. 

Cr = 1.113 x 10exp-10               Equation #18    

This author assumes that the elasticity of  a quantum structure is varies 
inversely with the
isotropic capacitance of entire structure. The elasticity expresses itself 
through the
analytics presented in this paper.  The Compton frequency Fc was shown to be 
the result
of the stiffness of space.   The downshifted Compton frequency of the 
electron  Fd was
determined from the change in the stiffness of space. 

Fd =  2pr Fc [ Cq / Cr]                 Equation #19    

The result is 1.09 megahertz-meter. Expressed in terms of velocity it 
represents 1/2 of the
ground state velocity of the electron in the hydrogen atom. The half unit of 
velocity
indicates that the frequency is representative of a spin one particle.  This 
dimensional
frequency expresses the relationship between the downshifted Compton 
frequency Fd
and the diameter of a Bose condensate.  The application of an external 
stimulation at this
frequency reinforces the condensation.

Equation number seven expressed the capacitance of an isolated sphere. 
Replacing radius
r  with circumference a  yields equation twenty.

 Cs = 4p e0 (a / 2p)                Equation #20    
                                                                              
                     
In order to express velocity in terms of capacitance the first derivative of 
equation twenty
was taken.

d Cs  / dt  = 2 e0 (da / dt)            Equation #21    

The application of an external stimulation at a dimensional frequency of one 
megahertz-
meter reinforces the condensation.  One megahertz-meter  [C/ (2*137)]  was 
substituted
for  velocity (da/dt).  The substitution resulted in equation twenty two.

 e0 c / 137 = 1.93 x 10exp-5 farads/second     Equation #22

Placing the result of equation twenty two (1.93 x 10exp-5 farads/second)  
into the formula
for the energy of a capacitor (equation #5)  yields equation twenty three.  
The result is 
Planck's constant.

(1/2) ( Q2 / 1.93 x 10exp-5 )  = 6.63 x 10exp-34  joule-seconds  Equation #23


Planck's constant is fundamental in describing the quantum nature of the 
universe.  It
restricts the radiative energy levels of the atom.  This author's analysis 
shows that the
flow of energy across quantum systems with differing motion constants is 
aided the
stimulation of the system at its downshifted Compton wavelength.   This 
stimulation
condenses the interacting electronic states of the atom.   This author's 
previous
publications have shown that the motion constants  converge in quantum 
systems that are
stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz-meter.  2,3 The 
convergence of
the motion constants allows energy to be exchanged between the various fields 
and
quantum states to change. 




                                                                   
 CONCLUSION 


The matter wave function propagates at the velocity of light.  The matter 
wave is
contained by  reflections.  The reflections occur when the intensity of the 
matter wave
exceeds the elastic limit of space.  This elastic limit is expressed by a 
quantum of
capacitance.  The elastic limit of space is a geometric property.  Its value 
is determined
by the structure of the universe.

    
 The quantum of capacitance determines the maximum energy, stress, frequency, 
and
stiffness of an energy field.  A maximum of energy determines the electron's 
energy of
formation.     A maximum of stress determines the radius of the proton. A 
maximum in
the elastic constant determines the Compton frequency of the electron.  A 
maximum of
stiffness determines the ground state velocities of  the atoms.  It has been 
shown that the
elastic limit of space determines the zero point properties of stable matter.

 
Many new phenomena are observed as fixed  parameters thaw (become variable) 
at
higher energies.  Conventional science has developed a bias towards looking 
to higher
energies to find interesting phenomena. Little application can be found for 
the discovered
high energy phenomena.  This author has  introduced a new parameter, the 
quantum of
capacitance.  The quantum of capacitance becomes variable at very low 
energies. The
low energy affects are accessible with affordable technologies.  This author 
believes that
the understanding of the affects produced by a changing quantum of 
capacitance will
produce a revolution in technology.
  
 

                                                                              
                             

 NOTES 


1.       Lawrence M. Kruss, Scientific American, December 31, 2002, Pg 36
         "The most recent analysis by our group puts the best-fit age of the 
universe at 13.4  
          billion years."   

2.     Frank Znidarsic,  "The Constants of the Motion", The Journal of New 
Energy Vol. 5 
        No. 2 September 2000


3.     Frank Znidarsic,  "Motion Constants", Transactions of the American 
Nuclear 
        Society,  Vol. 83, November 2000



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 18:52:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA03960;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:51:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 18:51:16 -0800
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Another Vortex
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:53:18 -0600
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <ct9dvugmp593i10do78gdo455qvo2jrljd 4ax.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
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 SAA03914
Resent-Message-ID: <"GTPFv3.0.oz.ZWgzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48526
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All,

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28285-2002Dec8.html  

By taking a cone-shaped cylinder, capping it and making four openings,
Polifka created what he thinks is the perfect environment for a
high-speed vortex. He takes compressed air and shoots it through the
openings, generating a miniature twister.
 <snip>
When Polifka switches on the huge compressor that sits outside the
testing shed, the lights inside dim as the huge motor starts sucking
air into the tank, enough to fill 50 tires a second.
 <snip>
Within seconds, a fine white powder starts dropping from the opening
at the bottom of the huge cone, and Polifka parks a wheelbarrow
underneath to catch the dust. Compressing the air so it can be pumped
into the cone at hundreds of miles per hour takes in excess of 200
kilowatts of electric power and costs about $12 per hour.


-- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 10 20:47:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA09220;
	Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:40:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 20:40:24 -0800
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 17:37:22 +1300
From: RBR <RBR clear.net.nz>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <004d01c2a0cf$00d79cc0$f690a7cb vuw.ac.nz>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4920.2300
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4920.2300
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <20021210050037.70588.qmail web40403.mail.yahoo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"pY0du3.0.zF2.t6izz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48527
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Well what I am about to post might not be a factual presentation of a
program I saw 2-3yrs ago as I cant recall it to well .It was a theory in
regard global warming .There is an observatory in England , the oldest and
still function . They were having a clean out , or what ever and the British
been British record everything and came across records that started from the
time the observatory opened . It opened 200 years ago , They picked up a
pattern in regard sun flares I think they happen every 7 yrs or so .They
found that since these records have been produced there has always been a
slight increase in temp just after these flare ups.Its seems overall
temperatures were cooler back then than to day .
----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Ford" <cjford1 yahoo.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 6:00 PM
Subject: Re: Global Warming


> Ok folks..
>
> It's reality check time.
>
> Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
> The cause   Fact or speculation?
>
> The cure   Possible?  or not  ?
>
> Have any of you ever taken a class in "Problem solving"?
>
> Lets face it the problem is still proving it.  The "Perponderance of
> evidence" is quite lean and much of it has been tampered with.
>
> Have you noticed that descussion only gets fired up durring El nino
> events?  Does anybody remember how HOT it was back in 84...  80...  72...
>     1909???   We only have records of the measurements of surface air
> temperature to work with are these reliable?  did anybody measure solar
> radiation 100 years back?   200 years back?
>
> I gues what I am trying to say (with a question or two) look closely
> first at the evidence   rather then the popular vote.
>
>
>
> =====
> Charles Ford
> KC5-OWZ
> cjford1 yahoo.com
> cjford1 swbell.net
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 01:35:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA18156;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:29:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 01:29:20 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b4aba1ca1b1229b [64.61.199.40]>
In-Reply-To: <f.41b4173.2b267153 aol.com>
References: <f.41b4173.2b267153 aol.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:34:48 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Breakthrough or BS?
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"vd2n4.0.XR4.lLmzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48528
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
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: Breakthrough or BS?</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">In a message
dated 12/9/02 8:08:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, jonesb9 pacbell.net
writes:<br>
<br>
http://www.genesisworldenergy.org/pressroom.htm</font><br>
<font face="Arial" size="-1"></font>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1">Press
Release from yesterday:<br>
<br>
&quot;Scientific Breakthrough Liberates Energy Users from Fossil Fuel
Dependence&quot;<br>
<br>
&quot;Technology breakthrough harnesses energy from the molecular
structure of water&quot;</font><br>
<font face="Arial" size="-1"></font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font face="Arial" size="-1"><br>
<br>
I vote for BS as most likely.&nbsp; If you read the article you may
notice whoever wrote it does not know the difference between power and
energy (kilowatts per day).&nbsp; For someone claiming to have a
free-energy design that is not a good sign.<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span
>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span
>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span
>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span
>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span
>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<span
></span>&nbsp;&nbsp; Ken</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>I called the number on the press release. I got their mouth
piece. I gave them our contact numbers and told them that we are
willing to send a man out to see their machine. We shall see, I'll
keep you people posted. I want to thank the man who posted the press
release.</div>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 02:16:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA28430;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:10:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:10:47 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1cb9acdaad [12.110.74.102]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 02:25:08 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
Cc: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Resent-Message-ID: <"1SDG91.0.6y6.cymzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48529
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:08 PM 12/10/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
[snip]
>The radius of the proton rp is also determined by the elastic limit of space.
> Electrical
>forces tend to expand the proton.  The process continues until the
>compressive elastic
>limit of space is reached.  The elastic limit is expressed by the quantum of
>capacitance.
>Equation ten expresses the relationship between the quantum of capacitance
>and the
>capacitance of an isolated sphere.
>
>    4p eo r = 1.56 x 10exp-25  Farads                           Equation #10
>
>
>Solving equation number ten for r yields equation eleven the radius of the
>proton.
>
>    r = 1.4 x 10exp-15  meters             Equation #11
>
>The radius of the proton has been derived from a technique employing the
>elastic limit of
>space.
[snip]


Mass does not appear to be used in this calculation.  Why does this radius
not also apply to the positron or electron?



[snip]
>
>Fd =  2pr Fc [ Cq / Cr]                 Equation #19
>
>The result is 1.09 megahertz-meter. Expressed in terms of velocity it
>represents 1/2 of the
>ground state velocity of the electron in the hydrogen atom. The half unit of
>velocity
>indicates that the frequency is representative of a spin one particle.  This
>dimensional
>frequency expresses the relationship between the downshifted Compton
>frequency Fd
>and the diameter of a Bose condensate.  The application of an external
>stimulation at this
>frequency reinforces the condensation.
[snip]


On a more subjective note, if there is anything to your theory, then it
appears use of the above terminology may be a disservice to it.  It sounds
like double talk.  A megahertz-meter is clearly a unit of speed.  You later
say "stimulation at this frequency" when there is no such frequency clearly
defined.  What, formally speaking is "this frequency" in this context.

For me your article jumps from concept to concept without clarity.  I feel
like you don't go into the why's and wherefore's enough to educate your
reader or sufficiently to justify your use of or even fully define your new
terminology.  This gives the reader an uneasy feeling.  There really is no
substitute for simplicity and clarity when communicating new ideas.

I realize you are not selling anything here and from long term association
that your motives are based principly on the desire to achieve good.  You
are not a snake oil salesman type like some that might better not be
mentioned.  However, obscuration and overcomplication, the "cloak of
complexity", is the stock and trade of the con man.  If a theory lacks
clarity then it gives one an uneasy feeling.  Articles reporting
experimental results and using existing theory can of course be very terse.
However, a new fundamental and broad reaching theory has to be held up to
a different standard of clarity in my opinion.  Any lack of clarity can be
the source of the uneasy feeling to which I refer.  Improper use of
physical units is probably right at the top of the list as a warning flag.
Referring to a megahertz-meter as a frequency has at least the appearance
of such a misuse.  Unfortunately, you may well need a book and not an
article to achieve complete clarity over the broad range of concepts
discussed, so I am not sure my comments will be helpful in regard to your
article.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 05:36:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA18447;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:35:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 05:35:57 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DF73ED6.609696DD verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:34:14 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
CC: Scott Little <little eden.com>
Subject: Are improved neutrino detection methods subject to clasification?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"SJRSA3.0.7W4.zypzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48531
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hello,

This would be a good hypothetical example I think, that science can not be free is in existence of the military.

Improved neutrino detraction makes nuclear weapons and submarines visible. One can immediately locate all
neutrino sources around the world. This would be unacceptable within an national defense system.

military authorities need be schizophrenic on every new scientific development and not allow them be available unless they dont have impact on national defense system.

This strategy on science would be more effective if development of physics science would be totally controlled. Only researches are proved historically having no yield would be allowed, but any "unproved" researches should be definitively avoided for the sake of keeping nuclear submarines invisible.

But dont be so pessimistic. May military is in the search of quieter new energy sources. May the "Edison Device" would be a solution for submarine powering, specially, there would be no water suply shortage. :)

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 06:08:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA00703;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:01:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:01:33 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DF74541.791C82B0 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:01:37 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Are improved neutrino detection... - correction
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"a2ywY.0.oA.zKqzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48532
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Please read first sentence as:

This would be a good hypothetical example I think, that the science can not be free in the presence of military.

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 06:37:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA12828;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:35:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:35:23 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:35:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021210154349.03a3c440 pop.mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0212110622320.3965-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"OOay61.0.M83.hqqzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48533
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Jed Rothwell wrote:

> Suppose we go to the trouble of reducing CO2 and 100 years from now we
> learn that we did not need to do so, because global warming wasn't real
> after all. Or it was real but it was not caused by CO2. What, then, have we
> sacrificed? Not much, as it turns out. Most of the steps we take to reduce
> CO2 benefit us in other ways. They reduce pollution, reduce the cost of
> fuel, create jobs, and alleviate human suffering in countless ways. Most of
> these steps would be good policy even if there is no global warming.


 Global warming is caused by variations in solar output, not due to CO2.
We know this because CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas compared to water
vapor. There is an argument that CO2 leverages water vapor, by calling
great increases in water vapor for small CO2 changes. Past data refutes
this, as the level of CO2 has been constantly increasing, and temperatures
in the 60's were decreasing. In order to support their theory, the pro-CO2
as first cause argument simply ignores this data.

 I do not think globally, but I do believe that the United States plays a
positive role in the world. It is wrong to damage the economy of the US
for no good reason.

[snip]

> We might spend a terrific amount of money on impractical, expensive schemes
> like sequestering, thereby diverting money from more cost-effective schemes
> that would have multiple benefits. That would be a mistake. I hope that we
> rely on free market competition to solve the problem, in which case such
> schemes will go nowhere. The best solutions are a creative combination of
> free-market and regulation, such as the "cap-and-trade" programs.
> Tremendous progress has been made controlling pollution by auctioning off
> the right to pollute under these programs. (Do-gooder type people even buy
> up the rights as birthday presents, to retire them instead of using them.)

If carbon dioxide worries people so much, perhaps I'll genetically
engineer a single celled algae that soaks up CO2 at a vast rate, using
solar to lock away the carbon in algae. Of course, if this algae was
to be effective, it would have to be put in a large area. The ecological
impact would be horrific.

> Of course, I *really* hope CF comes along and makes the whole question
> moot, but we cannot depend on that happening.

CF technology will never see the light of day.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 06:46:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA14304;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:39:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:39:00 -0800
X-Authentication-Warning: eskimo.com: lajoie owned process doing -bs
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:38:58 -0800 (PST)
From: Stephen Lajoie <lajoie eskimo.com>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <3DF66196.DAE8D218 ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSU.4.44.0212110636070.3965-100000 eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"s1e2g1.0.8V3.4uqzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48534
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, Edmund Storms wrote:

> Here is a good article giving some of the facts.  These observations simply
> can not be brushed aside.  The earth is showing long term warming. The only
> issue is how much of this is caused by man.  As Jed notes, it costs us nothing
> to error on the side of caution.  The problem now rests on the limited
> imagination of mankind, not on the observed facts.
>
> Of course local areas will show variations, sometimes higher than normal and
> sometimes lower than normal.  However, ice-melt integrates this trend over a
> long time.  Plants located all over the world that move their habitat to
> higher elevations also integrate this trend.  These effects are real and need
> to be acknowledged.  Rather than fighting the facts, would it not be better to
> debate what needs to be done?  Bush may be correct when he asserts that
> nothing can be done because the problem is too big.  If this is true, you
> people living near the coast had better think of moving.

Receeding glaciers only tells us that the snow accumulation and melting
equilibrium has been disturbed. It is a poor indicator of global warming,
as this could be the result of lowered precipitation, which has a number
of causes in local areas.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 06:58:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA20785;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:54:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 06:54:41 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 14:54:32 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211094952.02ccec78 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:54:24 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Message from Takahashi about Arata
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"olcS81.0.f45.m6rzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48535
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Dear JCF members:

On December 6th 2002, Prof. Emeritus Yoshiaki Arata and Prof. Emeritus 
Hiroshi Fujita of Osaka University had a press conference to announce the 
success of new kind of "cold" nuclear fusion. Next morning, Mainichi and 
Yomiuri Shinbuns( Newspapers) wrote short articles (but treated as big 
news) about Arata's new results on December 7th 2002 morning issues. 
Arata-Fujita group used about 5 nm diameter nano-particles of Pd and said 
to attain D/Pd ratio about 3.0 for gross deuterium absorption in D2 gas 
phase. This is surprisingly high gross value of D/Pd ratio ever attained. 
They explained that 5nm small crystal size can contain many deuterons in 
O-sites and T-sites because about 10 % expansion of Pd-Pd lattice distance 
is easily made up for small crystal (lattice-extension on surface is 
easier). Then they applied either ultrasonic wave (D2O liquid phase)(see 
Reference-1) or laser beam (D2 gas phase: this experiment is in progress) 
to Pd nano-particles powder and found large amount of He-4 generation 
(100,000 times level over He-4 level in air) with significant excess heat. 
They made a special lecture on December 9th 2002 at the Fall Meeting of 
High Temperature Society of Japan, held at Osaka University. Especially, in 
the case of laser beam irradiation, they found great amount of He-4 
generation by only about 100 seconds irradiation time. No neutron emissions 
were seen.

Takahashi listened the lecture and got an impression that these He-4 
results should be very clear evidence of "coherent nuclear fusion of
deuteron-cluster in condensed matter".

Replication experiments by other groups should be encouraged.

To explain mechanism, Arata referred Schwinger's conjecture that D + D to 
He-4 + lattice energy(23.8MeV) by the QED energy transfer from nuclear 
excited state (He-4*: 23.8MeV) to lattice phonons. But Takahashi disagrees 
with their view and thinks that their experimental results showed very 
clearly the mechanism quite different:

They used 5nm diam. Pd nano-crystals which contained about 8,000 Pd-atoms 
per a nano-Pd-particle. If 23.8MeV nuclear excited energy of He-4* were 
transferred to share in lattice phonons of a nano-particle, each Pd-atom in 
a nano-particle of Pd should have had about 3 keV phonon (lattice 
vibration) energy, which was 100 times greater than Pd-atom-displacement 
energy (20-40 eV) from lattice. There are of course no such high energy 
phonons in lattice vibrations. Over the displacement energy, all lattice 
atoms are evaporated and solid state-physics does not make sense there. To 
receive 23.8MeV energy by lattice phonons of coherent domain, we need more 
than one-million (1000,000) lattice atoms which make crystal size greater 
than 30 nm in diameter (or 25x25x25 nm cubic). This means that the presumed 
QED energy transfer from nuclear to lattice was impossible in the condition 
of Arata-Fujita's experiment. Takahashi thinks that Arata-Fujita's new 
results cleary denied the D + D to He-4 + lattice energy model as the 
coherent mechanism of He-4 generation.

Instead, the model mechanism of coherent multi-body deuteron-fusion 
microscopically in lattice focal points can be still alive as a candidate 
of He-4 generation mechanism typically as 4D (D+D+D+D) to He-4 + He-4 + 
47.6 MeV; two alpha-particles with each kinetic energy 23.8MeV emit into 
180 deg opposite directions in each other (therefore satisfies exactly the 
momentum conservation of nuclear reaction) and slow down in condensed 
matter by ionization and knock-on collision process to deposit energy to 
lattice phonons within the slowing-down ranges (in the order of 10-100 
microns depending on Pd density in nano-crystal powders and or bulk 
Pd-metal) with possible emission of soft X-rays by bremsstrahlung of convey 
electrons. Drastic screening effect for d-d pairs in transient Bose 
condensation of deuteron-cluster(3-8 Ds) with transient electronic 
quasi-particles was theorized by JCF4-21 paper (Reference-2) by Takahashi 
and inversion of reaction rates from two-body D+D dominance to multi-body 
(3D, 4D and 8D were concluded to occur selectively as resonances in strong 
pion-exchnage interaction) fusion dominance was numerically estimated.

I hope Arata-Fujita's new results of He-4 and heat will be replicated in 
many other laboratories, and hope also physics model(s) of 
fusion-in-condensed-matter being fixed up by your efforts.

With kind regards.

Reference 1): Y. Arata, H. Fujita, Y. Zhang: Intense deuterium nuclear 
fusion of pycnodeuterium-lumps coagulated locally within highly deuterated 
atom clusters, Proceedings of the Japan Academy, Vol.78, Ser.B, No.7 (2002)

Reference 2): A. Takahashi: Drastic enhancement of deuteron-cluster fusion 
by transient electronic quasi-particle screening, Proc. JCF4, The 4th 
Meeting of Japan CF-Research Society, paper JCF4-21, Morioka Japan, October 
2002 (in press)

News written by

Akito Takahashi
Professor
Department of Nuclear Engineering,
Graduate School of Engineering,
Osaka University
Yamadaoka 2-1, Suita, Osaka, 565-0871 Japan
Fax: 81-6-6879-7889
Tel: 81-6-6879-7890

Email: akito nucl.eng.osaka-u.ac.jp


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 07:54:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA13362;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:52:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:52:05 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <e.29b2ce00.2b28b8cf aol.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:50:39 EST
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: hheffner mtaonline.net
CC: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_e.29b2ce00.2b28b8cf_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"bKbAn2.0.iG3.byrzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48536
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_e.29b2ce00.2b28b8cf_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/11/02 5:11:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


> .  Unfortunately, you may well need a book and not an
> article to achieve complete clarity over the broad range of concepts
> discussed, so I am not sure my comments will be helpful in regard to your
> article.
> 
> 
> This is true.  I only want to present the ideas in the paper.  Each idea 
can in itself can be expanded.  I expect that the paper will be rejected or 
chopped up to the point where it is usless.  I then may have it published in 
a very low circultaton journal.

Ideas overlooked inclued

50 nm x thermal frequency = one megahertz meter

potlekonv spinning disk experiement

1/3 meter disk x 3 megahertz stimulation = one megahertz meter

The stiffness can effect the ground state orbit.  Hydrions may be possible in 
a vibrationally stimulated Bose condensate.

The extension of the ideas to the neutron and quarks.



Yes I need a book.  For now I only trying to get a start.

--part1_e.29b2ce00.2b28b8cf_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/11/02 5:11:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">.&nbsp; Unfortunately, you may well need a book and not an<BR>
article to achieve complete clarity over the broad range of concepts<BR>
discussed, so I am not sure my comments will be helpful in regard to your<BR>
article.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE>This is true.&nbsp; I only want to present the ideas in the paper.&nbsp; Each idea can in itself can be expanded.&nbsp; I expect that the paper will be rejected or chopped up to the point where it is usless.&nbsp; I then may have it published in a very low circultaton journal.<BR>
<BR>
Ideas overlooked inclued<BR>
<BR>
50 nm x thermal frequency = one megahertz meter<BR>
<BR>
potlekonv spinning disk experiement<BR>
<BR>
1/3 meter disk x 3 megahertz stimulation = one megahertz meter<BR>
<BR>
The stiffness can effect the ground state orbit.&nbsp; Hydrions may be possible in a vibrationally stimulated Bose condensate.<BR>
<BR>
The extension of the ideas to the neutron and quarks.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Yes I need a book.&nbsp; For now I only trying to get a start.</FONT></HTML>

--part1_e.29b2ce00.2b28b8cf_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 07:55:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14150;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:53:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 07:53:21 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <104.21b4b3f8.2b28b92f aol.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:52:15 EST
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_104.21b4b3f8.2b28b92f_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"W9S003.0.sS3.mzrzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48537
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_104.21b4b3f8.2b28b92f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/11/02 5:17:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


> Mass does not appear to be used in this calculation.  Why does this radius
> not also apply to the positron or electron?
> 
> 
It a different field leptonic vers hadronicf.  The expression of the elastic 
limit comes out differently.

Frank

--part1_104.21b4b3f8.2b28b92f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/11/02 5:17:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Mass does not appear to be used in this calculation.&nbsp; Why does this radius<BR>
not also apply to the positron or electron?<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
It a different field leptonic vers hadronicf.&nbsp; The expression of the elastic limit comes out differently.<BR>
<BR>
Frank<BR>
</FONT></HTML>
--part1_104.21b4b3f8.2b28b92f_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 09:01:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14412;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:59:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:59:25 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1d2010e925 [12.110.74.102]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:13:41 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"wxPrW1.0.DW3.bxszz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48539
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:01 AM 12/11/2, Taylor J. Smith wrote:

>"I took sets of existing, independent data and made new
>comparisons and calculations," says Sharma. Then he went a
>step further to make a connection with the history of ice
>ages by looking at oxygen isotopes in the oceans, which
>reveal the history of how much ice was at the poles and are
>therefore a measure of average global surface temperature.
>
>"I compared the estimated past variations in the solar
>activity with those of the oxygen isotopes in the
>ocean. Although there is a strong relationship between
>solar activity and oxygen isotopic variations, it is too
>early to say exactly what is the mechanism though which
>the sun is influencing the terrestrial climate."


Unless there is an unprecedented increase in solar activity in the last 100
years then this very long term study is not relevant to the previously
discussed changes in glaciers or wildlife patterns.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 09:01:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14359;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:59:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 08:59:17 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba1d1b8cd98a [12.110.74.102]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:13:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
Resent-Message-ID: <"EK98g1.0.5W3.axszz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48538
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 10:52 AM 12/11/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 12/11/02 5:17:01 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>hheffner mtaonline.net writes:
>
>
>> Mass does not appear to be used in this calculation.  Why does this radius
>> not also apply to the positron or electron?
>>
>>
>It a different field leptonic vers hadronicf.  The expression of the elastic
>limit comes out differently.


Specifically how and why?  Can you demonstrate that the difference in
criteria is not arbitrary, i.e. just to make it "come out right"?

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 10:02:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA12088;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:55:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:55:33 -0800
Message-ID: <20021211175457.13052.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 09:54:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <3DF66196.DAE8D218 ix.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"xsXXg2.0.oy2.Kmtzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48540
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

There are some truths that cannot be ignored.

1)  Global temperature is rising.  (cause unknown)
2)  Rate of change is less then 1 degree C per 100 years
3)  People panic about the climate every time weather activity peaks.
4)  Most production of energy produces CO2 (since the invention of fire)
5)  Production and use of energy all introduces heat into the system.

Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.  e.g 
Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If you
total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria you
will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.

Consumption of energy is the real problem.  You can point the finger at
industry but the fact is that we buy things giving them an incentive to
do what they do.  I also notice a problem deeply nested in what things we
buy.  e.g. SUVs, Incandescent bulbs, Packaged foods, CRT based monitors
and over powered computers.    All waste energy.  

Plants use solar energy to process CO2 back into O2 with the side benefit
of making fuel (food)  The use of energy all results in more heat.  We
use in excess.  In most cases 10 to 50 times the energy is used then what
is necessary to do the job.  This is especially shameful when "the job"
is "Entertainment".   

How about this solution.  

Teach society to live within there means. Teach them to be good stewards
of there resources.  Lets face it the real problem is not global warming
but rather global greed and decadence. 
  



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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 10:14:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18349;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:07:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:07:18 -0800
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1d24d73427 [12.21.208.179]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:21:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
Resent-Message-ID: <"ULOO63.0.YU4.Mxtzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48542
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frank, If you spend less time discussing well known formulas then maybe you
can provide more detail on the how and why of what's new, along with
justification.  For example:


At 6:08 PM 12/10/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:

>    E= (1/2) Qexp2/C                                      Equation #5
>
>
>
>The energy E is the rest energy of the electron.  The solution of equation
>five gave the
>quantum of capacitance Cq.   This quantum expresses the elastic limit of
>space.
>
>    Cq =  1.56 x 10 exp-25 Farads            Equation #6


I get 1.576911060 x 10 exp-25 Farads.

>
>The elastic limit of space was derived. This elastic limit is expressed in
>units of
>capacitance.  Matter forms when the energy intensity of space exceeds the
>elastic limit of
>that space.  An analogy can be made between the matter wavefunction and a
>stuck wave
>on a broken spring.


Much article space was devoted to deriving the well known formula #5, which
can simply be stated as a given, yet there is nothing sufficiently and
explicitly provided justifying the substitutions into #5 to give the
conclusion #6.  For example, why can you not put the rest energy of the
proton in for E?  Why not the rest energy of the deuteron for E?  Why does
the electron establish this limit, or any limit, if such exists?  For
example, it would seem that interactions of GeV electrons with hadrons
would exceed any such elastic limit, yet the collisions are elastic and in
many cases not mass producing.   Also, the derivations you give should use
the best available precision, and discrepancies between derived results and
known values, if any, should be explained.

Of further interest is that

   C = q/V = (e_0 A)/d = e_0 x

   x = C/e_0

and substituting Cq above into this for C gives x = 1.770564497x10^-14 m.
A radius for the electron?  If there is an elastic limit to space, then
elastic collision by charges separated by a lessor distance should not be
possible?

It is also of interest that, by definition:

   mu_0 = 4 Pi x10^-7 N A^-2   (exact)

and

   e_0 = 1/(mu_0 c^2)          (exact)

so the accuracy with which we know m_e, q, and c determines the accuracy
with which we know x.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 10:14:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA17949;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:06:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:06:29 -0800
Message-ID: <20021211180518.39341.qmail web40402.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Another Vortex
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <ct9dvugmp593i10do78gdo455qvo2jrljd 4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"CkpTF1.0.NO4.awtzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48541
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net> wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28285-2002Dec8.html  
> 
> By taking a cone-shaped cylinder, capping it and making four openings,
> Polifka created what he thinks is the perfect environment for a
> high-speed vortex. He takes compressed air and shoots it through the
> openings, generating a miniature twister.

Ranque Hilsch Vortex Tube ??

>  <snip>
> When Polifka switches on the huge compressor that sits outside the
> testing shed, the lights inside dim as the huge motor starts sucking
> air into the tank, enough to fill 50 tires a second.
>  <snip>

They do require a great deal of flow

> Within seconds, a fine white powder starts dropping from the opening
> at the bottom of the huge cone, and Polifka parks a wheelbarrow
> underneath to catch the dust. Compressing the air so it can be pumped
> into the cone at hundreds of miles per hour takes in excess of 200
> kilowatts of electric power and costs about $12 per hour.

This would be ice?

What is he trying to do?



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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 10:46:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA31848;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:39:10 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:39:10 -0800
Message-ID: <3DF77839.2947733 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:41:14 -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: Global Warming
References: <20021211175457.13052.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
 boundary="------------BE2984CB9761D0C057E89F92"
Resent-Message-ID: <"gdFkW2.0.Xn7.DPuzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48543
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------BE2984CB9761D0C057E89F92
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



Charles Ford wrote:

> There are some truths that cannot be ignored.
>
> 1)  Global temperature is rising.  (cause unknown)
> 2)  Rate of change is less then 1 degree C per 100 years
> 3)  People panic about the climate every time weather activity peaks.
> 4)  Most production of energy produces CO2 (since the invention of fire)
> 5)  Production and use of energy all introduces heat into the system.
>
> Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.  e.g
> Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If you
> total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria you
> will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.
>
> Consumption of energy is the real problem.  You can point the finger at
> industry but the fact is that we buy things giving them an incentive to
> do what they do.  I also notice a problem deeply nested in what things we
> buy.  e.g. SUVs, Incandescent bulbs, Packaged foods, CRT based monitors
> and over powered computers.    All waste energy.
>
> Plants use solar energy to process CO2 back into O2 with the side benefit
> of making fuel (food)  The use of energy all results in more heat.  We
> use in excess.  In most cases 10 to 50 times the energy is used then what
> is necessary to do the job.  This is especially shameful when "the job"
> is "Entertainment".
>
> How about this solution.
>
> Teach society to live within there means. Teach them to be good stewards
> of there resources.  Lets face it the real problem is not global warming
> but rather global greed and decadence.

And how would you propose to make this necessary change?  People do not
change because it is rational or because of general benefit.  Teaching has
very little effect on world behavior. People change because they are are
afraid or because their selfish interest is satisfied by a different course
of action.  The consequence of global warming provides that fear and
eventually a shift in selfish interest.  If you expect any change, you have
to provide a reason for change. This applies to individuals as well as
society.  How many times have you changed your behavior Charles because
someone "taught" you a different way?

Ed



>
>
>
> =====
> Charles Ford
> KC5-OWZ
> cjford1 yahoo.com
> cjford1 swbell.net
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com

--------------BE2984CB9761D0C057E89F92
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;
 name="storms2.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for Edmund Storms
Content-Disposition: attachment;
 filename="storms2.vcf"

begin:vcard 
n:; 
tel;work:505 988 3673
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
org:Energy K. System
adr:;;2140 Paseo Ponderosa;Santa Fe;NM;87501;http://home.netcom.com/~storms2/index.html
version:2.1
email;internet:storms2 ix.netcom.com
x-mozilla-cpt:;1
fn:Edmund Storms
end:vcard

--------------BE2984CB9761D0C057E89F92--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 10:53:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA02691;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:46:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:46:44 -0800
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Another Vortex
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:48:49 -0600
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <122fvu8tcg0mth4d4fjdfqbnu8gkc192nt 4ax.com>
References: <ct9dvugmp593i10do78gdo455qvo2jrljd 4ax.com> <20021211180518.39341.qmail@web40402.mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <20021211180518.39341.qmail web40402.mail.yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
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 KAA02614
Resent-Message-ID: <"5ch342.0.qf.KWuzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48544
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Wed, 11 Dec 2002 10:05:18 -0800 (PST), Charles Ford
<cjford1 yahoo.com> wrote:

>--- Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net> wrote:
>> 
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28285-2002Dec8.html  

>> Within seconds, a fine white powder starts dropping from the opening
>> at the bottom of the huge cone, and Polifka parks a wheelbarrow
>> underneath to catch the dust. Compressing the air so it can be pumped
>> into the cone at hundreds of miles per hour takes in excess of 200
>> kilowatts of electric power and costs about $12 per hour.
>
>This would be ice?
>
>What is he trying to do?

Make a super grinder/dryer.

-- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 11:17:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA14456;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:14:34 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:14:34 -0800
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:15:26 -0500 (EST)
From: John Schnurer <herman antioch-college.edu>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
cc: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Subject: Quantum condition ...what does the term mean?
In-Reply-To: <b7.2b3b1756.2b27cdeb aol.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1021211141432.18853A-100000 college.antioch-college.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Resent-Message-ID: <"6xBE-1.0.oX3.Pwuzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48546
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


	Dear FZ,

	What does "quantum condition" mean?

					JH


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 11:20:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA15576;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:18:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:18:08 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 19:18:01 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211141504.02cc6cf0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:16:26 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Meant "plant biomass"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"SO2603.0.Gp3.lzuzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48547
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

"The accumulated plants, crops and forest, together are referred to as 
biomass."

I meant "plant biomass." Overall biomass includes animals.


Also, I wrote:

"But far more energy was used in the last century than in all of previous 
human history."

I mean all previous centuries of human history *combined*.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 11:21:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA13909;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:13:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:13:06 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 19:13:00 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211131324.00b13490 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:12:58 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <20021211175457.13052.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <3DF66196.DAE8D218 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"F7evR1.0.5P3.2vuzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48545
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Charles Ford wrote:

>2)  Rate of change is less then 1 degree C per 100 years

Most sources say it more dramatic than that. For the past 25 years it has 
been rising at a rate of ~2 deg C per century.


>3)  People panic about the climate every time weather activity peaks.

Perhaps they should.


>4)  Most production of energy produces CO2 (since the invention of fire)

But far more energy was used in the last century than in all of previous 
human history.


>5)  Production and use of energy all introduces heat into the system.

I do not think that makes any difference. Heat from machinery (or sunlight) 
radiates away from the earth a half-hour after sunset.


>Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.

Whipping!


>e.g  Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If you 
>total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria you 
>will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.

That is incorrect. In a balanced global ecosystem, all CO2 output by 
animals and forest fires is converted back into free O2 by plants. If this 
does not happen, eventually the animals will be asphyxiated, or the plants 
will stop growing, so the global ecosystem always does come into balance. 
The accumulated plants, crops and forest, together are referred to as 
biomass. Biomass can be measured in megatons of material (mainly carbon). 
In the context of energy, biomass is usually measured in the solar energy 
it absorbs, which equals the potential energy it releases when it is 
burned, metabolized, or it rots. Most of the textbooks I have measure it in 
terms of energy. Anyway, what I am getting around to saying is that in the 
U.S., the total biomass of all plants "fix[es] about 13.5 x 10E15 kcal of 
solar energy per year," whereas "current annual fossil energy consumption 
is about 20 x 10E15." In other words, "Americans burn 40 percent more 
fossil energy than the total solar energy captured by all plant biomass in 
the United States." (Pimentel & Pimentel, p. 20)

The other textbooks agree with that.

The U.S. produces 24% of all man-made CO2 emissions, and unlike other 
advanced nations and China, its emissions are rising rapidly. In other 
continents the ratio of man-made energy to the energy in biomass (and 
animals) is smaller, but in all cases man-made energy and CO2 emissions are 
a very significant fraction of the total. All in all, the additional CO2 
represents an unprecedented change to the chemistry of the earth's 
environment, much larger than the other change induced by people, such as 
the widened Sahara and Gobi deserts, and the desert of asphalt in the U.S. 
(which is roughly the size of Maryland, I believe). Frankly, if such a 
gigantic change did not have an effect on nature, I would be amazed. In 
general, human-induced changes in ecosystems are harmful. That is to say, 
they usually cause extinctions, reduce biodiversity, reduce the amount of 
available food, increase disease, and so on. The exceptions to this rule 
are so rare they stand out in contrast. For example, when ships sink near 
land, they often host large numbers of fish and other marine life a few 
years later.

Fossil fuel advocates sometimes point to the actual amounts of carbon in 
the atmosphere. Fossil fuel adds 6 ppm of carbon to the atmosphere per 
year. The atmosphere is 320 ppm naturally. Six does not sound like much, 
but ecosystems can be destroyed by parts-per-million changes, just as a 
person can be sickened or killed by prolonged ppm level exposure to some 
toxic elements and chemicals. CO2 is benign, but so is salt for that 
matter. Salt is essential to life, as everyone knows. Yet if you routinely 
ingest a little too much salt your diet, every day for years, you will 
probably die young from high blood pressure and stroke. If you pour a 
little salt into your cropland every time you irrigate, as many farmers in 
the west end up doing, in a generation you will destroy the land.


>How about this solution.
>
>Teach society to live within there means. Teach them to be good stewards 
>of there resources.  Lets face it the real problem is not global warming 
>but rather global greed and decadence.

That solution requires people to change their nature significantly, and 
undergo major social reforms. People do change from time to time, as 
technology or circumstances warrant. (Human nature is extremely flexible, 
and can be expressed many different ways.) In the U.S. they gave up 
slavery, and later they ended most child labor. In Japan they abandoned 
militarism, forswore war, and embraced democracy. But it is often difficult 
to bring about such reforms. It often requires war, a Great Depression or 
some other traumatic event. I think it would be easier to implement cold 
fusion, if we can just make it work reliably. That will solve the problem 
without forcing anyone to change his lifestyle or give up his SUV. On the 
contrary, a few centuries from now, people might routinely commute daily 
from Europe to America in private aircraft, or commute from earth to the 
moon. They might use a thousand times more energy without hurting the 
ecology. The only concern would be waste heat.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 11:31:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18070;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:24:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 11:24:56 -0800
Message-ID: <005001c2a14a$e2b24160$2823010a arghou.argcorp.argworldwide.com>
From: "Craig" <cchaynie ix.netcom.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <20021211175457.13052.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 19:24:11 -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 5.50.4807.1700
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
Resent-Message-ID: <"g3Ys_1.0.AQ4.74vzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48548
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

> Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.  e.g
> Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If you
> total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria you
> will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.

For the Global Warming argument, it's not the CO2 in plants and animals that
are the problem, but rather the large amounts of carbon being dug-up after
being locked-out of the enviroment for hundreds of millions of years. When
this carbon enters the environment, new CO2 is produced, increasing the
total amount in the atmosphere. The CO2 from plants and animals is simply
recycled.

Incidentally, this highlights the real problem, which isn't specifically the
burning of fossil fuels, but rather the removal of carbon from the ground.
To stop Global Warming, (if it is indeed occurring), you need to stop the
drilling.

Sincerely,

Craig Haynie (Houston)



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 12:14:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA08351;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 12:11:07 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 20:10:50 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211151047.00b13490 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 15:10:50 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"aoNp01.0.M22.Rlvzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48549
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Craig wrote:

>For the Global Warming argument, it's not the CO2 in plants and animals 
>that are the problem, but rather the large amounts of carbon being dug-up 
>after being locked-out of the enviroment for hundreds of millions of years.

Right. Some of the proposed solutions to global warming call for putting 
the carbon back underground. That is called "sequestering," as I mentioned 
yesterday. The schemes I have read about seen much too expensive, and they 
would require a great deal of energy. Also, they would sequester and remove 
oxygen too, that was free O2 before the fuel was burned, so the balance 
would not be fully restored.

Plant biomass, particularly trees, does sequester a tiny amount of carbon 
every year. Most fallen trees rot or burn and release the carbon, but some 
pile up and form peat, which will eventually become coal. We might imitate 
nature and sequester carbon by burying organic garbage and old newspapers 
in extremely deep, anaerobic landfills, in places like abandoned coal 
mines. This would be incredibly expensive, and somehow it seems like a 
stupid thing to do. There has to be a better way!


>To stop Global Warming, (if it is indeed occurring), you need to stop the 
>drilling.

And coal mining. The drilling will stop soon enough, as the world runs out 
of oil. In the U.S. production has fallen by half since 1970, no new oil 
has been discovered in the U.S. since 1972, and none ever will be. The 
increase in world has leveled out, and world production is probably peaking 
just about now, or in the next few years. See K. S. Deffeyes, "Hubbert's 
Peak." If global warming is real, in the long term, coal is the bigger 
threat. Fortunately, coal is also easier to replace with wind power and 
other alternatives.

Perhaps, if cold fusion succeeds, in the year 2150 there will be massive 
chemical plants in Saudi Arabia -- reverse oil refineries, working to 
reverse global warming. They will convert millions of tons of atmospheric 
CO2 and ocean water into free O2 and liquid hydrocarbons, which will be 
pumped deep under the desert sand. That will give the destitute Saudi 
people a few jobs. To bring the atmosphere back into balance, these plants 
will have to expend more energy than we have derived from all the oil ever 
burned. Such a massive project could never be accomplished with wind or 
solar power, or even fission. It would require CF.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 13:26:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06032;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:19:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:19:20 -0800
Message-ID: <20021211211834.59352.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:18:34 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211131324.00b13490 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"azK-h.0.5U1.Nlwzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48550
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com> wrote:
> Charles Ford wrote:
> 
> >2)  Rate of change is less then 1 degree C per 100 years
> 
> Most sources say it more dramatic than that. For the past 25 years it
> has 
> been rising at a rate of ~2 deg C per century.

Likely you are more in touch with the figures.
 
> >3)  People panic about the climate every time weather activity peaks.
> 
> Perhaps they should.

NOT!   The weather peaks and valies in cycles anywhere form  a couple
years to a couple hundred years. bsed on historical accounts of freeze
and snowfall at various locations we know that our last El nino event
(bringer of much climate panic) was relitavely mild when looked at over
the last 200 years. 
 
> >4)  Most production of energy produces CO2 (since the invention of
> fire)
> 
> But far more energy was used in the last century than in all of
> previous 
> human history.

Yes  there is far more technology and far many more people
 
> >5)  Production and use of energy all introduces heat into the system.

> I do not think that makes any difference. Heat from machinery (or
> sunlight) 
> radiates away from the earth a half-hour after sunset.

Sunlight.  1000W/m^2 takes most of the day to reach a peak temperature
and darkness brings a 'peak' low temperature about 30min AFTER sunrise. 
The system maintains a balance this way.  When you introduce energy into
the system the temperature will climb.  High temp usually about 16:00hr
and lwo temp usually about 7:00hr means we spend only 9 hr heating up and
15 cooling off.

Effective cooling time is criticle.  more energy can be radiated into the
sky form dark surfaces (like trees) then light ones (like concreete).  A
clear nit sky is paramont.  CO2 is nothing compared to the other
stupidities that we all do every day.  be aware that a gass that blocks
long wave IR (CO2)
Blocks it durring the heating phase as well as the cooling.  Duodural
heating is a result of natural effects. CO2 nether helps nor hinders.

> >Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.
> 
> Whipping!

Yes that word...   Thats write..  ;-)

> >e.g  Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If
> you 
> >total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria you
> 
> >will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.
> 
> That is incorrect. In a balanced global ecosystem, all CO2 output by 
> animals and forest fires is converted back into free O2 by plants. If
> this 
> does not happen, eventually the animals will be asphyxiated, or the
> plants 
> will stop growing, so the global ecosystem always does come into
> balance. 
> The accumulated plants, crops and forest, together are referred to as 
> biomass. Biomass can be measured in megatons of material (mainly
> carbon). 
> In the context of energy, biomass is usually measured in the solar
> energy 
> it absorbs, which equals the potential energy it releases when it is 
> burned, metabolized, or it rots. Most of the textbooks I have measure
> it in 
> terms of energy. Anyway, what I am getting around to saying is that in
> the 
> U.S., the total biomass of all plants "fix[es] about 13.5 x 10E15 kcal
> of 
> solar energy per year," whereas "current annual fossil energy
> consumption 
> is about 20 x 10E15." In other words, "Americans burn 40 percent more 
> fossil energy than the total solar energy captured by all plant biomass
> in 
> the United States." (Pimentel & Pimentel, p. 20)
> 
> The other textbooks agree with that.
> 
> The U.S. produces 24% of all man-made CO2 emissions, and unlike other 
> advanced nations and China, its emissions are rising rapidly. In other 
> continents the ratio of man-made energy to the energy in biomass (and 
> animals) is smaller, but in all cases man-made energy and CO2 emissions
> are

Wrong..  The US reports 24% of all man made CO2 "Honestly" Along with
europ austraila and Japan.  Most of the rest are speculative.
 
> a very significant fraction of the total. All in all, the additional
> CO2 
> represents an unprecedented change to the chemistry of the earth's 

Jed:

This is a big arguement. There are many points and counter points.  

A CF based sorld would be better (polution wise) No arguement there.
The SUV is a multifacited problem and needs to be delt with anyway.

Or   another way

So if I go about things my way and you go about things your say won't we
cover more ground?

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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 13:29:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA07233;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:21:49 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:21:49 -0800
Message-ID: <20021211212108.77682.qmail web40403.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:21:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Meant "plant biomass"
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211141504.02cc6cf0 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"nUUNX3.0.mm1.jnwzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48551
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com> wrote:
> I wrote:
> 
> "The accumulated plants, crops and forest, together are referred to as 
> biomass."
> 
> I meant "plant biomass." Overall biomass includes animals.
> 
>

I got that.
 
> Also, I wrote:
> 
> "But far more energy was used in the last century than in all of
> previous 
> human history."
> 
> I mean all previous centuries of human history *combined*.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 
but we didn't start using energy until the 1880's really...  In a
measureable way.

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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 13:31:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA11635;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:30:22 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:30:22 -0800
Message-ID: <20021211212946.95388.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:29:46 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <005001c2a14a$e2b24160$2823010a arghou.argcorp.argworldwide.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"ynrAk3.0.dr2.jvwzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48552
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--- Craig <cchaynie ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > Taking action to reduce CO2 output is wiping a dead horse.  e.g
> > Everything that lives is based on the CO2 conversion process.  If you
> > total the CO2 output from every body, every animal, every bacteria
> you
> > will make industrial CO2 look like a drop in a bucket.
> 
> For the Global Warming argument, it's not the CO2 in plants and animals
> that
> are the problem, but rather the large amounts of carbon being dug-up
> after
> being locked-out of the enviroment for hundreds of millions of years.
> When
> this carbon enters the environment, new CO2 is produced, increasing the
> total amount in the atmosphere. The CO2 from plants and animals is
> simply
> recycled.
> 
> Incidentally, this highlights the real problem, which isn't
> specifically the
> burning of fossil fuels, but rather the removal of carbon from the
> ground.
> To stop Global Warming, (if it is indeed occurring), you need to stop
> the
> drilling.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Craig Haynie (Houston)

When anybody need the answer to the question "Why"

This is an angle I hadn't considered.  


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 13:50:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19220;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:46:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 13:46:43 -0800
X-Sent: 11 Dec 2002 21:46:26 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211162938.00b13490 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 16:46:20 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <20021211211834.59352.qmail web40411.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021211131324.00b13490 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"RNh-l.0.Ai4.29xzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48553
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Charles Ford wrote:

> > The U.S. produces 24% of all man-made CO2 emissions, and unlike other
> > advanced nations and China, its emissions are rising rapidly. In other
> > continents the ratio of man-made energy to the energy in biomass (and
> > animals) is smaller, but in all cases man-made energy and CO2 emissions
> > are
>
>Wrong..  The US reports 24% of all man made CO2 "Honestly" Along with 
>europ austraila and Japan.  Most of the rest are speculative.

Not that speculative. It is not too difficult to track coal mining and 
shipments of crude oil, which are the main inputs. Even if a country is 
dishonest, we know how often the supertankers land there. Coal trains are 
easy to spot, although some of the Russian rail cars used to have so many 
holes in them, they would arrive empty, leaving a trail of scattered coal 
from Siberia to Moscow. The EIA stats I quoted are similar to the CIA's, 
and the CIA does not take anyone's word for anything.

Keeping track of something like food production or tank production is much 
more difficult. That is what my father was trying to do in Russia during 
WWII, as a U.S. Embassy attache. The Russians needed lend-lease supplies, 
but they refused to say how much they had or what they needed. I expect 
they often did not know themselves. They were difficult to deal with. Nice 
folks, though. At least they had a good sense of humor.

These free Internet CIA handbooks are pretty good, by the way:

http://www.odci.gov/cia/di/products/hies/index.html
http://www.odci.gov/cia/publications/hies97/f/f.htm

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 14:46:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA10975;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:38:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:38:52 -0800
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 14:33:34 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2A122.49358740"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"UmBym3.0.Lh2.xvxzz" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48554
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2A122.49358740
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

As recently as a few hours ago, I was more than willing to write off the =
recently announced Genesis project as little more than a poorly executed =
money-grab put in place by non-scientist promoters, ala Stan Meyer, =
Dennis Lee, etc. And the political climate is perfect for this type of =
scam to win investors.

There is so much ingrained disgust and growing hatred for the entire =
petroleum industry - which is rooted in the moral and political =
compromises that oil reliance has placed upon this country (USA) that =
almost any alternative scheme that claims to lower our dependency on =
fossil fuels will attract wealthy investors (and scam artists). Let's =
face it, logical or not, many Americans equate 9/11 with an unrelenting =
appetite for other people's oil.

Like most vortexians who weighed-in on the issue, I still believe that =
the Genesis company, the gCell technology, the secrecy and the business =
plan all are just too improbable in almost every detail, especially the =
*science* to be real. Things just don't happen that way in the real =
world, at least as I understand it.

Even so, there is one remote scenario, as improbable as it will also =
sound, that fits the circumstances so well that - if true, it would =
explain almost everything. I don't yet believe in this explanation =
either, but it is worth throwing out there, given the enormity of the =
claims that have been publicly made, and the paradigm shift that would =
follow if the claims panned out.

The scenario that follows involves the Mills hydrino (below ground-state =
hydrogen), the fuel cell (just coming into commercial production), =
wealthy investors in Idaho, slick promoters in New Joysee, an attempt to =
dodge intellectual property issues for as long as possible, and perhaps =
somewhere near the end, a small commitment to help lesser developed =
economies.

The explanation goes something like this.=20

1) R. Mills has claimed that when hydrinos are formed, significant =
amounts of UV radiation are given off, and=20
2) hydrinos are claimed to form easily when water vapor at low pressure =
is irradiated in a 2.45 Ghz microwave field.=20
3) A number of other researchers have shown that water vapor can be =
split efficiently when exposed to UV radiation in the presence of =
certain semiconductor catalysts.
4) The solid oxide fuel cell uses a high temperature ceramic electrode =
that is also a semiconductor.
5) It turns out that many of these same catalysts used in =
photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen permeably =
membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.
6) There is nothing inherently prohibitive about a multi-plate fuel cell =
that splits water vapor in one space and then forces the split-off =
elements to  migrate through porous membranes and then recombine in =
adjacent spaces, providing current.

These factors could all be coincidental.=20

If not, one would have to imagine that a particular kind of fuel cell =
could be fed with low pressure water vapor (and perhaps a little =
hydrogen mixed in) and irradiated with microwaves, producing a certain =
amount of hydrinos along with UV radiation, and that radiation would =
split enough unreacted water vapor so that hydrogen would pass though =
one wall (proton conductor) while oxygen migrates through the solid =
oxide wall, and a net current flow across a number of stacked plates =
would thereby arise which would be sufficient to power the whole cell, =
with some left over.

It turns out the promoters of this project are from New Jersey - not too =
far from Mills and BLP. Perhaps they did not want to be associated with =
him and haven't disclosed the scientific details because of his prior =
art - and perhaps the promoters staged the whole show for Idaho because =
of certain investors, but also because of Mills intellectual property =
protection and fear of lawsuit.

BTW, Here is a picture of the actual device, for those who want an image =
to attach to their mental picture and some text that will raise more =
questions than are answered.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=3D27402

Regards,

Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2A122.49358740
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>As recently as a few hours ago, I was more than willing to write =
off the=20
recently announced Genesis project as little more than a poorly executed =

money-grab put in place by non-scientist promoters, ala Stan Meyer, =
Dennis Lee,=20
etc. And the political climate is perfect for this type of scam to win=20
investors.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>There is so much ingrained disgust and growing hatred for the =
entire=20
petroleum industry - which is rooted in the moral and political =
compromises that=20
oil reliance has placed upon this country (USA) that almost any =
alternative=20
scheme that claims to&nbsp;lower our dependency on fossil fuels will =
attract=20
wealthy investors (and scam artists). Let's face it, logical or not, =
many=20
Americans equate 9/11 with an unrelenting appetite&nbsp;for other=20
people's&nbsp;oil.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Like most vortexians who weighed-in on the issue,&nbsp;I still =
believe that=20
the Genesis company, the gCell technology, the secrecy&nbsp;and the =
business=20
plan all&nbsp;are just too improbable in almost every detail, especially =
the=20
*science* to be real. Things just don't happen that way in the real =
world, at=20
least as I understand it.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Even so, there is one remote =
scenario, as=20
improbable as it will also sound,&nbsp;that fits the circumstances so =
well that=20
- if true, it would explain almost everything. I don't yet =
believe&nbsp;in this=20
explanation&nbsp;either, but it is worth throwing out there, given the =
enormity=20
of the claims that have been publicly made, and the paradigm shift that =
would=20
follow if the claims panned out.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">The scenario that follows =
involves the=20
Mills hydrino (below ground-state hydrogen), the fuel cell (just coming =
into=20
commercial production), wealthy investors in Idaho, slick promoters in =
New=20
Joysee, an attempt to dodge intellectual property issues for as long as=20
possible, and perhaps somewhere near the end, a small commitment to help =
lesser=20
developed economies.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">The explanation goes =
something like this.=20
</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">1) R. Mills has claimed that =
when=20
hydrinos are formed, significant amounts of UV radiation are given off, =
and=20
</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">2) hydrinos are claimed to =
form easily=20
when water vapor at&nbsp;low pressure&nbsp;is irradiated in a 2.45 Ghz =
microwave=20
field. </DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">3) A number of other =
researchers have=20
shown that water vapor can be split efficiently when exposed to UV =
radiation in=20
the presence of certain semiconductor catalysts.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">4) The solid oxide fuel cell =
uses a high=20
temperature ceramic electrode that is also a semiconductor.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">5)&nbsp;It turns out that =
many of these=20
same catalysts used in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also =
used as=20
oxygen permeably membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">6) There is nothing =
inherently=20
prohibitive about a multi-plate fuel cell that splits water vapor in one =
space=20
and then forces&nbsp;the split-off elements to &nbsp;migrate through =
porous=20
membranes and then recombine in adjacent spaces, providing =
current.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">These factors&nbsp;could all =
be=20
coincidental. </DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">If not, one would have to =
imagine that a=20
particular kind of fuel cell could be fed with low pressure water vapor =
(and=20
perhaps a little hydrogen mixed in) and irradiated with microwaves, =
producing a=20
certain amount of hydrinos along with UV radiation, and that radiation =
would=20
split enough unreacted water vapor so that hydrogen would pass though =
one wall=20
(proton conductor) while oxygen migrates through the solid oxide wall, =
and a net=20
current flow across a number of stacked plates would thereby arise which =
would=20
be sufficient to power the whole cell, with some left over.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">It turns out the promoters of =
this=20
project are from New Jersey - not too far from Mills and BLP. Perhaps =
they did=20
not want to be associated with him and haven't disclosed the scientific =
details=20
because of his prior art - and perhaps the promoters staged the whole =
show for=20
Idaho&nbsp;because of certain investors, but also because of Mills =
intellectual=20
property protection and fear of lawsuit.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">BTW, Here is a picture of the =
actual=20
device, for those who want an image to attach to their mental picture =
and some=20
text that will raise more questions than are answered.</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><A=20
href=3D"http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=3D27402">http://www.id=
ahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=3D27402</A></DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Regards,</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">Jones =
Beene</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0012_01C2A122.49358740--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 22:47:45 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA27936;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:41:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 22:41:33 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b06ba1dccf57a15 [64.61.198.114]>
In-Reply-To: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 00:42:47 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"pbmjW.0.Nq6.T-2-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48555
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: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel
cell?</title></head><body>
<div>Jones Beene posted;</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>As recently as a few hours ago, I was
more than willing to write off the recently announced Genesis
project.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>It does sound too good to be true.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>There is so much ingrained disgust and
growing hatred for the entire petroleum industry</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Well, they brought it on themselves.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Like most vortexians who weighed-in on
the issue,&nbsp;I still believe that the Genesis company, the gCell
technology, the secrecy&nbsp;and the business plan all&nbsp;are just
too improbable</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>There is a sound basis in physical theory for the active vacuum
and the possibility of cohering that energy.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>The scenario that follows involves the
Mills hydrino (below ground-state hydrogen), the fuel cell (just
coming into commercial production), wealthy investors in Idaho, slick
promoters in New Joysee, an attempt to dodge intellectual property
issues for as long as possible, and perhaps somewhere near the end, a
small commitment to help lesser developed economies.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>The explanation goes something like
this.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>1) R. Mills has claimed that when
hydrinos are formed, significant amounts of UV radiation are given
off, and</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Mills initial funding came from utility companies who believed
that he had found a new source of energy</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>2) hydrinos are claimed to form easily
when water vapor at&nbsp;low pressure&nbsp;is irradiated in a 2.45 Ghz
microwave field.</blockquote>
<div><br>
I assume that you are getting this from Mills.<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>3) A number of other researchers have
shown that water vapor can be split efficiently when exposed to UV
radiation in the presence of certain semiconductor
catalysts.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Really, tell me more</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>4) The solid oxide fuel cell uses a high
temperature ceramic electrode that is also a
semiconductor.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>What fuel cell is this?</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>5)&nbsp;It turns out that many of these
same catalysts used in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also
used as oxygen permeably membranes in the solid oxide fuel
cell.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Hum, are those materials also Mills' catalysts?</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>6) There is nothing inherently
prohibitive about a multi-plate fuel cell that splits water vapor in
one space and then forces&nbsp;the split-off elements to &nbsp;migrate
through porous membranes and then recombine in adjacent spaces,
providing current.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Really, and could these two events generate surplus energy?</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>These factors&nbsp;could all be
coincidental.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>If not, one would have to imagine that a
particular kind of fuel cell could be fed with low pressure water
vapor (and perhaps a little hydrogen mixed in) and irradiated with
microwaves, producing a certain amount of hydrinos along with UV
radiation, and that radiation would split enough unreacted water vapor
so that hydrogen would pass though one wall (proton conductor) while
oxygen migrates through the solid oxide wall, and a net current flow
across a number of stacked plates would thereby arise which would be
sufficient to power the whole cell, with some left over.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>This is a very interesting scenario.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>It turns out the promoters of this
project are from New Jersey - not too far from Mills and BLP. Perhaps
they did not want to be associated with him and haven't disclosed the
scientific details because of his prior art - and perhaps the
promoters staged the whole show for Idaho&nbsp;because of certain
investors, but also because of Mills intellectual property protection
and fear of lawsuit.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>The last I heard, Parksie had successfully thwarted Mills'
efforts to get a patent. No patent, no intellectual property
protection, and no lawsuit.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>BTW, Here is a picture of the actual
device, for those who want an image to attach to their mental picture
and some text that will raise more questions than are
answered.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><a
href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=27402"
>http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=27402</a></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<div>Thanks for providing the URL, I'll check that out.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>They aren't looking for money. If they were they would have
contacted us. I told the lady at the mouth piece firm that some of our
associates had invested in Tilley Foundation. If that had been Dennis
Lee or Stan Meyer, they would have been all over us like stink on you
know what.</div>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 23:13:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA10294;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:08:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:08:12 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b02ba1de5431ae0 [64.61.199.167]>
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021210154349.03a3c440 pop.mindspring.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021209150301.00b12338 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021210154349.03a3c440 pop.mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:09:38 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Can we stop Global Warming
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"pxo6S.0.kW2.SN3-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48556
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Charles Ford wrote:
>
>>Ok folks..
>>
>>It's reality check time.
>>
>>Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
>>The cause   Fact or speculation?
>>
>>The cure   Possible?  or not  ?
>>

And Jed Rothwell responded;

>Suppose we go to the trouble of reducing CO2 and 100 years from now 
>we learn that we did not need to do so, because global warming 
>wasn't real after all. Or it was real but it was not caused by CO2. 
>What, then, have we sacrificed? Not much, as it turns out. Most of 
>the steps we take to reduce CO2 benefit us in other ways. They 
>reduce pollution, reduce the cost of fuel, create jobs, and 
>alleviate human suffering in countless ways. Most of these steps 
>would be good policy even if there is no global warming.

There is a hydrogen research group. Their representative was 
interviewed by Art Bell. According to him if we did a Manhattan 
Project style push we could power the entire country off of wind 
farms and alge grown in non oxygen atmospheres under glass in the 
Nevada desert. Have you looked into this.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 11 23:55:58 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA30306;
	Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:51:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2002 23:51:41 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: temalloy metro.lakes.com (Unverified)
Message-Id: <a05111b05ba1df07bbdef [64.61.199.167]>
In-Reply-To: <001d01c2a09c$ca0baba0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <004f01c29f9d$f06aad00$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <1kjcvu073rq2p40o3v11v27rhbt8jgs88f 4ax.com>
 <3DF65E27.5020904 zipworld.com.au> <001d01c2a09c$ca0baba0$0a016ea8@cpq>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:53:02 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Genesis project details
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"w_QXL2.0.OP7.C04-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48557
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene Posted;
>
>
>OTOH, When Mark Twain said, "truth is stranger than fiction," he 
>could have been referring to another home-grown improbability that 
>sprang up form  the potato fields near Boise Idaho - Micron 
>Technology, the company started in the basement of a dentist's 
>office in 1978, grew to become one the world's largest suppliers of 
>computer memory chips thanks to a simple farmer, named err... 
>Simplot..Heb Caen would have loved it ("names that work")...

The late Paul Brown came out of Boise.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 01:47:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA26855;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:41:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:41:11 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba1e0bab6fb5 [12.21.208.61]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:55:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"aYOxm3.0.XZ6.tc5-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48559
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:10 PM 12/11/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:
[snip]
>In the U.S. production has fallen by half since 1970, no new oil
>has been discovered in the U.S. since 1972, and none ever will be. The
>increase in world has leveled out, and world production is probably peaking
>just about now, or in the next few years. See K. S. Deffeyes, "Hubbert's
>Peak."
[snip]

If this is true it is purely because of environmental and economic
policies.  There is likely vast quantities of oil onshore and offhsore in
Alaska, and finds have been made here since 1972, though exploration has
been curtailed significantly here due to policy and market expectations.
The known amount of coal here dwarfs the oil potential though.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 01:47:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA26825;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:41:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:41:08 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba1e0b4156c7 [12.21.208.61]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 01:55:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
Resent-Message-ID: <"dwbbt.0.-Y6.qc5-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48558
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

PLEASE SUPPRESS HTML WHEN POSTING!


At 12:42 AM 12/12/2, thomas malloy wrote:
><!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: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel
>cell?</title></head><body>
><div>Jones Beene posted;</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>As recently as a few hours ago, I was
>more than willing to write off the recently announced Genesis
>project.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>It does sound too good to be true.</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>There is so much ingrained disgust and
>growing hatred for the entire petroleum industry</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>Well, they brought it on themselves.</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>Like most vortexians who weighed-in on
>the issue,&nbsp;I still believe that the Genesis company, the gCell
>technology, the secrecy&nbsp;and the business plan all&nbsp;are just
>too improbable</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>There is a sound basis in physical theory for the active vacuum
>and the possibility of cohering that energy.</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>The scenario that follows involves the
>Mills hydrino (below ground-state hydrogen), the fuel cell (just
>coming into commercial production), wealthy investors in Idaho, slick
>promoters in New Joysee, an attempt to dodge intellectual property
>issues for as long as possible, and perhaps somewhere near the end, a
>small commitment to help lesser developed economies.</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>The explanation goes something like
>this.</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>1) R. Mills has claimed that when
>hydrinos are formed, significant amounts of UV radiation are given
>off, and</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>Mills initial funding came from utility companies who believed
>that he had found a new source of energy</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>2) hydrinos are claimed to form easily
>when water vapor at&nbsp;low pressure&nbsp;is irradiated in a 2.45 Ghz
>microwave field.</blockquote>
><div><br>
>I assume that you are getting this from Mills.<br>
></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>3) A number of other researchers have
>shown that water vapor can be split efficiently when exposed to UV
>radiation in the presence of certain semiconductor
>catalysts.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>Really, tell me more</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>4) The solid oxide fuel cell uses a high
>temperature ceramic electrode that is also a
>semiconductor.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>What fuel cell is this?</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>5)&nbsp;It turns out that many of these
>same catalysts used in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also
>used as oxygen permeably membranes in the solid oxide fuel
>cell.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>Hum, are those materials also Mills' catalysts?</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>6) There is nothing inherently
>prohibitive about a multi-plate fuel cell that splits water vapor in
>one space and then forces&nbsp;the split-off elements to &nbsp;migrate
>through porous membranes and then recombine in adjacent spaces,
>providing current.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>Really, and could these two events generate surplus energy?</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>These factors&nbsp;could all be
>coincidental.</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>If not, one would have to imagine that a
>particular kind of fuel cell could be fed with low pressure water
>vapor (and perhaps a little hydrogen mixed in) and irradiated with
>microwaves, producing a certain amount of hydrinos along with UV
>radiation, and that radiation would split enough unreacted water vapor
>so that hydrogen would pass though one wall (proton conductor) while
>oxygen migrates through the solid oxide wall, and a net current flow
>across a number of stacked plates would thereby arise which would be
>sufficient to power the whole cell, with some left over.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>This is a very interesting scenario.</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>It turns out the promoters of this
>project are from New Jersey - not too far from Mills and BLP. Perhaps
>they did not want to be associated with him and haven't disclosed the
>scientific details because of his prior art - and perhaps the
>promoters staged the whole show for Idaho&nbsp;because of certain
>investors, but also because of Mills intellectual property protection
>and fear of lawsuit.</blockquote>
><div><br></div>
><div>The last I heard, Parksie had successfully thwarted Mills'
>efforts to get a patent. No patent, no intellectual property
>protection, and no lawsuit.</div>
><div><br></div>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>BTW, Here is a picture of the actual
>device, for those who want an image to attach to their mental picture
>and some text that will raise more questions than are
>answered.</blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite><a
>href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=27402"
>>http://www.idahostatesman.com/story.asp?ID=27402</a></blockquote>
><blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
><div>Thanks for providing the URL, I'll check that out.</div>
><div><br></div>
><div>They aren't looking for money. If they were they would have
>contacted us. I told the lady at the mouth piece firm that some of our
>associates had invested in Tilley Foundation. If that had been Dennis
>Lee or Stan Meyer, they would have been all over us like stink on you
>know what.</div>
></body>
></html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 08:10:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18134;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:02:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:02:23 -0800
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 07:57:05 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001d01c2a1f7$1e6932c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2A1B4.0FE13D80"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <a05111b06ba1dccf57a15 [64.61.198.114]>
Resent-Message-ID: <"EmL_O2.0.GR4.ECB-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48560
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2A1B4.0FE13D80
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?From: thomas malloy=20

  3) A number of other researchers have shown that water vapor can be =
split efficiently when exposed to UV radiation in the presence of =
certain semiconductor catalysts.
>Really, tell me more

NREL has some accessible material on solar photochemical water splitting
www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/pdfs/28890b.pdf
www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/pdfs/32405a25.pdf=20

Photochemical water splitting - using narrow UV radiation, as opposed to =
broad spectrum solar, is far more efficient, approaching 100% in terms =
of heat value of evolved H2 compared to the heating value of the photon =
flux, but not as well studied simply because there are few high =
intensity "free" sources of UV on earth (but plenty of them in space) as =
our atmosphere is an absorber.=20

If Dr. Mills can be believed, his hydrino plasma spectroscopy seems to =
show extremely high levels of UV at frequencies which would be useful =
for water splitting. It is somewhat surprising that he hasn't focused on =
this conversion method himself (or maybe he has, but isn't telling).
  5) It turns out that many of these same catalysts used in =
photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen permeably =
membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.
>Hum, are those materials also Mills' catalysts?

No, they are catalyst for photochemical water splitting. Water vapor =
itself, or hydrogen atoms, will serve to catalyze hydrino formation, =
according to Mills.

The band gap of the photo-active materials like TiO matches closely the =
binding energy of hydrogen to a hydroxyl radical. It is not totally =
coincidental that these materials are also permeable to oxygen ions, and =
are therefore used in solid oxide fuel cells, which are the most =
efficient variety of fuel cells, but having a downside that they must =
operate at high temperature.

If the Genesis gCell operates at high temperature, then it is probably a =
solid oxide cell (aka SOFC). If they told you that much, then all of =
this speculation might be going somewhere, with or without the =
involvement of the hydrino.


>The last I heard, Parksie had successfully thwarted Mills' efforts to =
get a >patent. No patent, no intellectual property protection, and no =
lawsuit.


He thwarted only one patent, but there are about two dozen others, =
mostly international (WPO) which will offer him very strong legal =
footing. BUT he cannot patent the hydrino, even if he was the first to =
describe it (not certain). Patents only apply to devices, not theories.

However, I can find no patents owned by Genesis or the Shaws, so the =
legal status of their device is not clear. Perhaps they decided to do an =
end-run around the patent system, and that would not be surprising as =
most of this technology is not that new, OTOH it has never been combined =
this way (if that is what is going on). BTW, a unique combination of =
patented technologies is also patentable by someone else if it is =
*Non-obvious*, so maybe Genesis does have applications either here or =
abroad.

>They aren't looking for money. If they were they would have contacted =
us. I >told the lady at the mouth piece firm that some of our associates =
had invested >in Tilley Foundation. If that had been Dennis Lee or Stan =
Meyer, they would >have been all over us like stink on you know what.

That is a good sign.

Perhaps they - or their investors really have approached this from the =
perspective of "save the world" rather than "make a quick buck"... but =
right now it is way to early to jump to that conclusion.

Do I understand that you will be granted access to view the device? I =
might be willing to volunteer to represent you as a technical advisor in =
that case,  just out of curiosity, if nothing else.=20

I still can't believe that people who were smart enough to discover such =
a technology ( the 400 visionaries !!) would be stupid enough to handle =
its commercial introduction in this way. It just doesn't add up.

I wouldn't be surprised if you were asked to put up a big chuck of money =
before viewing the device. If so RUN -don't walk - away from those =
folks. Real estate in Arizona is a better way to unload your excess =
resources.

Regards,

Jones Beene
------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2A1B4.0FE13D80
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<STYLE type=3Dtext/css>BLOCKQUOTE {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
DL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
UL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
OL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
LI {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=3Dtemalloy metro.lakes.com=20
href=3D"mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com">thomas malloy</A> <BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV>3) A number of other researchers have shown that water vapor can =
be split=20
  efficiently when exposed to UV radiation in the presence of certain=20
  semiconductor catalysts.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV>&gt;Really, tell me more</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>NREL has some accessible material on solar photochemical water=20
splitting</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/pdfs/28890b.pdf">www.eren.doe.go=
v/hydrogen/pdfs/28890b.pdf</A></DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.eren.doe.gov/hydrogen/pdfs/32405a25.pdf">www.eren.doe.=
gov/hydrogen/pdfs/32405a25.pdf</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Photochemical water splitting - using narrow UV radiation, as =
opposed to=20
broad spectrum solar, is far more efficient, approaching 100% in terms =
of heat=20
value of evolved H2 compared to the heating&nbsp;value of the photon =
flux, but=20
not as well studied simply because there are few high intensity "free" =
sources=20
of UV on earth (but plenty of them in space) as our atmosphere is an =
absorber.=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If Dr. Mills can be believed, his hydrino plasma spectroscopy seems =
to show=20
extremely high levels of UV at frequencies which would be useful for =
water=20
splitting. It is somewhat surprising that he hasn't focused on this =
conversion=20
method himself (or maybe he has, but isn't telling).</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV cite type=3D"cite">5)&nbsp;It turns out that many of these same =
catalysts=20
  used in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen =
permeably=20
  membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&gt;Hum, are those materials also Mills' =
catalysts?</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">No, they are catalyst for photochemical water =
splitting.=20
Water vapor itself, or hydrogen atoms, will serve to catalyze hydrino =
formation,=20
according to Mills.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">The band gap&nbsp;of the photo-active materials =
like TiO=20
matches&nbsp;closely the binding energy of hydrogen to a hydroxyl=20
radical.&nbsp;It is not totally coincidental that these materials are =
also=20
permeable to oxygen ions, and are therefore used in solid oxide fuel =
cells,=20
which are the most efficient variety of fuel cells, but having a =
downside that=20
they must operate at high temperature.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">If the Genesis gCell operates at high =
temperature, then it=20
is probably a solid oxide cell (aka SOFC). If they told you that much, =
then all=20
of this speculation might be going somewhere, with or without the =
involvement of=20
the hydrino.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&gt;The last I heard, Parksie had successfully thwarted Mills' =
efforts to=20
get a &gt;patent. No patent, no intellectual property protection, and no =

lawsuit.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>He thwarted only one patent, but there are about two dozen others, =
mostly=20
international (WPO) which will offer him very strong legal footing. BUT =
he=20
cannot patent the hydrino, even if he was the first to describe it (not=20
certain). Patents only apply to devices, not theories.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>However, I can find no patents owned by Genesis or the Shaws, so =
the legal=20
status of their device is not clear. Perhaps they decided to do an =
end-run=20
around the patent system, and that would not be surprising as most of =
this=20
technology is not that new, OTOH it has never been combined this way (if =
that is=20
what is going on).&nbsp;BTW, a&nbsp;unique combination of patented =
technologies=20
is also patentable by someone else if it is *Non-obvious*, so maybe =
Genesis does=20
have applications either here or abroad.<BR></DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&gt;They aren't looking for money. If they were =
they would=20
have contacted us. I &gt;told the lady at the mouth piece firm that some =
of our=20
associates had invested &gt;in Tilley Foundation. If that had been =
Dennis Lee or=20
Stan Meyer, they would &gt;have been all over us like stink on you know=20
what.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">That is a good sign.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">Perhaps they - or their investors really have =
approached=20
this from the perspective of "save the world" rather than "make a quick =
buck"...=20
but right now it is way to early to jump to that conclusion.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">Do I understand that you will be granted access =
to view=20
the device? I might be willing to volunteer to represent you as a =
technical=20
advisor in that case,&nbsp; just out of curiosity, if nothing else. =
</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">I still can't believe that people who were smart =

enough&nbsp;to discover such a technology ( the 400 visionaries !!) =
would be=20
stupid enough to handle its commercial introduction in this way. It just =
doesn't=20
add up.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">I wouldn't be surprised if you were asked to put =
up a big=20
chuck of money before viewing the device. If so RUN -don't walk - away =
from=20
those folks. Real estate in Arizona is a better way to unload your =
excess=20
resources.</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">Regards,</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV cite type=3D"cite">Jones Beene</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001A_01C2A1B4.0FE13D80--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 08:32:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA01452;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:30:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:30:01 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <34.31c18efc.2b2a1361 aol.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:29:21 EST
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_34.31c18efc.2b2a1361_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"Oe6nD.0.YM.9cB-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48561
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_34.31c18efc.2b2a1361_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/11/02 12:01:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


> 
> 
> Specifically how and why?  Can you demonstrate that the difference in
> criteria is not arbitrary, i.e. just to make it "come out right"?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Horace Heffner          
> 
> 
> 

Horrace what I assume is that there are four forces in the universe.  These 
are what they are.  I also assume that there are two types of fields  
hadrinic (of the nucleus) and Leptonic (of the electron).  Then I assume that 
the size of the universe is set.

I go to determine the zero point properties of mattter from these set 
conditions.
I say these zero point properties are variable.  They would be differnet in a 
differnet sized universe.  They are also different in a virbrationally 
reinforced Bose condensate.
The frequency of vibration that changes them is one megahertz-meter.

does this help

Frank Z

--part1_34.31c18efc.2b2a1361_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/11/02 12:01:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
<BR>
Specifically how and why?&nbsp; Can you demonstrate that the difference in<BR>
criteria is not arbitrary, i.e. just to make it "come out right"?<BR>
<BR>
Regards,<BR>
<BR>
Horace Heffner&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Horrace what I assume is that there are four forces in the universe.&nbsp; These are what they are.&nbsp; I also assume that there are two types of fields&nbsp; hadrinic (of the nucleus) and Leptonic (of the electron).&nbsp; Then I assume that the size of the universe is set.<BR>
<BR>
I go to determine the zero point properties of mattter from these set conditions.<BR>
I say these zero point properties are variable.&nbsp; They would be differnet in a differnet sized universe.&nbsp; They are also different in a virbrationally reinforced Bose condensate.<BR>
The frequency of vibration that changes them is one megahertz-meter.<BR>
<BR>
does this help<BR>
<BR>
Frank Z</FONT></HTML>

--part1_34.31c18efc.2b2a1361_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 08:42:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA05646;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:39:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:39:25 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <25.325c5849.2b2a1582 aol.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:38:26 EST
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_25.325c5849.2b2a1582_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"7Keuc3.0.uN1.ykB-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48562
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_25.325c5849.2b2a1582_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/11/02 1:26:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


> ?  If there is an elastic limit to space, then
> elastic collision by charges separated by a lessor distance should not be
> possible?
> 

You ask a lot of good questions.  The elastic limit of space does not 
detemine everything.  It only determines the properties listed.

It does not set a distace.  The distance is detemined by the strength of the 
field and the displacement.  The elastic limit is reached at the displacement 
length.

For the strong nuclear force the displacement length is very short,.  It is 
about quark size.  I don't go into this because I want to confine my work to 
low energies.

I also confine my work to stable particles.  My work is not reality.  It is 
only a model.  As with all models it has a limited range and validity.  It 
applies to stable particles at low energy.  This is good because this is 
where the economic applications are.

frank Z

--part1_25.325c5849.2b2a1582_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/11/02 1:26:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">?&nbsp; If there is an elastic limit to space, then<BR>
elastic collision by charges separated by a lessor distance should not be<BR>
possible?<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
You ask a lot of good questions.&nbsp; The elastic limit of space does not detemine everything.&nbsp; It only determines the properties listed.<BR>
<BR>
It does not set a distace.&nbsp; The distance is detemined by the strength of the field and the displacement.&nbsp; The elastic limit is reached at the displacement length.<BR>
<BR>
For the strong nuclear force the displacement length is very short,.&nbsp; It is about quark size.&nbsp; I don't go into this because I want to confine my work to low energies.<BR>
<BR>
I also confine my work to stable particles.&nbsp; My work is not reality.&nbsp; It is only a model.&nbsp; As with all models it has a limited range and validity.&nbsp; It applies to stable particles at low energy.&nbsp; This is good because this is where the economic applications are.<BR>
<BR>
frank Z</FONT></HTML>

--part1_25.325c5849.2b2a1582_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 08:48:31 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA08865;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:45:29 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 08:45:29 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <1c0.2ed2fcf.2b2a1701 aol.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:44:49 EST
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_1c0.2ed2fcf.2b2a1701_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"auAcG2.0.RA2.fqB-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48563
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_1c0.2ed2fcf.2b2a1701_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/11/02 1:26:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hheffner mtaonline.net writes:


> ?  Why not the rest energy of the deuteron for E?  

Another good question and one I struggled with.  The elastic limit of space 
and energy are only directly related with point particles.  It is derived 
from the capacitance of a point.  An electron is a point particle the proton 
and neutron are not.

To solve the nuclear proplem you have to assume that proton is a universe of 
its own.  The elactic limit within the nucleus is determined by the isotropic 
capacitance of the entire nucleus.  Quarks exist within this nuclear 
universe.  I do not what to go this far with this first paper.  I just want 
to get the main ideas out.  We really can extend the model for some time.

Frank

--part1_1c0.2ed2fcf.2b2a1701_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/11/02 1:26:50 PM Eastern Standard Time, hheffner mtaonline.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">?&nbsp; Why not the rest energy of the deuteron for E?&nbsp; </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Another good question and one I struggled with.&nbsp; The elastic limit of space and energy are only directly related with point particles.&nbsp; It is derived from the capacitance of a point.&nbsp; An electron is a point particle the proton and neutron are not.<BR>
<BR>
To solve the nuclear proplem you have to assume that proton is a universe of its own.&nbsp; The elactic limit within the nucleus is determined by the isotropic capacitance of the entire nucleus.&nbsp; Quarks exist within this nuclear universe.&nbsp; I do not what to go this far with this first paper.&nbsp; I just want to get the main ideas out.&nbsp; We really can extend the model for some time.<BR>
<BR>
Frank</FONT></HTML>

--part1_1c0.2ed2fcf.2b2a1701_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 09:46:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA04487;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:38:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 09:38:08 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Another Vortex
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:42:16 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <ct9dvugmp593i10do78gdo455qvo2jrljd 4ax.com>
In-Reply-To: <ct9dvugmp593i10do78gdo455qvo2jrljd 4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212121242.16979.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id JAA04456
Resent-Message-ID: <"LfMPj.0.x51._bC-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48564
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Tuesday 10 December 2002 21:53, Dean Miller wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28285-2002Dec8.html  
> 
> By taking a cone-shaped cylinder, capping it and making four openings,
> Polifka created what he thinks is the perfect environment for a
> high-speed vortex. He takes compressed air and shoots it through the
> openings, generating a miniature twister.
>  <snip>
> When Polifka switches on the huge compressor that sits outside the
> testing shed, the lights inside dim as the huge motor starts sucking
> air into the tank, enough to fill 50 tires a second.
>  <snip>
> Within seconds, a fine white powder starts dropping from the opening
> at the bottom of the huge cone, and Polifka parks a wheelbarrow
> underneath to catch the dust. Compressing the air so it can be pumped
> into the cone at hundreds of miles per hour takes in excess of 200
> kilowatts of electric power and costs about $12 per hour.
> 
> 
> -- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF
> 
Please Dean,  no more linx to the Washington Post.  They are now a 
cookie bender and what is worse, a data miner.  Your data.  LIke your
birthday and your birthplace as well as your name or whatever else that
your computer will let out due to open ports when you run windows
without a serious firewall.   They claim, like micro$$$gates that it is
all for 'your' good.  There are links on the questionnaire page to their
privacy policy and to a FAQ, but both links are dead while you are at 
the 'please fill out and bare your soul' page.  Statement at top of page
also makes reference to 'being able to provide relevant ads'  Suppose
that means suckers that fill the junk out can expect to be deluged with
junk.

Yakov

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 11:17:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA18944;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:14:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:14:45 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Dec 2002 19:14:37 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021212141433.032fb1a0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:14:36 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"d8RWs2.0.pd4.a0E-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48565
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

> >In the U.S. production has fallen by half since 1970, no new oil
> >has been discovered in the U.S. since 1972, and none ever will be. The
> >increase in world has leveled out, and world production is probably peaking
> >just about now, or in the next few years. See K. S. Deffeyes, "Hubbert's
> >Peak."
>[snip]
>
>If this is true it is purely because of environmental and economic
>policies.

Not at all, but I should have explained in a little more detail.


>   There is likely vast quantities of oil onshore and offhsore in
>Alaska, and finds have been made here since 1972 . . .

I should have said that the table I refer to is Deffeyes, p. 138, and it is 
"Discovery dates . . . on land in the lower 48 states." Not extraction, and 
not Alaska or offshore. However, the quantities found in Alaska have been 
very small compared to what was discovered in the lower 48, peaking in 
1930. Alaska production has already begun to fall, and even if all of the 
disputed sites the Administration wants to open were opened, it would soon 
fall asymptotically to zero.


>, though exploration has
>been curtailed significantly here due to policy and market expectations.

I think Deffeyes makes a convincing case that exploration in the lower 48 
and many other major fields worldwide has been curtailed because it is 
complete. The technology matured a long time ago. The depth range of oil 
fields (7,500 to 15,000 feet), and the type of geology they occur in is 
sharply limited, and the minimum distance between fields is well 
established. Oil cannot exist in most land sites or under the deep ocean 
floor (because the sediment is only 3,000 feet deep). (p. 22)

Extraction technology continues to improve. Exploration has gotten cheaper 
in the last 30 years, but it has not revealed more oil than was previously 
discovered, when old sites were revisited.

I highly recommend the Deffeyes book.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 11:46:59 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA31367;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:43:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:43:44 -0800
Message-ID: <20021212194306.16787.qmail web40410.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 11:43:06 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can we stop Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <a05111b02ba1de5431ae0 [64.61.199.167]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"IYxK01.0.1g7.mRE-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48566
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I have my nightmeres about wind farms.

There is a safety issue for those who intend to build wind farms up in
the centrial plains. e.g we have storms here that can strip pavement off
of the roads.  

Have never heard of the algy process


--- thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com> wrote:
> >Charles Ford wrote:
> >
> >>Ok folks..
> >>
> >>It's reality check time.
> >>
> >>Global warming...  Fact or propaganda?
> >>The cause   Fact or speculation?
> >>
> >>The cure   Possible?  or not  ?
> >>
> 
> And Jed Rothwell responded;
> 
> >Suppose we go to the trouble of reducing CO2 and 100 years from now 
> >we learn that we did not need to do so, because global warming 
> >wasn't real after all. Or it was real but it was not caused by CO2. 
> >What, then, have we sacrificed? Not much, as it turns out. Most of 
> >the steps we take to reduce CO2 benefit us in other ways. They 
> >reduce pollution, reduce the cost of fuel, create jobs, and 
> >alleviate human suffering in countless ways. Most of these steps 
> >would be good policy even if there is no global warming.
> 
> There is a hydrogen research group. Their representative was 
> interviewed by Art Bell. According to him if we did a Manhattan 
> Project style push we could power the entire country off of wind 
> farms and alge grown in non oxygen atmospheres under glass in the 
> Nevada desert. Have you looked into this.
> 


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 12:17:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10401;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:09:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 12:09:25 -0800
X-Sent: 12 Dec 2002 20:09:15 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021212145714.032fb1a0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 15:09:15 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Can we stop Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <20021212194306.16787.qmail web40410.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <a05111b02ba1de5431ae0 [64.61.199.167]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"4lcPl3.0.RY2.qpE-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48567
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Charles Ford wrote:

>I have my nightmeres about wind farms.
>
>There is a safety issue for those who intend to build wind farms up in
>the centrial plains. e.g we have storms here that can strip pavement off
>of the roads.

I doubt this is a problem. I have never heard of a modern wind tower being 
destroyed by weather, and they are installed in some unforgiving places, 
such as the North Sea. Do these storms lift helicopters and smash them into 
distant buildings? Do they topple radio transmission towers? Wind turbines 
resemble helicopters; the blades are as strong as helicopter blades, and 
the generators are as powerful as the largest helicopter engine, but much 
heavier. They are secured to the ground  more firmly than television towers 
or long distance high voltage power line pylons. (Power line pylons are 
sometimes blown over by storms.) During high winds and storms, the blades 
are automatically feathered, like the propeller on a multi-engine 
prop-plane when an engine fails. The propellers on airplanes and 
helicopters seldom fly off or disintegrate, and in normal operation they 
spend thousands of hours stressed in winds far higher than any storm produces.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 13:48:35 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19652;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:45:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:45:17 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <17a.1364911a.2b2a5d47 aol.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 16:44:39 EST
Subject: genesis world energy
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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"DeWhZ1.0.yo4.iDG-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48569
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

"The amount of water used to generate hydrogen and oxygen gases from this 
process are negligible, usually only a few ounces of water a day, much of 
which is ultimately recovered within the process and reused."

Apparenty they make mass as well as energy.

Frank 
    
    

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 13:50:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA18646;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:43:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:43:14 -0800
Message-ID: <20021212214242.42509.qmail web40410.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:42:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Can we stop Global Warming
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20021212145714.032fb1a0 pop.mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"Vx0Kr1.0.9Z4.nBG-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48568
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Yes that is the nightmere...

The winds are diferent.  A north sea storm is along the lines of a
huricane.  e.g straght line winds 135kts an so fourth.

A tornado is something that has wind going 200kts here and 200kts the
other way only 50 feet away.  If the vortex lets you be then you get the
hail.  Sometimes the size of a softball.   They are just plain viscous.  
  To date there have been no direct hits on a wind turbine.  Also there
have been no major comercial airport hits.  (another nightmere)  

But...  

Proliferation of the technology continuously raises the odds.
     

--- Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com> wrote:
> Charles Ford wrote:
> 
> >I have my nightmeres about wind farms.
> >
> >There is a safety issue for those who intend to build wind farms up in
> >the centrial plains. e.g we have storms here that can strip pavement
> off
> >of the roads.
> 
> I doubt this is a problem. I have never heard of a modern wind tower
> being 
> destroyed by weather, and they are installed in some unforgiving
> places, 
> such as the North Sea. Do these storms lift helicopters and smash them
> into 
> distant buildings? Do they topple radio transmission towers? Wind
> turbines 
> resemble helicopters; the blades are as strong as helicopter blades,
> and 
> the generators are as powerful as the largest helicopter engine, but
> much 
> heavier. They are secured to the ground  more firmly than television
> towers 
> or long distance high voltage power line pylons. (Power line pylons are
> 
> sometimes blown over by storms.) During high winds and storms, the
> blades 
> are automatically feathered, like the propeller on a multi-engine 
> prop-plane when an engine fails. The propellers on airplanes and 
> helicopters seldom fly off or disintegrate, and in normal operation
> they 
> spend thousands of hours stressed in winds far higher than any storm
> produces.
> 
> - Jed
> 
> 


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 18:23:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA26893;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:21:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:21:14 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1ee756dd6a [12.21.208.216]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:35:40 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Simple plan to move toward renewable energy
Resent-Message-ID: <"8HLEA2.0.6a6.QGK-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48570
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In an effort to be proactive, here is a first cut at a simple plan to get
the USA moving in the direction of producing significant renewable energy.


1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE,
dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the
capability to administer this plan. Eventually support this agency using a
perpetual renewable energy fund.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other energy sources like carbon fueled power
companies, enough to generate at least 3 billion dollars a year for the
renewable energy fund, about 10 dollars per person per year.  Rebate
trucking and commercial energy use in order to avoid a significant burden
in a single sector of the economy and a slowing of the economy.  The total
net income from this tax is called the annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the funds total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like ZPE, LENR, etc.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the fund total prior year's annual income to follow-on prototype
development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with emphasis on
those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the fund total prior year's annual income to projects that will
produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most nearly
competitive rates.  Awards to be based on best return on investment, as
provided by the bidders and adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.
Successful proposers can use or reserve up to 40 percent of annual revenues
from their product for maintenance or expansion of their facilities on a
cost plus basis.  The balance of sales income, the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the fund.  At the end of the year
any unawarded funds are deposited into the reneqable energy permanent fund
described below.  Break the request for proposals into large medium and
small categories, with minimum and maximum .

6) Reserve 10 percent of the fund total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandonded facilites.  This is a separate
fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the fund total prior year's annual revenue for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent fund interest
income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Reserve 10 percent of the fund annual revenue for emergency expenses.
Deposit half of the end of year balance into the renewable energy permanent
fund.

9) Reduce the energy taxes for the subsequent year by 1/2 the annual income
of the permanent fund after inflation proofing deductions.

10) Periodically adjust the percentages as required.


It is hoped that such a system could become self funding after 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech compaies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete or to partner with commercil competators in this
limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess, and at
that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 12 18:39:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA31680;
	Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:33:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:33:21 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530504ba1ef906055b [12.21.208.216]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 18:47:48 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Paper I 'm sending to the Journal of Appied Physics  (comments please)
Resent-Message-ID: <"2-K8w1.0.tk7.nRK-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48571
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:29 AM 12/12/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 12/11/02 12:01:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,

>does this help
>

No, this material was already defined in the article.  This is all too
fuzzy.  Where's the details?  (Hidden under the cloak of complexity of
course!)  8^)

It just feels like there is a lot more rationale needed and also a serious
discussion of any conflicts of the theory with observed values.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 01:40:11 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA12727;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:33:58 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:33:58 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b08ba1f3aa958ee [64.61.199.167]>
In-Reply-To: <001d01c2a1f7$1e6932c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq>
 <a05111b06ba1dccf57a15 [64.61.198.114]>
 <001d01c2a1f7$1e6932c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:35:14 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"h5hWz3.0.j63.5cQ-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48572
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: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel
cell?</title></head><body>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><b>I posted and Jones Beene
responded</b></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Photochemical water splitting - using
narrow UV radiation, as opposed to broad spectrum solar, is far more
efficient, approaching 100% in terms of heat value of</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>It just occurred to me that the hydrino formation process would
yield UV photons which could split more water.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote>5)&nbsp;It turns out that many of these same catalysts
used in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen
permeably membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&gt;Hum, are those materials also Mills'
catalysts?</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>No, they are catalyst for photochemical
water splitting. Water vapor itself, or hydrogen atoms, will serve to
catalyze hydrino formation, according to Mills.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>I understood that hydrino formation resulted from the presence of
various metallic elements along with the low pressure hydrogen. I
thought that was what the patent that Parksie thwarted was all
about.</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>He thwarted only one patent, but there
are about two dozen others, mostly international (WPO) which will
offer him very strong legal footing. BUT he cannot patent the hydrino,
even if he was the first to describe it (not certain). Patents only
apply to devices, not theories.</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>Ever heard of a material patent. AFAIK, that covers a substance,
no matter how it is produced.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>However, I can find no patents owned by
Genesis or the Shaws, so the legal status of</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>The patent could be in the patentee's name.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Do I understand that you will be granted
access to view the device?</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>No,</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>&nbsp;I might be willing to volunteer to
represent you as a technical advisor in that case,&nbsp; just out of
curiosity, if nothing else.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>If they grant us access I'll post it on Vortex, You are welcome
to come if you would like to.</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>I wouldn't be surprised if you were asked
to put up a big chuck of money before viewing the device. If so RUN
-don't walk - away from those folks.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Thank you, I'd be suspicious of a large investment even if I were
allowed to test the device without opening the box. That's how the
investors in Tilley Foundation got burned, They way the Genesis people
talked, they have a device ready to go to market. If this is the case
they will need a company like my brother's to install them in
Minnesota, and service them. They will also need someone to market
them, the best product will not sell itself. Unless they have access
to their own money, they will also require financing for the installed
units.</div>
</body>
</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 02:02:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA17585;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:55:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 01:55:52 -0800
Message-ID: <002001c2a28e$105ecfe0$4493cbc1 pc>
From: "Noel Whitney" <quantum iol.ie>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <001501c2a165$57c51da0$0a016ea8 cpq><a05111b06ba1dccf57a15@[64.61.198.114]><001d01c2a1f7$1e6932c0$0a016ea8@cpq> <a05111b08ba1f3aa958ee@[64.61.199.167]>
Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:57:35 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2A28E.0FCF6120"
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: <"115SJ3.0.hI4.ewQ-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48573
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2A28E.0FCF6120
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?Thomas- Leave your wallet at home and =
keep both hands in your pockets! when you view!

Good luck,
Noel D. Whitney.
  ----- Original Message -----=20
  From: thomas malloy=20
  To: vortex-l eskimo.com=20
  Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 9:35 AM
  Subject: Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?


    I posted and Jones Beene responded

    Photochemical water splitting - using narrow UV radiation, as =
opposed to broad spectrum solar, is far more efficient, approaching 100% =
in terms of heat value of


  It just occurred to me that the hydrino formation process would yield =
UV photons which could split more water.


        5) It turns out that many of these same catalysts used in =
photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen permeably =
membranes in the solid oxide fuel cell.

      >Hum, are those materials also Mills' catalysts?

      No, they are catalyst for photochemical water splitting. Water =
vapor itself, or hydrogen atoms, will serve to catalyze hydrino =
formation, according to Mills.


  I understood that hydrino formation resulted from the presence of =
various metallic elements along with the low pressure hydrogen. I =
thought that was what the patent that Parksie thwarted was all about.


    He thwarted only one patent, but there are about two dozen others, =
mostly international (WPO) which will offer him very strong legal =
footing. BUT he cannot patent the hydrino, even if he was the first to =
describe it (not certain). Patents only apply to devices, not theories.


  Ever heard of a material patent. AFAIK, that covers a substance, no =
matter how it is produced.



    However, I can find no patents owned by Genesis or the Shaws, so the =
legal status of


  The patent could be in the patentee's name.


      Do I understand that you will be granted access to view the =
device?


  No,


       I might be willing to volunteer to represent you as a technical =
advisor in that case,  just out of curiosity, if nothing else.


  If they grant us access I'll post it on Vortex, You are welcome to =
come if you would like to.




      I wouldn't be surprised if you were asked to put up a big chuck of =
money before viewing the device. If so RUN -don't walk - away from those =
folks.



  Thank you, I'd be suspicious of a large investment even if I were =
allowed to test the device without opening the box. That's how the =
investors in Tilley Foundation got burned, They way the Genesis people =
talked, they have a device ready to go to market. If this is the case =
they will need a company like my brother's to install them in Minnesota, =
and service them. They will also need someone to market them, the best =
product will not sell itself. Unless they have access to their own =
money, they will also require financing for the installed units.

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2A28E.0FCF6120
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Re: Is the gCell a Hy Fuel cell?</TITLE>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<STYLE type=3Dtext/css>BLOCKQUOTE {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
DL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
UL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
OL {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
LI {
	PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; PADDING-TOP: 0px
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Thomas- Leave your wallet at home and =
keep both=20
hands in your pockets! when you view!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Good luck,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Noel D. Whitney.</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: =
0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
  <DIV=20
  style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
  <A href=3D"mailto:temalloy metro.lakes.com"=20
  title=3Dtemalloy metro.lakes.com>thomas malloy</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
href=3D"mailto:vortex-l eskimo.com"=20
  title=3Dvortex-l eskimo.com>vortex-l@eskimo.com</A> </DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 13, 2002 =
9:35=20
  AM</DIV>
  <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: Is the gCell a Hy =
Fuel=20
  cell?</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite"><B>I posted and Jones Beene=20
  responded</B></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">Photochemical water splitting - using =
narrow UV=20
    radiation, as opposed to broad spectrum solar, is far more =
efficient,=20
    approaching 100% in terms of heat value of</BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>It just occurred to me that the hydrino formation process would =
yield UV=20
  photons which could split more water.</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">
      <BLOCKQUOTE>5)&nbsp;It turns out that many of these same catalysts =
used=20
        in photo-electrolysis (esp ZrO and TiO) are also used as oxygen=20
        permeably membranes in the solid oxide fuel=20
    cell.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">&gt;Hum, are those materials also =
Mills'=20
      catalysts?</BLOCKQUOTE>
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">No, they are catalyst for =
photochemical water=20
      splitting. Water vapor itself, or hydrogen atoms, will serve to =
catalyze=20
      hydrino formation, according to Mills.</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>I understood that hydrino formation resulted from the presence of =
various=20
  metallic elements along with the low pressure hydrogen. I thought that =
was=20
  what the patent that Parksie thwarted was all about.</DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">He thwarted only one patent, but there =
are=20
    about two dozen others, mostly international (WPO) which will offer =
him very=20
    strong legal footing. BUT he cannot patent the hydrino, even if he =
was the=20
    first to describe it (not certain). Patents only apply to devices, =
not=20
    theories.</BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>Ever heard of a material patent. AFAIK, that covers a substance, =
no=20
  matter how it is produced.</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;</BLOCKQUOTE>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">However, I can find no patents owned by =
Genesis=20
    or the Shaws, so the legal status of</BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>The patent could be in the patentee's name.</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">Do I understand that you will be =
granted=20
      access to view the device?</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>No,</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">&nbsp;I might be willing to volunteer =
to=20
      represent you as a technical advisor in that case,&nbsp; just out =
of=20
      curiosity, if nothing else.</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>If they grant us access I'll post it on Vortex, You are welcome =
to come=20
  if you would like to.</DIV>
  <DIV><BR></DIV>
  <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite"><BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    <BLOCKQUOTE cite type=3D"cite">I wouldn't be surprised if you were =
asked to=20
      put up a big chuck of money before viewing the device. If so RUN =
-don't=20
      walk - away from those folks.</BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
  <DIV><BR><BR></DIV>
  <DIV>Thank you, I'd be suspicious of a large investment even if I were =
allowed=20
  to test the device without opening the box. That's how the investors =
in Tilley=20
  Foundation got burned, They way the Genesis people talked, they have a =
device=20
  ready to go to market. If this is the case they will need a company =
like my=20
  brother's to install them in Minnesota, and service them. They will =
also need=20
  someone to market them, the best product will not sell itself. Unless =
they=20
  have access to their own money, they will also require financing for =
the=20
  installed units.</DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001D_01C2A28E.0FCF6120--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 02:24:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA23530;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:18:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:18:45 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba1f64633f0b [12.21.208.216]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:33:12 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Simple plan to move toward renewable energy
Resent-Message-ID: <"zigaF1.0.Ul5.5GR-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48574
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In an effort to be proactive, here is a second draft first cut at a simple
plan to get the USA moving in the direction of producing significant
renewable energy.


1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE,
dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the
capability to administer this plan. Eventually support this agency using a
perpetual renewable energy fund.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other energy sources like carbon fueled power
companies, enough to generate at least 3 billion dollars a year for the
renewable energy fund, about 10 dollars per person per year.  Rebate
trucking and commercial energy use in order to avoid a significant burden
in a single sector of the economy and a slowing of the economy.  The total
net income from this tax is called the annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the fund's total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like ZPE, LENR, etc.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the fund''s total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the fund's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that be
more, or less than competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.
Awards to be based on best return on investment, as proposed by the bidders
and adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, called the annual energy sales income, is treated as annual income
to the fund.  At the end of the year any non awarded funds are deposited
into the renewable energy permanent fund described below.  The request for
proposals will be in large, medium and small categories, with minimum and
maximum funding amounts in each category, with roughly equal funding to
each category.  In the event of no or insufficient acceptable bids in a
category in a year, the balance of funds for that category for that year
will be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 10 percent of the fund total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities.  This is a separate
fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the fund total prior year's annual revenue for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Reserve 10 percent of the fund annual revenue for emergency expenses.
Deposit half of the end of year emergency fund balance into the renewable
energy permanent fund.

9) Reduce the energy taxes for the subsequent year by 1/2 the annual income
of the permanent fund after inflation proofing deductions.

10) Periodically adjust the percentages as required.


It is hoped that such a system could become self funding after 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors
in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess,
and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 03:03:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id CAA01066;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:56:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 02:56:30 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba1f6bfd0839 [12.21.211.69]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 03:10:55 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"uhT6t1.0.ZG.UpR-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48575
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a continuing effort to be proactive, here is Draft #3 of the Simple
Renewable Energy Plan


1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE,
dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the
capability to administer this plan. Eventually support this agency using a
perpetual renewable energy fund.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other energy sources like carbon fueled power
companies, enough to generate at least 3 billion dollars a year for the
renewable energy fund, about 10 dollars per person per year.  Rebate
trucking and commercial energy use in order to avoid a significant burden
in a single sector of the economy and a slowing of the economy.  The total
net income from this tax is called the annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like ZPE, LENR, etc.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comperable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals will be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year will be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities.  This is a separate
fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
emergency expenses.  Deposit half of the end of year emergency fund balance
into the renewable energy permanent fund.

9) Reduce the 3 billion dollars in energy taxes for the subsequent year by
1/2 the annual interest income of the permanent fund after inflation
proofing deductions.

10) Periodically adjust the percentages as required.

11) At the end of 20 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandonded, place facilities into the private
domain by sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive
percentage.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net
proceeds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund.

It is hoped that such an agency could become self funding within 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors
in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess,
and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 07:10:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14513;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:03:56 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:03:56 -0800
Message-ID: <20021213150322.50313.qmail web40404.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 07:03:22 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Simple plan to move toward renewable energy
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <v01530501ba1ee756dd6a [12.21.208.216]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"U_MW02.0.bY3.RRV-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48576
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Now you'r talking...

--- Horace Heffner <hheffner mtaonline.net> wrote:
> In an effort to be proactive, here is a first cut at a simple plan to
> get
> the USA moving in the direction of producing significant renewable
> energy.
> 
> 
> 1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE,
> dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it
> the
> capability to administer this plan. Eventually support this agency
> using a
> perpetual renewable energy fund.  A small seed funding need be provided
> until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.

I have never been a believer in Excise Taxes but there is a time and
place for everything.  As of right now gasolene is too cheep to make a
proper incentave for alternitaves.  e.g. So you want to buy an electric
car.  suddenly you find out that at $.09 / KWH you are not gaining much
over the $1.23 / gal.   In fact if you own a 30 mpg import and drive 80
miles a day you are only spending about three and a quarter bucks on
transportation energy. At $.09/KWH the damn electrics cost that much and
just flat don't have the performance...  (or air conditioning)  

The energy efficency of the average home is abysmal...  I mean...  I pay
about 1.3 of what most of my neigbors pay and we all live in simular
structures.  Lona and I just take better care of the energy.
 
 
> 2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other energy sources like carbon fueled
> power

Very good.  Excppt carbon 'sortoa' leaves out everything except nuke CF
and H2.  There are many renewables that contain carbon. even some of the
H2 processes start with fuels that have carbon.  The renuable liquids
should be considered exempt (to be considered for taxing at a later date.
  

A sugestion:

How about taxing all mineral based fuels by the fuel volume.  e.g  IF you
burn it you consume a huge volume.  If it is nuke (mineral based) the
volume is very small for a great deal of output energy.  This will
stimulate the cleaner systems (less volume) and higher energy costs will
stimulate reduced waste.  



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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 09:29:17 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA07749;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:27:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:27:41 -0800
Sender: jack mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3DFA177B.5B7397F2 centurytel.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:23:07 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11 centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
References: <v01530501ba1d2010e925 [12.110.74.102]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xh"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xh"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Q4N6b.0._u1.DYX-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48577
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Horace wrote:

Unless there is an unprecedented increase in solar activity
in the last 100 years then this very long term [Sharma]
study is not relevant to the previously discussed changes
in glaciers or wildlife patterns.

Jack writes:

I don't think I know what you mean by "unprecedented."
The temperature of the Earth obviously depends on the
amount of energy received by (and generated within)
the Earth and on the amount of energy the Earth loses
into space.  When the Earth is in a "warm room," the
Earth's temperature would be expected to oscillate about
a higher average than when the warm room disappears and
we are plunged back into an ice age.

The warm room theory should be judged on the quality of
the design equations it can generate from the data, in
this case the relevance of the recent (last 200 years)
increase in the CO2 concentration (an advocate of the
Gaia theory might contend that Earth has brought forth a
fire-making animal to save it from an ice-ball destiny).

Horace wrote:

There is likely vast quantities of oil onshore and offhsore
in Alaska, and finds have been made here since 1972,
though exploration has been curtailed significantly here
due to policy and market expectations.  The known amount
of coal here dwarfs the oil potential though.

Hi Horace,

It's possible that the Earth's supply of hydrocarbons is,
for all practical purposes, infinite.  An advocate of
the Gaia theory might argue that it is our duty to get as
much up into the atmosphere as we can as CO2 before we are
expelled from the warm room (sort of laying up treasure in
heaven -- the story of the ant and the grasshopper comes
to mind).

Please see "Hydrogen as the Driver of Global Tectonics"
by C. Warren Hunt, "Infinite Energy", Vol. 6, #32.

In his article, Warren Hunt (p. 60) writes "New data from
a drill hole at Fort McMurray ... H2, CH4, and CO2 were
found to evolve continuously from the shield granite as
it was pulverized by drilling ...

Silanes oxidize in the presence of the first water they
encounter, releasing their energy and silicon as volcanic
effusives or passively by creating granites ...

Hydrocarbons, mainly methane, migrating with the silanes,
are less reactive and accumulate where barriers obstruct
their upward progress, thus generating deposits of natural
gas, petroleum, and coal ..."

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 09:45:30 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA13891;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:44:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:44:07 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Physics today on fraud in physics
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:00:34 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAEJMDGAA.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
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"3J6dE.0.fO3.bnX-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48578
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

After hearing so much about "pathological science" from
Mr. Parks et al. it's nice to see some scrutiny directed
towards the more traditional sources of new ideas.

http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-55/iss-12/p10.html

The author makes some good assessments about the current
state of industrial research, and about the real nature
of doing science in the market economy.

K.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 09:54:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA17668;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:52:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:52:45 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:09:20 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEJMDGAA.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
In-Reply-To: <v01530502ba1f6bfd0839 [12.21.211.69]>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"Jp-rV2.0.zJ4.ivX-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48580
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Horace.

What you are suggesting is a public works project to stimulate
the economy. Much like the Human Genome Project and the Internet,
a great deal of good can come out of it. 

Unfortunately, the current administration has no interest
in this sort of arrangement. I don't think there is any need
to go into why that state of affairs exist; either you understand
why or you are ideologically incapable of comprehension.
But it does exist. 

For what it's worth, the tax part will never work. If you rethink
this portion, perhaps the results can be made to fit the
private sector or a 501(c) corporation. Can draft four be
"Simple Renewable Energy Business Plan"???? I think it's
fair to say that if we leave this up to the voters we'll
be buying clean air at a dollar a breath in 50 years.

K.

-----Original Message-----
From: Horace Heffner [mailto:hheffner mtaonline.net]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 6:11 AM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan


In a continuing effort to be proactive, here is Draft #3 of the Simple
Renewable Energy Plan


1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE,
dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the
capability to administer this plan. Eventually support this agency using a
perpetual renewable energy fund.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other energy sources like carbon fueled power
companies, enough to generate at least 3 billion dollars a year for the
renewable energy fund, about 10 dollars per person per year.  Rebate
trucking and commercial energy use in order to avoid a significant burden
in a single sector of the economy and a slowing of the economy.  The total
net income from this tax is called the annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like ZPE, LENR, etc.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comperable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals will be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year will be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities.  This is a separate
fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
emergency expenses.  Deposit half of the end of year emergency fund balance
into the renewable energy permanent fund.

9) Reduce the 3 billion dollars in energy taxes for the subsequent year by
1/2 the annual interest income of the permanent fund after inflation
proofing deductions.

10) Periodically adjust the percentages as required.

11) At the end of 20 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandonded, place facilities into the private
domain by sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive
percentage.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net
proceeds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund.

It is hoped that such an agency could become self funding within 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors
in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess,
and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 09:56:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA16450;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:49:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 09:49:14 -0800
X-Sent: 13 Dec 2002 17:49:06 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021213124900.032fadd8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:49:03 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Miles paper uploaded
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"3ZtYs.0.y04.QsX-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48579
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

I uploaded a famous paper by Miles et al.:

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MilesMcorrelatio.pdf

I should have done this one a long time ago. It is one of the best in the 
literature. Among other things, it demonstrates that Lewis et al. (CalTech) 
made an "obvious" error in calorimetry, and both Lewis and Albagi (MIT) 
used far too insensitive helium detection.

- Jed




From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 10:26:22 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA31893;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:22:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 10:22:59 -0800
X-Sent: 13 Dec 2002 18:22:52 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021213132224.00b13fd0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:22:28 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Physics today on fraud in physics
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"paz5D3.0.Fo7.2MY-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48581
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Keith Nagel wrote:

>After hearing so much about "pathological science" from
>Mr. Parks et al.

Park! Not Parks.


>. . . it's nice to see some scrutiny directed
>towards the more traditional sources of new ideas.
>
>http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-55/iss-12/p10.html

That is incisive article, well worth reading.

The conflict of interests described by the author exists in other 
institutions too, even business, even though it is supposedly "purely" 
economic. It isn't only high-status scientists who sometimes find 
themselves impaled on the horns of these dilemmas. A lowly customer support 
engineer may have to choose between helping the customer and revealing 
valuable technical secrets, or revealing aspects of company policy that 
management would prefer to sweep under the rug. For example, it might be in 
the customer's interest to say: "Don't buy that product; it has problems, 
and we are bringing out a better model next month." But that would be 
disastrous for the company, since it would leave a pile of unsold 
merchandise in the warehouse.

Scientists sometimes exaggerate the difference between research and jobs in 
other fields, such as programming, farming, factory work or medicine. They 
think that they alone are devoted to finding the truth, and they represent 
some kind of "gold standard" (as Laughlin puts it) in world-class truth 
seeking. Actually, a farmer or programmer must also learn the truth, or 
perish. An airplane pilot or factory worker who ignores the truth may be 
killed in an accident. As Rudyard Kipling wrote, in "The Secret of the 
Machines:"

But, remember, please, the Law by which we live,
      We are not built to comprehend a lie,
We can neither love nor pity nor forgive.
      If you make a slip in handling us you die!

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 11:29:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA28680;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:36 -0800
Message-ID: <20021213192201.60610.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:22:01 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: EL backlite panels.
To: "Vortex-L Bill Beaty's list" <vortex-l eskimo.com>,
        Rugid grid egroup <rugrid-laptop yahoogroups.com>,
        freenrg <freenrg-l eskimo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"iFyq61.0.l_6.xDZ-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48582
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Does anybody know where I can find EL backlite panels sutable for a 10
inch LCD display.

My GRiD seems to cook them prety regularraly after a couple months of
use.  I think the inverter voltage is too high but I do not have any of
the engineering spec.  

Someone who has proper sizes (8 1/2 X 6 1/2) or cutable EL sheet or even
a process for 'do it yourself'   


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 11:50:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA07244;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:43:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:43:30 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021213114203.00afae10 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 11:42:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: EL backlite panels.
In-Reply-To: <20021213192201.60610.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="=====================_672478437==.ALT"
Resent-Message-ID: <"CHOgR3.0.5n1.WXZ-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48583
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

--=====================_672478437==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Charles:

Hard to find pc parts:

www.startech.com
http://cuetech.com/


At 11:22 AM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote:
>Does anybody know where I can find EL backlite panels sutable for a 10
>inch LCD display.

Steve Krivit
Los Angeles, CA USA
<http://www.newenergytimes.com/>www.newenergytimes.com
www.coldfusioninfo.com
--=====================_672478437==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
Charles:<br><br>
Hard to find pc parts:<br><br>
<a href="http://www.startech.com/" eudora="autourl">www.startech.com</a><br>
<a href="http://cuetech.com/" eudora="autourl">http://cuetech.com/</a><br><br>
<br>
At 11:22 AM 12/13/2002 -0800, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>Does anybody know where I can find
EL backlite panels sutable for a 10<br>
inch LCD display.<br>
</blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Steve Krivit<br>
Los Angeles, CA USA<br>
<a href="http://www.newenergytimes.com/">www.newenergytimes.com<br>
www.coldfusioninfo.com</a></html>

--=====================_672478437==.ALT--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 12:20:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA21735;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:17:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:17:52 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <15.491bb8e.2b2b9a41 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:17:05 EST
Subject: thank you hheffner and others
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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"muzF8.0.XJ5.m1a-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48585
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The review of my paper was most helpful.  I incorporated your recomendations 
in version #2 and subuitted it.  Version #2 was rewritted and greatly 
improved.

I hope it flies.

Frank Znidarsic

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 12:21:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA20413;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:14:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:14:25 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <f8.260dea03.2b2b9971 aol.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:13:37 EST
Subject: Re: Quantum condition ...what does the term mean?
To: herman antioch-college.edu
CC: 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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"k4PVo2.0.o-4.X-Z-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48584
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

It means the angular momentum of the electron going around the nucleus can 
only be certain discrete values.  angular momentum = R X V

for the atom angular momentum = N* R X  V

whare n is an integer

Frank

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 12:46:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31303;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:26 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:26 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba1fef4ce1c2 [12.21.208.16]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:58:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Simple plan to move toward renewable energy
Resent-Message-ID: <"yLJCo1.0.1f7.fQa-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48587
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:03 AM 12/13/2, Charles Ford wrote:

>A sugestion:
>
>How about taxing all mineral based fuels by the fuel volume.  e.g  IF you
>burn it you consume a huge volume.  If it is nuke (mineral based) the
>volume is very small for a great deal of output energy.  This will
>stimulate the cleaner systems (less volume) and higher energy costs will
>stimulate reduced waste.

Yes, or nukes could be excluded.  Also, nukes might be considered renewable
(though not necessarily clean) if the source of fuel is a breeder.  There
are a vast number of variations of such a plan, in all aspects of
implementation.  Hopefully, however, the basic notion of initial taxation
to achieve permanent funding plus the significant economic feedback cycles
involved, can initiate the necessary dialong to find a way to satisfy
enough people to make it happen.

I should also note that the main aim of the program, even the taxation
part, is not to penalize, it is simply to promote aggressive employment of
renewables.  Taxing non-renewable fuel seems like the simplest most
agreeable way to get the money to jump-start the fund.  Admittedly, such a
tax does further the fund's objectives.  Ultimately though, the tax payer
and energy user gets the money all back in the form of reduced energy cost,
interest reduced taxes, and eventually in funding (without taxation) for
energy conservation efforts.  In addition, the capitalization of the
(eventually) multi-trillion dollar fund helps drive the stock market,
capitalizes industry in general, while the fund interest supports the
energy industry directly, helps drive the economy and increases general tax
revenue.  Ulitmately, energy prices will be driven lower than they would be
otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in driving the
economy and keeping inflation low.  I think, if anything, the annual
taxation amount is way too timid.  The main problem with a high funding
level is that there should be a significant delay in the above expected
feedback effects, maybe 5 years or more. It would not be surprising to see
no proposals in the large category for a number of years.  However, this is
good in that the fund then simply grows, which makes the opportunities ever
more attractive in subsequent years, and corporations can readily plan for
the bigger target opportunites coming downstream.   The nice part of the
"carrot" is that a permanent fund guarantees the "carrot" won't go away.
The incentive remains year after year.   The hard part is getting
legislators to see the nature of this thing and to initially sponsor and
then protect it in the formative years when nothing much may happen.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 12:51:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA31229;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:44:18 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530504ba1ff528422b [12.21.208.16]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 12:58:42 -0800
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"BIBOX1.0.td7.XQa-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48586
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 1:09 PM 12/13/2, Keith Nagel wrote:

>Unfortunately, the current administration has no interest
>in this sort of arrangement.

The benfits of this plan are about as Republican as you can get.  The tax
payer gets the money all back in the form of reduced energy cost, interest
reduced taxes, and eventually in funding (without taxation) for energy
conservation efforts.  In addition, the capitalization of the (eventually)
multi-trillion dollar fund helps drive the stock market, capitalizes
industry in general, while the fund interest supports the energy industry
directly, helps drive the economy and increases general tax revenue.
Ulitmately, energy prices will be driven lower than they would be
otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in driving the
economy and keeping inflation low.

I agree that it is obvious there may be a present administration bias
against such a plan, but if we end up with an oil embargo over the persion
gulf situation, the wisdom of having had such a plan implemented 20 years
ago should be apparent to everyone.  The principle problem with the plan is
that results probably would not be immediate.  It has to be sponsored in
the legislature where careers have a planning horizon of more than 4 or 8
years.

There is no way such a plan could be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  The principle benefits derived
are long term and to the system as a whole and not readily allocated back
to the plan or to the proposers on a business planning cycle basis.
Business planning cycles are way too short.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 13:28:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA10678;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:15:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:15:40 -0800
X-Sent: 13 Dec 2002 21:15:31 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021213151204.031cd5f0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:03:50 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
In-Reply-To: <v01530502ba1f6bfd0839 [12.21.211.69]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"WKiay1.0.Vc2.wta-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48588
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Horace Heffner wrote:

>1) Form a separate government agency, especially one separate from DOE, 
>dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the 
>capability to administer this plan. . . .

The government does many things well, but not radical, innovative research 
in controversial subjects. The kind of research the government has done 
well historically has almost all been in incremental, mainstream, 
well-established fields, such as financing railroads in 1870, inventing 
computers, or inventing the Internet with Al Gore's help. Gore really *did* 
help, and that's a telling point. When a middle-aged C-student politician 
with no technical experience can help an R&D program, you know that program 
is not profoundly innovative. It may be challenging, it may be tremendously 
valuable, but it isn't controversial, revolutionary physics, because 
someone like Gore has no clue what revolutionary physics looks like, or how 
to distinguish it from claptrap. In 1989, the powerful political operative 
Ira Magaziner testified in favor of funding CF research, while admitting 
that he had no clue whether cold fusion is real or not. From my point of 
view, that means he should not have said one word in favor of it -- or 
against it. I would no more endorse a claim I cannot judge personally than 
I would volunteer to fly the Space Shuttle, but these politicians feel they 
have the responsibility to form opinions about technical subjects far over 
their heads. (In a sense, they are right -- society does call upon them to 
approve funding for things they do not understand. Corporate executives 
must do this too, often with disastrous results.)

When it comes to controversies and revolutionary science, the government 
should help keep score, and it should publish statistics and facts. It does 
those things with scrupulous honesty -- it is the envy of the world in that 
respect. But I do not think it should not take sides or fund research. 
Unfortunately, that leaves us with no means to fund CF. It is a difficult 
problem. In the end, I think the best solution is to rejuvenate the 
traditional academic institutions. We need to reduce the control exerted by 
Washington and by the peer-review process. We need to lower the stakes, and 
make it okay to be wrong, as long as you are having fun and you are 
inspirational. I agree with Robert Laughlin: ". . . the product of science 
in general, and university science in particular, that counts is not 
intellectual property at all but young people with fiery independence and 
the courage to take risks." The system was never perfect in the past, but I 
think it has gone downhill.

Looking at the history of cold fusion, and the papers in the LENR-CANR 
library, I get a sense that academic institutions -- including 
government-run ones like China Lake and Los Alamos -- might have done cold 
fusion properly, if only they been left in peace, and the healthy 
traditions of academic science had been honored. Much has been made of the 
hostility that cold fusion faces. Of course I know that hostility is real! 
But I think it comes from a small group of people. I suspect it might have 
been overcome with a little more gumption on the part of the cold fusion 
researchers. (It may yet be overcome -- history is not over.) The 
enthusiastic public response to LENR-CANR demonstrates that there are many 
open-minded people out there. The problem seems to be too much power is 
concentrated in the hands of a small number of conservative 
stick-in-the-mud naysayers. What we want is a system in which power is 
dispersed, in nobody's hands. The risk is that some number of people will 
waste money and abuse the freedom given to them at the taxpayer's expense. 
Hagelstein and others have told me the drive to make science more 
"accountable" is what caused this

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 13:34:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA16461;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:27:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 13:27:35 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 16:44:09 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMOEJODGAA.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
In-Reply-To: <v01530504ba1ff528422b [12.21.208.16]>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"id-iu.0.714.63b-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48589
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi Horace.

You write:
>The benfits of this plan are about as Republican as you can get.

Indeed, that is the plan's problem. It is WAY too conservative for
the current administration. It's funny really, how little the actual
Republican party resembles the idea of the thing. The Democrats
are no better; Clinton was a bit of an anomaly, and they seem
to have returned to their ordinary mode of operation...

The problem is political, not scientific or administrative.

I agree with all you are saying, a plan such as you are proposing
is VERY doable, and would solve some major world problems. Plus
the economy would boom as a result. But none of these things
will compel a voter to vote for the plan.

The current crisis presents a golden opportunity to float
such a plan, voters will accept it if it is presented
to them as a means to fight terrorism. That could be made
to work politically, with the backing of EITHER of the
two major political parties. But unless John McCain somehow
gains control of the Whitehouse, I suggest approaching the
Dem's. They're maybe hungry enough now for power to take
a stab at it. 

Please rethink the business plan. This is the way it will
actually happen, IMHO. 

K.




  The tax
payer gets the money all back in the form of reduced energy cost, interest
reduced taxes, and eventually in funding (without taxation) for energy
conservation efforts.  In addition, the capitalization of the (eventually)
multi-trillion dollar fund helps drive the stock market, capitalizes
industry in general, while the fund interest supports the energy industry
directly, helps drive the economy and increases general tax revenue.
Ulitmately, energy prices will be driven lower than they would be
otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in driving the
economy and keeping inflation low.

I agree that it is obvious there may be a present administration bias
against such a plan, but if we end up with an oil embargo over the persion
gulf situation, the wisdom of having had such a plan implemented 20 years
ago should be apparent to everyone.  The principle problem with the plan is
that results probably would not be immediate.  It has to be sponsored in
the legislature where careers have a planning horizon of more than 4 or 8
years.

There is no way such a plan could be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  The principle benefits derived
are long term and to the system as a whole and not readily allocated back
to the plan or to the proposers on a business planning cycle basis.
Business planning cycles are way too short.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 14:13:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx2.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01967;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:11:00 -0800 (PST)
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:11:00 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3DFA5BE6.67A076 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 14:15:02 -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   Friday, 13 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"OpCW_3.0.YU.ihb-z" mx2>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48590
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   Friday, 13 Dec 02
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 15:24:08 -0500
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 13 Dec 02   Washington, DC

1. MISSILE DEFENSE: TEST FAILS, BUT "SUCCESS RATE" IS UNCHANGED. 
The "exoatmospheric kill vehicle" failed to separate from the
booster in Wednesday's test over the Pacific.  "It must be pretty
gloomy around the office this morning," I said to my friend Puff
Panegyric in the Missile Defense Agency.  "Not really," Puff
replied, "this one didn't count; it failed to reach the endgame.
Our success rate remains at the 88 percent quoted by General
Kadish."  I did a quick calculation: "But the interceptor only
hit the target in 40 percent of the tests."  Puff's voice was
rising, "You can't include tests that don't reach the endgame;
they haven't gotten to the technically challenging part."  Then
why, I wanted to ask, do they fail?  But Puff had hung up.

2. MISSILE DEFENSE II: WE STILL CAN'T SEEM TO STOP SCUDS.  The
ship had been tracked by the US since leaving North Korea bound
for the Middle East.  It was stopped and searched before reaching
Yeman, and buried under bags of concrete, inspectors found Scud
missiles.  What would a nation that threatens preemptive nuclear
strikes be expected to do next?  Citing International Law, the
United States allowed the ship to proceed with its cargo.  You
will recall that during the Gulf War the U.S. claimed to be able
to stop 96% of the Scud missiles with the Patriot, but in a
careful analysis of actual tapes, MIT physicist Ted Postol showed
the actual figure was zero percent (WN 20 Mar 92).  A decade
later the United States still can't seem to stop scud missiles.

3. GENESIS PROJECT: A REALLY GOOD SCAM CAN BE USED OVER AND OVER. 
Back in the early '70s, an inventor named Sam Leach claimed to
have built a car that used ordinary water as a fuel.  The idea
was simple: You use electrolysis to decompose the water into
oxygen and hydrogen and then use the hydrogen as a fuel to run
the engine and generate electricity for the separation.  So there
you have it: You start with water and end up with water plus
work.  Scientists scoffed: it would take more energy to decompose
the water than you could get from the combustion of hydrogen. 
Ordinarily yes, Leach agreed, but he had a secret catalyst that
reduced the energy of decomposition.  The great thing about the
First Law of Thermodynamics, however, is that it doesn't care
what's in your secret box, it gives you the limit of any process. 
Leach raised millions from investors and then retired to a
seaside villa in California.  Who needs a car that runs on water
when you have a chauffeur-driven Rolls-Royce?  The rumor spread
that he had been bought off by the oil companies.  Now something
called Genesis World Energy is running the same scam over again.

4. RICHARD MESERVE: BECOMES PRESIDENT OF CARNEGIE INSTITUTION. 
Meserve, a Democrat, resigned as Chair of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.  A physicist-lawyer, Merserve earned a Physics PhD
from Stanford.  He was the APS/AIP lawyer during the protracted
legal dispute with Gordon and Breach and won in every country in
which APS was sued (WN 19 Aug 94).  He replaces Maxine Singer, a
leading geneticist, who retires after an illustrious career.

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.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 17:46:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09616;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:45:21 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:45:21 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba203fcdcbf6 [12.21.208.16]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:59:41 -0800
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"7dJtm3.0.5M2.nqe-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48592
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:44 PM 12/13/2, Keith Nagel wrote:

>I agree with all you are saying, a plan such as you are proposing
>is VERY doable, and would solve some major world problems. Plus
>the economy would boom as a result. But none of these things
>will compel a voter to vote for the plan.


Although wide grass roots support would be good, the only voters necessary
are the members of congress, true?  Unfortunately, swaying congress usually
takes bucks for lobbying.  I don't know how that hurdle might be breached,
unless some member of congress, seeing the long term potential reputation
to be gained,  might take up the banner as his own.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 17:51:29 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA09554;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:45:13 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:45:13 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba203a959211 [12.21.208.16]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 17:59:37 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"y384n2.0.CL2.fqe-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48591
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 4:03 PM 12/13/2, Jed Rothwell wrote:

[SNIP]
>When it comes to controversies and revolutionary science, the government
>should help keep score, and it should publish statistics and facts. It does
>those things with scrupulous honesty -- it is the envy of the world in that
>respect. But I do not think it should not take sides or fund research.
>Unfortunately, that leaves us with no means to fund CF. It is a difficult
>problem.
[SNIP]


First, let me say that the principle need for a Renewable Energy Agency to
be government affiliated is that there is an initial need for tax funding.
Ultimately, once fully self funded, it might possibly be freed from
government control, and turned into a trust of some kind.  However, to be
maximally effective, such an agency would likely still need the equivalent
of a utility regulatory capability for some circumstances, which is also
inherently a government activity.  In any event, it should be as
independent as possible from existing government agencies for the reasons
you cite, and also to get it out of the realm of short term politics.

Second, and more to the point, only 5 percent was proposed for research.
Though critical in the long run, it is still a comparatively small part of
the suggested agency function.  Only 0.5 percent was suggest for the kinds
of things that are controversial.  This is initially about 15 million
dollars a year.  That's still one heck of a lot of funding for what
mainstreamers might consider to be crackpot schemes.  It might provide the
kind of opportunites many of us on vortex have dreamed about.  A large
amount of this tiny portion of the budget would be expected to be (or at
least appear to be) wasted.  Unfortunately, it would probably generate by
far the most political heat.

The problem with CF research funding, and funding of other similar topics,
is $15 million dollars worth LESS of a problem with this scheme.  Sure,
still a problem, but the proposal helps the problem a lot more than it
hurts.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 19:58:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA21608;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:57:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 19:57:51 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba2057c56d91 [12.21.208.229]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:12:20 -0800
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"IPh6J3.0.YH5.-mg-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48593
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Some of my thinking may be way too optimistic.  If half of sales and
interest is applied to reducing the excise tax, then it takes a VERY
optimistic average annual profit (20 percent of project investment) to
reach the goal of self-sufficientcy in 20 years, inflation ignored.  On the
other hand, an energy crisis starting somewhere early in there would make
this estimate look modest.  The picture looks a lot better if the taxes
remain in effect for the full 20 years.  No net revenue from pilot projects
was assumed.

Some kind of revenue boost from the researh and innovation is needed to
make for a really solid plan.  This might be in the form of royalties, or
maybe simply in increasing productivity to the point where the
profitability is achived.  Unfortunately, if similar profitability is
achieved by the industry as a whole, the energy prices go down and the
picture looks less favorable for the Renewed Energy Agency.  Some kind of
intellectual property arrangement would work well, probably shared with the
proposal winners.

It would take a long time to make a trillion dollar fund, unless the
initial tax rate is increased to about 50 dollars per person.  As is, at 20
years the total assets are only about 88 billion, and that without
depreciation applied.

Here is a first cut at some 20 year numbers, inflation ignored:


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       2,925   0       150     3,075   4,275   300
3       2,821   144     214     3,179   5,609   308
4       2,714   292     280     3,286   6,988   318
5       2,603   444     349     3,397   8,413   329
6       2,489   602     421     3,511   9,716   340
7       2,364   785     486     3,636   10,894  351
8       2,230   996     545     3,770   11,937  364
9       2,084   1,236   597     3,916   12,838  377
10      1,925   1,507   642     4,075   13,622  392
11      1,755   1,808   681     4,245   14,363  407
12      1,575   2,131   718     4,425   14,967  424
13      1,382   2,487   748     4,618   15,603  442
14      1,180   2,859   780     4,820   16,267  462
15      970     3,247   813     5,030   16,959  482
16      750     3,652   848     5,250   17,682  503
17      521     4,074   884     5,479   18,436  525
18      281     4,515   922     5,719   19,223  548
19      32      4,976   961     5,968   20,045  572
20      0       5,456   1,002   6,458   21,132  597



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)

0       0       3,000   0
300     1,200   900     1,200
308     1,230   923     2,430
325     1,300   975     3,730
343     1,373   1,030   5,104
363     1,632   907     6,736
383     1,915   766     8,651
406     2,235   610     10,886
433     2,597   433     13,483
463     2,962   278     16,445
497     3,279   199     19,724
535     3,746   0       23,470
577     4,040   0       27,510
625     4,372   0       31,882
676     4,729   0       36,611
731     5,116   0       41,727
791     5,535   0       47,262
855     5,988   0       53,250
925     6,478   0       59,729
1,001   7,009   0       66,737

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 13 20:24:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA29257;
	Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:23:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:23:02 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba20646564e2 [12.21.209.219]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2002 20:37:28 -0800
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Draft #3 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"I05H13.0.t87.b8h-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48594
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Here is a second cut at some 20 year numbers, inflation ignored.  Here
taxes remain in effect for the full 20 years.  Average payback time for the
projects is down to about 13 years.  This is very reasonable if the cost of
energy rises signifcantly above inflation over the 20 year period.  At the
end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding consideration
of intellectual property rights etc.  All just very rough guesses of
course.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,350   300
3       3,000   55      218     3,273   5,733   315
4       3,000   114     287     3,400   7,169   327
5       3,000   174     358     3,532   8,662   340
6       3,000   237     433     3,670   10,035  353
7       3,000   310     502     3,812   11,278  367
8       3,000   395     564     3,959   12,378  381
9       3,000   492     619     4,110   13,322  396
10      3,000   601     666     4,267   14,136  411
11      3,000   723     707     4,429   14,896  427
12      3,000   853     745     4,597   15,507  443
13      3,000   996     775     4,771   16,140  460
14      3,000   1,144   807     4,951   16,797  477
15      3,000   1,298   840     5,138   17,479  495
16      3,000   1,458   874     5,332   18,187  514
17      3,000   1,624   909     5,534   18,922  533
18      3,000   1,797   946     5,743   19,684  553
19      3,000   1,975   984     5,960   20,476  574
20      3,000   2,161   1,024   6,185   21,297  596



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)

0       0       3,000   0
300     1,200   900     1,200
315     1,260   945     2,460
327     1,309   982     3,769
340     1,360   1,020   5,129
353     1,590   883     6,719
367     1,835   734     8,554
381     2,097   572     10,650
396     2,375   396     13,025
411     2,631   247     15,656
427     2,816   171     18,473
443     3,101   0       21,573
460     3,218   0       24,791
477     3,340   0       28,131
495     3,466   0       31,597
514     3,597   0       35,194
533     3,733   0       38,926
553     3,874   0       42,800
574     4,020   0       46,820
596     4,172   0       50,991

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 08:57:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA14145;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:56:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 08:56:09 -0800
Sender: jack granger.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3DF89F3F.636338DC centurytel.net>
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 14:37:51 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11 centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
References: <v01530501ba1d2010e925 [12.110.74.102]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xh"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xh"
Resent-Message-ID: <"N5z7d.0.wS3.eAs-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48595
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Horace wrote:

Unless there is an unprecedented increase in solar activity
in the last 100 years then this very long term [Sharma]
study is not relevant to the previously discussed changes
in glaciers or wildlife patterns.

Jack writes:

I don't think I know what you mean by "unprecedented."
The temperature of the Earth obviously depends on the
amount of energy received by (and generated within)
the Earth and on the amount of energy the Earth loses
into space.  When the Earth is in a "warm room," the
Earth's temperature would be expected to oscillate about
a higher average than when the warm room disappears and
we are plunged back into an ice age.

The warm room theory should be judged on the quality of
the design equations it can generate from the data, in
this case the relevance of the recent (last 200 years)
increase in the CO2 concentration (an advocate of the
Gaia theory might contend that Earth has brought forth a
fire-making animal to save it from an ice-ball destiny).

Horace wrote:

There is likely vast quantities of oil onshore and offhsore
in Alaska, and finds have been made here since 1972,
though exploration has been curtailed significantly here
due to policy and market expectations.  The known amount
of coal here dwarfs the oil potential though.

Hi Horace,

It's possible that the Earth's supply of hydrocarbons is,
for all practical purposes, infinite.  An advocate of
the Gaia theory might argue that it is our duty to get as
much up into the atmosphere as we can as CO2 before we are
expelled from the warm room (sort of laying up treasure in
heaven -- the story of the ant and the grasshopper comes
to mind).

Please see "Hydrogen as the Driver of Global Tectonics"
by C. Warren Hunt, "Infinite Energy", Vol. 6, #32.

In his article, Warren Hunt (p. 60) writes "New data from
a drill hole at Fort McMurray ... H2, CH4, and CO2 were
found to evolve continuously from the shield granite as
it was pulverized by drilling ...

Silanes oxidize in the presence of the first water they
encounter, releasing their energy and silicon as volcanic
effusives or passively by creating granites ...

Hydrocarbons, mainly methane, migrating with the silanes,
are less reactive and accumulate where barriers obstruct
their upward progress, thus generating deposits of natural
gas, petroleum, and coal ..."

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 10:38:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA18051;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:38:04 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:38:04 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba21296e816d [12.21.209.219]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:52:35 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"oHCFp1.0.zP4.Cgt-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48596
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 6:37 AM 12/12/2, Taylor J. Smith wrote:
>Horace wrote:
>
>Unless there is an unprecedented increase in solar activity
>in the last 100 years then this very long term [Sharma]
>study is not relevant to the previously discussed changes
>in glaciers or wildlife patterns.
>
>Jack writes:
>
>I don't think I know what you mean by "unprecedented."
>The temperature of the Earth obviously depends on the
>amount of energy received by (and generated within)
>the Earth and on the amount of energy the Earth loses
>into space.

At the moment you are focused on model while I am talking about data.  The
history of glacial melt can be determined from examination of rock scoring
and of vegetation and biological remains left on the morain, and other
indicators.  In more recent times there are written and verbal historical
accounts.  When glaciers melt-off in 100 years or less in a quantity
equivalent to thousands of years at prior melt rates, and melt by 1/3 or
more, then that is reasonably assumed to be unprecedented, especially in
the middle of a glacial cycle as we are now.

When glaciers that have long term advanced only small fractions of an inch
per year, or even have been in long term retreat, go rogue and advance at a
foot or more a year, then that is also reasonably called unprecedented,
though maybe with much less evidence than that provided by large melt-offs.

When these thing happen on a world-wide basis, then it seems to me to
indicate an unprecedented state world-wide.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 10:58:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA22890;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:53:05 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 10:53:05 -0800
X-Sent: 14 Dec 2002 18:53:02 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021214134654.00b153b8 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 13:52:37 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Appeal to readers on LENR-CANR.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"uspLq3.0.ab5.Hut-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48597
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://lenr-canr.org/Appeal.htm

So many people have visited LENR-CANR.org, I hope we can make use of them, 
as leverage, to pry open funding for CF.

Unfortunately, I may have made things a little too convenient, and readers 
may miss the link to this Appeal on the first page. Many readers now 
download files directly, bypassing the web pages. This week, for example, 
992 visitors downloaded 2,285 papers, but only 422 visited the first page 
(index.html), and only 149 visited the Features page.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 11:43:09 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA06693;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:42:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:42:16 -0800
X-Sender: hheffner mtaonline.net (Unverified)
Message-Id: <v01530500ba212f12d49e [12.21.211.199]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 11:56:43 -0800
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: RE: Draft #4 of the Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"nc8vL1.0.Te1.Ocu-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48598
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

In a continuing effort to be proactive, here is Draft #4 of the Simple
Renewable Energy Plan.


1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, separate
from DOE, dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and
give it the capability to administer this plan.  Eventually support this
agency using a only a perpetual Renewable Energy Permanent Fund plus agency
revenues.  A small seed funding need be provided until sufficient energy
taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  This plan should scale to much larger tax
rates if desired.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in order to
avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a slowing
of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the annual
tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions, hydrinos, etc.  Proposal cycles for
research might be quarterly however.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals should be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year are be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This is a separate fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Annually adjust the percentages as required.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place facilities into the private
domain by sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive
percentage.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net
proceeds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund.

It is hoped that such an agency could become self funding within 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors
in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess,
and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this has to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal occurs 10 years after a project is initiated. The full value
awarded to the project is deducted from the Total Project Amount, while
only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered from the property disposal.
The full disposal amount is placed in the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund
balance.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,350   300
3       3,000   55      218     3,273   5,733   315
4       3,000   114     287     3,400   7,169   327
5       3,000   174     358     3,532   8,662   340
6       3,000   237     433     3,670   10,035  353
7       3,000   310     502     3,812   11,278  367
8       3,000   395     564     3,959   12,378  381
9       3,000   492     619     4,110   13,322  396
10      3,000   601     666     4,267   14,136  411
11      3,000   723     707     4,429   14,896  427
12      3,000   853     745     4,597   16,107  443
13      3,000   940     805     4,746   17,345  460
14      3,000   1,031   867     4,898   18,626  475
15      3,000   1,124   931     5,055   19,953  490
16      3,000   1,219   998     5,217   21,415  505
17      3,000   1,309   1,071   5,380   23,017  522
18      3,000   1,393   1,151   5,544   24,767  538
19      3,000   1,470   1,238   5,708   26,674  554
20      3,000   1,539   1,334   5,873   28,725  571
21      0       1,602   1,436   3,039   27,886  587
22      0       1,662   1,394   3,056   29,758  304
23      0       1,617   1,488   3,105   31,721  306
24      0       1,567   1,586   3,153   33,741  311
25      0       1,514   1,687   3,201   35,819  315
26      0       1,458   1,791   3,249   37,956  320
27      0       1,398   1,898   3,296   40,153  325
28      0       1,335   2,008   3,342   42,412  330
29      0       1,267   2,121   3,388   44,732  334
30      0       1,196   2,237   3,433   47,114  339
31      0       1,121   2,356   3,477   49,557  343
32      0       1,042   2,478   3,520   51,011  348
33      0       1,056   2,551   3,607   52,520  352
34      0       1,071   2,626   3,697   54,058  361
35      0       1,088   2,703   3,791   55,624  370
36      0       1,105   2,781   3,886   57,220  379
37      0       1,124   2,861   3,985   58,844  389
38      0       1,145   2,942   4,087   60,498  399
39      0       1,167   3,025   4,192   62,182  409
40      0       1,191   3,109   4,300   63,895  419


Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Disposal
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)

0       0       3,000   0       0
300     1,200   900     1,200   0
315     1,260   945     2,460   0
327     1,309   982     3,769   0
340     1,360   1,020   5,129   0
353     1,590   883     6,719   0
367     1,835   734     8,554   0
381     2,097   572     10,650  0
396     2,375   396     13,025  0
411     2,631   247     15,656  0
427     2,816   171     18,473  0
443     3,101   0       20,373  600
460     3,218   0       22,331  630
475     3,322   0       24,344  655
490     3,429   0       26,413  680
505     3,538   0       28,361  795
522     3,652   0       30,178  917
538     3,766   0       31,847  1,048
554     3,881   0       33,353  1,188
571     3,996   0       34,718  1,315
587     4,111   0       36,013  1,408
304     2,127   0       35,039  1,550
306     2,139   0       33,960  1,609
311     2,174   0       32,812  1,661
315     2,207   0       31,591  1,714
320     2,241   0       30,293  1,769
325     2,274   0       28,916  1,826
330     2,307   0       27,457  1,883
334     2,340   0       25,916  1,940
339     2,372   0       24,292  1,998
343     2,403   0       22,584  2,056
348     2,434   0       22,891  1,064
352     2,464   0       23,215  1,070
361     2,525   0       23,567  1,087
370     2,588   0       23,948  1,104
379     2,653   0       24,360  1,121
389     2,721   0       24,806  1,137
399     2,790   0       25,289  1,154
409     2,861   0       25,810  1,170
419     2,934   0       26,373  1,186


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.
The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  If profitability
goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is that the excise
taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad thing in that
event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of reduced energy cost, interest reduced taxes,
and eventually in funding (without taxation) for energy conservation
efforts.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive the stock
market, capitalizes industry in general, while the fund interest supports
the energy industry directly, helps drive the economy and increases general
tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be driven lower than they
would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in
driving the economy and keeping inflation low. There is also the potential
of major technological breakthroughs that will permanently free us from
energy worries.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 14:06:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15115;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:05:15 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:05:15 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:04:38 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <69anvu8pjr8noqi12f9r6q1ls9dkvaj411 4ax.com>
References: <v01530500ba19035ee3dd [12.21.209.203]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530500ba19035ee3dd [12.21.209.203]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 OAA15045
Resent-Message-ID: <"R9YSN1.0.-h3.Qiw-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48599
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 Sun, 8 Dec 2002 06:41:09 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
>>>However, looking at the hydrino formation, Mills states we have:
>>>
>>>   r = (n) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)), ,  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...
>>>
>>>instead of the normal quantized Bohr radius:
>>>
>>
>>Did you take into account that in Mills case 'q' is also a function of n?
>>(perhaps you did, I have only scanned this briefly, and haven't yet had a
>>chance to study it thoroughly).
>
>
>No.  For q to be a function of n we have to have a photon trapped insired
>radius r.  Since that requires a 47 keV photon even for n = 1/2, how can we
>accept this theory of q as a function of n?  We are violating Heisenberg,
>and now have to throw out any concept of magnetic pressure and Plank's law
>as well.

What I meant was did you take it into account when creating the equation.
It appears to have been taken into account, though this may have been because
you obtained the equation directly from Mills, rather than doing it yourself?
(BTW Mills assumes (AFAIK) that the circumference is exactly one full De Broglie wavelength for all hydrinos).

Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 14:08:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA15902;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:07:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 14:07:09 -0800
From: Robin van Spaandonk <rvanspaa bigpond.net.au>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 09:06:34 +1100
Organization: Improving
Message-ID: <7panvu8s620fcfmiou6a4c694s9qh0ve8b 4ax.com>
References: <v01530501ba1724bd3c48 [12.21.208.113]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530501ba1724bd3c48 [12.21.208.113]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.92/32.572
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 OAA15873
Resent-Message-ID: <"aP76X.0.Ou3.Dkw-z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48600
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 Fri, 6 Dec 2002 20:21:45 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]

>At 10:52 AM 12/7/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:
>
>>If you are interested enough to find the time, you will find a
>>relativistically corrected, completely energy consistent model on my web
>>page
>>at http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/New-hydrogen.html.
>>The sole difference between this model and the model you used for your
>>calculations above, is the fact the you have demanded that the De Broglie
>>wavelength be exactly equal to a single orbit length (necessary for it to
>>be in phase after completing an orbit). I have relaxed this requirement,
>>allowing it to make multiple orbits before once again being in phase.
>
>
>I think this squeezing of the electron, i.e. rolling it up to fit into a
>more compact volume, requires energy which is not available.  
[snip]
This doesn't appear to be a problem for the electrons in the inner orbitals of the higher elements.


Regards,

R. van Spaandonk

It isn't terrorism we need to fear,
it's apathy and stupidity.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 18:50:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA05074;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:49:00 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 18:49:00 -0800
Message-ID: <3DFBEE4B.2050505 bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:51:55 -0500
From: Terry Blanton <commengr bellsouth.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Appeal to readers on LENR-CANR.org
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021214134654.00b153b8 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"XIhiO.0.BF1.Ss--z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48601
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Well, you could have a pop-up window soliciting funding while the files d/l.

Jed Rothwell wrote:

> See:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/Appeal.htm
>
> So many people have visited LENR-CANR.org, I hope we can make use of 
> them, as leverage, to pry open funding for CF.
>
> Unfortunately, I may have made things a little too convenient, and 
> readers may miss the link to this Appeal on the first page. Many 
> readers now download files directly, bypassing the web pages. This 
> week, for example, 992 visitors downloaded 2,285 papers, but only 422 
> visited the first page (index.html), and only 149 visited the Features 
> page.
>
> - Jed
>
>
>


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 21:30:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id VAA20558;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:29:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 21:29:44 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DFC1337.5C9BBB1E verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 07:29:27 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Re: Are improved neutrino detection methods subject to clasification?
References: <3DF73ED6.609696DD verisoft.com.tr>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"2IEMh2.0.715.8D1_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48602
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

As it is confirmed that neutrinos does have mass and does not obey to the
"Standard Model", restriction given on magnetic moment of neutrino by this
model is also lifted. As a consequence, detection of neutrinos by magnetic
interactions become a research focus.

I found from Google research a good resource page on "Electromagnetic Properties
of Neutrinos", http://www.to.infn.it/~giunti/neutrino/ele/ .
I looked to research papers referenced there. I prefer be wrong on my
limited observation but I found the distribution of nationality of 
authors and institutions is unexpectingly different from similar research
fields on physics. 

Is this distribution can be linked to national military arguments?



hamdix verisoft.com.tr wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> This would be a good hypothetical example I think, that science can not be
> free in the presence of the military.
> 
> Improved neutrino detection makes nuclear weapons and submarines visible.
> One can immediately locate all neutrino sources around the world. This
> would be unacceptable within an national defense system.



Regards,
 
hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 22:44:19 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id WAA20954;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:42:53 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:42:53 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba21d6eb3855 [12.21.208.160]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 22:57:24 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"nh0Ci.0.K75.jH2_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48603
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:04 AM 12/15/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>What I meant was did you take it into account when creating the equation.
>It appears to have been taken into account, though this may have been because
>you obtained the equation directly from Mills, rather than doing it yourself?
>(BTW Mills assumes (AFAIK) that the circumference is exactly one full De
>Broglie wavelength for all hydrinos).


Now that you mention it, if memory serves me, I think I got this equation
from you!  In any event, I got that formula from prior discussions of Mills
here on vortex.  I simply cut and pasted my calculations from my prior
posts, that were base on givens from vortex. Apparently I should have said
I did no FURTHER consideration of q as a function of n.  I did not realize
this is how that equation was derived.  I simply used it as a given
replacement for the standard equation.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 23:18:26 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA02631;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:17:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:17:37 -0800
Message-ID: <3DFC2D8F.E3D53D46 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:21:51 -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: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"LZ07B3.0.ye.Ho2_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48604
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

December 13, 2992

Vortex,
A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally. This
has been an age old challenge in the mathematics world limited only by
the sheer calculating tenacity of the mathematicians --- over the ages.
Well thanks to the supercomputer, it seems the Pi does have a
determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!  It now waits to be confirmed.
The run occurred around November of this year.

-AK-



From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 14 23:37:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA07019;
	Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:36:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:36:52 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530504ba21da0bf463 [12.21.208.160]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2002 23:51:23 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Mass Spec. question
Resent-Message-ID: <"vsOkd1.0.bj1.K43_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48605
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 9:06 AM 12/15/2, Robin van Spaandonk wrote:

>This doesn't appear to be a problem for the electrons in the inner
>orbitals of the higher elements.

I think none of the conventional inner orbitals violates Heisenberg.  If
they did, Heisenberg would have been struck down long ago.   The energy
levels are or at least can be very high.  The 29th ionization level of
copper, for example, is 11.567 keV.  The 28th ionization level of Ni is
10.775 keV.  But that is neither here or there, as both models are in synch
with regard to Heisenberg when n=1. (After all, if n=1, then no fractional
state is involved.)

Looking at the situation again from a simple (hopefully not too simple?)
perspective, the kinetic energy K of an electron in Bohr orbit radius r is
given by:

   K = q^2/((8Pi)(e0)(r)) = (1/2)(m)(v^2)

So speed v is:

   v = (q^2/((4pi)(e0)(r)(m))^0.5

and momentum is thus ~ 1/r:

   p = mv = ((m)(q^2)/(4(pi)e0(r))^0.5

Given that the radius is quantized to:

   r = (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)),  for n = 1,2,3, ...
                                      (or in Mills' case: n = 1/2, 1/3, ...)
we have:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  (1/n) = [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

instead of the Mills valocity:

   v = [q^2/(2(e0)(h))]  1/(n^0.5),  for n = 1/2,1/3,1/4, ...


Uncertainty of momentum (delta mv) for a particle (electron) constrained by
distance delta x is given by Heisenberg as:

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi delta x)

but 2r acts as our delta x because the electron is contained within the
orbitsphere, so we have (substituting 2r for delta x in the above):

   delta mv = h/(2 Pi [ 2 (n^2) ((h^2)(e0))/((pi)(q^2)(m)) ] )

   delta mv = [h (q^2)(m)] / [4 (n^2)(h^2)(e0)]

   delta mv = (q^2)(m) / [4 (n^2)(h)(e0)]

and an uncertainty in velocity delta v:

   delta v = (q^2) / (4 (n^2)(h)(e0))

So now the question is how does delta v compare to v?  That is to say is
the uncertainty on v small in comparison to v?  To see, let's look at the
ratio:

   (delta v)/v = [ (q^2) / (4 (n^2)(h)(e0)) ] / [q^2/(2(e0)(h)(n))]

   (delta v)/v = [(2)(e0)(h)(n)] / [(4)(n^2)(h)(e0)]

   (delta v)/v = [(2)(n)] / [4 (n^2)]

   (delta v)/v = 1 / (2n)

However, with normal (non-Mills) orbitals, n is a whole number, so deltav
remains small with respect to v.  There is not the large imbalance I
pointed out in the earlier post of mine which is the subject of discussion
here, which occurs because (1) n is a fraction, and (2) the exponents in
the Mills equations differ such that as n goes to increasingly lower
values, i.e. n = 1/x as x gets large, we have

   delta v = (1/2) (x^0.5) v

for Mill's, and the resulting energy gets way out of whack in states other
than n=1.

The above relations for K, v, p  remain valid for inner electons in the
Bohr or Mills model (ignoring relativisitc effects)1,  With n = 1 in these
inner states, it appears r is valid for either model, thus either model
works fine for the innner electrons.  Neither then violates Heisenberg.  It
is only the hypothesized (by Mills) fractional quantum states that violate
Heisenberg.  At least that's the way it appears to me.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 15 05:06:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA22481;
	Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:05:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:05:59 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba2230032727 [12.21.208.160]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:20:32 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
Resent-Message-ID: <"q8cnS3.0.BV5.tu7_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48606
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 11:21 PM 12/14/2, Akira Kawasaki wrote:
>December 13, 2992
>
>Vortex,
>A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
>carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
>mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally. This
>has been an age old challenge in the mathematics world limited only by
>the sheer calculating tenacity of the mathematicians --- over the ages.
>Well thanks to the supercomputer, it seems the Pi does have a
>determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
>before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!  It now waits to be confirmed.
>The run occurred around November of this year.
>
>-AK-


Now THAT's hubris!  To think it can not be a bug is typical programmer ego
showing through.

The above implies Pi is a rational number.  That this is not so was first
proven by Lambert.  It was proven that one can not "square the circle" in
1882 by F. Lindemann, that Pi is not only not rational, but is
transcendental.   This means there are no polynomials with integer
coefficients (thus even ratioanal coeffficients) in Pi that equal zero.

My money is fairly safely on this being a bug.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 15 05:26:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA26805;
	Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:26:11 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 05:26:11 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3DFC8304.DAC67A5A verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:26:28 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
References: <3DFC2D8F.E3D53D46 ix.netcom.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"ICLtL3.0.jY6.pB8_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48607
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


A discovery last year suggesting the opposite was true where individual (hexadecimal) digits of PI can be calculated without calculating prior digits. 
See http://www.nersc.gov/~dhbailey/ and http://pi.nersc.gov/ and related links on randomness of PI.

On the other hand 400 hours run on a supercomputer is really impressive and a numerical solution obtained in a such computation could surpass precision of an analytical result :)


Akira Kawasaki wrote:
> 
> December 13, 2992
> 
> Vortex,
> A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
> carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
> mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally. This
> has been an age old challenge in the mathematics world limited only by
> the sheer calculating tenacity of the mathematicians --- over the ages.
> Well thanks to the supercomputer, it seems the Pi does have a
> determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
> before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!  It now waits to be confirmed.
> The run occurred around November of this year.
> 
> -AK-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 15 06:11:47 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA03444;
	Sun, 15 Dec 2002 06:10:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 06:10:45 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba223efcab9c [12.21.208.109]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 06:25:08 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan, DRAFT #5
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZYKZT.0.ar.ar8_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48608
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


                 A Simple Renewable Energy Plan, DRAFT #5


1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, separate
from DOE, dedicated solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and
give it the capability to administer this plan.  Eventually support this
agency using a only a perpetual Renewable Energy Permanent Fund plus agency
revenues.  A small seed funding need be provided until sufficient energy
taxes can be raised.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income. This plan should scale to much larger tax rates if
desired.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, and
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions, hydrinos, etc.  Proposal cycles for
research might be quarterly however.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals should be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent
fund.

6) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This is a separate fund.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development.  Each
year include the prior year's interest from the permanent fund, after
inflation proofing deductions, as income to the current year above and
beyond the annual energy sales income. The total prior year's income is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.

8) Annually adjust the percentages as required.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place facilities into the private
domain by sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive
percentage.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net
proceeds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund.

It is hoped that such an agency could become self funding within 20 years,
with a significant reduction in tax burden coming much sooner.  It is
further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums available for
energy systems design and construction would garner serious attention from
big high-tech companies or even some government agencies, like the national
laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be required to permit such
agencies to compete commercially or to partner with commercial competitors
in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may have an extreme excess,
and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider applying those funds to
incentives for or funding for energy conservation programs

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this has to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal occurs 10 years after a project is initiated. The full value
awarded to the project is deducted from the Total Project Amount, while
only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered from the property disposal.
The full disposal recovery amount is placed into the Renewable Energy
Permanent Fund balance.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,350   300
3       3,000   55      218     3,273   5,733   315
4       3,000   114     287     3,400   7,169   327
5       3,000   174     358     3,532   8,662   340
6       3,000   237     433     3,670   10,035  353
7       3,000   310     502     3,812   11,278  367
8       3,000   395     564     3,959   12,378  381
9       3,000   492     619     4,110   13,322  396
10      3,000   601     666     4,267   14,136  411
11      3,000   723     707     4,429   14,896  427
12      3,000   853     745     4,597   16,107  443
13      3,000   940     805     4,746   17,345  460
14      3,000   1,031   867     4,898   18,626  475
15      3,000   1,124   931     5,055   19,953  490
16      3,000   1,219   998     5,217   21,415  505
17      3,000   1,309   1,071   5,380   23,017  522
18      3,000   1,393   1,151   5,544   24,767  538
19      3,000   1,470   1,238   5,708   26,674  554
20      3,000   1,539   1,334   5,873   28,725  571
21      0       1,602   1,436   3,039   27,886  587
22      0       1,662   1,394   3,056   29,758  304
23      0       1,617   1,488   3,105   31,721  306
24      0       1,567   1,586   3,153   33,741  311
25      0       1,514   1,687   3,201   35,819  315
26      0       1,458   1,791   3,249   37,956  320
27      0       1,398   1,898   3,296   40,153  325
28      0       1,335   2,008   3,342   42,412  330
29      0       1,267   2,121   3,388   44,732  334
30      0       1,196   2,237   3,433   47,114  339
31      0       1,121   2,356   3,477   49,557  343
32      0       1,042   2,478   3,520   51,011  348
33      0       1,056   2,551   3,607   52,520  352
34      0       1,071   2,626   3,697   54,058  361
35      0       1,088   2,703   3,791   55,624  370
36      0       1,105   2,781   3,886   57,220  379
37      0       1,124   2,861   3,985   58,844  389
38      0       1,145   2,942   4,087   60,498  399
39      0       1,167   3,025   4,192   62,182  409
40      0       1,191   3,109   4,300   63,895  419


Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Disposal
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)

0       0       3,000   0       0
300     1,200   900     1,200   0
315     1,260   945     2,460   0
327     1,309   982     3,769   0
340     1,360   1,020   5,129   0
353     1,590   883     6,719   0
367     1,835   734     8,554   0
381     2,097   572     10,650  0
396     2,375   396     13,025  0
411     2,631   247     15,656  0
427     2,816   171     18,473  0
443     3,101   0       20,373  600
460     3,218   0       22,331  630
475     3,322   0       24,344  655
490     3,429   0       26,413  680
505     3,538   0       28,361  795
522     3,652   0       30,178  917
538     3,766   0       31,847  1,048
554     3,881   0       33,353  1,188
571     3,996   0       34,718  1,315
587     4,111   0       36,013  1,408
304     2,127   0       35,039  1,550
306     2,139   0       33,960  1,609
311     2,174   0       32,812  1,661
315     2,207   0       31,591  1,714
320     2,241   0       30,293  1,769
325     2,274   0       28,916  1,826
330     2,307   0       27,457  1,883
334     2,340   0       25,916  1,940
339     2,372   0       24,292  1,998
343     2,403   0       22,584  2,056
348     2,434   0       22,891  1,064
352     2,464   0       23,215  1,070
361     2,525   0       23,567  1,087
370     2,588   0       23,948  1,104
379     2,653   0       24,360  1,121
389     2,721   0       24,806  1,137
399     2,790   0       25,289  1,154
409     2,861   0       25,810  1,170
419     2,934   0       26,373  1,186

Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

        Total Fund Balance              63,895
        Total Research and Pilots       15,413
        Total Current Projects          26,373
        Total Sold Project Value        37,333
                                    ==========
        Total benefit                  143,014

        Total tax cost                  60,000

        Cost/Benefit                   0.41954


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.
The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  If profitability
goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is that the excise
taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad thing in that
event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding (without taxation) for energy conservation
efforts.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive the stock
market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund interest
supports the energy industry directly with low risk and potentially
windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing, and increases
general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be driven lower than
they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be a major factor in
driving the economic productivity and in keeping inflation low. There is
also the potential of major technological breakthroughs that will
permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 2 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the Cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about 1 for 1, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 15 07:30:33 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23071;
	Sun, 15 Dec 2002 07:27:41 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 07:27:41 -0800
Sender: jack mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3DFC9E55.38D80B40 centurytel.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 15:23:01 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11 centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
References: <v01530500ba21296e816d [12.21.209.219]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xh"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xh"
Resent-Message-ID: <"kFSqL2.0.Pe5.jz9_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48609
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Horace wrote:

Unless there is an unprecedented increase in solar activity
in the last 100 years then this very long term [Sharma]
study is not relevant to the previously discussed changes
in glaciers or wildlife patterns.

Jack wrote:

I don't think I know what you mean by "unprecedented."
The temperature of the Earth obviously depends on the
amount of energy received by (and generated within)
the Earth and on the amount of energy the Earth loses
into space.

Horace wrote:

... When glaciers melt-off in 100 years or less in a
quantity equivalent to thousands of years at prior melt
rates, and melt by 1/3 or more, then that is reasonably
assumed to be unprecedented, especially in the middle of a
[inter?]glacial cycle as we are now ...

Hi Horace,

I should abandon this and join the very interesting thread
that you and Robin are pursuing.

Anyway, the precedent I see is the much faster melting of
world ice that occurred about 12,000 years ago.  At the
beginning of this interglacial, the ice was probably
melting faster than today because of the relatively rapid
increase in world average temperature.

The 'warm room" theory would predict that more ice will
melt and the average temperature of the Earth will move
higher until the warm room disappears, or until the
temperature of the Earth oscillates around a non-moving
average that gives "heat in = heat out" for the current
warm room.  That final average temperature could be high
enough to melt all the Earth's ice if this interglacial
lasts long enough (unlikely).

The Sharma proposal is just one of many factors that could
affect world temperature.  Given constant solar radiation,
my guess is that CO2 concentration is the most important
factor.  Without human intervention, the increasing
Himalayan rock face could reduce world temperature during
the next glacial to the point where the oceans freeze over,
given enough time (and the glacials have been much longer
than the interglacials).

As Earth freezes over, reflection of light back into space
could become increasingly important, as well as reduction
in water vapor concentration.  A world freeze would most
likely be a deviation amplfying process until an "ice-ball"
equilibrium is established, or until we find ourselves in
another warm room.

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 15 14:40:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA26683;
	Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:39:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:39:08 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:53:39 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"i0izk2.0.qW6.BIG_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48610
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 7:23 AM 12/15/2, Taylor J. Smith wrote:

>
>Hi Horace,
>
>I should abandon this and join the very interesting thread
>that you and Robin are pursuing.

I am going to have to pretty much abandon all threads, as I have little
free time left.

>
>Anyway, the precedent I see is the much faster melting of
>world ice that occurred about 12,000 years ago.


That melt-off was in the normal glacial cycle, true?  Are you saying a
sudden melt-off now is in-cycle?  It strikes me that a sudden high latitude
and high altitude melt-off unseen in 10,000 years is unprecedented.
Further, if the CO2 dumped into the atmosphere were not there, this
melt-off and the docmented global temperature rise of the last 100 years
would not have ocurred.  I think this melt-off is man made, and certainly
*that* is unprecedented.

Futher, there is no evidence of a significant release of methane in that
period 12,000 years ago, is there?  If there is I am unaware of it, but on
the other hand I don't know that it would be possible to determine.  The
things most worrisome about the present situation is the known release of
ocean bottom clatherates, and the potential for a significant increase in
the release of such clatherates, which may have been frozen since before
life even formed, and the release of methane and other greenhouse gasses
from arctic tundra, which is documented, but which is continuing to be
studied.  Also of concern is the dumping of high altitude water vapor by
jet planes, and the loss of ozone. Unfortunately, we may not be able to
know what the high altitude ozone sitation was 12,000 years ago. Ozone
reflects some high energy radiation before the greenhouse effect can trap
it. While it is true that CO2 is probably the main problem moving us toward
the edge of a permanent regime change, it may be other things that can
actually push us over that edge.

The greenhouse effect is the effect of the atmosphere changing the
wavelength of incoming radiation from one to which the atmosphere is
relatively transparent to wavelengths that are highly absorbed and not
liklely to be converted back.  High altitude methane and water vapor do
this very effectively, as can be seen on venus.  Venus has 100 percent
cloud cover, yet the high reflectivity of those clouds is not enough to
cool venus, because too much energy is trapped before it even gets to the
clouds.

What is worrisome is not that we are involved in some cyclical phenomenon,
but rather that we have tipped the balance beyond the possibility of any
life sustaining equilibrium.  If sufficient high altitude changes occur,
earth can be in a state similar to venus, not permitting surface water,
even though we are farther away from the sun.

Sorry, but I don't have the time to dig up references.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 01:47:46 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id BAA04691;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:46:02 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 01:46:02 -0800
From: Dean Miller <dtmiller midiowa.net>
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:47:55 -0600
Organization: Miller and Associates
Message-ID: <808rvu89mq244lnd4lkkki1bk43fjjjucj 4ax.com>
References: <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
In-Reply-To: <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 1.91/32.564
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 BAA04657
Resent-Message-ID: <"Kl_kE3.0.B91.P3Q_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48611
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 14:53:39 -0800, hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace
Heffner) wrote:

>That melt-off was in the normal glacial cycle, true?  Are you saying a
>sudden melt-off now is in-cycle?  It strikes me that a sudden high latitude
>and high altitude melt-off unseen in 10,000 years is unprecedented.
>Further, if the CO2 dumped into the atmosphere were not there, this
>melt-off and the docmented global temperature rise of the last 100 years
>would not have ocurred.  I think this melt-off is man made, and certainly
>*that* is unprecedented.

I've not seen any evidence for either the tiny increase in CO2 that's
currently measured as being the cause of the global temperature rise
nor the increase being due to mankind.  Only projections of what
*could* happen *if* we increase our CO2 output.

I have seen evidence that the interior of the Earth is heating up (as
best we can measure it).  For example, the permafrost in the Arctic is
melting *from the bottom.*  The *bottom* of the Mediterranean is
getting hotter (and saltier).  Neither of those examples is readily
attributable to an atmospheric CO2 increase (nor anything man can
control at present).

-- Dean -- from (almost) Des Moines -- KB0ZDF

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 03:50:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id DAA13472;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:49:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 03:49:01 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <196.12677ffa.2b2f1787 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 06:48:23 EST
Subject: BlackLight article supplement
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 10512
Resent-Message-ID: <"wQM0T2.0.LI3.isR_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48612
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All,

Sorry to be tardy in fleshing out some points touched upon in the article 
(http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0250/baard.php).  I hope these early 
morning notes are coherent.  

The draft was short of 2,000 words, but the piece was published at a bit over 
1,000.  Web stories are usually brief.  One irony of the web, where "space" 
is limitless, is that readers tend to have shorter attention spans.  I reveal 
nothing new of a technical nature here, just human context.

But first let me note up top that Peter Zimmerman and Aaron Barth felt that I 
didn't convey the full force of Dr. Mills' offense in copying long passages 
of standard physics from other texts into his own book.  Though some have 
argued over what attribution was needed and in what form, I had no intention 
of belittling the complaint and apologize if it came across that way.  I 
don't think I did underplay it given the thrust of the article was elsewhere, 
but for future articles I have asked Dr. Barth to provide me with a brief 
quotation in an email that fully addresses the extent he feels Dr. Mills has 
violated academic standards.

Second, I'm not in a position to judge, as some have asked me to do, if "real 
progress is being made."  I know that real work is being done, but whether it 
is potentially fruitful, properly directed, and along the lines of what many 
people in this discussion forum would like is beyond my expertise to judge.  
What I can say is that BlackLight doesn't seem to be a ship of fools -- these 
are bright people with serious goals who don't seem to have lost their 
marbles.  As for Dr. Mills himself, he's definitely unusual, charismatic, 
driven, brilliant, and I believe sincere.  Some people have tried to portray 
him as a snake oil salesman or madman frothing at the mouth.  Neither will 
prove out when this is all said and done.  But that still doesn't make him 
right.

As for timetables, Dr. Mills has wisely stopped providing them (as a 
technology reporter, I know it's nearly always a mistake to make such 
commitments).  One thing I've learned about Dr. Mills in the past year or so 
is that while he'll tell you that he can calculate "everything from quarks to 
the Cosmos in closed form equation" he won't tell you, "Oh, check out the 
Journal of Applied Physics next week."  

He's learned that Park et al will go behind the scenes to scuttle his 
progress or public recognition.  Given the history, for Dr. Mills to say, and 
this is fiction, "GE is putting out a space heater with us in 2003 and that 
company is applying for patents through its R&D department" would be 
foolhardy.  I expect an announcement when a first product is practically 
loaded onto flatbed trucks and heading for Walmart.

Now, a few quotations and notes left out of the article:

MILLS

Referring to the Rowan work for NASA:

"We're just helping him out. It's not super-duper core to what we're doing as 
a company, but it's useful.  We're getting good data on power density."

"We might eventually be interested in further grants for propulsion, but ti's 
not our immediate goal."

On sharing data with other scientists:

"I just gave a talk at Los Alamos and I'm giving one to the EPA.  But I'm not 
sure we can talk about those things in any detail yet."

"I have a former GE guy on the board and he says they never put out papers at 
the rate we do.  We have 85 papers in academic journals with a small staff.  
How many papers does a professor write in a career?"

On the various PhDs on staff, ad whether they believe in hydrinos:

"A lot probably didn't when we first hired them, but I think everyone does 
now."

"Going into this it was hard to tell if there would be any use for it.  Now I 
think we've demonstrated that there can be extraordinary usefulness."

On funding:

The current round of funding is seeking "less than five million [dollars]."

Products:

"One major focus is on microdistribution systems for homes or cars."

Note:  My impression is that immediately, Dr. Mills seems to expect to be 
very competitive with other system existing and emerging systems, not to blow 
them out of the water right away.  Then with recognition of the hydrino 
effect, improvements developed through more resources being put into R&D 
would scale up steadily to a vastly superior product.

"It doesn't matter how long took us or the cost because at the end of the 
day, how could it matter? It's worth every cent because it's priceless."

MARCHESE

"I have a lifelong love for exploration of space and propulsion and here was 
an opportunity.  I had kept my eyes on what Blacklight was doing for the past 
five years and thought if the claims had any validity it might be used for 
propulsion in space."

"Maybe he's [Mills] less interested in something like propulsion, but I'm 
near their top priority because the work has gotten visibility, but I'm not 
the one to make or break them."

"I wouldn't be there if I didn't think there was potential."

"I just looked at this from an aerospace engineering standpoint.  If you have 
this energetic plasma, why not exhaust rocket engine.  Instead of converting 
it to heat, why not use it for kinetic energy?"

"I'm convinced that at low pressures with some mixed gas plasma systems you 
produce some results that suggest that the hydrogen atoms in those systems 
are energetic, more so than they should be."

"The issue is that maybe there's a completely conventional explanation for 
these results, or maybe it's some new phenomena we don't understand."

On BlackLight switching gears from one testing platform to another:

"I would have to say that's a fair criticism. They've been learning, just 
like the rest of us. But they've gotten a lot better at doing the experiments 
they need to do to demonstrate to the rest of the scientific community that 
this is a scientific endeavor and not a science fiction endeavor."

On BLP in more fringe or lesser-known publications:

"That's certainly the only place they published for the first ten years of 
the company's existence. But now they've submitted to more respected 
journals."

On BLP staff:

"They've PhDs from top schools like Berkeley, in things like mechanical 
engineering, nuclear physics, and spectroscopy.  These are people really 
trained in their respective fields. They could easily get other jobs and I 
sometimes wondered why they were taking such a risk."

"I don't ask this question because these are nice guys, but I often want to 
ask what brings you here?"

"There are some really good engineers there.  Mark Nansteel has a PhD from 
Berkeley and was a professor at U. Penn.  He could work at any national lab.  
He's not at BlackLight because he's unemployable."

On whether the staff believes in the hydrino:

"I try not to grill them about that either.  But the guys talk about an 
approach similar to the way I approach things -- we stick to experimental 
data and to an extent we understand Randy's interpretations." 

"We're going to leave theory up to him."

"The experiments they are doing there are good experiments and the data is 
real data."

"Randy is also not an engineer.  He relies heavily on the experimentalists."

On skeptics:

"I'm here to build a rocket.  Violating the second law of thermodynamics is 
not one of my goals."

"These experiments are not very difficult to reproduce.  You can't do it in a 
garage, but any national lab or university physics department could reproduce 
these experiments, and they should.  If there's a debate, folks should 
reproduce them."

"The scientific community is averse to risk, especially in academia, and it 
shouldn't be that way.  Some of the folks who go into academia are the most 
conservative people you could ever meet."

"There are those who say shouldn't go anywhere near this because it might 
affect my career."

"I'm not crazy about reading my name in Nature or Scientific American, 
particularly in a negative light when in academia your name is all you have."

"The only thing I can do is to approach this as a scientist.  The feedback to 
date from every camp of people who really looked is that I'm approaching this 
the only way a scientist possibly can."

"The Scientific American article I was actually pretty upset about. The guy 
didn't even have the decency to give me a call."

"I haven't been burned by Bob Park as much as others have. I read his book, 
Voodoo Science, and I liked it quite a bit."

On how Dr. Mills has gone about things:

"The hydrino is a crazy thought for most people and I think the way you need 
to approach this thing is to say, "Here's all of this interesting unexplained 
experimental evidence. The have other people reproduce those experimental 
results and let them try to come up with explanations.  Then say "Here's one 
possible explanation." That might be the craziest of all theories, but if the 
other nine are ruled out over twenty years, then maybe it's correct.  Dr. 
Mills did it in a different order, saying, "I have this theory and let's try 
to prove if it's correct or not."

But Marchese indicated that until light from stars was seen being bent, 
Einstein might be considered to have been in the same boat.

On availability of compounds and other experiments:

"They don't say, 'Yeah, we've got it but you're not allowed to test it.'"

On Observations:

"Blacklight people are not the only folks out there who have seen some of 
these effects -- look at the literature for the plasma and coating industry, 
for hydrogen and argon.  Some of them may have been seeing similar results."

"I've seen those [early] experiments and that's certainly not an especially 
easy way to determine conclusively what's going on.  They've had ten years to 
devote to this so they've gotten a heck of a lot better at experiments.  The 
spectral data is certainly saying there's something unique going on.  
Calorimetry is more open to debate, I think."

The condensed hydrogen:

"That's a really dramatic turn and that's why I don't even want to mess with 
that now.  If he's right [about having created the liquid hydrogen in this 
method], then it's true, he's done. But if he's wrong, he's going to have to 
take a step back."

"He shows me a condensed vial, and it's another thing that's crazy."

Context:  Marchese clearly meant "crazy" in the sense that it's wild and 
out-there, as is the whole hydrino enterprise, not insane.  This is made 
clear in the following part of the interview in which I pounded on that very 
question.

On Mills personally:

"I think the guy is definitely very intelligent.  Maybe if this hydrino thing 
turns out to be wrong, which happens to best of us, it might considered 
wasted energy because he can solve a lot of problems with his intelligence.  
If he's right, it's the most amazing thing of all time."

"Certainly he's got a different personality than me.  If you walked down the 
hallways at Princeton or Rowan, you've got some wacky characters.  It's not 
fair for me to say he's crazy."

"He certainly believes in what he's doing.  Get him talking about it and he 
won't stop."

"When I go there, I'm there a couple of hours doing experiments. I don't seek 
him out.  I purposefully try not to deal with him that much.  He's a nice 
guy, but I'm there to get very specific things done."

"He's not the best communicator, but he's gotten a little better.  There are 
those who talk at various levels, and can dumb things down.  That's not one 
of his strengths.  When he's talking to me outside of my field I can have a 
hard time following."

Note:  If my writing has made any sense to laymen, I'll take my Pulitzer 
right now, thank you.   : )  

On being contacted by others since I reported on his work for Wired:

"A major company in the energy business asked me about the work.  They didn't 
really say why, I'm not sure if they are already investors or looking to 
invest or what.  They already saw some of my results.  I presume BlackLight 
said they could call me...I don't think it's appropriate that I name the 
company, but yes, it was a Fortune 500."

"A Department of Energy scientist was curious as to why I was pursuing this 
work since he had evaluated in some way --  read some papers or something but 
didn't do experiments -- and didn't think there was much merit to it.  I just 
told him the effects we were seeing warranted further study.  I referred him 
to more recent papers Mills and others have published in that area."

Note:  HSG members have also reached out to Marchese.

MICHAEL SHERMER OF SKEPTIC

"Maybe it's useful to have fuzzy shades of evaluation.  Maybe we could say, 
"Gee, he doesn't fit the profile of a total crackpot.  Maybe there are three 
or four categories between pure bunk and acceptable science, but that still 
doesn't make it workable."

"Scientists are the most open-minded group of people there are.  I don't 
think it matters a bit what investors think.  Maybe he's passed the hurdle of 
getting investors interested, but that doesn't at all make it right."

"It does make me nervous that most people can't make sense of this work and 
those who say they can remain pretty divided."

Note:  In context it was clear that he was not nervous Mills might be right, 
but rather nervous that we might be seeing more crank science.  I got the 
impression that he felt the more firmly grounded science was, the more 
convergence of understanding there would be about a phenomenon."

On serendipity:

"As a general principal I find that some ideas may work for reasons 
completely different than those their claimants originally cite.  
Chiropractics, muscle manipulation may work for reasons that have nothing to 
do with charkras and energy fields and other nonsense."

ROBERT A. CASSANOVA

"We like vigorous debate.  We look for ideas that may have some uncertainty 
attached to them.  This was one we thought was worth another look, based on 
the research that's gone on for the last decade or so."

"We don't endorse anything.  We look for the facts.  Just because we fund 
something doesn't mean we think it's going to work.  Most of what we fund is 
high risk."

"We have over 170 credible peer reviewers around the country and the vast 
majority hold PhDs."

"We're looking for significant advancements, even paradigm shifts, that 
address challenges in aeronautics and space.  We take a lot of chances with 
concepts."

Note:  Since 1998, there have been 80 Phase 1 studies funded by NIAC, and 21 
for Phase 2.  Phase 1 work can pull down $75K for six months and Phase 2 up 
to $500K for two years.

"We're looking for a very high failure rate, but also significant 
breakthroughs well beyond what NASA does now."

"We're not really afraid of controversy.  We want open debate and 
examination."

"We've had some we thought were questionable and did question some projects 
in our meetings, but they turned into a real successes."

Note:  One example was Dr. Winglee's M2P2 propulsion  -- 
http://www.geophys.washington.edu/Space/SpaceModel/M2P2/

On Cold Fusion:

"With cold fusion something they observed something no one was able to repeat 
reliably experimentally.  And now there's a report out by the Navy that 
summarizes work over the past decade that is very credible.  There may be 
something undiscovered going on with those experiments, now they are saying 
there's something there.  I'm saying we need to have open minds.  We're not 
taking a stand pro or con on the Blacklight Rocket; were just investigating 
it."

"We're not in the mode of responding to sensationalist comments like were 
heard from Park."

JAMES VICCARO, Journal of Applied Physics

"The reviewers were aware of the [hydrino] theory but felt there were enough 
international observations to be worth publishing."

"If this were obviously crackpot or really controversial, it would be 
recognized as such.  It's a rather run of the mill article, he's [Mills] not 
proposing anything outrageous here.  There's no reason to suspect anything 
strange by reading the abstract."  Mills played down the hydrino in his 
Applied Physics article. "He basically did an analysis of it, but it wasn't 
the main point of the manuscript."

Vicarro notes that Mills has recently published in Chemical Physics Letters. 
"That's also impressive," he says.

"This was one of the more thorough reviews I've seen, but the ultimate level 
of peer review is the community itself."

"If a cold fusion paper came to me I'd look at it very carefully and send it 
out to a few people for review."

Note:  The Journal currently has a 44% rejection rate.

Erik Baard
http://www.baard.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 06:00:02 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id FAA00902;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 05:58:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 05:58:38 -0800
From: Erikbaard aol.com
Message-ID: <1bb.ad89754.2b2f35e5 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:57:57 EST
Subject: Re: BlackLight article supplement
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 10512
Resent-Message-ID: <"pSOQ92.0.-D.DmT_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48613
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi All - 

I caught a few typos (even a use of "international" for "interesting") in my 
early morning typing delirium.  I'll correct them for the permanent document 
being posted on hydrino.org.  Sorry for the glitches.

Erik

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 07:43:40 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA07322;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:42:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:42:18 -0800
Sender: jack mail3.centurytel.net
Message-ID: <3DFDF344.4BFE2140 centurytel.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:37:40 +0000
From: "Taylor J. Smith" <tjs11 centurytel.net>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0C-Caldera (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5-15 i486)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global Warming
References: <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; name="xh"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; filename="xh"
Resent-Message-ID: <"Dac7G3.0.Fo1.QHV_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48614
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


Jack wrote:

Anyway, the precedent I see is the much faster melting of
world ice that occurred about 12,000 years ago.

Horace wrote:

That melt-off was in the normal glacial cycle, true?
Are you saying a sudden melt-off now is in-cycle?
It strikes me that a sudden high latitude and high altitude
melt-off unseen in 10,000 years is unprecedented.

Jack writes:

The current melt-off could be predominantly the effect of
the warm room.  If we are really in a warm room, the danger
is global cooling, not global warming; and our policy
should be to put as much CO2 and other greenhouse gases
into the air as possible (laying up treasure in heaven).
See below for Dean Miller's interesting suggestion.

Horace wrote:

The things most worrisome about the present situation is
the known release of ocean bottom clatherates [releasing
methane], and the potential for a significant increase
in the release of such clatherates, which may have been
frozen since before life even formed, and the release of
methane and other greenhouse gasses from arctic tundra,
which is documented, but which is continuing to be studied.

Jack writes:

We could be in the midst of another deviation amplifying
process; and, as usual, timing is everything: A possible
scenario is that the Arctic ice cap melts, but the Arctic
remains cold.  The result could be "lake effect" snow of
almost unimaginable magnitude which may blanket Cleveland
with fifty feet of snow in July, reflecting sunlight
into space.

In a relatively few years, there would be a mile-high
sheet of ice formed in place, to stay for "100,000" years.
The "lake effect" snow stops when the Arctic Ocean freezes
over again.

Horace wrote:

What is worrisome is not that we are involved in some
cyclical phenomenon, but rather that we have tipped the
balance beyond the possibility of any life sustaining
equilibrium.  If sufficient high altitude changes occur,
earth can be in a state similar to Venus, not permitting
surface water, even though we are farther away from
the sun.

Jack writes:

I think that the overwhelming influences are cyclic, and that
we have not quantified the effects, nor even identified
all of them.  (As an aside, how much of Venus' surface
heat is due to solar radiation and how much is coming from
inside Venus?)

Dean Miller from (almost) Des Moines wrote:

I've not seen any evidence for either the tiny increase
in CO2 that's currently measured as being the cause of
the global temperature rise nor the increase being due
to mankind.  Only projections of what *could* happen *if*
we increase our CO2 output.

I have seen evidence that the interior of the Earth is
heating up (as best we can measure it).  For example, the
permafrost in the Arctic is melting *from the bottom.*
The *bottom* of the Mediterranean is getting hotter
(and saltier).  Neither of those examples is readily
attributable to an atmospheric CO2 increase (nor anything
man can control at present).

Hi All,

Since we don't know what's going on regarding global
warming and the next ice age, I think we should confine
ourselves to affecting CO2 emissions only as part of
measures to increase efficiency and to reduce the emission
of other pollutants into the atmosphere such as particles
and hydrocarbons.

Jack Smith


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 07:55:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA12592;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:52:40 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 07:52:40 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba23a9e8634a [12.21.208.218]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:07:12 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Resent-Message-ID: <"Y2FhO.0.g43.8RV_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48615
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 3:47 AM 12/16/2, Dean Miller wrote:

>I've not seen any evidence for either the tiny increase in CO2 that's
>currently measured as being the cause of the global temperature rise
>nor the increase being due to mankind.  Only projections of what
>*could* happen *if* we increase our CO2 output.

There have been a number of credible references posted here on vortex the
last couple years.  One showed a nice graph of human CO2 production and
avg. temperature vs time for the 20th century, if I recall.  It took
forever for me to download with my old 14.4 modem.  Sorry, I just don't
have the time to dig them up or to debate further.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 08:07:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA18731;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:05:51 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 08:05:51 -0800
Message-Id: <3.0.6.32.20021217000611.00957dd0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
X-Sender: jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32)
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 00:06:11 +0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: John Winterflood <jwinter cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
In-Reply-To: <3DFC2D8F.E3D53D46 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Resent-Message-ID: <"5p0Zi3.0.Ya4.VdV_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48616
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

AK wrote:
>A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
>carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
>mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally. This
>has been an age old challenge in the mathematics world limited only by
>the sheer calculating tenacity of the mathematicians --- over the ages.
>Well thanks to the supercomputer, it seems the Pi does have a
>determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
>before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!  It now waits to be confirmed.
>The run occurred around November of this year.

Someone managed to get an almost identical report (different computer
but same result) printed in a serious Australian newspaper several
years ago.  Someone posted it on our Physics notice board and it
created a bit of discussion.  So it would appear that this is actually
the confirmation rather than the discovery.  On the other hand it
is rather more likely to be someone trying the same hoax a second time!


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 09:32:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA13334;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:26:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:26:16 -0800
X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 17:19:28 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021216121928.02ccf478 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:19:31 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"PlAd22.0.EG3.toW_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48617
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I wrote:

"The increase is not tiny at all. It is 6 ppp per year, which is easily 
measured with today's instruments."

Correction: That is approximate amount being added from fossil fuel. The 
amounts present in the atmosphere are:

1. Approximately 280 ppm before the industrial revolution, based on a 
variety of sampling techniques from ancient ice, air trapped in bottles and 
so on. See the graphs in the first reference, below.

2. 315 ppm in 1958, the first year the total was measured with modern, high 
precision instruments (mass spectrometers).

3. 370 ppm today. (Measured in Hawaii.) A 55 ppm increase in 44 years; 1.3 
ppm per year. However, most of the increase is recent. The curve correlates 
with the world-wide explosion in fossil fuel use.

Sources:

http://geowww.gcn.ou.edu/~msoreg/tes/atm%20greenhouse.htm
http://www2.bc.edu/~kafka/ge187.f01/ge187f01_lect10.html
http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/atmosphere/data3.html

- Jed 


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 09:34:12 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA13829;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:27:17 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:27:17 -0800
X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 17:00:30 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021216113246.00b14a98 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:48:16 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global Warming
In-Reply-To: <808rvu89mq244lnd4lkkki1bk43fjjjucj 4ax.com>
References: <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
 <v01530501ba22acbae02f [12.21.209.121]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"Xffe5.0.nN3.qpW_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48618
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Dean Miller wrote:

>I've not seen any evidence for either the tiny increase in CO2 that's
>currently measured as being the cause of the global temperature rise
>nor the increase being due to mankind.

The increase is not tiny at all. It is 6 ppp per year, which is easily 
measured with today's instruments. Atmospheric carbon is 350 ppm, so the 
increase is about 2% per year, which is gigantic compared to most changes 
in the exosphere. There is no question the carbon increase is coming from 
human contributions. Fossil fuel inputs are easily measured, to within 5% 
or so, anyway. A quick back-of-the-envelope computation shows that they are 
far larger than the carbon exchanged in the plant - animal system. If every 
plant on earth stopped growing it would not be enough to account for the 
carbon build-up. Here is an example of calculation:

http://www.hydrogen.co.uk/h2_now/journal/articles/2_global_warming.htm

Engineers and scientists have known since the late 19th century that 
mankind is "vaporizing mountains of coal" (as someone put it circa 1890). 
The only question is: might this have an effect on the climate? The last 
time the climate held a great deal more carbon was the age of the 
dinosaurs, when the earth was much hotter than it is now. Since then, coal 
beds formed, sequestering much of the carbon that used to be in the 
atmosphere, along with a significant amount of hydrogen. Now we have dug up 
and burned a significant fraction of this carbon and hydrogen, and in a few 
centuries we will burn virtually all of it. That is probably not a wise 
thing to do.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 09:34:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA15088;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:28:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 09:28:35 -0800
X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 17:00:29 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021216105004.02ccd448 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:31:18 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: BlackLight article supplement
In-Reply-To: <196.12677ffa.2b2f1787 aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"tg78U.0.gh3.3rW_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48619
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Thank you, Erik, for posting these fascinating quotes regarding Mills. 
There is nothing like a direct quote to give a sense of the story. A few 
comments:

>What I can say is that BlackLight doesn't seem to be a ship of fools -- 
>these are bright people with serious goals who don't seem to have lost 
>their marbles.  As for Dr. Mills himself, he's definitely unusual, 
>charismatic, driven, brilliant, and I believe sincere.

No one who knows about him would dispute that he is brilliant. He proved 
that years ago. But even Edison made drastic mistakes, late in his career 
after decades of experience. He was a genius (much smarter than his popular 
image), and he was well grounded in reality and practicality.


>He's learned that Park et al will go behind the scenes to scuttle his
>progress or public recognition.

He should act on this knowledge.


>I expect an announcement when a first product is practically
>loaded onto flatbed trucks and heading for Walmart.

An impossible business plan. The regulatory burden alone makes this out of 
the question. Any of Mills' numerous enemies can easily sabotage him if 
this truly is his plan.


>Now, a few quotations and notes left out of the article:

Thank you so much for giving us the raw notes!


>MICHAEL SHERMER OF SKEPTIC
>
>"Maybe it's useful to have fuzzy shades of evaluation.  Maybe we could 
>say, "Gee, he doesn't fit the profile of a total crackpot.  Maybe there 
>are three or four categories between pure bunk and acceptable science, but 
>that still doesn't make it workable."

This guy is a fool. Has he read *nothing* about the history of science and 
technology?

1. There are an infinite series of gradations between pure bunk and 
acceptable science.

2. Many radical, important and valuable new ideas are both bunk and real 
science, simultaneously. Columbus though he could reach India by sailing 
west. His numbers were wrong, and the people in the establishment who 
opposed him were right. It turned out his screwy mistake was more fruitful 
than their correct knowledge.

3. You can never tell in advance which new idea will be bunk and which 
science. That is why the scientific method is grounded in experiment. Ideas 
which now seem perfectly ordinary to us were first dismissed as bunk, 
lunacy or fraud. Examples include the telephone, the maser, radio 
telescopes and the zipper.

4. Nearly all previously held scientific theories and ideas turned out to 
be bunk, and all present theories, laws and textbook values are a crude 
approximation at best. As Bockris wrote: "I am skeptical of the permanence 
of theories in the Science. Some chemistry libraries go back to the 19th 
Century and it struck me early in my career that few theories hold for more 
than a generation." (Accountability in Research)

5. We know virtually nothing, in any case. Ask any scientist a series of 
questions about any subject -- ask why to every because the way a small 
small child does -- and after some five iterations you will reach the 
frontier of present day knowledge. What we know is an acre of ground in a 
continent of ignorance.


>"Scientists are the most open-minded group of people there are.

Says who?!? Does Shermer have any data to back this assertion? Any public 
opinion research? I doubt it. I do not have any either, but based on 
history and anecdotal evidence, I see no reason to believe this. Shermer 
should at least add a caveat: "it is my impression that . . ." or 
"scientists have the reputation for . . ."


>On serendipity:
>
>"As a general principal I find that some ideas may work for reasons 
>completely different than those their claimants originally 
>cite.  Chiropractics, muscle manipulation may work for reasons that have 
>nothing to do with charkras and energy fields and other nonsense."

I presume this is still Shermer. Since he knows this, why does he dismiss 
Mills and CF?

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 12:48:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA10941;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:41:38 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:41:38 -0800
Message-ID: <3DFE3A42.2090305 zipworld.com.au>
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 07:40:34 +1100
From: Alan Schneider <alansch zipworld.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
References: <3.0.6.32.20021217000611.00957dd0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20021217000611.00957dd0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Qw4_U.0.sg2.1gZ_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48620
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



John Winterflood wrote:
> AK wrote:
> 
>>A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
>>carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
>>mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally. This
>>has been an age old challenge in the mathematics world limited only by
>>the sheer calculating tenacity of the mathematicians --- over the ages.
>>Well thanks to the supercomputer, it seems the Pi does have a
>>determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
>>before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!  It now waits to be confirmed.
>>The run occurred around November of this year.
> 
> 
> Someone managed to get an almost identical report (different computer
> but same result) printed in a serious Australian newspaper several
> years ago.  Someone posted it on our Physics notice board and it
> created a bit of discussion.  So it would appear that this is actually
> the confirmation rather than the discovery.  On the other hand it
> is rather more likely to be someone trying the same hoax a second time!
> 

LOL...

I remember that one well, John. I was almost certain at the time
that it *WAS* a hoax because the dates matched up too well with
its being an April 1st joke in the *original* publication.

The newspaper concerned did in fact publish a quite red-faced
retraction the following week.


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 16 12:55:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA14388;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:48:35 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:48:35 -0800
X-Sent: 16 Dec 2002 20:48:31 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021216152915.02ccd448 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 15:48:18 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
In-Reply-To: <3DFC2D8F.E3D53D46 ix.netcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"VGDK73.0.jW3.ZmZ_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48621
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Akira Kawasaki wrote:

>A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
>carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
>mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally.

The broadcaster probably misunderstood. It was proven a long time ago that 
Pi is not a rational number. It seems unlikely that math theory is wrong to 
that extent. Computers have often been used to generate Pi to many digits. 
This is partly a frivolous effort to establish a world record, but it also 
serves some useful purposes. It is an interesting computer benchmark, and 
the results can be compared to the output from other computers to verify 
the computer works correctly. If digits 1,000,001 through 1,000,100 are the 
same from two different computers, they are both working correctly. It 
takes many previous, identical operations to get that far. Also, some 
studies of random numbers may benefit from the data.

See: P. Beckman, "History of Pi."


>determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
>before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!

I doubt this is true, but even if it were, it would not mean anything. The 
zeros might repeat many times and then suddenly turn into a random stream 
of other digits again. Although I suppose a number theorist would be 
interested to find out where the zeros start and how far they go.

Here are the first 10,000 digits, in case you are wondering:

http://www.geocities.com/periodonepiday/tenthousand.html

In the science fiction book "Contact" Sagan described hidden messages 
millions of digits into Pi, which were somehow introduced when the universe 
began. I don't see how. That book was interesting. The last chapters 
describing the establishment's rejection of indisputable scientific proof 
that pod had undergone an anomalous event. There ere traces of 
radioactivity and the like, where there should not have been. That sounds 
familiar! Sagan rejected CF outright. It is a shame he never thought how 
cold fusion fits into the scenario in his book.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 17 19:22:07 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA15140;
	Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:20:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:20:48 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021217191832.00aa1080 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2002 19:20:29 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: would it be so with CF, perhaps someday
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="=====================_1045529640==.ALT"
Resent-Message-ID: <"ZBfwu.0.Qi3.Fc-_z" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48622
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

--=====================_1045529640==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out Quickly, Online

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html
A group of prominent scientists is mounting an electronic challenge to the 
leading scientific journals, accusing them of holding back the progress of 
science by restricting online access to their articles so they can reap 
higher profits.


Steve Krivit
Los Angeles, CA USA
<http://www.newenergytimes.com/>www.newenergytimes.com
www.coldfusioninfo.com
--=====================_1045529640==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
<font face="Arial, Helvetica">New Premise in Science: Get the Word Out
Quickly, Online<br><br>
</font><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html" eudora="autourl">http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/17/science/17JOUR.html</a><br>
A<b> </b>group of prominent scientists is mounting an electronic
challenge to the leading scientific journals, accusing them of holding
back the progress of science by restricting online access to their
articles so they can reap higher profits.<br><br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Steve Krivit<br>
Los Angeles, CA USA<br>
<a href="http://www.newenergytimes.com/">www.newenergytimes.com<br>
www.coldfusioninfo.com</a></html>

--=====================_1045529640==.ALT--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 18 11:03:38 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA04525;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:58:28 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 10:58:28 -0800
X-Sent: 18 Dec 2002 18:58:21 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021218135620.03d4e0a0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 13:58:12 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: would it be so with CF, perhaps someday
In-Reply-To: <5.1.1.6.2.20021217191832.00aa1080 mail.dlsi.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"st32x3.0.b61.JLC0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48623
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a good article. We are trying the same technique with CF, at 
LENR-CANR.org. We have distributed more than 11,000 papers. So far it has 
not had any measurable effect on public opinion or funding, but who knows 
what is happening behind the scenes.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 18 17:39:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA14466;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:34:16 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:34:16 -0800
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 17:34:06 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: The Hydrated Electron
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <003e01c2a6fe$b904d1c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
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: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2A6BB.AA860440"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"uyCel.0.tX3.O8I0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48624
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2A6BB.AA860440
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The *Hydrated Electron* could be a possible "back door" to catalyzed =
water-splitting

In 1963, a new kind of *ion* or virtual ion - the hydrated electron - =
was discovered by Argonne chemist Edwin Hort. The hydrated electron may =
be thought of as resulting from the temporary interaction of a negative =
electron with the positive end of a polar water molecule,  but with less =
energy than would be required to form the normal water ions. This is =
somewhat analogous to the formation of hydronium ions by interaction of =
a positive proton (H+) with the negative end of a water molecule. =
Because the water molecules associated with hydrated electrons do not =
participate in subsequent chemical reactions, they are not shown in the =
equations. Hydrated electrons may interact with H30+ or hydronium ions =
or with paired water molecules. These reactions produce another very =
important short-lived reactive species, atomic hydrogen.

Hort's discovery  was considered a major breakthrough in 1963 but even =
today the dynamics of this fleeting species are not very well =
appreciated. Hort was doing research on pulsed radiation of water. =
Unexpectedly, his spectrograph indicated a blue absorption band and =
perhaps equally unexpectedly thirty years later, a new door to "free =
energy" is beginning to be cracked open. It is also not yet clear if =
this virtual ion has been eliminated as a contributing source of the =
unusual excess radiation attributed to hydrino formation in water vapor =
in the recent BLP experiments.

Excess electrons, when they can be reluctantly coaxed into liquids, play =
a central role in photochemistry and photoelectrochemistry - and the =
hydrated electron ((e-)aq ) is a ubiquitous transient species in =
irradiated aqueous systems. It has a very short lifetime and that is =
probably why it went undetected for so many years in electrochemistry =
prior to '63 and why even today some electrochemists are not fully =
cognizant of its potential impact in water splitting efficiency.

Dainton in 1966 proposed a possible way to generate a hydrated electron =
by photoionization. He concluded that the radiation should lie in the =
vacuum UV region, since he expected that something near the ionization =
potential of the water molecule (12.56 eV) should be determinative, but =
later experiments showed an energy balance that is surprisingly more =
favorable.

Sokolow and Stein found that hydrated electrons were formed upon =
irradiation of water at 6.8 eV (184.9 nm) by a mercury lamp. It was =
already known that mercury lamp radiation generates surprising amounts =
of hydrogen. The detected (e-)aq yield is approximately 10% of that for =
hydrogen atom in these experiments, and that is surprising considering =
how short-lived the ion is, and how this transience affects detection - =
plus it is not clear to what extent the hydrated electron might itself =
catalyze the water splitting and thereafter disappear in the process. =
Other experiments have found these electrons at even far lower radiation =
energies.

In 1998 Kazunari Domen at Tokyo Institute of Technology reported that a =
powdered cuprous oxide catalyst could split water at room temperature. =
This reaction can take place at high temps and when driven by light, but =
now he reports that the reaction continues in the dark for hundreds of =
hours. The quicker the container is stirred, the more hydrogen and =
oxygen are produced . Domen believes that the mechanical energy is =
converted to chemical energy without first being converted to thermal =
energy. But it is more likely that something else may be occurring, such =
as friction between the catalyst and the glass container causing a =
triboelectric build-up of charge resulting in numerous hydrated =
electrons that catalyze the reaction.

Ultimately, of course, if some kind of positive OU energy balance is =
ever discovered in water-splitting, the "excess" energy will still have =
to be derived from somewhere, and that "somewhere" is likely to be =
intimately associated with the hydrogen atom, even if the zero point =
field is also involved. =20

We know that he overall prospect of capturing the annihilation energy of =
"virtual pairs" is hopeless because their lifetime in our 3space is far =
too short to be a viable source of free energy, ZPE theories =
notwithstanding.  And even for the much longer lived electron-positron =
pair, the prospect of capturing positrons from the vacuum seems =
intractable. But Heisenberg's door may be cracked open just far enough =
to admit, not the positron itself but its "wake". i.e. its 6.8 eV =
binding energy with its virtual electron. This binding energy is but a =
tiny fraction of the positron or electron  mass/energy of ~ .5 MeV, or a =
GeV if they were to actually annihilate in our 3-space, but still it =
isn't too shabby, more than what one gets from hydrogen combustion. The =
proven Lamb shift is indicative of the ongoing reality of this =
phenomenon.

If a 6.8 eV binding energy photon turns out to be the most "natural" =
gateway to ZPE coherence and that free energy can be captured under =
certain circumstances, it is a consequence of the positrons and electron =
having just enough time to form a fleeting virtual atom, positronium =
(Ps) which is anisotropically disrupted by proximity to something =
locally before fading into someone else's 3-space.

What is that disruptive something?

Perhaps it is the hydrated electron, and perhaps the reaction can be =
pushed towards being somewhat autocatalytic as the 6.8 eV photon which =
is disrupted (and cohered) will have just enough energy to form another =
fleeting hydrated electron, ad infinitum. But this would be a =
"precision" reaction and that kind of precision is something that is =
hard to pull off in energetic plasmas.

The key to all of this (and also its Achilles heel) is that ion density =
will be an extremely critical parameter. And it must be surprisingly low =
(I think). And that is something that all of the past researchers who =
wanted to catalyze water splitting have tended to ignore.

More later,

Jones Beene





------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2A6BB.AA860440
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.50.4916.2300" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>The *Hydrated Electron* could be a possible&nbsp;"back door" to =
catalyzed=20
water-splitting</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In 1963, a new kind of&nbsp;*ion* or virtual ion - the hydrated =
electron -=20
was discovered by Argonne chemist Edwin Hort. The hydrated electron may =
be=20
thought of as resulting from the temporary interaction of a negative =
electron=20
with the positive end of a polar water molecule,&nbsp; but with less =
energy than=20
would be required to form the normal water ions. This is somewhat =
analogous to=20
the formation of hydronium ions by interaction of a positive proton (H+) =
with=20
the negative end of a water molecule. Because the water molecules =
associated=20
with hydrated electrons do not participate in subsequent chemical =
reactions,=20
they are not shown in the equations. Hydrated electrons may interact =
with H30+=20
or hydronium ions or with paired water molecules. These reactions =
produce=20
another very important&nbsp;short-lived reactive species, atomic =
hydrogen.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Hort's discovery &nbsp;was considered a major breakthrough in 1963 =
but even=20
today&nbsp;the dynamics of this fleeting species&nbsp;are not very well=20
appreciated. Hort was doing research on pulsed radiation of water. =
Unexpectedly,=20
his spectrograph indicated a blue absorption band and perhaps equally=20
unexpectedly thirty years later, a new door to "free energy" is =
beginning to be=20
cracked open. It is also not yet clear if this virtual ion has been =
eliminated=20
as a contributing source of the unusual excess radiation&nbsp;attributed =
to=20
hydrino formation in water vapor in the recent BLP experiments.</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV align=3Dleft><FONT face=3DArial>Excess electrons, when they can be =
reluctantly=20
coaxed into liquids, play a central role in photochemistry and=20
photoelectrochemistry - and the hydrated electron ((e-)aq ) is a =
ubiquitous=20
transient species in irradiated aqueous systems. It has a very short =
lifetime=20
and that is probably why it went undetected for so many years in=20
electrochemistry prior to '63 and why even today some electrochemists =
are not=20
fully cognizant of its potential impact in water splitting=20
efficiency.</DIV></FONT>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Dainton in 1966 proposed a possible way to generate a hydrated =
electron by=20
photoionization. He concluded that the radiation should lie in the =
vacuum UV=20
region, since he expected that something near the ionization potential =
of the=20
water molecule (12.56 eV) should be determinative, but later experiments =
showed=20
an energy balance that is surprisingly more favorable.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Sokolow and Stein found that hydrated electrons were formed upon=20
irradiation of water at 6.8 eV (184.9 nm) by a mercury lamp. It was =
already=20
known that mercury lamp radiation generates surprising amounts =
of&nbsp;hydrogen.=20
The detected (e-)aq yield is approximately 10% of that for hydrogen atom =
in=20
these experiments, and that is surprising considering how short-lived =
the ion=20
is, and how this transience affects detection - plus it is not clear to =
what=20
extent the hydrated electron might itself catalyze the water splitting =
and=20
thereafter disappear in the process. Other experiments have found these=20
electrons at even far lower radiation energies.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In 1998&nbsp;Kazunari Domen at Tokyo Institute of Technology =
reported that=20
a powdered cuprous oxide catalyst could split water at room temperature. =
This=20
reaction can take place at high temps and when driven by light, but now =
he=20
reports that the reaction continues in the dark for hundreds of hours. =
The=20
quicker the container is stirred, the more hydrogen and oxygen are =
produced .=20
Domen believes that the mechanical energy is converted to chemical =
energy=20
without first being converted to thermal energy. But it is more likely =
that=20
something else may be&nbsp;occurring, such as friction between the =
catalyst and=20
the glass container causing a triboelectric build-up of charge resulting =
in=20
numerous hydrated electrons that catalyze the reaction.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Ultimately, of course, if some kind of positive OU energy balance =
is ever=20
discovered in water-splitting, the "excess" energy will still have to be =
derived=20
from somewhere, and that "somewhere" is likely to be intimately =
associated with=20
the hydrogen atom, even if the zero point field is=20
also&nbsp;involved.&nbsp;&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>We know that he overall prospect of capturing the annihilation =
energy of=20
"virtual pairs" is hopeless because their lifetime in our 3space&nbsp;is =
far too=20
short to be a viable source of free energy, ZPE theories =
notwithstanding.&nbsp;=20
And even for the much longer lived electron-positron pair, the prospect =
of=20
capturing positrons from the vacuum seems intractable. But Heisenberg's =
door may=20
be cracked open just far enough to admit, not the positron itself =
but&nbsp;its=20
"wake". i.e. its 6.8 eV binding energy with its virtual electron. This =
binding=20
energy is but a tiny fraction of the positron or electron&nbsp; =
mass/energy of ~=20
.5 MeV, or a GeV if they were to actually annihilate in our 3-space, but =
still=20
it isn't too shabby, more than what one gets from hydrogen combustion. =
The=20
proven Lamb shift is indicative of the ongoing reality of this =
phenomenon.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If&nbsp;a 6.8&nbsp;eV binding energy photon turns out to be the=20
most&nbsp;"natural" gateway to ZPE coherence and&nbsp;that free energy =
can be=20
captured under certain circumstances, it is a consequence of the =
positrons and=20
electron having just enough time to form a fleeting virtual atom, =
positronium=20
(Ps) which is anisotropically disrupted by proximity to something =
locally before=20
fading into someone else's 3-space.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What is that disruptive something?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Perhaps it is the hydrated electron, and perhaps the reaction can =
be pushed=20
towards being somewhat autocatalytic as the 6.8 eV photon which is =
disrupted=20
(and cohered) will have just enough energy to form another fleeting =
hydrated=20
electron, ad infinitum. But this would be a "precision" reaction and =
that kind=20
of precision is something that is hard to pull off in energetic =
plasmas.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The key to all of this (and also its Achilles heel) is that ion =
density=20
will be an extremely critical&nbsp;parameter. And it must be =
surprisingly low (I=20
think). And that is something that all of the past researchers who =
wanted to=20
catalyze water splitting have&nbsp;tended to ignore.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>More later,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones Beene<BR></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01C2A6BB.AA860440--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 18 18:45:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA15827;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:41:08 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:41:08 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba26dd60fb8a [12.21.211.207]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:55:23 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan, DRAFT #5
Resent-Message-ID: <"UfgLX2.0.Dt3.47J0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48625
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


                     A SIMPLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN

THE PROBLEM

In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of
problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy
conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction,
energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of
energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration,
production, and use.  The debate and problems have been so broad as to
demand continuous media, political and academic attention.  These issues
are too broad and controversial for discussion here, but it does not seem
very controversial that a means to obtain large amounts of renewable energy
should be helpful in all these energy related arenas.  However, devising a
means to achieve significant renewable energy development has been somewhat
elusive. It is the intent here to help solve that problem.


A SIMPLE PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION

A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues
addressed, is very simple indeed.  The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped
to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems, if
implemented.

1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated
solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability
to administer this plan.  It should be a stand-alone agency, but at minimum
it should be independent of NSF, NASA, DOE and the national laboratories.
Eventually support this agency using a only a perpetual Renewable Energy
Permanent Fund plus agency revenues.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.  It is the goal of the agency
to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create renewable energy
production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient revenue stream to
fund energy conservation measures.  The agency should be operated with as
much independence from direct management involvement of the administrative
and legislative branches of government as possible.  When financially
independent, the agency should become a private non-profit corporation with
special legislated benefits.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income. This plan should scale to much larger tax rates if
desired.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc.  Proposal
cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with special
projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining non
awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research
funding.  On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5
percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should
receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.  Proposal cycles
for this could be similar to research awards, but likely less often due to
the lower number of grants likely due to the fact bidders in this category
would likely have had successful research awards.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals should be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent
fund.

6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This fund is managed separately from all others.

7) Reserve 75 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.   The "total prior year's income" is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.  If the emergency
fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Oversight of the fund management should
be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of
trusts.  The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund
management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund
management should be awarded to a single bidder.  The permanent fund goal
is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions.
This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by the
suggested financial mechanisms to follow, which are part of this plan.  Any
contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, made tax deductible, but
preferably encouraged by further incentives .  Investment leverage should
be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds.  One income
producing element should be green loans for financing construction of
energy efficient housing or businesses, or for energy efficiency home or
business improvements.  Achieving the combined housing and business finance
goals might be achieved via a single entity similar to existing home
finance entities, with such an entity having both bond holders and equity
holders, each earning the corresponding returns on investments.

8) Annually adjust the percentages and other agency operating parameters as
required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation,
regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the
agency.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place project facilities into the
private domain.  This is called project disposal.  Project disposal is by
sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage.  If
that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net proceeds are deposited
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Abandoned property may be
operated by the agency or the agency may choose to put the operation out to
bid using the bid parameters of its choosing.  If a project does not
achieve the proposed average annual revenue for the 10 year projected
operating period, then the operating period may be extended at the choice
of the agency, until the projected annual return is achieved.

It is hoped that the proposed agency can become self funding within 20
years.  It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums
available for energy systems design and construction would garner serious
attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies,
like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be
required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with
commercial competitors in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may
have an extreme excess, and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider
applying those funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation
programs.


A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this has to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is
initiated.  The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the
Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered
from the property disposal.  The full disposal recovery amount is placed
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,500   150
3       3,000   55      225     3,280   6,048   158
4       3,000   114     302     3,416   7,660   164
5       3,000   174     383     3,557   9,338   171
6       3,000   237     467     3,704   10,908  178
7       3,000   311     545     3,856   12,357  185
8       3,000   397     618     4,014   13,671  193
9       3,000   494     684     4,178   14,839  201
10      3,000   606     742     4,348   15,844  209
11      3,000   731     792     4,523   16,671  217
12      3,000   871     834     4,705   17,906  226
13      3,000   973     895     4,868   19,169  235
14      3,000   1,077   958     5,036   20,480  243
15      3,000   1,185   1,024   5,209   21,840  252
16      3,000   1,296   1,092   5,388   23,340  260
17      3,000   1,403   1,167   5,570   24,987  269
18      3,000   1,504   1,249   5,753   26,788  278
19      3,000   1,599   1,339   5,938   28,752  288
20      3,000   1,687   1,438   6,124   30,890  297
21      0       1,767   1,545   3,312   30,211  306
22      0       1,839   1,511   3,349   32,276  166
23      0       1,797   1,614   3,410   34,437  167
24      0       1,750   1,722   3,472   36,664  171
25      0       1,699   1,833   3,533   38,961  174
26      0       1,645   1,948   3,593   41,328  177
27      0       1,587   2,066   3,654   43,769  180
28      0       1,525   2,188   3,713   46,283  183
29      0       1,459   2,314   3,773   48,871  186
30      0       1,388   2,444   3,832   51,534  189
31      0       1,313   2,577   3,890   54,272  192
32      0       1,234   2,714   3,947   55,960  194
33      0       1,254   2,798   4,052   57,715  197
34      0       1,274   2,886   4,160   59,508  203
35      0       1,297   2,975   4,272   61,337  208
36      0       1,320   3,067   4,387   63,205  214
37      0       1,346   3,160   4,506   65,110  219
38      0       1,374   3,255   4,629   67,053  225
39      0       1,403   3,353   4,756   69,035  231
40      0       1,435   3,452   4,886   71,056  238



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Dispos.
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    Year

0       0       3,000   0       0       1
300     1,200   1,050   1,200   0       2
315     1,260   1,103   2,460   0       3
328     1,312   1,148   3,772   0       4
342     1,366   1,196   5,139   0       5
356     1,601   1,067   6,739   0       6
370     1,852   926     8,591   0       7
386     2,121   771     10,712  0       8
401     2,409   602     13,121  0       9
418     2,716   418     15,837  0       10
435     3,043   217     18,880  0       11
452     3,392   0       21,072  600     12
470     3,529   0       23,341  630     13
487     3,651   0       25,680  656     14
504     3,777   0       28,090  683     15
521     3,907   0       30,396  800     16
539     4,041   0       32,586  926     17
557     4,177   0       34,642  1,061   18
575     4,315   0       36,548  1,204   19
594     4,454   0       38,286  1,358   20
612     4,593   0       39,836  1,522   21
331     2,484   0       38,928  1,696   22
335     2,512   0       37,911  1,764   23
341     2,558   0       36,818  1,825   24
347     2,604   0       35,645  1,888   25
353     2,649   0       34,387  1,953   26
359     2,695   0       33,041  2,021   27
365     2,740   0       31,603  2,089   28
371     2,785   0       30,074  2,157   29
377     2,830   0       28,449  2,227   30
383     2,874   0       26,730  2,297   31
389     2,917   0       27,163  1,242   32
395     2,960   0       27,612  1,256   33
405     3,039   0       28,093  1,279   34
416     3,120   0       28,609  1,302   35
427     3,204   0       29,164  1,325   36
439     3,290   0       29,759  1,347   37
451     3,380   0       30,399  1,370   38
463     3,472   0       31,086  1,393   39
476     3,567   0       31,823  1,415   40

Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

Total Fund Balance              71,056
Total Research and Pilots       16,386
Total Current Projects          31,823
Total Sold Project Value        41,286
                            ==========
       Total benefit           160,551

        Total tax cost          60,000

       Cost/Benefit            0.37371


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.

If profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is
that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad
thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.  If
foreign owned bidders or projects are to be allowed, this should be via a
separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benfits to the
taxpayer will not be forthcoming.  However, the plan might easily be
adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached.


BENEFITS OF THE PLAN

The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and are not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  The permanent nature
of the plan is designed to achieve independence from political cycles, and
this aspect is critical to its success and is a major and distinguishing
benefit of the plan.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding for energy conservation efforts produced
without taxation.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive
the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund
interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and
potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing,
and increases general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be
driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be
a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping
inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological
breakthroughs that will permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.  At the assumed taxation rate
over 140 billion dollars in energy  production facilities is produced in 40
years, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very large,
with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion dollars.
The suggested taxation rate, about a dollar per person per month, is much
too timid to achieve all the benefits for which there is a defined need,
but could be significantly scaled up if or when desired, with a
corresponding increase in expected benefits, both quantified and
unquantified.

This plan is hereby declared to be public domain, without copyright.
Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is
encouraged by the author.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 18 18:53:04 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA18958;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:50:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 18:50:01 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba26e78cd1c9 [12.21.211.91]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:04:40 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"Id_sk2.0.7e4.PFJ0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48626
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sorry for the duplicate posting.  I tried to cancel the first one and
thought the cancel took.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Wed Dec 18 19:13:42 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA25307;
	Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:08:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:08:59 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530502ba26eb88c141 [12.21.211.91]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2002 19:23:25 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"uiN-y2.0.KB6.AXJ0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48627
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

I posted the following on my favorite newslist.  Maybe it will spark
someting.  Maybe it will even work!  8^)

                     A SIMPLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN

THE PROBLEM

In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of
problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy
conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction,
energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of
energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration,
production, and use.  The debate and problems have been so broad as to
demand continuous media, political and academic attention.  These issues
are too broad and controversial for discussion here, but it does not seem
very controversial that a means to obtain large amounts of renewable energy
should be helpful in all these energy related arenas.  However, devising a
means to achieve significant renewable energy development has been somewhat
elusive. It is the intent here to help solve that problem.


A SIMPLE PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION

A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues
addressed, is very simple indeed.  The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped
to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems, if
implemented.

1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated
solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability
to administer this plan.  It should be a stand-alone agency, but at minimum
it should be independent of NSF, NASA, DOE and the national laboratories.
Eventually support this agency using a only a perpetual Renewable Energy
Permanent Fund plus agency revenues.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.  It is the goal of the agency
to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create renewable energy
production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient revenue stream to
fund energy conservation measures.  The agency should be operated with as
much independence from direct management involvement of the administrative
and legislative branches of government as possible.  When financially
independent, the agency should become a private non-profit corporation with
special legislated benefits.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income. This plan should scale to much larger tax rates if
desired.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc.  Proposal
cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with special
projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining non
awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research
funding.  On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5
percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should
receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.  Proposal cycles
for this could be similar to research awards, but likely less often due to
the lower number of grants likely due to the fact bidders in this category
would likely have had successful research awards.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals should be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent
fund.

6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This fund is managed separately from all others.

7) Reserve 75 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.   The "total prior year's income" is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.  If the emergency
fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Oversight of the fund management should
be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of
trusts.  The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund
management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund
management should be awarded to a single bidder.  The permanent fund goal
is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions.
This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by the
suggested financial mechanisms to follow, which are part of this plan.  Any
contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, made tax deductible, but
preferably encouraged by further incentives .  Investment leverage should
be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds.  One income
producing element should be green loans for financing construction of
energy efficient housing or businesses, or for energy efficiency home or
business improvements.  Achieving the combined housing and business finance
goals might be achieved via a single entity similar to existing home
finance entities, with such an entity having both bond holders and equity
holders, each earning the corresponding returns on investments.

8) Annually adjust the percentages and other agency operating parameters as
required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation,
regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the
agency.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place project facilities into the
private domain.  This is called project disposal.  Project disposal is by
sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage.  If
that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net proceeds are deposited
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Abandoned property may be
operated by the agency or the agency may choose to put the operation out to
bid using the bid parameters of its choosing.  If a project does not
achieve the proposed average annual revenue for the 10 year projected
operating period, then the operating period may be extended at the choice
of the agency, until the projected annual return is achieved.

It is hoped that the proposed agency can become self funding within 20
years.  It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums
available for energy systems design and construction would garner serious
attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies,
like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be
required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with
commercial competitors in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may
have an extreme excess, and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider
applying those funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation
programs.


A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this has to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is
initiated.  The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the
Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered
from the property disposal.  The full disposal recovery amount is placed
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,500   150
3       3,000   55      225     3,280   6,048   158
4       3,000   114     302     3,416   7,660   164
5       3,000   174     383     3,557   9,338   171
6       3,000   237     467     3,704   10,908  178
7       3,000   311     545     3,856   12,357  185
8       3,000   397     618     4,014   13,671  193
9       3,000   494     684     4,178   14,839  201
10      3,000   606     742     4,348   15,844  209
11      3,000   731     792     4,523   16,671  217
12      3,000   871     834     4,705   17,906  226
13      3,000   973     895     4,868   19,169  235
14      3,000   1,077   958     5,036   20,480  243
15      3,000   1,185   1,024   5,209   21,840  252
16      3,000   1,296   1,092   5,388   23,340  260
17      3,000   1,403   1,167   5,570   24,987  269
18      3,000   1,504   1,249   5,753   26,788  278
19      3,000   1,599   1,339   5,938   28,752  288
20      3,000   1,687   1,438   6,124   30,890  297
21      0       1,767   1,545   3,312   30,211  306
22      0       1,839   1,511   3,349   32,276  166
23      0       1,797   1,614   3,410   34,437  167
24      0       1,750   1,722   3,472   36,664  171
25      0       1,699   1,833   3,533   38,961  174
26      0       1,645   1,948   3,593   41,328  177
27      0       1,587   2,066   3,654   43,769  180
28      0       1,525   2,188   3,713   46,283  183
29      0       1,459   2,314   3,773   48,871  186
30      0       1,388   2,444   3,832   51,534  189
31      0       1,313   2,577   3,890   54,272  192
32      0       1,234   2,714   3,947   55,960  194
33      0       1,254   2,798   4,052   57,715  197
34      0       1,274   2,886   4,160   59,508  203
35      0       1,297   2,975   4,272   61,337  208
36      0       1,320   3,067   4,387   63,205  214
37      0       1,346   3,160   4,506   65,110  219
38      0       1,374   3,255   4,629   67,053  225
39      0       1,403   3,353   4,756   69,035  231
40      0       1,435   3,452   4,886   71,056  238



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Dispos.
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    Year

0       0       3,000   0       0       1
300     1,200   1,050   1,200   0       2
315     1,260   1,103   2,460   0       3
328     1,312   1,148   3,772   0       4
342     1,366   1,196   5,139   0       5
356     1,601   1,067   6,739   0       6
370     1,852   926     8,591   0       7
386     2,121   771     10,712  0       8
401     2,409   602     13,121  0       9
418     2,716   418     15,837  0       10
435     3,043   217     18,880  0       11
452     3,392   0       21,072  600     12
470     3,529   0       23,341  630     13
487     3,651   0       25,680  656     14
504     3,777   0       28,090  683     15
521     3,907   0       30,396  800     16
539     4,041   0       32,586  926     17
557     4,177   0       34,642  1,061   18
575     4,315   0       36,548  1,204   19
594     4,454   0       38,286  1,358   20
612     4,593   0       39,836  1,522   21
331     2,484   0       38,928  1,696   22
335     2,512   0       37,911  1,764   23
341     2,558   0       36,818  1,825   24
347     2,604   0       35,645  1,888   25
353     2,649   0       34,387  1,953   26
359     2,695   0       33,041  2,021   27
365     2,740   0       31,603  2,089   28
371     2,785   0       30,074  2,157   29
377     2,830   0       28,449  2,227   30
383     2,874   0       26,730  2,297   31
389     2,917   0       27,163  1,242   32
395     2,960   0       27,612  1,256   33
405     3,039   0       28,093  1,279   34
416     3,120   0       28,609  1,302   35
427     3,204   0       29,164  1,325   36
439     3,290   0       29,759  1,347   37
451     3,380   0       30,399  1,370   38
463     3,472   0       31,086  1,393   39
476     3,567   0       31,823  1,415   40

Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

Total Fund Balance              71,056
Total Research and Pilots       16,386
Total Current Projects          31,823
Total Sold Project Value        41,286
                            ==========
       Total benefit           160,551

        Total tax cost          60,000

       Cost/Benefit            0.37371


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.

If profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is
that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad
thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.  If
foreign owned bidders or projects are to be allowed, this should be via a
separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benfits to the
taxpayer will not be forthcoming.  However, the plan might easily be
adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached.


BENEFITS OF THE PLAN

The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and are not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  The permanent nature
of the plan is designed to achieve independence from political cycles, and
this aspect is critical to its success and is a major and distinguishing
benefit of the plan.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding for energy conservation efforts produced
without taxation.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive
the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund
interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and
potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing,
and increases general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be
driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be
a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping
inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological
breakthroughs that will permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.  At the assumed taxation rate
over 140 billion dollars in energy  production facilities is produced in 40
years, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very large,
with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion dollars.
The suggested taxation rate, about a dollar per person per month, is much
too timid to achieve all the benefits for which there is a defined need,
but could be significantly scaled up if or when desired, with a
corresponding increase in expected benefits, both quantified and
unquantified.

This plan is hereby declared to be public domain, without copyright.
Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is
encouraged by the author.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 19 06:14:57 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA28192;
	Thu, 19 Dec 2002 06:12:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 06:12:24 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3E01D3D5.2FD2C90 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 16:12:37 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
CC: Scott Little <little earthtech.org>
Subject: Susceptibility of carbon rod extracted from D size dead battery
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"Gm3dY3.0.Mu6.8FT0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48628
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi,

I could not found on the web a good information about susceptibility of carbon/graphite.

According my observation  a carbon or graphite rod of dimension of 8 mm dia,
and 57 mm length extracted from Philips D-size old dead battery attracted by a NdFeB magnet. Magnet can hold the rod hang by a thread up to 12 degrees from vertical. Not too weak.

Is that rod is kind "ordinary" carbon or kind of graphite? (it leave trace
on paper)

What would be magnetic susceptibility range of carbon types?

I found that Pyrolytic graphite is good for diamagnetic levitation. Scitoys is selling it in small sheets with reasonable price I found. Is there any other sources for this material?

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 19 07:14:52 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA23403;
	Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:10:59 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:10:59 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba2794566a74 [12.21.211.91]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 07:25:19 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"ws_sx.0.aj5.26U0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48629
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


                     A SIMPLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN

THE PROBLEM

In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of
problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy
conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction,
energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of
energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration,
production, and use.  The debate and problems have been so broad as to
demand continuous media, political and academic attention.  These issues
are too broad and controversial for discussion here, but it does not seem
very controversial that a means to obtain large amounts of renewable energy
should be helpful in all these energy related arenas.  However, a means to
achieve significant renewable energy development has been somewhat elusive.
It is the intent here to help solve that problem.


A SIMPLE PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION

A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues
addressed, is very simple indeed.  The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped
to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems, if
implemented.

1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated
solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability
to administer this plan.  It should be a stand-alone agency, but at minimum
it should be independent of NSF, NASA, DOE and the national laboratories.
Eventually support this agency using a only a perpetual Renewable Energy
Permanent Fund plus agency revenues.  A small seed funding need be provided
until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.  It is the goal of the agency
to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create renewable energy
production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient revenue stream to
fund energy conservation measures.  The agency should be operated with as
much independence from direct management involvement of the administrative
and legislative branches of government as possible.  When financially
independent, the agency should become a private non-profit corporation with
special legislated benefits.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income. This plan should scale to much larger tax rates if
desired.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc.  Proposal
cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with special
projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining non
awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research
funding.  On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5
percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should
receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.  Proposal cycles
for this could be similar to research awards, but likely less often due to
the lower number of grants likely due to the fact bidders in this category
would likely have had successful research awards.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 75
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  In years of operation
subsequent to construction, successful proposers can use or reserve up to
40 percent of annual revenues from their product for maintenance or
expansion of their facilities on a cost plus basis.  The balance of sales
income, in the aggregate from all projects, called the annual energy sales
income, is treated as annual income to the agency.  At the end of the year
any non awarded funds are deposited into the renewable energy permanent
fund described below.  The request for proposals should be in large, medium
and small categories, with minimum and maximum funding amounts in each
category, with roughly equal funding to each category.  In the event of no
or insufficient acceptable bids in a category in a year, the balance of
funds for that category for that year are to be placed in the permanent
fund.

6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This fund is managed separately from all others.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.   The "total prior year's income" is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.  If the emergency
fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Oversight of the fund management should
be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of
trusts.  The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund
management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund
management should be awarded to a single bidder.  The permanent fund goal
is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions.
This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by the
suggested financial mechanisms to follow, which are part of this plan.  Any
contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, made tax deductible, but
preferably encouraged by further incentives .  Investment leverage should
be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds.  One income
producing element should be green loans for financing construction of
energy efficient housing or businesses, or for energy efficiency home or
business improvements.  Achieving the combined housing and business finance
goals might be achieved via a single entity similar to existing home
finance entities, with such an entity having both bond holders and equity
holders, each earning the corresponding returns on investments.

8) Annually adjust the percentages and other agency operating parameters as
required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation,
regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the
agency.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place project facilities into the
private domain.  This is called project disposal.  Project disposal is by
sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage.  If
that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction.  Net proceeds are deposited
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Abandoned property may be
operated by the agency or the agency may choose to put the operation out to
bid using the bid parameters of its choosing.  If a project does not
achieve the proposed average annual revenue for the 10 year projected
operating period, then the operating period may be extended at the choice
of the agency, until the projected annual return is achieved.

It is hoped that the proposed agency can become self funding within 20
years.  It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums
available for energy systems design and construction would garner serious
attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies,
like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be
required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with
commercial competitors in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may
have an extreme excess, and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider
applying those funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation
programs.


A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this has to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is
initiated.  The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the
Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered
from the property disposal.  The full disposal recovery amount is placed
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance.


                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,500   150
3       3,000   55      225     3,280   6,048   158
4       3,000   114     302     3,416   7,660   164
5       3,000   174     383     3,557   9,338   171
6       3,000   237     467     3,704   10,908  178
7       3,000   311     545     3,856   12,357  185
8       3,000   397     618     4,014   13,671  193
9       3,000   494     684     4,178   14,839  201
10      3,000   606     742     4,348   15,844  209
11      3,000   731     792     4,523   16,671  217
12      3,000   871     834     4,705   17,906  226
13      3,000   973     895     4,868   19,169  235
14      3,000   1,077   958     5,036   20,480  243
15      3,000   1,185   1,024   5,209   21,840  252
16      3,000   1,296   1,092   5,388   23,340  260
17      3,000   1,403   1,167   5,570   24,987  269
18      3,000   1,504   1,249   5,753   26,788  278
19      3,000   1,599   1,339   5,938   28,752  288
20      3,000   1,687   1,438   6,124   30,890  297
21      0       1,767   1,545   3,312   30,211  306
22      0       1,839   1,511   3,349   32,276  166
23      0       1,797   1,614   3,410   34,437  167
24      0       1,750   1,722   3,472   36,664  171
25      0       1,699   1,833   3,533   38,961  174
26      0       1,645   1,948   3,593   41,328  177
27      0       1,587   2,066   3,654   43,769  180
28      0       1,525   2,188   3,713   46,283  183
29      0       1,459   2,314   3,773   48,871  186
30      0       1,388   2,444   3,832   51,534  189
31      0       1,313   2,577   3,890   54,272  192
32      0       1,234   2,714   3,947   55,960  194
33      0       1,254   2,798   4,052   57,715  197
34      0       1,274   2,886   4,160   59,508  203
35      0       1,297   2,975   4,272   61,337  208
36      0       1,320   3,067   4,387   63,205  214
37      0       1,346   3,160   4,506   65,110  219
38      0       1,374   3,255   4,629   67,053  225
39      0       1,403   3,353   4,756   69,035  231
40      0       1,435   3,452   4,886   71,056  238



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Dispos.
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    Year

0       0       3,000   0       0       1
300     1,200   1,050   1,200   0       2
315     1,260   1,103   2,460   0       3
328     1,312   1,148   3,772   0       4
342     1,366   1,196   5,139   0       5
356     1,601   1,067   6,739   0       6
370     1,852   926     8,591   0       7
386     2,121   771     10,712  0       8
401     2,409   602     13,121  0       9
418     2,716   418     15,837  0       10
435     3,043   217     18,880  0       11
452     3,392   0       21,072  600     12
470     3,529   0       23,341  630     13
487     3,651   0       25,680  656     14
504     3,777   0       28,090  683     15
521     3,907   0       30,396  800     16
539     4,041   0       32,586  926     17
557     4,177   0       34,642  1,061   18
575     4,315   0       36,548  1,204   19
594     4,454   0       38,286  1,358   20
612     4,593   0       39,836  1,522   21
331     2,484   0       38,928  1,696   22
335     2,512   0       37,911  1,764   23
341     2,558   0       36,818  1,825   24
347     2,604   0       35,645  1,888   25
353     2,649   0       34,387  1,953   26
359     2,695   0       33,041  2,021   27
365     2,740   0       31,603  2,089   28
371     2,785   0       30,074  2,157   29
377     2,830   0       28,449  2,227   30
383     2,874   0       26,730  2,297   31
389     2,917   0       27,163  1,242   32
395     2,960   0       27,612  1,256   33
405     3,039   0       28,093  1,279   34
416     3,120   0       28,609  1,302   35
427     3,204   0       29,164  1,325   36
439     3,290   0       29,759  1,347   37
451     3,380   0       30,399  1,370   38
463     3,472   0       31,086  1,393   39
476     3,567   0       31,823  1,415   40

Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

Total Fund Balance              71,056
Total Research and Pilots       16,386
Total Current Projects          31,823
Total Sold Project Value        41,286
                            ==========
       Total benefit           160,551

        Total tax cost          60,000

       Cost/Benefit            0.37371


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.

If profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is
that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad
thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.  If
foreign owned bidders or projects are to be allowed, this should be via a
separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benfits to the
taxpayer will not be forthcoming.  However, the plan might easily be
adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached.


BENEFITS OF THE PLAN

The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and are not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  The permanent nature
of the plan is designed to achieve independence from political cycles, and
this aspect is critical to its success and is a major and distinguishing
benefit of the plan.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding for energy conservation efforts produced
without taxation.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive
the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund
interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and
potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing,
and increases general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be
driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be
a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping
inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological
breakthroughs that will permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.  At the assumed taxation rate
about 150 billion dollars in energy  production facilities is produced in
40 years, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very
large, with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion
dollars.  The suggested taxation rate, about a dollar per person per month,
is much too timid to achieve all the benefits for which there is a defined
need,  but could be significantly scaled up if or when desired, with a
corresponding increase in expected benefits, both quantified and
unquantified.

This plan is hereby declared to be public domain, without copyright.
Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is
encouraged by the author.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Thu Dec 19 08:40:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA25016;
	Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:35:06 -0800
Resent-Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 08:35:06 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b24ba272d74d4cb [64.61.199.167]>
In-Reply-To: <003e01c2a6fe$b904d1c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <003e01c2a6fe$b904d1c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2002 10:34:44 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: Re: The Hydrated Electron
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"WNYPh1.0.n66.vKV0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48630
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

>Jones Breene Posted;
>
>Perhaps it is the hydrated electron, and perhaps the reaction can be 
>pushed towards being somewhat autocatalytic as the 6.8 eV photon 
>which is disrupted (and cohered)


I don't understand your use of the word cohered and disrupted 
together, please explain.


>The key to all of this (and also its Achilles heel) is that ion 
>density will be an extremely critical parameter. And it must be 
>surprisingly low (I think). And that is something that all of the 
>past researchers who wanted to catalyze water splitting have tended 
>to ignore.

Hum, this is beginning to sound like Mills having to pull a vacuum in 
the micro torr range. I liked the thing with the copper catalyst in 
liquid water better.

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 10:47:06 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA10896;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:44:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:44:57 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: "Vortex" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: Big tax break for buying SUV.
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 14:01:37 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMAELIDGAA.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)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"zHy_H1.0.wf2.dKs0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48631
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Hi All.

I thought this might be of interest concerning the recent
debate about promotion of a government agency to research
alt-energy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/20/business/20AUTO.html?pagewanted=print&posi
tion=top

Dr. Tedd March and his partners know a good deal when they see
it. He and his fellow internists who share a practice are taking
advantage of an odd confluence of tax breaks to buy giant sport
utility vehicles, with a healthy subsidy from Uncle Sam.

"I have one partner who just did it with a Suburban," said Dr.
March, a 42-year-old physician in Monroe, Mich., about 30 miles
south of Detroit. He said he planned to buy a Lincoln Navigator
next month, "and I have a third partner who's going to buy one
the year after."

The tax deductions — a combination of longstanding provisions in
the tax code and breaks instituted after the 2001 terror attacks
to spur the economy — are available only to small-business owners
and the self-employed.

Environmental groups, alerted to the tax breaks by a report this
week in The Detroit News, want them ended. They note that despite
concerns about the nation's growing dependence on imported oil,
the deductions provide far greater incentive to buy gas guzzlers
like Ford Excursions and General Motors Hummers than to buy the
most fuel-efficient cars, like the Toyota Prius.

All together, an eligible buyer of a 2003 Hummer H2 could deduct
$34,912 of the $48,800 base price in the vehicle's first year of
service, according to tax rules. That would translate into a tax
savings of nearly $13,500 for someone in the highest personal
income tax bracket.

The biggest piece in the package of tax breaks is an immediate
deduction for any depreciable capital expense of $24,000 this
year, rising to $25,000 starting next year. Dr. March said that
he and his partners are spreading their purchases over three
years so that each vehicle would qualify for the full deduction.
(He said that an S.U.V. was a necessity for a doctor who has to
get to work during Michigan winters.)

In addition, businesses can take the normal depreciation on
vehicles over five years, starting with a 20 percent deduction in
the first year. An extra dollop of tax savings comes from a bonus
30 percent first-year deduction on capital expenses, part of an
economic stimulus package approved by Congress after the Sept. 11
attacks. Both are computed after the $24,000 deduction.

The deal is not nearly so generous for buyers of
less-than-gargantuan vehicles. When the portion of the tax code
governing these kinds of deductions was written in the 1980's,
deductions for the purchase of an automobile were capped.
Currently, a business can deduct no more than $7,660 for a car in
its first year of service (including the 30 percent bonus),
$4,900 in the second year and less in the succeeding years.

The limits were imposed, tax experts say, to prevent businesses
from loading up on Cadillacs and Mercedeses at taxpayers'
expense. But the cap was not extended to trucks and vans with a
gross vehicle weight — basically the weight fully loaded — of
6,000 pounds or more.

Back then, that gave businesses the ability to take big tax
deductions on vehicles used for construction, farming or hauling.
Today, the tax benefits extend to dozens of vehicles that make
the weight limit — from sport utility vehicles like the Cadillac
Escalade and BMW X5, which are typically used as family
transportation, to pickups like the GMC Sierra and the Chevrolet
Silverado.

That has made environmentalists livid.

"We think it's outrageous that the government is giving special
treatment to these vehicles under the guise that they are used
for farm or work purposes," said Michelle Robinson, a spokeswoman
for the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental group.
"Congress needs to step up and close this loophole, especially at
a time when we clearly, now more than ever, need to be saving oil
and not promoting the biggest gas guzzlers."

Though there is a special $2,000 tax deduction for purchasers of
alternative-fuel and electric-powered vehicles, the qualifying
vehicles naturally weigh less than 6,000 pounds, and the benefits
therefore are capped.

For example, an owner of a small business who takes the maximum
deductions on a $20,500 Prius could trim $9,660 from his taxable
income. To a taxpayer in the highest bracket, that means a tax
saving of $3,500.

The Prius, a hybrid that teams a traditional gasoline-powered
engine with an electric motor, gets an average of 48 miles per
gallon, according to government data. The H2 is so big that
General Motors does not have to report its fuel efficiency to the
government; drivers say it gets a combined 11 miles per gallon in
city and highway driving.

The Monroe doctors' accountant is spreading the word about the
advantages of buying a behemoth.

"As soon as they passed the law, it dawned on me that this is a
real tax break for some people," said the accountant, Jim Jenkins
of Southfield, Mich. "For example, a self-employed realtor who
buys, say, a Lincoln Navigator and pays $40,000, he puts zero
down, he gets zero percent interest and gets a $32,000 tax
deduction."

It is a deal he is considering for himself.

"I drive a Ford Explorer," Mr. Jenkins said, a sport utility
vehicle not quite big enough to qualify for the enlarged
deduction. The vehicles that do, he added, "are just bigger than
anything I want, but with that tax deduction dangling in front of
me, it's tempting."

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 15:44:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA26576;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:42:57 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:42:57 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba295d8ab96a [12.21.208.171]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:57:38 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan
Resent-Message-ID: <"A_1po.0.tU6.0iw0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48632
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

The following miscellaneous comments were in response to remarks regarding
the Simple Renewable Energy Plan which were made in another forum.

The Simple Renewable Energy Plan is a result of about 12 hours work, though
the result of years of work or exposure to the energy and utility fields.
It is also somewhat the result of having enjoyed the Alaskan experience.  I
have been a resident of Alaska since 1976.  The plan is likely full of
flaws and oversimplifications, both computational and conceptual.  However,
it definitely provides a point of departure for constructive dialog that is
more than pointless debate, complaining, and hand wringing or head in the
sand dismissal of important real or controversial issues.  It is an attempt
to be proactive, to move in a concrete and useful direction rather than
simply talk and do nothing.  Furthermore, the concept might actually work!
Like a democracy, the plan depends on a built in self-adjustment mechanism.


The subject plan has a lot of resiliency to change, as the spreadsheet
seems to change comparatively little with significantly changing scenarios.
However, it does benefit significantly if the price of energy soars.  The
corresponding negative damage due to a downturn in price is somewhat
reduced due to the fact the RFP evaluation is based on profitability, and
thus money that might have gone into projects, during low energy cost
times, goes directly into the permanent fund, thus positively affecting
later years.  It would be nice for once to have a tax and spend scheme that
actually works long term.

Us oil consumption in 2000 was about 7.2 billion barrels.  If the 3 billion
dollar a year tax were simply levied against oil, without rebates to
industry, the price of oil would increase less than 42 cents a barrel.  We
are currently paying about a 5 to 10 dollar a barrel premium for some minor
disruptions to supply.  This could become much worse if the US and Britain
decide on a "go it alone" strategy regarding Iraq.  Further, if the direct
3 for 1 pay back in the plan is achieved, with much more payback given
economic multipliers and intangibles, the tax should not be a burden on the
taxpayer, but rather a carrier of the taxpayer's burden.  It does not pay
to be short sighted in long term issues.  Further, that tax could be spread
over gas and coal consumption as well.  The plan as proposed is very
modest, and in fact way too timid in my opinion.

The main goal of the proposed agency or trust is to achieve financial
independence, becoming a private non-profit corporation with special
legislated benefits. a trust, after 20 years.  Perhaps this can be done
immediately, but there may be advantages to the US in having the entity be
a government agency, due to the likely involvement of international
relations and international deals.  Foreign bidding and investment could
simply be excluded, though this is less than optimum from a world view, and
may even violate existing treaties. Still, in that the plan is based on
profit, competition, and privatization, it logically could be implemented
by a private trust.  Such a trust might be useful in preventing the
temptation of future legislators to raid the fund balance. Some creative
legislating is called for here.

The proposed agency is only 5 percent dedicated to research funding, with
0.5 percent being to non-mainstream options.  However, neither this
research, nor the bulk of the work of the agency, is suggested to be done
by agency employees.  For the most part, the suggested agency merely
manages RFP's and provides project oversight and funding.  The basis for
the project awards is profit.  A further stated objective is to maximize
private involvement, or at least competitive involvement, and to return the
projects to private hands.  It is intended that the bidders make
substantial profits, as well as the agency.  Profitability has become a
possibility in the arena of wind power, and may well prove to be feasible
in other arenas, like geothermal power, depending on location.  With
sufficient regulatory control, both energy delivery and profitability goals
can be reached.  Significant leverage can be achieved by creating a
reliable and big long term carrot that attracts big industry investment to
attack the problems.  That is a principle basis for the plan.

The unconventional research program, which receives up to 0.05 percent of
annual revenues, is intended to be modeled after NASA's Breakthrough
Propulsion Physics Project.  However, it seems reasonable to possibly
commit up to half of that amount to infrastructure development for
amateurs, small collaborations, and  small businesses working in related
areas.  Such infrastructure might include lending libraries, instruction,
consultation, laboratory or shop facilities located about the country,
and/or for a device test or concept verification center.


Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 16:35:10 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA11394;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:33:46 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 16:33:46 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3E03B70A.E4FF7BDB verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 02:34:18 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021216152915.02ccd448 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"LnXnO3.0.yn2.gRx0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48633
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

This article clarify the issue.  Calculations made recently on a supercomputer. This is OK.  Reaching zeroes at the end is hoax.

Detailed report and relevant links are at http://www.sciencenews.org/20021214/mathtrek.asp

and at

http://www.super-computing.org/



Jed Rothwell wrote:
> 
> Akira Kawasaki wrote:
> 
> >A local (Los Angeles) community vernacular TV broadcast on Saturday
> >carried a segment  covering a run of Japan's supercomputer by
> >mathematicians to see if Pi's value could be determined, finally.
> 
> The broadcaster probably misunderstood. It was proven a long time ago that
> Pi is not a rational number. It seems unlikely that math theory is wrong to
> that extent. Computers have often been used to generate Pi to many digits.
> This is partly a frivolous effort to establish a world record, but it also
> serves some useful purposes. It is an interesting computer benchmark, and
> the results can be compared to the output from other computers to verify
> the computer works correctly. If digits 1,000,001 through 1,000,100 are the
> same from two different computers, they are both working correctly. It
> takes many previous, identical operations to get that far. Also, some
> studies of random numbers may benefit from the data.
> 
> See: P. Beckman, "History of Pi."
> 
> >determinable value limit. The supercomputer ran for some 400 hours
> >before it came to zeroes --- Pi solved!
> 

[snip]

> 
> - Jed


Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 17:28:48 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id RAA29043;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:27:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 17:27:36 -0800
Message-ID: <3E03C35E.7000407 zipworld.com.au>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 12:26:54 +1100
From: Alan Schneider <alansch zipworld.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; WinNT4.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Pi solved with Japan's supercomputer --- it seems
References: <3.0.6.32.20021217000611.00957dd0 cyllene.uwa.edu.au> <3DFE3A42.2090305@zipworld.com.au>
In-Reply-To: <3DFE3A42.2090305 zipworld.com.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"kdVnm2.0.d57.8Ey0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48634
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 



Alan Schneider wrote:
> 
> 
> John Winterflood wrote:
> 
>> Someone managed to get an almost identical report (different computer
>> but same result) printed in a serious Australian newspaper several
>> years ago.  Someone posted it on our Physics notice board and it
>> created a bit of discussion.  So it would appear that this is actually
>> the confirmation rather than the discovery.  On the other hand it
>> is rather more likely to be someone trying the same hoax a second time!
>>
> 
> LOL...
> 
> I remember that one well, John. I was almost certain at the time
> that it *WAS* a hoax because the dates matched up too well with
> its being an April 1st joke in the *original* publication.
> 
> The newspaper concerned did in fact publish a quite red-faced
> retraction the following week.
> 

For what it's worth in terms of amusement and/or historical
value, following is the text of the newspaper article
mentioned, and the subsequent retraction...

The article would be copyright to News Limited.

Unfortunately, their online archives only go back to 1995, so
I can't provide a URL.

This text is typed in from a photocopy of the original article
so any typos will be my fault <grin>.


 From "The Australian" 12 April 1994...
===================================================================

"Researchers finally slice the pi"
Computers have finally solved one of mathematics's longest
lasting puzzles with the discovery that the mathematical
constant "pi" has a finite number of decimal places.

It's official: pi, the ratio of the circumference of a
circle to its diameter, ends at the 2,075,932,542,102nd
decimal place, according to a mathematical theory
laboratory in the United States.

Researcers were left open-mouthed last month when a
computer given the onerous task of finding pi's last
decimal place suddenly starting printing "millions of
zeros" at the end of the "irrational" number.

"After years of computation, using the most sophisticated
programming, we have found that the number pi ends at a
little over the two trillionth decimap place, thereby
proving that it is indeed a rational number after all,"
the Advanced Computer Numerics Foundation in Colorado
announced.

Pi, approximately 3.1416, had wrongly been assumed to be
an irrational number - a number that could only be
expressed by an infinity of decimal places, according to
the foundation's director, Dr Warren Tomaczewski.

But after "doggedly pursuing this matter to the fullest",
researchers ended the uncertainty, declaring pi to be a
"pure ratio of one complete number divided by another
complete number".

A supposed "proof" that pi was an irrational number had
been kicking around academic circles literally for
centuries, and everybody just bought into it without
doing the real empirical nuts-and-bolts research to
confirm it," Dr Tomaczewski said in a formal statement.

"When the preliminary results started to come in, we
were stunned and put the computer onto the problem full
time," he said.

"The results were the same.

"With the advent of computers there has been an ongoing
race to find the last decimal place of pi and I guess
it was just in the cards for us to actually do it."

Dr Tomaczewski said the discovery had tremendous
theoretical implications, since the result "casts severe
doubt on the adequacy of previous methods to arrive at
so-called 'mathematical proofs' of scientific premises".

It is not at all like the theory of relativity, which has
indeed been confirmed by empirical results in space and
astronomical research," he said.

But despite the revision, architects and engineers, who
use the mathematical constant daily in everything from
bridges to electrical cirucits, may breathe a sigh of
relief.

In practical terms, the difference in the two-trillionth
decimal place was "completely insignificant", Dr
Tomaczewski said.
  - David Higgins

===================================================================

Then the following week (19th April 1994)...

"Pi fails to slice rationally.

Last Tuesday, The Australian published a report,
Researchers Finally Slice The Pi, which stated the
Advanced Computer Numerics Foundation in Colorado
had declared the mathematical constant pi to be a
rational number.

The Australian acknowledges the information supplied
by the source of the report was incorrect and apologises
for any confusion it may have caused.

===================================================================

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 19:00:00 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id SAA24647;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:58:52 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 18:58:52 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba298c7dc14e [12.21.208.171]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:13:24 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan (Amended)
Resent-Message-ID: <"tG3mT2.0.116.hZz0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48635
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


                     A SIMPLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN

THE PROBLEM

In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of
problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy
conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction,
energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of
energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration,
production, and use.  The debate and problems have been so broad as to
demand continuous media, political and academic attention.  These issues
are too broad and controversial for discussion here, but it does not seem
very controversial that a means to obtain large amounts of renewable energy
should be helpful in all these energy related arenas.  However, devising a
means to achieve significant renewable energy development has been somewhat
elusive. It is the intent here to help solve that problem.


A SIMPLE PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION

A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues
addressed, is very simple indeed.  The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped
to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems, if
implemented.

1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated
solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability
to administer this plan.  It should be a stand-alone agency, but at minimum
it should be independent of NSF, NASA, DOE, NREL and the national
laboratories, as these agencies could be potential bidders and significant
benefactors of the plan.

Eventually support this Renewable Energy Agency using a only a perpetual
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund plus agency revenues.  A small seed funding
need be provided until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.  It is the
goal of the agency to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create
renewable energy production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient
revenue stream to fund energy conservation measures.  The agency should be
operated with as much independence from direct management involvement of
the administrative and legislative branches of government as possible.
When financially independent, the agency should become a private non-profit
corporation, a trust, with special legislated benefits and duties.

The planned goal of the proposed agency or trust is to achieve financial
independence within 20 years.  Perhaps making the agency a private trust
can be done immediately, but there may be advantages to the US in having
the entity be a government agency, due to the likely involvement of
international relations and international deals.  Foreign bidding and
investment could simply be excluded, though this is less than optimum from
a world view, and may even violate existing treaties. Still, in that the
plan is based on profit, competition, and privatization, it logically could
be implemented by a private trust.  Such a trust might be useful in
preventing the temptation of future legislators to raid the fund balance.
Some creative legislating is called for here.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc.  The
non-conventional research program is intended to be modeled after NASA's
Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program.  However, it is reasonable to
commit up to half of the 0.5 percent  to infrastructure development for
amateurs, small collaborations, and small businesses working in related
areas.  Such infrastructure might include lending libraries, instruction,
consultation, laboratory or shop facilities located about the country,
and/or for a device test or concept verification center.

Proposal cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with
special projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining
non awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research
funding.  On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5
percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should
receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.  Proposal cycles
for this could be similar to research awards, but likely less often due to
the lower number of grants likely due to the fact bidders in this category
would likely have had successful research awards.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 60
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  A critical requirement is
profitability.  In years of operation subsequent to construction,
successful proposers can use or reserve up to 40 percent of annual revenues
from their project for maintenance or expansion of their facilities on a
cost plus basis.  The balance of sales income, in the aggregate from all
projects, called the annual energy sales income, is treated as annual
income to the agency.  At the end of the year any non awarded funds are
deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund described below.  The
request for proposals should be in large, medium and small categories, with
minimum and maximum funding amounts in each category, with roughly equal
funding to each category.  In the event of no or insufficient acceptable
bids in a category in a year, the balance of funds for that category for
that year are to be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This fund is managed separately from all others.

7) Reserve 75 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.   The "total prior year's income" is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.  If the emergency
fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Oversight of the fund management should
be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of
trusts.  The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund
management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund
management should be awarded to a single bidder.  The permanent fund goal
is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions.
This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by the
suggested financial mechanisms to follow, which are part of this plan.

Any contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, made tax deductible,
but preferably encouraged by further incentives .  Investment leverage
should be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds.  One income
producing element should be green loans for financing construction of
energy efficient housing or businesses, or for energy efficiency home or
business improvements.  Achieving the combined housing and business finance
goals might be achieved via a single entity similar to existing home
finance entities, with such an entity having both bond holders and equity
holders, each earning the corresponding returns on investments.

8) Annually adjust the percentages and other agency operating parameters as
required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation,
regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the
agency.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place project facilities into the
private domain.  This is called project disposal.  Project disposal is by
sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage of 20
percent.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction, but with the
proposer retaining his incentive percentage as a bidding advantage.  Net
proceeds are deposited into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Abandoned
property may be operated by the agency or the agency may choose to put the
operation out to bid using the bid parameters of its choosing.  If a
project does not achieve the proposed average annual revenue for the 10
year projected operating period, then the operating period may be extended
at the choice of the agency, until the projected annual return is achieved.

It is hoped that the proposed agency can become self funding within 20
years.  It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums
available for energy systems design and construction would garner serious
attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies,
like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be
required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with
commercial competitors in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may
have an extreme excess, and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider
applying those funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation
programs.


A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this is to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is
initiated.  The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the
Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered
from the property disposal.  The full disposal recovery amount is placed
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance.



                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,500   150
3       3,000   55      225     3,280   6,048   158
4       3,000   114     302     3,416   7,660   164
5       3,000   174     383     3,557   9,338   171
6       3,000   237     467     3,704   10,908  178
7       3,000   311     545     3,856   12,357  185
8       3,000   397     618     4,014   13,671  193
9       3,000   494     684     4,178   14,839  201
10      3,000   606     742     4,348   15,844  209
11      3,000   731     792     4,523   16,671  217
12      3,000   871     834     4,705   17,906  226
13      3,000   973     895     4,868   19,169  235
14      3,000   1,077   958     5,036   20,480  243
15      3,000   1,185   1,024   5,209   21,840  252
16      3,000   1,296   1,092   5,388   23,340  260
17      3,000   1,403   1,167   5,570   24,987  269
18      3,000   1,504   1,249   5,753   26,788  278
19      3,000   1,599   1,339   5,938   28,752  288
20      3,000   1,687   1,438   6,124   30,890  297
21      0       1,767   1,545   3,312   30,211  306
22      0       1,839   1,511   3,349   32,276  166
23      0       1,797   1,614   3,410   34,437  167
24      0       1,750   1,722   3,472   36,664  171
25      0       1,699   1,833   3,533   38,961  174
26      0       1,645   1,948   3,593   41,328  177
27      0       1,587   2,066   3,654   43,769  180
28      0       1,525   2,188   3,713   46,283  183
29      0       1,459   2,314   3,773   48,871  186
30      0       1,388   2,444   3,832   51,534  189
31      0       1,313   2,577   3,890   54,272  192
32      0       1,234   2,714   3,947   55,960  194
33      0       1,254   2,798   4,052   57,715  197
34      0       1,274   2,886   4,160   59,508  203
35      0       1,297   2,975   4,272   61,337  208
36      0       1,320   3,067   4,387   63,205  214
37      0       1,346   3,160   4,506   65,110  219
38      0       1,374   3,255   4,629   67,053  225
39      0       1,403   3,353   4,756   69,035  231
40      0       1,435   3,452   4,886   71,056  238



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Dispos.
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    Year

0       0       3,000   0       0       1
300     1,200   1,050   1,200   0       2
315     1,260   1,103   2,460   0       3
328     1,312   1,148   3,772   0       4
342     1,366   1,196   5,139   0       5
356     1,601   1,067   6,739   0       6
370     1,852   926     8,591   0       7
386     2,121   771     10,712  0       8
401     2,409   602     13,121  0       9
418     2,716   418     15,837  0       10
435     3,043   217     18,880  0       11
452     3,392   0       21,072  600     12
470     3,529   0       23,341  630     13
487     3,651   0       25,680  656     14
504     3,777   0       28,090  683     15
521     3,907   0       30,396  800     16
539     4,041   0       32,586  926     17
557     4,177   0       34,642  1,061   18
575     4,315   0       36,548  1,204   19
594     4,454   0       38,286  1,358   20
612     4,593   0       39,836  1,522   21
331     2,484   0       38,928  1,696   22
335     2,512   0       37,911  1,764   23
341     2,558   0       36,818  1,825   24
347     2,604   0       35,645  1,888   25
353     2,649   0       34,387  1,953   26
359     2,695   0       33,041  2,021   27
365     2,740   0       31,603  2,089   28
371     2,785   0       30,074  2,157   29
377     2,830   0       28,449  2,227   30
383     2,874   0       26,730  2,297   31
389     2,917   0       27,163  1,242   32
395     2,960   0       27,612  1,256   33
405     3,039   0       28,093  1,279   34
416     3,120   0       28,609  1,302   35
427     3,204   0       29,164  1,325   36
439     3,290   0       29,759  1,347   37
451     3,380   0       30,399  1,370   38
463     3,472   0       31,086  1,393   39
476     3,567   0       31,823  1,415   40


Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

Total Fund Balance              71,056
Total Research and Pilots       16,386
Total Current Projects          31,823
Total Sold Project Value        41,286
                            ==========
       Total benefit           160,551

        Total tax cost          60,000

       Cost/Benefit            0.37371


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.

If profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is
that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad
thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.  If
foreign owned bidders or projects are to be allowed, this should be via a
separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benefits to the
taxpayer will not be forthcoming.  However, the plan might easily be
adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached.

The plan has a lot of resiliency to change, as the final numbers seem to
change comparatively little with significantly changing scenarios. However,
it does benefit significantly if the price of energy soars.  The
corresponding negative damage due to a downturn in price is somewhat
reduced due to the fact  RFP evaluation is based on profitability, and
therefore money that might have gone into projects, during low energy cost
times, goes directly into the permanent fund, thus positively affecting
later years.

US oil consumption in 2000 was about 7.2 billion barrels.  If the 3 billion
dollar a year tax were simply levied against oil, without rebates to
industry, the price of oil would increase less than 42 cents a barrel.  We
are currently paying about a 5 to 10 dollar a barrel premium for some minor
disruptions to supply.  This could become much worse if the US and Britain
decide on a "go it alone" strategy regarding Iraq.  Further, if the direct
3 for 1 payback in the plan is achieved, with much more payback given
economic multipliers and intangibles, the tax should not be a burden on the
taxpayer, but rather a carrier of the taxpayer's burden.  It does not pay
to be short sighted in long term issues.  Further, that tax could be spread
over gas and coal consumption as well.  The plan as proposed is very
modest, and in fact too timid for the significant needs addressed.


BENEFITS OF THE PLAN

The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and are not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  The permanent nature
of the plan is designed to achieve independence from political cycles, and
this aspect is critical to its success and is a major and distinguishing
benefit of the plan.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding for energy conservation efforts produced
without taxation.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive
the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund
interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and
potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing,
and increases general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be
driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be
a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping
inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological
breakthroughs that will permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.  At the assumed taxation rate
over 150 billion dollars in energy production facilities is produced in 40
years, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very large,
with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion dollars.
The suggested taxation rate can not achieve all the benefits for which
there is a defined need,  but could be significantly scaled up if or when
desired, with a corresponding increase in expected benefits, both
quantified and unquantified.

This plan is hereby declared to be public domain, without copyright.
Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is
encouraged by the author.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 20 20:18:36 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id UAA13797;
	Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:17:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:17:24 -0800
Message-ID: <3E03EC5A.9FAC9293 ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 20:21:46 -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   Friday, 20 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"42D1G1.0.VN3.Kj-0-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48636
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   Friday, 20 Dec 02
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2002 15:58:03 -0500
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 20 Dec 02   Washington, DC

1. MISSILE DEFENSE: BUSH ORDERS A LIMITED SYSTEM BY 2004. Just
ten interceptors in Alaska and California, to stop an attack from
North Korea.  Puff Panegyric in the Missile Defense Agency seemed
annoyed last week (WN 13 Dec 02), but this time he was up.  "You
can't imagine how proud we are to be a part of this," he gushed. 
I heard glasses clinking in the background. "But Puff," I said,
trying to talk over the sounds of celebration, "your interceptors
only hit the target 40% of the time, and that's when you know the
exact launch time and trajectory--and there's a homing beacon on
the target."  "Nothing's perfect," he snorted, "that's the beauty
of the plan.  North Korea only has a handful of missiles.  Can
you imagine a commander launching a missile if he thinks there's
any chance it might get shot down?"  Puff went back to the party.

2. PRIVACY: POINDEXTER HEADS "TOTAL INFORMATION AWARENESS."  The
1974 Privacy Act prohibits federal agencies from sharing personal
information, but 9/11 may have changed all that.  We are entered
in a database every time we enter a federal building or use a
credit card, and the government wants to integrate such databases
to keep track of terrorists--or anyone else.  But who has the
experience to head such a program?  Who but John Poindexter, the
man who invented "sensitive but unclassified."  A PhD physicist
from Cal Tech, where he was a student of Mossbauer, Poindexter
was National Security Advisor to President Reagan.  The same John
Poindexter masterminded the supply of arms to Iran, and sought to
extend government control over unclassified private data bases. 
His conviction for lying to Congress was overturned on an appeal.

3. EAU DE MONEY: A ROSE IS A ROSE, EXCEPT WHEN IT GROWS ... 
Except when it grows in microgravity.  Maybe.  After years of
telling us the Space Station would lead to a cure for cancer, or
produce more perfect crystals, NASA now proudly reveals a program
with perfume industry giant International Flavors & Fragrances to
look for new fragrances from roses grown in space.  Environmental
parameters on Earth, such as water, sunlight, temperature and
soil, influence the essential oils that give flowers their smell. 
Why shouldn't gravity do the same?  This is exciting stuff.  It
puts the space station program in perspective.  Oh yes, and how
much of the cost will International Flavors and Fragrances bear?

4. HERBAL ABUSE: ECHINACEA FAILS IN A DOUBLE-BLIND TEST.  There
is no reason why some herbal medications shouldn't be beneficial.
The field of pharmacology had its origins in the empiricism of
the herbalist.  The world's best selling herbal supplement,
derived from the purple coneflower (Echinacea angustifolia), is
taken by millions to ward off colds and flu.  Alas, in a double-
blind test carried out at the University of Wisconsin, cold
sufferers taking a placebo, fared just as well as those taking
the herb.  What do you suppose the authors recommend?  More
research.

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.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 21 06:56:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30662;
	Sat, 21 Dec 2002 06:55:24 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 06:55:24 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3E0480FB.8719F1D1 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:55:55 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
CC: Scott Little <little earthtech.org>
Subject: magnetic refrigeration with gadolinium
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"q7v1E2.0.0V7.S381-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48637
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi,

I recently interested on Gd due its unique magnetic susceptibility of more than 700,000. Great material for science projects. Then I learned that curie temperature is about 293K, not so suitable. Then I just figure out that it can be used for magnetic refrigeration. And voila! A search on Google with keywords "magnetic refrigeration gadolinium" gives many hits. Science is easy! :) It was discovered in 1997 that alloy of Gd,Si, and Ge offer very good magnetocolorific capability in very large range of temperature. 

http://www.ameslab.gov/News/release/1997release/97magrefrig.html

What is also interesting about Gd its price. I found a Canada source selling
Gd in ingots for USD$80/Kg

Let SMOT again with Gd balls :)

Regards,

hamdix

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 21 07:44:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA12273;
	Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:42:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:42:33 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530501ba2a3fb924dd [12.110.74.93]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:57:06 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan (Corrected)
Resent-Message-ID: <"cQNXg3.0.d_2.fl81-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48638
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


                     A SIMPLE RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN

THE PROBLEM

In recent years there has been continuous significant and heated debate of
problematic and energy related issues including global warming, energy
conservation, energy resource depletion, the economics of tax reduction,
energy as a war related factor, disposal of nuclear waste, the funding of
energy research, and the environmental impacts of energy exploration,
production, and use.  The debate and problems have been so broad as to
demand continuous media, political and academic attention.  These issues
are too broad and controversial for discussion here, but it does not seem
very controversial that a means to obtain large amounts of renewable energy
should be helpful in all these energy related arenas.  However, devising a
means to achieve significant renewable energy development has been somewhat
elusive. It is the intent here to help solve that problem.


A SIMPLE PLAN FOR IMPROVING THE SITUATION

A plan is proposed here, which, compared to the problematic issues
addressed, is very simple indeed.  The following plan, in 9 parts, is hoped
to result in a significant and permanent reduction in energy problems.

1) Form a separate government agency, a Renewable Energy Agency, dedicated
solely to fostering the use of renewable energy, and give it the capability
to administer this plan.  It should be a stand-alone agency, but at minimum
it should be independent of NSF, NASA, DOE, NREL and the national
laboratories, as these agencies could be potential bidders and significant
benefactors of the plan.

Eventually support this Renewable Energy Agency using a only a perpetual
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund plus agency revenues.  A small seed funding
need be provided until sufficient energy taxes can be raised.  It is the
goal of the agency to achieve and maintain self-sufficiency, to create
renewable energy production assets, and eventually to achieve a sufficient
revenue stream to fund energy conservation measures.  The agency should be
operated with as much independence from direct management involvement of
the administrative and legislative branches of government as possible.
When financially independent, the agency should become a private non-profit
corporation, a trust, with special legislated benefits and duties.

The planned goal of the proposed agency or trust is to achieve financial
independence within 20 years.  Perhaps making the agency a private trust
can be done immediately, but there may be advantages to the US in having
the entity be a government agency, due to the likely involvement of
international relations and international deals.  Foreign bidding and
investment could simply be excluded, though this is less than optimum from
a world view, and may even violate existing treaties. Still, in that the
plan is based on profit, competition, and privatization, it logically could
be implemented by a private trust.  Such a trust might be useful in
preventing the temptation of future legislators to raid the fund balance.
Some creative legislating would benefit this plan.

2) Tax gasoline, and maybe other non-renewable energy, enough to generate
at least 3 billion dollars a year for the renewable energy fund, about a
dollar per person per month.  Rebate trucking and commercial energy use in
order to avoid a significant burden in a single sector of the economy and a
slowing of the economy.  The total net income from this tax is called the
annual tax income.

3) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to research, using
about 0.5 percent of this to support research in non-conventional,
controversial, or long term development areas, like zero point energy (ZPE)
research, low energy nuclear reactions (LENR), hydrinos, etc.  The
non-conventional research program is intended to be modeled after NASA's
Breakthrough Propulsion Physics program.  However, it is reasonable to
commit up to half of the 0.5 percent  to infrastructure development for
amateurs, small collaborations, and small businesses working in related
areas.  Such infrastructure might include lending libraries, instruction,
consultation, laboratory or shop facilities located about the country,
and/or for a device test or concept verification center.

Proposal cycles for research might be quarterly rather than annually, with
special projects being awarded on an as desired basis from any remaining
non awarded research funds or for some fixed percentage of the research
funding.  On average, research projects should receive less than 0.5
percent of the annual research budget, and no research project should
receive more than 5 percent of the annual research budget.

4) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 5
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to follow-on
prototype development, pilot projects, or small yet novel projects, with
emphasis on those designed to produce a billable product.  Proposal cycles
for this could be similar to research awards, but likely less often due to
the lower number of grants likely due to the fact bidders in this category
would likely have had successful research awards.

5) On an annual basis, based upon competitive proposals, distribute 75
percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income to projects that
will produce energy that will be billed at a rate comparable to the most
nearly competitive rates, regardless of the cost of production, if that
cost be more than the comparable production rates, or less than the
prevailing competitive rates if that is feasible at a profit.  Awards to be
based on best 10 year return on investment, as proposed by the bidders and
adjusted as desired by the proposal reviewers.  A critical requirement is
profitability.  In years of operation subsequent to construction,
successful proposers can use or reserve up to 40 percent of annual revenues
from their project for maintenance or expansion of their facilities on a
cost plus basis.  The balance of sales income, in the aggregate from all
projects, called the annual energy sales income, is treated as annual
income to the agency.  At the end of the year any non awarded funds are
deposited into the renewable energy permanent fund described below.  The
request for proposals should be in large, medium and small categories, with
minimum and maximum funding amounts in each category, with roughly equal
funding to each category.  In the event of no or insufficient acceptable
bids in a category in a year, the balance of funds for that category for
that year are to be placed in the permanent fund.

6) Reserve 5 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
maintenance of or disposal of abandoned facilities, and emergency expenses.
This fund is managed separately from all others.

7) Reserve 10 percent of the agency's total prior year's annual income for
depositing into a permanent fund for renewable energy development, the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.   The "total prior year's income" is the
prior year's sum of tax income, annual energy sales income, and permanent
fund interest income after inflation proofing deductions.  If the emergency
fund balance becomes excessive to needs, a portion may be rolled into the
Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.  Oversight of the fund management should
be by an independent board in a manner consistent with the management of
trusts.  The board is expected to contract all or portions of the fund
management on a periodic basis, but no more than 25 percent of the fund
management should be awarded to a single bidder.  The permanent fund goal
is to make at least 5 percent interest after inflation proofing deductions.
This is difficult but the chances for success are enhanced by the
suggested financial mechanisms to follow, which are part of this plan.

Any contributions to the fund should be, at minimum, made tax deductible,
but preferably encouraged by further incentives .  Investment leverage
should be achieved by award of tax free green investment bonds.  One income
producing element should be green loans for financing construction of
energy efficient housing or businesses, or for energy efficiency home or
business improvements.  Achieving the combined housing and business finance
goals might be achieved via a single entity similar to existing home
finance entities, with such an entity having both bond holders and equity
holders, each earning the corresponding returns on investments.

8) Annually adjust the percentages and other agency operating parameters as
required, consistent with prior commitments, changing legislation,
regulations and economic conditions, and with the long term goals of the
agency.

9) At the end of 10 years of operation, or sooner if desirable to the
agency and a facility is abandoned, place project facilities into the
private domain.  This is called project disposal.  Project disposal is by
sale to proposer at an appraised value less an incentive percentage of 10
to 20 percent.  If that is not agreeable, sale is then by auction, but with
the proposer retaining his incentive percentage as a bidding advantage.
Net proceeds are deposited into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund.
Abandoned property may be operated by the agency or the agency may choose
to put the operation out to bid using the bid parameters of its choosing.
If a project does not achieve the proposed average annual revenue for the
10 year projected operating period, then the operating period may be
extended at the choice of the agency, until the projected annual return is
achieved.

It is hoped that the proposed agency can become self funding within 20
years.  It is further hoped that the large and comparatively risk-free sums
available for energy systems design and construction would garner serious
attention from big high-tech companies or even some government agencies,
like the national laboratories or NASA. Special legislation might be
required to permit such agencies to compete commercially or to partner with
commercial competitors in this limited arena.  At some point the fund may
have an extreme excess, and at that point it seems worthwhile to consider
applying those funds to incentives for or funding for energy conservation
programs.


A PRELIMINARY LOOK AT SOME NUMBERS

Below is a first rough cut at some 40 year numbers, inflation ignored.
Here taxes remain in effect for a full 20 years, then are eliminated.  The
fund runs on its own revenue after that.  Average payback time for the
projects to achieve this is to be about 13 years.  This is very reasonable
if the cost of energy rises significantly above inflation over the 20 year
period.  At the end of 20 years the fund is self-sustaining, even excluding
consideration of prototype sales revenue, intellectual property rights
revenue, possible creation of lynch pin technologies, and excluding any
project growth due to the 40 percent of sales dedicated to the proposers,
which can at their discretion be used to grow their projects.  Project
disposal in the 40 year estimate occurs 10 years after a project is
initiated.  The full value awarded to the project is deducted from the
Total Project Amount, while only 50 percent of that is assumed recovered
from the property disposal.  The full disposal recovery amount is placed
into the Renewable Energy Permanent Fund balance.



                                Total   Fund    Maint. &
        Taxes   Sales   Int.    Income  Bal.    Disposal
Year    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    End Yr. (M$)

1       3,000   0       0       3,000   3,000   0
2       3,000   0       150     3,150   4,500   150
3       3,000   55      225     3,280   6,048   158
4       3,000   114     302     3,416   7,660   164
5       3,000   174     383     3,557   9,338   171
6       3,000   237     467     3,704   10,908  178
7       3,000   311     545     3,856   12,357  185
8       3,000   397     618     4,014   13,671  193
9       3,000   494     684     4,178   14,839  201
10      3,000   606     742     4,348   15,844  209
11      3,000   731     792     4,523   16,671  217
12      3,000   871     834     4,705   17,906  226
13      3,000   973     895     4,868   19,169  235
14      3,000   1,077   958     5,036   20,480  243
15      3,000   1,185   1,024   5,209   21,840  252
16      3,000   1,296   1,092   5,388   23,340  260
17      3,000   1,403   1,167   5,570   24,987  269
18      3,000   1,504   1,249   5,753   26,788  278
19      3,000   1,599   1,339   5,938   28,752  288
20      3,000   1,687   1,438   6,124   30,890  297
21      0       1,767   1,545   3,312   30,211  306
22      0       1,839   1,511   3,349   32,276  166
23      0       1,797   1,614   3,410   34,437  167
24      0       1,750   1,722   3,472   36,664  171
25      0       1,699   1,833   3,533   38,961  174
26      0       1,645   1,948   3,593   41,328  177
27      0       1,587   2,066   3,654   43,769  180
28      0       1,525   2,188   3,713   46,283  183
29      0       1,459   2,314   3,773   48,871  186
30      0       1,388   2,444   3,832   51,534  189
31      0       1,313   2,577   3,890   54,272  192
32      0       1,234   2,714   3,947   55,960  194
33      0       1,254   2,798   4,052   57,715  197
34      0       1,274   2,886   4,160   59,508  203
35      0       1,297   2,975   4,272   61,337  208
36      0       1,320   3,067   4,387   63,205  214
37      0       1,346   3,160   4,506   65,110  219
38      0       1,374   3,255   4,629   67,053  225
39      0       1,403   3,353   4,756   69,035  231
40      0       1,435   3,452   4,886   71,056  238



Resrch                  Total
and     Project Not     Project Project
Pilot   Awards  Awarded Amount  Dispos.
(M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    (M$)    Year

0       0       3,000   0       0       1
300     1,200   1,050   1,200   0       2
315     1,260   1,103   2,460   0       3
328     1,312   1,148   3,772   0       4
342     1,366   1,196   5,139   0       5
356     1,601   1,067   6,739   0       6
370     1,852   926     8,591   0       7
386     2,121   771     10,712  0       8
401     2,409   602     13,121  0       9
418     2,716   418     15,837  0       10
435     3,043   217     18,880  0       11
452     3,392   0       21,072  600     12
470     3,529   0       23,341  630     13
487     3,651   0       25,680  656     14
504     3,777   0       28,090  683     15
521     3,907   0       30,396  800     16
539     4,041   0       32,586  926     17
557     4,177   0       34,642  1,061   18
575     4,315   0       36,548  1,204   19
594     4,454   0       38,286  1,358   20
612     4,593   0       39,836  1,522   21
331     2,484   0       38,928  1,696   22
335     2,512   0       37,911  1,764   23
341     2,558   0       36,818  1,825   24
347     2,604   0       35,645  1,888   25
353     2,649   0       34,387  1,953   26
359     2,695   0       33,041  2,021   27
365     2,740   0       31,603  2,089   28
371     2,785   0       30,074  2,157   29
377     2,830   0       28,449  2,227   30
383     2,874   0       26,730  2,297   31
389     2,917   0       27,163  1,242   32
395     2,960   0       27,612  1,256   33
405     3,039   0       28,093  1,279   34
416     3,120   0       28,609  1,302   35
427     3,204   0       29,164  1,325   36
439     3,290   0       29,759  1,347   37
451     3,380   0       30,399  1,370   38
463     3,472   0       31,086  1,393   39
476     3,567   0       31,823  1,415   40


Cost/benefit at 40 year planning horizon:

Total Fund Balance              71,056
Total Research and Pilots       16,386
Total Current Projects          31,823
Total Sold Project Value        41,286
                            ==========
       Total benefit           160,551

        Total tax cost          60,000

       Cost/Benefit            0.37371


Such a plan could should not be considered a business plan in that the
energy generation is initially subsidized.  Additional utility type
regulation, both for project proposal winners and for utilities in general
may be required to avoid abuses.  It is intended, however, that the
financial incentives to the proposers be significant and that those awarded
grants be extremely profitable, almost to the extent of a windfall, and
that performance after initial construction be comparatively risk free.

If profitability goals are not met, the most likely down side scenario is
that the excise taxes need continue longer, and that may not be such a bad
thing in that event, in that the abuse of energy is discouraged.  If
foreign owned bidders or projects are to be allowed, this should be via a
separate entity or agency, as the expected quantified benefits to the
taxpayer will not be forthcoming.  However, the plan might easily be
adopted by foreign entities, or cooperative agreements reached.

The plan has a lot of resiliency to change, as the final numbers seem to
change comparatively little with significantly changing scenarios. However,
it does benefit significantly if the price of energy soars.  The
corresponding negative damage due to a downturn in price is somewhat
reduced due to the fact  RFP evaluation is based on profitability, and
therefore money that might have gone into projects, during low energy cost
times, goes directly into the permanent fund, thus positively affecting
later years.

US oil consumption in 2000 was about 7.2 billion barrels.  If the 3 billion
dollar a year tax were simply levied against oil, without rebates to
industry, the price of oil would increase less than 42 cents a barrel.  We
are currently paying about a 5 to 10 dollar a barrel premium for some minor
disruptions to supply.  This could become much worse if an oil embargo
should occur due to political conditions.  Further, if the direct 3 for 1
payback in the plan is achieved, with much more payback due to economic
multipliers and intangibles, the tax should not be a burden on the
taxpayer, but rather a carrier of the taxpayer's burden.  It does not pay
to be short sighted in long term issues.  Further, that tax could be spread
over gas and coal consumption as well.  The plan as proposed is very
modest, and in fact too timid for the significant needs addressed.


BENEFITS OF THE PLAN

The principle benefits derived are long term and to the nation as a whole
and are not readily allocated back to the plan on a business planning cycle
basis, as business planning cycles are far too short.  The permanent nature
of the plan is designed to achieve independence from political cycles, and
this aspect is critical to its success and is a major and distinguishing
benefit of the plan.

The principle reliable benefit of the plan is that the tax payer gets the
money all back in the form of direct economic stimulation, reduced energy
cost, and eventually in funding for energy conservation efforts produced
without taxation.  In addition, the capitalization of the fund helps drive
the stock market and capitalizes industry in general, while the fund
interest supports the energy industry directly with low risk and
potentially windfall profits, helps drive the economy through financing,
and increases general tax revenue.  Ultimately, energy prices will be
driven lower than they would be otherwise, and low energy prices should be
a major factor in driving the economic productivity and in keeping
inflation low. There is also the potential of major technological
breakthroughs that will permanently free us from energy worries.

In addition to the above unquantified benefits, the quantified estimates
indicate an about 3 for 1 return on investment to the nation at the 40 year
horizon if the plan becomes self funding at the 20 year horizon.  If
foreign firms are permitted to bid, then the cost/benefit for the
quantified values drops to about half that, though the full value of the
project energy production is still achieved.  At the assumed taxation rate
over 150 billion dollars in energy production facilities is produced in 40
years, but the economic multiplier for this benefit should be very large,
with a measurable economic benefit possibly closer to a trillion dollars.
The suggested taxation rate can not achieve all the benefits for which
there is a defined need,  but could be significantly scaled up if or when
desired, with a corresponding increase in expected benefits, both
quantified and unquantified.

This plan is hereby declared to be public domain, without copyright.
Publishing, distribution, correction or enhancement by any means is
encouraged by the author.

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 21 07:50:23 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id HAA14366;
	Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:49:19 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 07:49:19 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530505ba2a412e7c77 [12.110.74.93]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 08:04:06 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: A Simple Renewable Energy Plan (Corrected)
Resent-Message-ID: <"l81jJ.0.NW3.-r81-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48639
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Sorry to keep sending the same old thing, but some days I just can't seem
to get anything right.  8^(

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 22 08:17:05 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id IAA13816;
	Sun, 22 Dec 2002 08:15:30 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 08:15:30 -0800
Message-ID: <006701c2a9cc$f812cf40$5210b83f computer>
From: "Frederick Sparber" <fjsparber earthlink.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: 1902 Sears Catalogue - CDROM Version
Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 09:15:10 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
	boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0060_01C2A99A.A0E64B20"
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: <"QCvN02.0.mN3.XKU1-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48640
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0060_01C2A99A.A0E64B20
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I bought a copy of this CD.    ($28.00 with priority mailing cost).
 What a delightful experience it is to see the technology available at the time the
Wright brothers were getting
airborne.The imagery is as good or better than what you would see with the catalog.


 http://www.princetonimaging.com/cdrom/sears/

Check out their services, too. I would consider buying the back issues of
Infinite-Energy magazine if they were on a CD as good as this, and at a comparable
price. :-)

Fred


------=_NextPart_000_0060_01C2A99A.A0E64B20
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
	name="1902 Sears Catalogue - CDROM Version.url"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="1902 Sears Catalogue - CDROM Version.url"

[DEFAULT]
BASEURL=http://www.princetonimaging.com/cdrom/sears/

[InternetShortcut]
URL=http://www.princetonimaging.com/cdrom/sears/
Modified=8052AB51CCA9C20106

------=_NextPart_000_0060_01C2A99A.A0E64B20--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sun Dec 22 14:18:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA21400;
	Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:16:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2002 14:16:36 -0800
From: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
Message-ID: <3E0639E9.CC454294 verisoft.com.tr>
Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2002 00:17:13 +0200
Reply-To: hamdix verisoft.com.tr
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (Win98; U)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
CC: Scott Little <little earthtech.org>
Subject: Magnetic cooling is almost free
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"B_2a43.0.HE5.3dZ1-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48641
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


See abstract http://www.aps.org/BAPSMAR98/abs/S3220002.html

"Using a superconducting magnet at 5 T, cooling of 500 watts was
obtained at coefficients of performance of 5 or more watts of cooling
per watt of work input. Cooling of 150 watts was obtained using a 1.5 T
field, which can be obtained from permanent magnet sources. The
main losses in the present device are magnet AC losses and seal
friction, although limits on temperature span may also be imposed by
magnetic material properties. We have identified design, magnet, and
magnetic material improvements that should reduce such losses,
allowing the construction of devices whose efficiency well exceeds that
obtainable from conventional technology."

Using NdFeB magnets of 1.5 T is not a restriction indeed. Is is possible to concentrate the flux using soft magnetic materials. 2-3 T was possible.

See http://www.eps.org/aps/meet/MAR02/baps/abs/S2170.html#SF17.008
"[F17.008] Magnetocaloric effect: permanent magnet array for generation
of high magnetic fields"

COP=5 of higher is possible, and it not top secret.

It is also possible I think to play around Curie temperature of same Gd alloy or a different one thermally and mechanically coupled to magnetocaloric element to obtain mechanical power for free. 

I think this "SMOT"ing scheme will work according this diagram:
                  
                  |||||            
 C C C C C C H H H H H C C C C C C (magnetocaloric material)
  (tail)          ||||| >>    (head)  
              (magnetic field)

C and H denote cold and hot material

If susceptibility of the material decrease from cold to hot,
(preferably T_cold < T_Curie < T_hot) due to provided positional asymmetry of the field respecting temperature mapping as shown on the diagram, magnetic field would pull the material on head more than at tail So we have already a SMOT. (please look the diagram with fixed fonts) 

My next posting subject line would be 
Mr. Spock, where we can find some good Gadolinium crystals?

Regards,

hamdi ucar

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 24 12:15:08 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA11367;
	Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:13:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 12:13:36 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <a05111b35ba2c1079f08d [64.61.199.167]>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 14:13:17 -0600
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: thomas malloy <temalloy metro.lakes.com>
Subject: David Moon's Christmas message
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Resent-Message-ID: <"PcSuw.0.Xn2.m_B2-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48642
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

My friend David Moon, whose latest article of his speculations into 
the mechanisms behind cold fusion will be published in the upcoming 
edition of Infinite Energy, came across the following article, which 
was obviously written by an engineer. He was moved to write the 
second article, Quanta Clause, which is such an excellent discussion 
of physics, that I was motivated to type up the whole thing.


                                          An Engineer looks at Santa Claus

No known species of reindeer can fly, but there are an estimated 
300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while 
most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule 
out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.

There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world, But 
since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslin, Hindu, Jewish, and 
Buddhist children. that reduces the workload to 15% of the total 378 
million, according to Population Reference Bureau. At an average 
(census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million 
homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.

Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different 
time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to 
west, (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per 
second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good 
children, Santa has 1/1000 of a  second to park, hop out of the 
sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings distribute the 
remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been 
left, get back up the chimney get back into the sleigh and move on to 
the next house.

Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed 
around the earth 9which , of course , we know to be false but for the 
purposes of our calculations we will accept). we are now talking 
about counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once 
every 1 hours, plus feeding etc. This means that Santa's sleigh is 
moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For 
purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle, the Ulysses 
space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second - a conventional 
reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.

The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming 
that each child gets nothing more than a medium - sized Lego set (2 
pounds ), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons. not counting Santa, 
who is invariably described as overweight. On land, conventional 
reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying 
reindeer" (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we 
cannot do the job with eight or even nine, we need 214,200 reindeer. 
This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the 
sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times 
the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.

353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second create enormous air 
resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a 
spacecrafts re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of 
reindeer will absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of per second each. In 
short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously,  exposing 
the reindeer behind them, and create a deafening sonic boom in their 
wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 
thousandths of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to 
centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250 pound 
Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of 
his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.

In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, 
he's been vaporized by now;

                                                              Quanta Claus

The above story, indeed presents a problem for Santa. The physics 
applied to Santa Claus - his mass, momentum, velocity, kinetic energy 
and time limitations - is on the macro level, and uses Newtonian 
physics, based on the equations of Isaac Newton. Treated this way, 
Santa has a dilemma, and his Christmas Eve task is impossible. 
However, what if Santa Claus were described with relativity and 
quantum physics? His yearly trip might be explained. And Santa Claus 
become Quanta Claus.

First, some basic concepts from quantum theory. When a baseball is 
thrown, for example, you can describe it's mass, velocity, energy and 
position at any instant in flight. You can also describe it's physics 
wen resting on a table. This is Newtonian physics. Particles on the 
atomic and sub-atomic level - particles like electrons, protons and 
neutrons - have a bit different description. We begin to lose the 
picture of hard massy objects having very defined boundaries and 
locations. Instead. particles become blurred, fuzzy and spread out 
(Hi, Santa!)

Between 1900 and 1930, the quantum theory developed, along with 
Einstein's theories of relativity. The German physicist Max Plank 
started the quantum revolution in 1900 with his equation relating the 
frequency of a quantum, or "piece", of electromagnetic radiation, to 
it's energy. The radical idea was that light, while having properties 
of waves, was transferred discontinuously in packets of energy called 
quanta. Their energy of a quantum (or photon) of a particular 
electromagnetic radiation is directly related to it's frequency - 
higher frequency, higher energy.

In 1925, the French scientist Louis de Broglie, using Plank's 
equation and Albert Einstein's special relativity equation, E=MC^2, 
showed that [particles such as electrons, have wavelengths. Thus 
there emerged the particle - wave duality of matter and energy. 
Electromagnetic energy, such as visible light, had a "particle" 
nature (quanta or photons), and particles, like electrons, protons 
and neutrons, possessed wave - like properties.

Today, the best description of particles is a picture of not a massy 
particle at all, but of a standing wave (like a vibrating guitar 
string). In other words, a particle like an electron is a 
concentration of (dense form of) electromagnetic energy. That is, 
mass is energy , and has electromagnetic energy. That is, mass is 
energy, and has characteristics of wavelength and frequency, even 
while standing still. Einstein's E=MC^2 gives the equivalence of mass 
and is energy,  with all mass and energy being oscillatory, (wave - 
like).

Now, an electron or other quantum particle is understood to be not a 
point particle with defined edges, but a "wavicle", having wavelength 
and frequency, and being spread out extended in space. In fact, an 
electron orbiting the nucleus (a proton) of a hydrogen atom - as 
first calculated by Neils Bohr in 1913 - has a wavelength equal to 
the circumference of the electron's orbit: about 3 divided by 10 
eight times, moving the decimal point to the left eight places).

In quantum theory, the more "mass" that is, the shorter the 
wavelength and the higher the frequency. For example, a free neutron 
has a rest mass of 1.675 X  10^ -24 gram, (1.675 divided by 10 twenty 
four times). The frequency of this mass is 2.275 X 10^23 cycles or 
oscillations per second (2.275 multiplied by 10 twenty three times). 
The neutron's wavelength is 1.32 Fermis or 1.32 trillionth of a 
millimeter. The electron's "rest mass" (mass increases with velocity, 
says relativity theory) is 9.11 X 10^ -28 gram, and the frequency of 
it's wave is "only" 1.237  10^ 20 cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). 
The neutron is about 1840 times heavier than an electron.

Electromagnetic energy, emitted and absorbed as quanta (photons), 
also has frequency - energy relationship (E M) spectrum, radio waves, 
infrared and microwaves are longer, have lower frequency and lower 
energy per photon. At the other end of the wavelength, high frequency 
and higher energy per photon (and are penetrating).

I will get back to Quanta Claus shortly. But one side note applies. 
It comes from the science of cold fusion and one theory to explain 
it. There is in physics something known as "quantum field theory." 
Field theory looks at not one particle, one wave motion, but orderly 
collections of particles that have constructive wave interferences. 
We say that atoms do not behave individually, but affect one another. 
A single copper atom, for example, is not a unit of substance that is 
able to explain all the properties of copper. A "domain" of atoms, or 
domain of energy states, is of interest. It is better to talk about 
groups of electrons having the same or similar energies, or groups of 
atoms having very similar energy states.  Especially in condensed 
matter (liquids and solids), particle frequencies - although existing 
in a wave range of energies - can have close bands of frequencies and 
harmonics that contain large, cooperative assemblies of particles 
(waveicles) which act as one large body, that is, a "macro quantum 
element" that acts coherently as one. This is called a coherent 
domain. In a metal lattice (crystalline structure), coherent domains 
might consist of 10^9 (a billion) or 10^12 (a trillion) particles, 
perhaps more. The ultimate reality of any property of matter, such as 
electrical conductivity, is found not so much in the individual 
atoms, but in the collective behavior of many particles (waves) in 
the coherent domains.

A superb example of collective particle behavior - cooperative 
behavior - occurs in superconductors, which are made of ceramic 
material caller perovskites. These ceramic materials, at very low 
temperatures such as liquid nitrogen (-196 C), when coherent domains 
grow in size, can conduct electricity  with zero resistance. This 
happens because electrons in the conduction energy band couple 
together into "large quantum elements" of electrons, which act 
together as one. Therefore, there exists very large electron - 
domains of electrons - extending, in a sense, their collective or 
combined Wavelength through the superconducting crystal. The 
conducting electrons are so delocalized (see the next paragraph) that 
a conducting electron exists everywhere at once in the crystal. 
Electrons in the superconductor encounter no electrical resistance. 
There is created a kind of "perpetual conducting machine"!!

One important idea of a coherent domain in matter is that all the 
like - particles in the domain (e.g., a domain of electrons) are 
essentially indistinguishable from each other. Physicists talk of 
delocalization of the wave functions of the particles. It's like a 
particle (wave function) on one end of a coherent domain existing at 
the same time on the other end of the domain. We are now getting 
close to seeing how Quanta Claus can get to all those houses - I 
should say domains of houses all in one night.

One side note fits here. It comes from a theoretical explanation of 
the phenomena known as cold fusion. When heavy hydrogen (deuterium) 
is absorbed into the surface layers of a metal such as palladium, the 
deuterium atom nuclei (deterons) interact collectively with the 
electrons of the metal. This allows positively charged deuterons to 
get close enough together to fuse. Two deutrons fuse to make a helium 
nucleus. In rarefied matter - (i.e. hot plasma gasses) the energy 
release from nuclear fusion is emitted as high energy gamma photons, 
on the order of 10^21 Hz frequency. (That's a billion trillion 
oscillations of the photon wave per second.) In a metal lattice that 
is host to this fusion, the energy normally carried by a photon of 
10^32 Hz is spread over 110^9 particles, giving each particle a 
quantum of energy of 10^12 Hz: (10^9 particles X 10^12 Hz added per 
particle = 10^21 Hz) A frequency of 110^12 Hz is in the infrared 
(heat radiation) part of the EM spectrum. This is how cold fusion can 
make heat instead of dangerous, penetrating gamma radiation.

And now! The breathtaking conclusion of the story of Quantum Claus.

It is expected that Quanta Claus, whose wave (He WAVED! what a nice 
man.) function is coherent with other wave functions throughout a 
domain, will be delocalized and will be functions throughout a 
domain, will be delocalized and will be able to "exist" in a million 
places at once (no offense, Santa look - alikes). However, he is 
really one large (no offense, Santa) delocalized quantum element. 
Therefore, if a domain of houses is one million homes, Quanta Claus 
makes only 91.8 stops all night. Let's round - off to 92 stops, for a 
total of 92 million homes. Quanta could easily spend a leisurely two 
minutes per domain, for a total of 184 minutes. I'll call it 3 hours 
stop time. Having 31 hours to complete his circuit, this leaves 28 
hours travel time.

Since Santa is stopping only at domains of houses, he does less zig - 
zagging during his trip. So, I'll estimate his total distance be be 
140,000 miles. His average velocity will be: 140,000 miles divided by 
28 hours = 5,000 miles per hour. This speed still seems pretty fast 
for the big guy - but remember, he's QUANTA Claus! And in quantum 
physics, strange and miraculous things can happen. Besides that, It's 
Christmas!

Merry Christmas Everyone

Dave

P.S. I predict that next year Santa will drive a cold fusion - 
powered Sleigh. If so, he'll be know as Good Ol' St. Nuke! (WAVE Good 
- bye, Dave)


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 24 15:50:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA07419;
	Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:49:32 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 15:49:32 -0800
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Yakov Smirnoff <rockcast net-link.net>
Reply-To: rockcast net-link.net
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: David Moon's Christmas message
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2002 18:53:40 -0500
X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4]
References: <a05111b35ba2c1079f08d [64.61.199.167]>
In-Reply-To: <a05111b35ba2c1079f08d [64.61.199.167]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <200212241853.41014.rockcast net-link.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA07396
Resent-Message-ID: <"0qfXy1.0.qp1.BAF2-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48643
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

How about Star Trek Clause?   Here Santa has made an arrangement
with the greys that live in a neighboring galaxy that was visited by StarGate
SG-1's Richard Dean Anderson.  Now they understand that there are more
things in the sub nucleic realm than quarks, and can manipulate, say the
components of the nuclear strong force to create a temporal field.  In this
way, Santa can exist in a time stasis bubble while the universe around
him  exists in normal fashion.  In this way we can never see him, as he
would be percieved by us as moving infinitly fast.  He can then service
all the homes in the world from his saucer or orb, using spooky action at
a distance to tangle transport toys to billions of homes.  He can even take
years doing it, as no time passes in our present time/space line while he
is doing the deed.  No wonder he is so old!  Why get sooty from all  those
chimneys or set off all those burglar alarms in all those apartments when
he can just punch buttons in his craft as he passes overhead.  He can use
his computer consoles to find out who is naughty or nice and not have to
remember all what little Johnny told three different department store Santas
(all different)......just look at the screen while enjoying an ice cold beer
and some cherry pipe tobacco......oh thats not PC.

Yakov







On Tuesday 24 December 2002 15:13, thomas malloy wrote:
> My friend David Moon, whose latest article of his speculations into 
> the mechanisms behind cold fusion will be published in the upcoming 
> edition of Infinite Energy, came across the following article, which 
> was obviously written by an engineer. He was moved to write the 
> second article, Quanta Clause, which is such an excellent discussion 
> of physics, that I was motivated to type up the whole thing.
> 
> 
>                                           An Engineer looks at Santa Claus
> 
> No known species of reindeer can fly, but there are an estimated 
> 300,000 species of living organisms yet to be classified, and while 
> most of these are insects and germs, this does not completely rule 
> out flying reindeer which only Santa has ever seen.
> 
> There are 2 billion children (persons under 18) in the world, But 
> since Santa doesn't (appear) to handle the Muslin, Hindu, Jewish, and 
> Buddhist children. that reduces the workload to 15% of the total 378 
> million, according to Population Reference Bureau. At an average 
> (census) rate of 3.5 children per household, that's 91.8 million 
> homes. One presumes there's at least one good child in each.
> 
> Santa has 31 hours of Christmas to work with, thanks to the different 
> time zones and the rotation of the earth, assuming he travels east to 
> west, (which seems logical). This works out to 822.6 visits per 
> second. This is to say that for each Christian household with good 
> children, Santa has 1/1000 of a  second to park, hop out of the 
> sleigh, jump down the chimney, fill the stockings distribute the 
> remaining presents under the tree, eat whatever snacks have been 
> left, get back up the chimney get back into the sleigh and move on to 
> the next house.
> 
> Assuming that each of these 91.8 million stops are evenly distributed 
> around the earth 9which , of course , we know to be false but for the 
> purposes of our calculations we will accept). we are now talking 
> about counting stops to do what most of us must do at least once 
> every 1 hours, plus feeding etc. This means that Santa's sleigh is 
> moving at 650 miles per second, 3,000 times the speed of sound. For 
> purposes of comparison, the fastest man-made vehicle, the Ulysses 
> space probe, moves at a poky 27.4 miles per second - a conventional 
> reindeer can run, tops, 15 miles per hour.
> 
> The payload on the sleigh adds another interesting element. Assuming 
> that each child gets nothing more than a medium - sized Lego set (2 
> pounds ), the sleigh is carrying 321,300 tons. not counting Santa, 
> who is invariably described as overweight. On land, conventional 
> reindeer can pull no more than 300 pounds. Even granting that "flying 
> reindeer" (see point #1) could pull TEN TIMES the normal amount, we 
> cannot do the job with eight or even nine, we need 214,200 reindeer. 
> This increases the payload - not even counting the weight of the 
> sleigh - to 353,430 tons. Again, for comparison - this is four times 
> the weight of the Queen Elizabeth.
> 
> 353,000 tons traveling at 650 miles per second create enormous air 
> resistance - this will heat the reindeer up in the same fashion as a 
> spacecrafts re-entering the earth's atmosphere. The lead pair of 
> reindeer will absorb 14.3 quintillion joules of per second each. In 
> short, they will burst into flame almost instantaneously,  exposing 
> the reindeer behind them, and create a deafening sonic boom in their 
> wake. The entire reindeer team will be vaporized within 4.26 
> thousandths of a second. Santa, meanwhile, will be subjected to 
> centrifugal forces 17,500.06 times greater than gravity. A 250 pound 
> Santa (which seems ludicrously slim) would be pinned to the back of 
> his sleigh by 4,315,015 pounds of force.
> 
> In conclusion - If Santa ever DID deliver presents on Christmas Eve, 
> he's been vaporized by now;
> 
>                                                               Quanta Claus
> 
> The above story, indeed presents a problem for Santa. The physics 
> applied to Santa Claus - his mass, momentum, velocity, kinetic energy 
> and time limitations - is on the macro level, and uses Newtonian 
> physics, based on the equations of Isaac Newton. Treated this way, 
> Santa has a dilemma, and his Christmas Eve task is impossible. 
> However, what if Santa Claus were described with relativity and 
> quantum physics? His yearly trip might be explained. And Santa Claus 
> become Quanta Claus.
> 
> First, some basic concepts from quantum theory. When a baseball is 
> thrown, for example, you can describe it's mass, velocity, energy and 
> position at any instant in flight. You can also describe it's physics 
> wen resting on a table. This is Newtonian physics. Particles on the 
> atomic and sub-atomic level - particles like electrons, protons and 
> neutrons - have a bit different description. We begin to lose the 
> picture of hard massy objects having very defined boundaries and 
> locations. Instead. particles become blurred, fuzzy and spread out 
> (Hi, Santa!)
> 
> Between 1900 and 1930, the quantum theory developed, along with 
> Einstein's theories of relativity. The German physicist Max Plank 
> started the quantum revolution in 1900 with his equation relating the 
> frequency of a quantum, or "piece", of electromagnetic radiation, to 
> it's energy. The radical idea was that light, while having properties 
> of waves, was transferred discontinuously in packets of energy called 
> quanta. Their energy of a quantum (or photon) of a particular 
> electromagnetic radiation is directly related to it's frequency - 
> higher frequency, higher energy.
> 
> In 1925, the French scientist Louis de Broglie, using Plank's 
> equation and Albert Einstein's special relativity equation, E=MC^2, 
> showed that [particles such as electrons, have wavelengths. Thus 
> there emerged the particle - wave duality of matter and energy. 
> Electromagnetic energy, such as visible light, had a "particle" 
> nature (quanta or photons), and particles, like electrons, protons 
> and neutrons, possessed wave - like properties.
> 
> Today, the best description of particles is a picture of not a massy 
> particle at all, but of a standing wave (like a vibrating guitar 
> string). In other words, a particle like an electron is a 
> concentration of (dense form of) electromagnetic energy. That is, 
> mass is energy , and has electromagnetic energy. That is, mass is 
> energy, and has characteristics of wavelength and frequency, even 
> while standing still. Einstein's E=MC^2 gives the equivalence of mass 
> and is energy,  with all mass and energy being oscillatory, (wave - 
> like).
> 
> Now, an electron or other quantum particle is understood to be not a 
> point particle with defined edges, but a "wavicle", having wavelength 
> and frequency, and being spread out extended in space. In fact, an 
> electron orbiting the nucleus (a proton) of a hydrogen atom - as 
> first calculated by Neils Bohr in 1913 - has a wavelength equal to 
> the circumference of the electron's orbit: about 3 divided by 10 
> eight times, moving the decimal point to the left eight places).
> 
> In quantum theory, the more "mass" that is, the shorter the 
> wavelength and the higher the frequency. For example, a free neutron 
> has a rest mass of 1.675 X  10^ -24 gram, (1.675 divided by 10 twenty 
> four times). The frequency of this mass is 2.275 X 10^23 cycles or 
> oscillations per second (2.275 multiplied by 10 twenty three times). 
> The neutron's wavelength is 1.32 Fermis or 1.32 trillionth of a 
> millimeter. The electron's "rest mass" (mass increases with velocity, 
> says relativity theory) is 9.11 X 10^ -28 gram, and the frequency of 
> it's wave is "only" 1.237  10^ 20 cycles per second, or Hertz (Hz). 
> The neutron is about 1840 times heavier than an electron.
> 
> Electromagnetic energy, emitted and absorbed as quanta (photons), 
> also has frequency - energy relationship (E M) spectrum, radio waves, 
> infrared and microwaves are longer, have lower frequency and lower 
> energy per photon. At the other end of the wavelength, high frequency 
> and higher energy per photon (and are penetrating).
> 
> I will get back to Quanta Claus shortly. But one side note applies. 
> It comes from the science of cold fusion and one theory to explain 
> it. There is in physics something known as "quantum field theory." 
> Field theory looks at not one particle, one wave motion, but orderly 
> collections of particles that have constructive wave interferences. 
> We say that atoms do not behave individually, but affect one another. 
> A single copper atom, for example, is not a unit of substance that is 
> able to explain all the properties of copper. A "domain" of atoms, or 
> domain of energy states, is of interest. It is better to talk about 
> groups of electrons having the same or similar energies, or groups of 
> atoms having very similar energy states.  Especially in condensed 
> matter (liquids and solids), particle frequencies - although existing 
> in a wave range of energies - can have close bands of frequencies and 
> harmonics that contain large, cooperative assemblies of particles 
> (waveicles) which act as one large body, that is, a "macro quantum 
> element" that acts coherently as one. This is called a coherent 
> domain. In a metal lattice (crystalline structure), coherent domains 
> might consist of 10^9 (a billion) or 10^12 (a trillion) particles, 
> perhaps more. The ultimate reality of any property of matter, such as 
> electrical conductivity, is found not so much in the individual 
> atoms, but in the collective behavior of many particles (waves) in 
> the coherent domains.
> 
> A superb example of collective particle behavior - cooperative 
> behavior - occurs in superconductors, which are made of ceramic 
> material caller perovskites. These ceramic materials, at very low 
> temperatures such as liquid nitrogen (-196 C), when coherent domains 
> grow in size, can conduct electricity  with zero resistance. This 
> happens because electrons in the conduction energy band couple 
> together into "large quantum elements" of electrons, which act 
> together as one. Therefore, there exists very large electron - 
> domains of electrons - extending, in a sense, their collective or 
> combined Wavelength through the superconducting crystal. The 
> conducting electrons are so delocalized (see the next paragraph) that 
> a conducting electron exists everywhere at once in the crystal. 
> Electrons in the superconductor encounter no electrical resistance. 
> There is created a kind of "perpetual conducting machine"!!
> 
> One important idea of a coherent domain in matter is that all the 
> like - particles in the domain (e.g., a domain of electrons) are 
> essentially indistinguishable from each other. Physicists talk of 
> delocalization of the wave functions of the particles. It's like a 
> particle (wave function) on one end of a coherent domain existing at 
> the same time on the other end of the domain. We are now getting 
> close to seeing how Quanta Claus can get to all those houses - I 
> should say domains of houses all in one night.
> 
> One side note fits here. It comes from a theoretical explanation of 
> the phenomena known as cold fusion. When heavy hydrogen (deuterium) 
> is absorbed into the surface layers of a metal such as palladium, the 
> deuterium atom nuclei (deterons) interact collectively with the 
> electrons of the metal. This allows positively charged deuterons to 
> get close enough together to fuse. Two deutrons fuse to make a helium 
> nucleus. In rarefied matter - (i.e. hot plasma gasses) the energy 
> release from nuclear fusion is emitted as high energy gamma photons, 
> on the order of 10^21 Hz frequency. (That's a billion trillion 
> oscillations of the photon wave per second.) In a metal lattice that 
> is host to this fusion, the energy normally carried by a photon of 
> 10^32 Hz is spread over 110^9 particles, giving each particle a 
> quantum of energy of 10^12 Hz: (10^9 particles X 10^12 Hz added per 
> particle = 10^21 Hz) A frequency of 110^12 Hz is in the infrared 
> (heat radiation) part of the EM spectrum. This is how cold fusion can 
> make heat instead of dangerous, penetrating gamma radiation.
> 
> And now! The breathtaking conclusion of the story of Quantum Claus.
> 
> It is expected that Quanta Claus, whose wave (He WAVED! what a nice 
> man.) function is coherent with other wave functions throughout a 
> domain, will be delocalized and will be functions throughout a 
> domain, will be delocalized and will be able to "exist" in a million 
> places at once (no offense, Santa look - alikes). However, he is 
> really one large (no offense, Santa) delocalized quantum element. 
> Therefore, if a domain of houses is one million homes, Quanta Claus 
> makes only 91.8 stops all night. Let's round - off to 92 stops, for a 
> total of 92 million homes. Quanta could easily spend a leisurely two 
> minutes per domain, for a total of 184 minutes. I'll call it 3 hours 
> stop time. Having 31 hours to complete his circuit, this leaves 28 
> hours travel time.
> 
> Since Santa is stopping only at domains of houses, he does less zig - 
> zagging during his trip. So, I'll estimate his total distance be be 
> 140,000 miles. His average velocity will be: 140,000 miles divided by 
> 28 hours = 5,000 miles per hour. This speed still seems pretty fast 
> for the big guy - but remember, he's QUANTA Claus! And in quantum 
> physics, strange and miraculous things can happen. Besides that, It's 
> Christmas!
> 
> Merry Christmas Everyone
> 
> Dave
> 
> P.S. I predict that next year Santa will drive a cold fusion - 
> powered Sleigh. If so, he'll be know as Good Ol' St. Nuke! (WAVE Good 
> - bye, Dave)
> 
> 
> 
> 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Fri Dec 27 13:40:54 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA06977;
	Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:38:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:38:43 -0800
Message-ID: <3E0CC96A.4FF539AD ix.netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 13:43:06 -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   Friday, 27 Dec 02]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"l-tDd3.0.pi1.YXC3-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48644
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   Friday, 27 Dec 02
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 2002 15:36:52 -0500
From: "What's New" <opa aps.org>
Reply-To: opa aps.org
To: "What's New" <whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

WHAT'S NEW   Robert L. Park   Friday, 27 Dec 02   Washington, DC

1. NUCLEAR WEAPONS: NORTH KOREA JABS THE U.S. WITH A SHARP STICK. 
So here we are, threatening to go to war with Iraq over weapons
of mass destruction, whether UN inspectors find evidence or not,
when North Korea decides to rub our nose in it by restarting an
old plutonium production facility, and expelling UN inspectors. 
North Korea was one of the 185 signatories to the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty.  However, they claim the agreement was
voided by the oil-for-nuclear-abstinence deal struck with the
U.S. in 1994.  Having threatened the "axis of evil" with
peremptory strikes, the U.S. is under pressure to follow through.

2. HUMAN CLONING: RAELIANS ANNOUNCE THE BIRTH OF BABY "EVE."  Do
you recall the controversy stirred up by physicist Richard Seed,
PhD Harvard '53, when he announced his intention to clone the
first human (WN 9 Jan 98)?  We haven't heard anything from Seed
lately, but today the scientific director of Clonaid says her
company has created the first human clone.  Clonaid was founded
by Raelians, a religious group that believes extraterrestrials
created humans.  There are no details on how the supposed cloning
of Eve was achieved, but physicist Michael Guillen, PhD Cornell,
has been selected by Clonaid to verify the claim.  Guillen has
just the credentials Clonaid needs.  In 1997 as the science
correspondent for ABC Good Morning America, Guillen did a three-
part series, "Fringe or Frontier."  Of precognition he concluded
"these guys are not flakes"; on astrology, "I think we're just
going to have to suspend judgement"; on psychokinesis, "you have
to take it seriously" (WN 3 Oct 97).  Indeed, Guillen covered
everything from James Patterson's cold fusion cell to Kirlian
photographs of the human aura with the same credulity.  A PhD in
physics, after all, is not an inoculation against foolishness. 
We called ABC, but were told emphatically that their relationship
with Guillen ended nearly a year ago.

3. HERBAL REALITY CHECK: TV's TOP MEDICAL UNDISCOVERIES OF 2002. 
This is the week network news programs like to reflect on the top
stories of the past year.  The health message from ABC News was
that good science can trump widespread beliefs: the food pyramid
has been revised to elevate the importance of good fats, hormone
replacement therapy has been found to increase risk for cancer,
heart disease and stroke, and recently, the world's most widely
used herbal supplements were found to be ineffective. "Echinacea,
which is used to treat the common cold; St. Johns Wort, used for
depression; and Ginko biloba, thought to sharpen memory, were all
shown to be ineffective in studies published this year."  You may
recall that CBS Evening News reported that herbal supplements are
untested, impure and often harmful (WN 1 Nov 02).  The newly
skeptical treatment of herbal supplements on network TV is
attributable to the rigorous testing sponsored by the NIH Center
of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (WN 23 Aug 02). 

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.
---
Archives of What's New can be found at http://www.aps.org/WN.
You are currently subscribed to whatsnew as: <aki ix.netcom.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank e-mail to:
<leave-whatsnew-27231J lists.apsmsgs.org>
To subscribe, send a blank e-mail to: <join-whatsnew lists.apsmsgs.org>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 28 12:18:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA15722;
	Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:16:07 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:16:07 -0800
Message-ID: <3E0E072B.5508B7F ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 12:18:51 -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: CF, Patterson, Guillen, Clonaid, and Park's latest
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"bm85b.0.ar3.6QW3-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48645
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

 
Vortex,

On Dec. 27, 2992, Robert Park wrote in part:

"HUMAN CLONING: (clip)
 There are no details on how the supposed cloning
of Eve was achieved, but physicist Michael Guillen, PhD Cornell,
has been selected by Clonaid to verify the claim.  Guillen has
just the credentials Clonaid needs.  In 1997 as the science
correspondent for ABC Good Morning America, Guillen did a three-
part series, "Fringe or Frontier."  Of precognition he concluded
"these guys are not flakes"; on astrology, "I think we're just
going to have to suspend judgement"; on psychokinesis, "you have
to take it seriously" (WN 3 Oct 97).  Indeed, Guillen covered
everything from James Patterson's cold fusion cell to Kirlian
photographs of the human aura with the same credulity.  A PhD in
physics, after all, is not an inoculation against foolishness. 
We called ABC, but were told emphatically that their relationship
with Guillen ended nearly a year ago."

According to Newsday, Guillen worked for ABC from 1988 to 2002 when he
left as their Science Editor. He now describes himself as a freelance
journalist and has written a few books including a mathematics book
picked as the Book of the Year by The Publisher's Weekly.
Guillen, independent of Clonaid but with their cooperation, is said to
be organizing a panel of experts to establish by DNA whether 'Eve' is
actually a clone of the mother.
Guillen is said to be keenly interested in the subject of cloning.

Since Guillen lives outside of Boston, perhaps Eugene Mallove, of
Infinite Energy or Mitchell Swartz of Cold Fusion Times could interview
him on a wide variety of subjects including his opinion on unfolding of
new science and phenomenon including cold fusion. He should be able to
speak freely since he is no longer tied to ABC.

-AK-

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Sat Dec 28 14:16:03 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA16608;
	Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:14:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 14:14:48 -0800
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/9.0.1.3108
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2002 17:16:40 -0800
Subject: Re: CF, Patterson, Guillen, Clonaid, and Park's latest
From: "Eugene F. Mallove" <editor infinite-energy.com>
To: "vortex l eskimo.com" <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-ID: <BA338CF8.5A30%editor infinite-energy.com>
In-Reply-To: <3E0E072B.5508B7F ix.netcom.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Resent-Message-ID: <"EDBJn2.0.P34.O9Y3-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48646
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

On 12/28/02 12:18 PM, "Akira Kawasaki" <aki ix.netcom.com> wrote:

> Since Guillen lives outside of Boston, perhaps Eugene Mallove, of
> Infinite Energy or Mitchell Swartz of Cold Fusion Times could interview
> him on a wide variety of subjects including his opinion on unfolding of
> new science and phenomenon including cold fusion. He should be able to
> speak freely since he is no longer tied to ABC.
> 
> -AK-
> 
> 


Akira,

I keep in regular touch with Michael Guillen, but these exchanges are quiet
and confidential.  Thank you for your query.

I am sure we will be hearing more from Dr. Guillen on this and other topics.

Best,

Gene Mallove

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 30 10:51:16 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA24936;
	Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:47:43 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 10:47:43 -0800
X-Sent: 30 Dec 2002 18:47:29 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230125758.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 13:08:26 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Wired reports on clone
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"KjMZF2.0.W56.FJ94-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48647
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

See:

http://www.wired.com/news/medtech/0,1286,57001,00.html

Quote:

"[Raelian spokesperson] Boisselier offered no scientific proof, provided no 
photographs and did not produce the child or the mother, who she said is a 
31-year-old with an infertile husband. Her announcement was met with doubt 
by the scientific community and with revulsion by many ethicists.

To gain convincing proof that "Eve" is a clone, Boisselier said she had 
accepted an offer by a former ABC News science editor, Michael Guillen, who 
has chosen independent experts to draw DNA from the mother and the newborn 
and test them for a match. . . ."

My comments:

I do not understand why Park is attacking Guillen, or belittling him or the 
Raelian claim. This is a cut-and-dry claim. If the Raelians give unimpeded 
access to the mother and newborn child, then Guillen -- or any educated 
person -- can easily select a suitable expert, who will prove or disprove 
the claim in a few days. You can find experts in the Yellow Pages under 
"DNA testing." 92 are listed in the Atlanta area. This sort of thing is 
done all the time in paternity suits. Millions of monozygotic twins have 
identical DNA; any expert will recognize it easily. There is no way a clone 
can be faked. Park is setting himself up for a fall by ridiculing the claim 
at this stage.

(Actually, twins are probably not 100% identical, and the genes do not 
express the same way by any means. Twins look different, especially in old 
age. I know a female pair age ~20. One has developed a rare, serious 
disease which is thought to be genetic in origin, and the other has not.)

Regarding morality, as I have said here previously, that many cloned 
animals have serious health problems, apparently connected with the cloning 
procedure. Cloning is still poorly understood. Lifespans may be truncated. 
For this reason cloning a human now is  dangerous and outrageous, and it 
should be illegal in my opinion.

However, if years from now the procedure can be made safe and the rate of 
birth deformities and health problems with other mammals is no worse than 
it is with natural reproduction, I would have no moral objection to cloning 
people. It is no different from having twins, except they are generations 
apart. I would only object to extreme tendencies, which are not likely to 
arise anyway, such as:

1. Cloning more than three copies. Dozens or hundreds of copies of one 
person would be socially disruptive. For that matter, cloning even one 
additional copy of Robert Park -- or me -- might bring civilization to its 
knees.

2. Cloning more than a tiny fraction of the population. Any significant 
fraction would slow down the pace of evolution.

3. Cloning large numbers of infertile people, or people with severe health 
problems that prevent natural reproduction. This is bad eugenics. Eugenics 
were distorted by racists and Nazis, and given a bad name, but there is 
some merit to the idea. This may already be a problem. Many babies are born 
with various artificial insemination techniques, and many may inherit the 
problems that required artificial insemination in the first place. This 
will mean a growing number of people in the future will require special, 
expensive treatment.

Most of the other moral objections to cloning have little merit. For 
example, it is said that cloning would be immoral because it would be done 
mainly to satisfy the parent's ego. That is often true of natural 
reproduction, so it is not a valid objection. Most objections boil down to 
the statement: "we are afraid of anything new." The first test tube babies 
a generation ago caused a storm of moral objections, which are long forgotten.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 30 12:47:44 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA07400;
	Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:42:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:42:44 -0800
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 12:42:02 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
To: vortex <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Message-id: <002201c2b043$e8b57a20$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2B000.DA0BF320"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"vZlO51.0.Np1.3_A4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48648
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2B000.DA0BF320
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A collection of loosely coherent, pregnant thoughts which are focused =
somewhat on the recent global warming thread...

For those who appreciate how a change in perspective offers some insight =
into complicated issues, consider this conundrum. Many of us don't want =
"global warming" for a lot of reasons, real and imagined. But is there =
any air-tight proof that warming of the planet would not be beneficial =
to earth's population somewhere down the road ?=20

In the most general terms, "warming" itself is *negentropic* =
(anti-entopic), and furthermore almost everything else in our moral code =
and our lives in general that we associate with anti-entropy is labeled =
as good, desirable, moral... the right thing do. Why should "global =
warming" be any different?

A lot of this qualitative balancing act depends on a time perspective, =
of course. We might reason that we don't want warming now because =
warming would have the immediate effect of melting the polar ice which =
would raise the ocean level and flood costal cities.=20

But that particular tradeoff assumes falsely that we can only alter some =
of the relevant negative factors but can't alter others that might =
mollify, even improve the predicted situation. In actuality, although =
there is a lot of water tied up in ice at the polar regions, there is a =
great deficit of water elsewhere, so this tradeoff can be looked at as =
only an engineering challenge, subject to the same cost/benefits =
analysis that are used throughout the corporate and governmental world.  =
In other words, it may be possible in principle to embrace global =
warming as an *opportunity* to plan ahead to convert our deserts into =
corn fields, rather than sit idly by and let the costal cities flood =
over, or worse yet, do nothing but argue about the details while an =
inevitable progression marches on - and then try to dike up all our =
low-lands at the last minute.

Let me state clearly for the record that *global warming* itself is not =
what I am advocating. It is something more akin to universal, binding, =
intelligent long-term planning - planning which is life-centered but not =
necessarily species-centered. I liked very much Horace's recent =
renewable energy plan- and that kind of thing is what government should =
be about...not Bush's shoot-from-the-hip military intervention in =
far-away lands...except as a last resort (Iraq may be a last resort =
situation, but the administration has yet to prove that contention to =
anyone except its own hawk extremists).

BTW, the Dutch have taught us that even diking of lowlands makes good =
economic sense when population density reaches a certain level. Does =
anyone doubt that the population density on earth will not double in the =
next few centuries?=20

What should be our time horizon for evaluating the issue of global =
warming?

If it could be shown (with some kind of gigantic computer simulation) =
that global warming would be injurious to one billion people for fifty =
years and then absolutely essential to survival for ten billion people =
for the next five hundred years, should not we take the long term =
perspective at the expense of our immediate needs? In all such cases, of =
course, the advocacy group which is not supported by the computer will =
claim that the program is flawed. That predicament will not change, even =
as we enter the age of superior machines.

To depersonalize the argument somewhat, there are other "places" fairly =
close-by that might accommodate intelligent life, sometime in the next =
few hundred years, BUT humans would benefit most only if we permit =
unfettered warming of those particular globes (our moon, Mars or Titan). =
Is this "moral" and does it shed any light on the current local =
arguments about global earthly warming?

Titan is the largest moon of Saturn, larger than the planet Mercury, and =
is the only moon in the solar system with a thick gaseous atmosphere. It =
has been the locale of a number of Sci-Fi tales, including "hard Sci-Fi" =
(more within the realm of scientific probability) by I. Asimov and R. =
Forward and others. Like Earth's atmosphere, Titan's is mostly nitrogen, =
very cold nitrogen. Unlike Earth, Titan is inhospitable to life as we =
know it because of a lack of oxygen and "lack of global warming"  ;-)=20

Titan, on the positive side (from an SUV owners perspective), has oceans =
that could fuel your gas-guzzler till the sun went cold (oceans of =
ethane similar to LP gas)! But, alas, no O2 to combust with it, so we =
can't just warm the place up by torching the oceans, thankfully ! or =
some NASA cowboy would have already done it - PLUS extremely cold =
surface temperatures - minus 183 degrees Celsius (-297 degrees =
Fahrenheit) and probably a rocky core.=20

Combining these facts with knowledge gained in the last decade regarding =
natural mineral compounds, intermetallic compounds such as perovskites, =
and Titan should be a grand place to implement HTSC "high temperature =
superconductivity" on a large scale.

Or has this feat already been accomplished elsewhere? The evolution of =
minerals into HTSC organisms is pretty far out, but not outside the =
realm of possibility, especially if AI (artificial intelligence) becomes =
fully developed. Evolution can even be seen as a two stage process, =
organic first and non-organic second. There is a devastating argument =
(devastating to most kinds of environmentalism) that logically states =
that the one and only qualitative feature that is natural to life =
is....ta,da: CHANGE and not just change, but change that makes the past =
unrecognizable. From that perspective, environmentalism can be seen as =
morally repugnant since it attempts to preserve the present and recent =
past in an unnaturally way - by the elimination of change. But that =
argument bites both ways.

Extreme cold and lack of oxygen does not automatically preclude life, =
only "life as we know it." BTW, if there is other life at all in the =
universe, then "life as we don't know it" will logically far exceed life =
based on carbohydrate chemistry simply because of the wider range of =
possibilities, xenobiology notwithstanding.=20

Our growing understanding of other places and other physical =
chemistries, like that of Titan, is now making some of these previously =
remote possibilities more imminent. Curiously, no Sci-Fi writer AFAIK, =
has yet to considered the possibility that HTSC, high temperature =
superconductivity, could be a basis for evolution of a superior =
life-form, even though perovskites are a common mineral structure (at =
least on earth) and computers based on HTSC components would probably =
make Ghz Pentiums look like a de-clocked '386 by comparison.

So here is the hypothetical moral conundrum that would make a good theme =
for a Sci-Fi tale (there are many that are similar):  A race of =
quasi-intelligent beings evolves through hydrocarbon chemistry in one =
location (Earth) but cannot sustain their growing needs and indulgences, =
even though they have created machines of superior intellectual =
abilities (Earth of 2010) so they send out missions to terra-form a =
nearby moon (Titan) because of its nearly unlimited supply of =
gasoline-like fuel in its oceans. The only problem is that - for =
monetary reasons, they must send out unmanned drones, mini-factories =
controlled by the superior artificial intelligence, into which they have =
programmed a moral code based on *negentropy*

What happens when those AI drones get together on Titan and start =
communicating and manufacturing things among themselves?

Lets just hope Titan doesn't  have much Uranium...because it wouldn't be =
used to warm things up on Titan....

More later,

Jones


------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2B000.DA0BF320
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dwindows-1252"><BASE=20
href=3D"file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft =
Shared\Stationery\">
<STYLE>BODY {
	BACKGROUND-POSITION: left top; MARGIN-TOP: 25px; FONT-SIZE: 12pt; =
MARGIN-LEFT: 25px; COLOR: #000000; BACKGROUND-REPEAT: no-repeat; =
FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
</STYLE>

<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>A collection of loosely coherent, pregnant thoughts&nbsp;which are =
focused=20
somewhat on&nbsp;the recent global warming thread...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>For those who appreciate how a change in perspective offers some=20
insight&nbsp;into complicated issues, consider this conundrum. Many of =
us don't=20
want "global warming" for a lot of reasons, real and imagined. But is =
there any=20
air-tight proof that warming of the planet would not be beneficial to =
earth's=20
population&nbsp;somewhere down the road ? </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>In the most general terms, "warming" itself&nbsp;is *negentropic*=20
(anti-entopic), and furthermore almost everything else in our moral code =
and our=20
lives in general that we associate with anti-entropy is labeled as good, =

desirable, moral... the right thing do. Why should "global warming" be =
any=20
different?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>A lot of this qualitative balancing act depends on a time =
perspective, of=20
course. We might reason that we don't want warming now because warming =
would=20
have the immediate effect of melting the&nbsp;polar ice which would =
raise the=20
ocean level and flood costal cities. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>But that particular tradeoff assumes falsely that we can only alter =
some of=20
the relevant negative&nbsp;factors but can't alter others that might =
mollify,=20
even improve the predicted situation. In actuality, although there is a =
lot of=20
water tied up in ice at the polar regions, there is a great deficit of =
water=20
elsewhere, so this tradeoff&nbsp;can be looked at as only an engineering =

challenge, subject to the same cost/benefits analysis that&nbsp;are used =

throughout the corporate and governmental world.&nbsp;&nbsp;In other =
words,=20
it&nbsp;may be possible in principle to embrace global warming as an=20
*opportunity* to plan ahead to convert our deserts into corn fields, =
rather than=20
sit idly by and let the costal cities flood over, or worse yet, do =
nothing but=20
argue about the details while an inevitable progression marches on - and =

then&nbsp;try to dike up all our low-lands at the last minute.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Let me state clearly for the record that *global warming* itself is =
not=20
what I am advocating. It is something more akin to universal,=20
binding,&nbsp;intelligent long-term planning - planning which is =
life-centered=20
but not necessarily species-centered. I liked very much Horace's=20
recent&nbsp;renewable energy&nbsp;plan- and that kind of thing is what=20
government should be about...not Bush's shoot-from-the-hip&nbsp;military =

intervention in far-away lands...except as a last resort (Iraq may be a =
last=20
resort situation, but the administration has yet to prove that =
contention to=20
anyone except its own&nbsp;hawk extremists).</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>BTW, the Dutch have taught us that even diking of lowlands makes =
good=20
economic sense when population density reaches a certain level. Does =
anyone=20
doubt that the population density on earth will not double in the next =
few=20
centuries? </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What should be our time horizon for evaluating the issue of global=20
warming?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>If it could be shown (with some kind of gigantic computer =
simulation) that=20
global warming would be injurious to one billion people for fifty years =
and then=20
absolutely&nbsp;essential to survival for ten billion people for the =
next five=20
hundred years, should not we take the long term perspective at the =
expense of=20
our immediate needs? In all such cases, of course, the advocacy =
group&nbsp;which=20
is&nbsp;not supported by the computer will claim that the program is =
flawed.=20
That predicament will not change, even as we enter the age of superior=20
machines.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>To depersonalize the argument somewhat, there are other "places" =
fairly=20
close-by that might accommodate intelligent life, sometime in the next =
few=20
hundred years, BUT humans would benefit most only if we permit =
unfettered=20
warming of those particular globes (our moon, Mars or&nbsp;Titan). Is =
this=20
"moral" and does it shed any light on the current local arguments about =
global=20
earthly warming?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Titan is the largest moon of Saturn, larger than the planet =
Mercury, and is=20
the only moon in the solar system with a thick gaseous atmosphere. It =
has been=20
the locale of a number of Sci-Fi tales, including "hard Sci-Fi" (more =
within the=20
realm of scientific probability) by I. Asimov and R. Forward and others. =
Like=20
Earth's atmosphere, Titan's is mostly nitrogen, very cold nitrogen. =
Unlike=20
Earth, Titan is inhospitable to life as we know it because of a lack of =
oxygen=20
and "lack of global warming"&nbsp; ;-)&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV>Titan, on the positive side (from an SUV owners perspective), has=20
oceans&nbsp;that could fuel your gas-guzzler till the sun went cold =
(oceans of=20
ethane similar to LP gas)! But, alas,&nbsp;no O2 to combust with it, so =
we can't=20
just warm the place up by torching the oceans, thankfully ! or some NASA =
cowboy=20
would have already done it&nbsp;-&nbsp;PLUS extremely cold surface =
temperatures=20
- minus 183 degrees Celsius (-297 degrees Fahrenheit) and probably a =
rocky core.=20
</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Combining these facts&nbsp;with knowledge gained in the last decade =

regarding natural mineral compounds, intermetallic compounds such as=20
perovskites, and Titan should be a grand place to implement HTSC "high=20
temperature superconductivity"&nbsp;on a large scale.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Or&nbsp;has&nbsp;this feat already been accomplished elsewhere? The =

evolution of minerals into HTSC organisms is pretty far out, but not =
outside the=20
realm of possibility, especially if AI (artificial intelligence) becomes =
fully=20
developed. Evolution can even be seen as a two stage process, organic =
first and=20
non-organic second. There is a devastating argument (devastating to most =
kinds=20
of environmentalism) that logically states that the one and&nbsp;only=20
qualitative feature that is natural&nbsp;to life =
is....ta,da:&nbsp;CHANGE and=20
not just change, but change that makes the past unrecognizable. From =
that=20
perspective, environmentalism can be seen as morally =
repugnant&nbsp;since it=20
attempts to preserve the present and recent past in an unnaturally way - =
by the=20
elimination of change. But that argument bites both ways.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Extreme cold and lack of oxygen&nbsp;does not automatically =
preclude life,=20
only "life&nbsp;as we know it." BTW, if there is other life at all in =
the=20
universe, then "life as we don't know it" will logically far exceed life =
based=20
on carbohydrate chemistry simply because of&nbsp;the wider range of=20
possibilities, xenobiology notwithstanding. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Our growing understanding of other places and other physical =
chemistries,=20
like that of Titan, is now making some of these previously remote =
possibilities=20
more imminent. Curiously, no Sci-Fi&nbsp;writer AFAIK, has yet to =
considered the=20
possibility&nbsp;that HTSC, high temperature =
superconductivity,&nbsp;could=20
be&nbsp;a basis for evolution of a superior life-form, even though =
perovskites=20
are a common mineral&nbsp;structure (at least on earth) and computers =
based on=20
HTSC components would probably make Ghz Pentiums look like a de-clocked =
'386 by=20
comparison.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>So here is the hypothetical moral conundrum that would make a good =
theme=20
for a Sci-Fi tale (there are many that are similar):&nbsp; A race of=20
quasi-intelligent beings evolves through hydrocarbon chemistry in one =
location=20
(Earth) but cannot sustain their growing needs and indulgences, even =
though they=20
have created machines of superior intellectual abilities (Earth of 2010) =
so they=20
send out missions to terra-form a nearby moon (Titan)&nbsp;because of=20
its&nbsp;nearly unlimited supply of gasoline-like fuel in its oceans. =
The only=20
problem is that - for monetary reasons, they must send out unmanned =
drones,=20
mini-factories controlled by the superior artificial intelligence, into =
which=20
they have programmed a moral code based on *negentropy*</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>What happens when those AI drones get together on&nbsp;Titan and =
start=20
communicating and manufacturing things among themselves?</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Lets just hope Titan doesn't &nbsp;have much Uranium...because it =
wouldn't=20
be used to warm things up on Titan....</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>More later,</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Jones</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/12/021227071208.htm"></=
A>&nbsp;</DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C2B000.DA0BF320--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 30 14:07:28 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA01467;
	Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:01:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 14:01:31 -0800
X-Sent: 30 Dec 2002 22:01:07 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 16:27:09 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
In-Reply-To: <002201c2b043$e8b57a20$0a016ea8 cpq>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"761sz1.0.rM.x8C4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48649
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>But is there any air-tight proof that warming of the planet would not be 
>beneficial to earth's population somewhere down the road ?

YES THERE IS!!! I do not know about the human population, but many other 
species would be disrupted or gravely endangered. It is certain that many 
would be wiped out. Many would be forced to make rapid adoptions not seen 
in nature since the ice ages or the last large meteor impact. This is 
terrible. It is a moral outrage. Man has no right to affect other species 
-- plants or animals. We have no right to interfere in their destiny, any 
more than some race of aliens would have the right to invade earth and 
exterminate us.

We are forced to interfere with other species because we must grow food in 
farms and build cities and highways. We should reduce this impact as much 
as possible. The sooner we can synthesize food in factories, the better for 
everyone -- for us, and the other species too. The earth belongs to other 
species as much as it does to us. Rattlesnakes have as much right to be 
here as we do! The only species we should ever deliberately drive into 
extinction are bacteria & viruses that cause serious illness in our species 
alone, such as smallpox and polio.

The only deliberate future changes we should make to wildlife should be to 
undo the damage we have caused. For example, someday we should make a 
hundred million biodegradable tiny robots to wipe out kudzu from the U.S. 
southeast. It was deliberately brought in from Japan to reduce soil 
erosion. It has no natural enemies, and it is causing widespread havoc. It 
is destroying millions of acres and endangering many native species. It 
should be wiped out as soon as possible, to restore the balance that 
evolved here over millions of years. Soil erosion should be controlled by 
some other means.


>In the most general terms, "warming" itself is *negentropic* 
>(anti-entopic), and furthermore almost everything else in our moral code 
>and our lives in general that we associate with anti-entropy is labeled as 
>good, desirable, moral... the right thing do.

NO, NO, NO!!!! Not when it comes to things like nature, small children, or 
historic preservation. Some things should be sacred and OFF LIMITS to 
change. Anti-entropy is fine for the computer business, food synthesis, and 
most medical care, but we must NEVER change the way we give birth to babies 
and raise them. We should rebuild most of our cities, or knock them flat 
and let nature take back the land, but we must not lay a hand on Venice, or 
Georgetown in Washington DC, or what is left of Kyoto.


>In other words, it may be possible in principle to embrace global warming 
>as an *opportunity* to plan ahead to convert our deserts into corn fields, 
>rather than sit idly by and let the costal cities flood over . . .

This would not work. You could not "tie up" enough water in the land even 
if you converted the Sahara and the Gobi back into verdant land. Besides, 
you could do that easily with the amount of free water and the temperatures 
we now have, by planting trees.


>It is something more akin to universal, binding, intelligent long-term 
>planning - planning which is life-centered but not necessarily 
>species-centered.

 From my point of view this discussion is species centered. In any case, we 
have no business whatever planning or interfering with other species. What 
happens to them is their business. If we stop massacring them and taking 
away their land, they will be fine.


>BTW, the Dutch have taught us that even diking of lowlands makes good 
>economic sense when population density reaches a certain level.

Only in that particular landscape. Such lowlands are not available in most 
parts of the world. For example, there are none in Japan, where people have 
been frantically filling in the ocean and Tokyo bay for centuries. This has 
caused terrible harm.


>Does anyone doubt that the population density on earth will not double in 
>the next few centuries?

I doubt that. In any case, no one can predict such things. It is a matter 
of choice; free will. The people in Italy, Russia and Japan have chosen to 
cut their population by half in the next 100 years. Some people say this is 
a crisis, but I think it is a fine idea, because Italy and Japan are too 
crowded for my taste. These countries are far below replacement level (2.1 
children per woman). In Italy the rate is now 1.2, and in Spain it is 1.1. 
In the wealthy, highly educated Italian province of Ferrara, it has been 
below 0.9 since 1986. The U.S. would be at 2.0, were it not for 
immigration. People everywhere in the third world may decide to to limit 
population, starting today.

See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/26/international/europe/26FERT.html


>If it could be shown (with some kind of gigantic computer simulation) that 
>global warming would be injurious to one billion people for fifty years 
>and then absolutely essential to survival for ten billion people for the 
>next five hundred years, should not we take the long term perspective at 
>the expense of our immediate needs?

No, because people are not the only inhabitants on earth. Furthermore, even 
if you think people are more important than the other species, people 
cannot survive without the other species. We must have ants, trees, stomach 
flu and all the rest. It is impossible for anyone to know which is vital to 
our survival, and which might be destroyed without hurting us much. No one 
can possibly untangle the roles that each species plays in the ecosystem. 
In any case, destroying a species is as bad as genocide (which is defined 
as destroying a whole nation -- or culture -- of people).


>Titan is the largest moon of Saturn, larger than the planet Mercury, and 
>is the only moon in the solar system with a thick gaseous atmosphere. It 
>has been the locale of a number of Sci-Fi tales, including "hard Sci-Fi" 
>(more within the realm of scientific probability) by I. Asimov and R. 
>Forward and others. Like Earth's atmosphere, Titan's is mostly nitrogen, 
>very cold nitrogen. Unlike Earth, Titan is inhospitable to life as we know 
>it because of a lack of oxygen and "lack of global warming"  ;-)

If it turns out there is ANY form of life on these other planets -- even so 
much as a few bacteria under the rocks, then we must not touch them. Not 
one change should be allowed. Not one acre of land "developed." No visits, 
no samples taken except by sterile robots. Nothing but observations from 
afar should be allowed. Otherwise, we might accidentally introduce some 
hardy species of bacteria from earth. Our bacteria lives in incredibly 
hostile places such as Antarctica, underwater volcanic springs, and bottles 
of heavy water. Bacteria adapted to heavy water in only ~50 years, starting 
from scratch.

This doctrine was published by Arthur Clarke and others, and I could not 
agree more. It is bad enough that we have messed up earth! The biggest task 
facing mankind at present is to clean up the mess here, and put things back 
the way they should be. Progress and change is wonderful for people. It is 
our nature to change things, and our birthright to enjoy the benefits of 
change. We would not exist without change, and without technology. We & our 
predecessors have been making tools, domesticating other animals and 
plants, and changing our own environment before homo sapiens appeared. 
There is nothing "artificial," unnatural or wrong about tool-making, 
wearing clothes, cooking with fire, synthesizing food, or cloning children 
(in small numbers). But let us strictly limit change to our own species, 
and our own human environment: the spaces within our villages, cities, 
laboratories and houses. The forests, fields, deserts and oceans belong to 
others, not to us.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Mon Dec 30 19:15:41 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id TAA29422;
	Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:13:48 -0800
Resent-Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 19:13:48 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <10f.1c470bba.2b426547 aol.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 22:13:11 EST
Subject: schrodinger
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, FZNIDARSIC@aol.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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"4-P6q1.0.eB7.ijG4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48650
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

<html>
<h2> Appendix A, Schrodinger's  Wave Equation Revisited </h2>
<br>

  Schrodinger's wave equation is a basic tenement of low energy physics.  
 It embodies all of chemistry and most of physics.  The equation is 
considered
 to be fundamental and not derivable from more basic principles.
 The equation will be produced (not derived) using an accepted approach.
  Several assumptions are fundamental to this approach.  The flaws within 
these
 asssumptions will be exposed.
 <br><br>
 This author will derive Schrodinger's wave equation using an alternate 
approach.
 The new approach is based upon the elastic limit of space.

 The matter wave is restrained when the elastic limit of space is exceeded.
 The resulting forces confine the matter wave. The new approach is 
fundamental, produces 
  all of the classical results, and reveals the technologies of low level 
nuclear reactions
 and gravity control. 

<br><br>

<h3> The accepted approach </h3>
The classical wave equation is given by equation #A1.
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT> 
= 
(1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>  / d t<sup>2<
/sup>)
<br><br></b>
<FONT FACE= "Belwe Bd Bt">V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> is the second derivative of 
the function in
three dimensions.  
 <b><br><br>

   <FONT FACE= "Belwe Bd Bt">V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> = (d<sup>2 </sup>/dx<sup>2 
</sup> +
d<sup>2 </sup>/dy<sup>2 </sup> + d<sup>2 </sup>/dz<sup>2 </sup>)
</b>
<br><br>


The wave equation describes a classical relationship between velocity, time, 
and position.  
 The velocity of the wave packet is v.
 <i> It is an error to assume that the natural velocity of a matter wave is 
velocity v.
  Disturbances within force fields propagate  at light speed c.  The matter 
wave <FONT
FACE="Symbol"> Y </FONT>  is also a field.  Like all fields it propagates at 
velocity c.</i> 
 Equation #3 below  expresses the wave equation as of function of position 
and time.

<br><br>

<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x, t)
 =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x, t)  / d t<
sup>2</sup>)
</b><br><br>

The exponential form of the sin function  (e <sup>jwt </sup>)  is introduced. 
This gives
a wave that varies with time in simple harmonic motion.
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x, t)
 =  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>

<br><br></b>
Therefore
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x) e
<sup>jwt </sup>
 =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>
jwt </sup>  / d
t<sup>2</sup>)

<br><br></b>
</b>
 A solution is obtained by integrating twice with respect to time.
The wave function <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) is constant.
 The solution is a function of time.  This 
is known as the time independent Schrodinger equation.
<b>
<br><br>

<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>
<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>/( j<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT>)
 =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) d (<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>)  
/ d t

<br></b>
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x) e
<sup>jwt </sup> / -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2</sup>
 =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup> 

</b>
<br><br>
After the double integration the equation is reduced.
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =  ( -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2</sup>/v<sup>2</sup>) <FONT
FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 

<br><br>
</b>
Replacing  angular velocity <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT> with frequency  f.
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>f<sup>2</sup>/v<sup>2</sup>) <
FONT
FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
</b>
<br><br>
Frequency squared f divided by velocity squared v equals  (1/<FONT 
FACE="Symbol">l</FONT>)
squared.
<br><br>
<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>/ <FONT
FACE="Symbol">l</FONT><sup>2</sup> ) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
</b>
<br><br>
The debroglie relationship is introduced here.<i>  It is incorporated in an 
add-hoc way. 
 This author's analysis has shown that the deBrogle wavelength is a beat 
note.
This beat note is generated by a  reflection of a matter wave that moves at 
velocity c.</i>
<br><br>
<b>
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">l</FONT><sup>2</sup> = h/Mv

<br><br>

<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>M<sup>2</sup>v<sup>2</sup>/ h
<sup>2</sup> ) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 

<br><br>

<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>M (Mv<sup>2</sup>)/ h <sup>2<
/sup> )
<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
<br><br>
</b>
The relationship between kinetic, total, and potential energy is expressed 
below.

<b><br><br>

(Mv<sup>2</sup>) = 2 (Total - Potential)

</b><br><br>
Substituting

<b><br><br>

<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)
 =   -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup> M  2(E - U)
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / h <sup>2</sup> 
</b>
<br><br>
 Simplifying
<br><br>
<b>
- h <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT
FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / (-4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup> 2  M)
 =   (E - U)
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
<br><br>
</b>
Substituting h-bar for h
<br><br>
<b>

- <FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"  
>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / ( 2  M)
 =  (E - U)
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
<br><br>
</b>

The result below is the time independent Schrodinger equation.   This 
production embodies
the idea that the matter wave propagates at velocity v.   


 <br><br>
<b>
[ (-<FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"  

>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>/2M )
 +  U ]
<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
 =  E <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 

</b>

<br><br><br>

<a NAME=Pg17>Pg_17</a>
<A HREF="#Pg1"> UP </A>

<h3> A new approach </h3>




This author contends that the phase velocity of the matter wave is c. 
The matter wave is localized by reflections.  These reflections are produced 
when the
elastic limit of space is exceeded. The superposition of the Compton wave and 
its doppler
shifted reflection is the deBrogle wavelength of matter.
<br><br>

 Matter's natural vibrational mode at the elastic limit of space is
 expressed by its Compton frequency.  

<br><br>
The Compton angular velocity is.
<br><br>
<b>
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sub>c</sub> =  Mc/<FONT FACE="Westminster">h<
/FONT>
</b>
<br><br>
Squaring and factoring. 
<br><br>
<b>
 <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sub>c</sub><sup>2</sup> =  M (Mc<sup>4</sup>)/ <
FONT
FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>
</b><br><br>


Simple harmonic motion is expressed by:
<b>
<br><br>

d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup> / dt<sup>2</sup>

= -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
</b>


<br><br>




 At the elastic limit of space the frequency is the Compton frequency.
 Substituting the Compton frequency squared for circumferential angular
 velocity squared.

 <br><br>


<b>d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup> / dt<sup>2</sup>

= - [M (Mc<sup>4</sup>)/ <FONT
FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>]  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>

<br><br>
Dividing by light speed squared.  
<br><br>

<b>d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup>/dt<sup>2</sup> (1/c<sup>2<
/sup>)

= - M (Mc<sup>2</sup>)/ <FONT
FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>
<br><br>

Refer to equation A1.  Substituting <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 <
/sup> for the product of acceleration and light speed
 squared. This step embodies the idea the matter wave propagates at light 
speed. 
<br><br>
<b><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y<
/FONT>(x)
= - M (Mc<sup>2</sup>)/ <FONT
FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>
<br><br>

  Mass energy is expressed as the difference between the total energy and the 
potential
 energy of the matter wave.    
<br><br>
<b>
 Mc<sup>2</sup> = 2(E - U) 
</b>
<br><br>


Substituting
<br><br>

<b>
<FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
(x)

=-[2M ( E - U ) / <FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2
</sup>]  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)

</b>
 <br><br>

 The result below is the time independent Schrodinger equation. 
 <br><br>
<b>
[ (-<FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"  

>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>/2M )+ U  ]
<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 
 =  E <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) 

</b>

<br><br>

<br>
 
 
This author contends that the matter wave is restrained when the elastic 
limit of space is
exceeded.  This author's approach is fundamental.  It provides insight to the 
underlying 
mechanisms.  It yields the following results. Energy in a massless confine 
assumes a relativistic
characteristic.  This links this author's model to special relativity.  
Trapped
energy generates a force.  This author has shown that this force produces 
that gravitational field of matter.
This links this author's model to general relativity.  In a moving body the 
restraining force 
produces a doppler shifted reflection.  The sum of the original Compton wave 
and its doppler 
shifted reflection is the deBroglie wave of matter. This links this author's 
model to matter's 
deBroglie wavelength.

 A change in quantum states is accompanied by a megahertz-meter stimulation.
 This provides support for this author's contention that the constants of the 
motion converge 
 in quantum systems that are stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one 
megahertz-meter. 
 This result permitts anomalous nuclear and gravitational phenonema.


<br><br><br>

</html>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 00:03:32 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA04020;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:01:37 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:01:37 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530500ba3702b8059a [12.110.74.68]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:16:42 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: schrodinger
Resent-Message-ID: <"uwdbs1.0.k-.WxK4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48651
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Could you please turn off HTML when posting?


At 10:13 PM 12/30/2, FZNIDARSIC aol.com wrote:
><html>
><h2> Appendix A, Schrodinger's  Wave Equation Revisited </h2>
><br>
>
>  Schrodinger's wave equation is a basic tenement of low energy physics.
> It embodies all of chemistry and most of physics.  The equation is
>considered
> to be fundamental and not derivable from more basic principles.
> The equation will be produced (not derived) using an accepted approach.
>  Several assumptions are fundamental to this approach.  The flaws within
>these
> asssumptions will be exposed.
> <br><br>
> This author will derive Schrodinger's wave equation using an alternate
>approach.
> The new approach is based upon the elastic limit of space.
>
> The matter wave is restrained when the elastic limit of space is exceeded.
> The resulting forces confine the matter wave. The new approach is
>fundamental, produces
>  all of the classical results, and reveals the technologies of low level
>nuclear reactions
> and gravity control.
>
><br><br>
>
><h3> The accepted approach </h3>
>The classical wave equation is given by equation #A1.
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>=
>(1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>  / d t<sup>2<
>/sup>)
><br><br></b>
><FONT FACE= "Belwe Bd Bt">V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> is the second derivative of
>the function in
>three dimensions.
> <b><br><br>
>
>   <FONT FACE= "Belwe Bd Bt">V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> = (d<sup>2 </sup>/dx<sup>2
></sup> +
>d<sup>2 </sup>/dy<sup>2 </sup> + d<sup>2 </sup>/dz<sup>2 </sup>)
></b>
><br><br>
>
>
>The wave equation describes a classical relationship between velocity, time,
>and position.
> The velocity of the wave packet is v.
> <i> It is an error to assume that the natural velocity of a matter wave is
>velocity v.
>  Disturbances within force fields propagate  at light speed c.  The matter
>wave <FONT
>FACE="Symbol"> Y </FONT>  is also a field.  Like all fields it propagates at
>velocity c.</i>
> Equation #3 below  expresses the wave equation as of function of position
>and time.
>
><br><br>
>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x, t)
> =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x, t)  / d t<
>sup>2</sup>)
></b><br><br>
>
>The exponential form of the sin function  (e <sup>jwt </sup>)  is introduced.
>This gives
>a wave that varies with time in simple harmonic motion.
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x, t)
> =  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>
>
><br><br></b>
>Therefore
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x) e
><sup>jwt </sup>
> =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) (d<sup>2</sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>
>jwt </sup>  / d
>t<sup>2</sup>)
>
><br><br></b>
></b>
> A solution is obtained by integrating twice with respect to time.
>The wave function <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) is constant.
> The solution is a function of time.  This
>is known as the time independent Schrodinger equation.
><b>
><br><br>
>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>
><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>/( j<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT>)
> =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) d (<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>)
>/ d t
>
><br></b>
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x) e
><sup>jwt </sup> / -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2</sup>
> =  (1/v<sup>2</sup>) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) e <sup>jwt </sup>
>
></b>
><br><br>
>After the double integration the equation is reduced.
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =  ( -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2</sup>/v<sup>2</sup>) <FONT
>FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
>
><br><br>
></b>
>Replacing  angular velocity <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT> with frequency  f.
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>f<sup>2</sup>/v<sup>2</sup>) <
>FONT
>FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
></b>
><br><br>
>Frequency squared f divided by velocity squared v equals  (1/<FONT
>FACE="Symbol">l</FONT>)
>squared.
><br><br>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>/ <FONT
>FACE="Symbol">l</FONT><sup>2</sup> ) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
></b>
><br><br>
>The debroglie relationship is introduced here.<i>  It is incorporated in an
>add-hoc way.
> This author's analysis has shown that the deBrogle wavelength is a beat
>note.
>This beat note is generated by a  reflection of a matter wave that moves at
>velocity c.</i>
><br><br>
><b>
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">l</FONT><sup>2</sup> = h/Mv
>
><br><br>
>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>M<sup>2</sup>v<sup>2</sup>/ h
><sup>2</sup> ) <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
>
><br><br>
>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =  ( -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup>M (Mv<sup>2</sup>)/ h <sup>2<
>/sup> )
><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
><br><br>
></b>
>The relationship between kinetic, total, and potential energy is expressed
>below.
>
><b><br><br>
>
>(Mv<sup>2</sup>) = 2 (Total - Potential)
>
></b><br><br>
>Substituting
>
><b><br><br>
>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
> =   -4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup> M  2(E - U)
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / h <sup>2</sup>
></b>
><br><br>
> Simplifying
><br><br>
><b>
>- h <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"   >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT
>FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / (-4<FONT FACE="Symbol">p</FONT><sup>2</sup> 2  M)
> =   (E - U)
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
><br><br>
></b>
>Substituting h-bar for h
><br><br>
><b>
>
>- <FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"
>>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x) / ( 2  M)
> =  (E - U)
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
><br><br>
></b>
>
>The result below is the time independent Schrodinger equation.   This
>production embodies
>the idea that the matter wave propagates at velocity v.
>
>
> <br><br>
><b>
>[ (-<FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"
>
>>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>/2M )
> +  U ]
><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
> =  E <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
>
></b>
>
><br><br><br>
>
><a NAME=Pg17>Pg_17</a>
><A HREF="#Pg1"> UP </A>
>
><h3> A new approach </h3>
>
>
>
>
>This author contends that the phase velocity of the matter wave is c.
>The matter wave is localized by reflections.  These reflections are produced
>when the
>elastic limit of space is exceeded. The superposition of the Compton wave and
>its doppler
>shifted reflection is the deBrogle wavelength of matter.
><br><br>
>
> Matter's natural vibrational mode at the elastic limit of space is
> expressed by its Compton frequency.
>
><br><br>
>The Compton angular velocity is.
><br><br>
><b>
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sub>c</sub> =  Mc/<FONT FACE="Westminster">h<
>/FONT>
></b>
><br><br>
>Squaring and factoring.
><br><br>
><b>
> <FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sub>c</sub><sup>2</sup> =  M (Mc<sup>4</sup>)/ <
>FONT
>FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>
></b><br><br>
>
>
>Simple harmonic motion is expressed by:
><b>
><br><br>
>
>d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup> / dt<sup>2</sup>
>
>= -<FONT FACE="Symbol">w</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
></b>
>
>
><br><br>
>
>
>
>
> At the elastic limit of space the frequency is the Compton frequency.
> Substituting the Compton frequency squared for circumferential angular
> velocity squared.
>
> <br><br>
>
>
><b>d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup> / dt<sup>2</sup>
>
>= - [M (Mc<sup>4</sup>)/ <FONT
>FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>]  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>
>
><br><br>
>Dividing by light speed squared.
><br><br>
>
><b>d(<FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x))<sup>2</sup>/dt<sup>2</sup> (1/c<sup>2<
>/sup>)
>
>= - M (Mc<sup>2</sup>)/ <FONT
>FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>
><br><br>
>
>Refer to equation A1.  Substituting <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 <
>/sup> for the product of acceleration and light speed
> squared. This step embodies the idea the matter wave propagates at light
>speed.
><br><br>
><b><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup> <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y<
>/FONT>(x)
>= - M (Mc<sup>2</sup>)/ <FONT
>FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2</sup>  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)</b>
><br><br>
>
>  Mass energy is expressed as the difference between the total energy and the
>potential
> energy of the matter wave.
><br><br>
><b>
> Mc<sup>2</sup> = 2(E - U)
></b>
><br><br>
>
>
>Substituting
><br><br>
>
><b>
><FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt" >V</FONT><sup>2 </sup><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>
>(x)
>
>=-[2M ( E - U ) / <FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT><sup>2
></sup>]  <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
>
></b>
> <br><br>
>
> The result below is the time independent Schrodinger equation.
> <br><br>
><b>
>[ (-<FONT FACE="Westminster">h</FONT>  <sup>2</sup> <FONT FACE="Belwe Bd Bt"
>
>>V</FONT><sup>2 </sup>/2M )+ U  ]
><FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
> =  E <FONT FACE="Symbol">Y</FONT>(x)
>
></b>
>
><br><br>
>
><br>
>
>
>This author contends that the matter wave is restrained when the elastic
>limit of space is
>exceeded.  This author's approach is fundamental.  It provides insight to the
>underlying
>mechanisms.  It yields the following results. Energy in a massless confine
>assumes a relativistic
>characteristic.  This links this author's model to special relativity.
>Trapped
>energy generates a force.  This author has shown that this force produces
>that gravitational field of matter.
>This links this author's model to general relativity.  In a moving body the
>restraining force
>produces a doppler shifted reflection.  The sum of the original Compton wave
>and its doppler
>shifted reflection is the deBroglie wave of matter. This links this author's
>model to matter's
>deBroglie wavelength.
>
> A change in quantum states is accompanied by a megahertz-meter stimulation.
> This provides support for this author's contention that the constants of the
>motion converge
> in quantum systems that are stimulated at a dimensional frequency of one
>megahertz-meter.
> This result permitts anomalous nuclear and gravitational phenonema.
>
>
><br><br><br>
>
></html>

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 00:12:20 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id AAA07239;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:11:36 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:11:36 -0800
Message-Id: <v01530503ba3704b77dcf [12.21.208.185]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 00:26:47 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: hheffner mtaonline.net (Horace Heffner)
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
Resent-Message-ID: <"eNbzv1.0.ym1.t4L4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48652
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

At 12:42 PM 12/30/2, Jones Beene wrote:
>A collection of loosely coherent, pregnant thoughts which are focused
>somewhat on the recent global warming thread...


Hmmm.... 150 C earth with massive amounts of methane dumped into the
atmosphere - could be a real bang-up experience!

Regards,

Horace Heffner          


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 06:16:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA30640;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:15:20 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:15:20 -0800
Message-ID: <000d01c2b0d6$bfb9a5e0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: "vortex-L" <vortex-L eskimo.com>
Subject: Piezoelectric Brainhurt
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:13:08 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"fFbtj.0.gU7.tPQ4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48653
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Gentlemen,

Das Brainhurt on New Years Eve.  Argh.

Quite a few years ago, I recall seeing some references to rock salt (halite)
NaCl as being piezoelectric.  Second guessing myself on these memories, I
did some serious digging on-line yesterday and this morning, and I can find
no mention anywhere of halite being PZ.  The usuals, such as sugar, Rochelle
Salt, quartz, tourmaline are mentioned frequently of course.

Now OK, having immersed myself into the lore of lattices these past few
months on my chiral questing, I find that halite is face centered cubic,
space group Fm(-3)m, and quite symmetrical.  The center of symmetry says
that it should not be piezoelectric.  So from all the data, I would presume
that large halite crystals would not exhibit any piezoelectric effect.

Can anyone out there correct me, or tell me of any empirical knowledge of
halite as piezoelectric.  An anomaly perhaps?  Or just poor memory of faulty
references in amateur science books of years ago.

The basis for this question is some speculation on earth lights, and
transient high geo-electric potentials from earth fault activity OR man made
stresses such as quarry and mine blasting.  A woman in Canada contacted me
with claims of peculiar "paranormal" activity in her home, however she is a
sharp and thoughtful lass, and also admitted that their home is over an
active halite mine!

Thanks to all in advance.

Happy Nu Wave

NR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 06:39:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA07432;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:38:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:38:45 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <192.132935ff.2b4305c9 aol.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:38:01 EST
Subject: Re: schrodinger
To: JoeGuokas aol.com, vortex-l@eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_192.132935ff.2b4305c9_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"MyqDl3.0.zp1.qlQ4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48654
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_192.132935ff.2b4305c9_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

In a message dated 12/31/02 12:03:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, Joe Guokas=20
writes:


>=20
> After the first equation, everything showed up in Greek text.  (See below.=
)=20
>  It might just be on my computer, since my browser is AOL version 5, which=
=20
> is as old as the Greek alphabet.  But you might want to check if others ar=
e=20
> seeing it this way.  Your previous messages on this were very interesting.=
 =20
>=20
>=20
> Thanks for sharing your efforts,
> Joe
>=20

Thank you Joe.  I tried to transmitt a HTML E-mail.  I guess it did not work
My paper was rejected by the Jouranl of Applied Physics.  I have now sent it=
=20
to the Journal of Low Temperature Physics.  Miley sent me a Christmas card=20
that outlined his year in review.   It was very nice.

My work with Schrodings equation is in the appendix of chapter 10 of my work=
.

 <A HREF=3D"http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.cnt">logos cnt dec=20=
27 start</A>=20

I am very prowd of my paper and what it means. I came up with the idea, that=
=20
the constants of the motion converge in a Bose condensate that is stimulated=
=20
at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter, in 1996.  After that I=20
found out that 50 nano meter partclies are best for cold fusion.  I also saw=
=20
that cold fusion had a positive temperature coefficient.  The frequency of=20
thermal energy is about 10 exp 14 hertz.  The product of diameter and therma=
l=20
frequency is one megahertz-meter.  I tell the story in Chapter five of :=20

 <A HREF=3D"http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?=
userid=3D2XW7BTTO5T&btob=3DY&isbn=3D1892062313">Barnes=A0&=A0Noble.com - Nic=
ola Tesla Journey to Mars=A0</A>=20

50 nm x  to 10 exp 14 hertz =3D one megaherz - meter

Upon my trip to Nasa Marshall in 1996.   I discovered that Podkletnov=20
stimulated his 1/3 of meter disc with 3 megahertz radio signal.  Once again=20
the megahertz-meter relationship appeared.

3 mega hertz x 1/3 meter =3D one megahertz-meter.

I believed that this concept was limited to a Bose condensate under special=20
conditions.  This Ocotober I applied it to the atom.  I found that quantum=20
states change with stimulated at a dimesional frequency of one megahertz=20
meter.  The idea is connected to Planck's constant. =20

Take electron capture for example.  The very large electron goes into the=20
small proton.  The gravity associated with the electron is transferred to th=
e=20
proton.  The electron, graviton, and proton are very different fields of=20
motion.  The motion is described with motion constants.  Dring the capture=20
process the motion constants must converge.  It obvious.  My therom is=20
fundamental.  Now I must get it published.

Frank Znidarsic

--part1_192.132935ff.2b4305c9_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2>In a message dated 12/31/=
02 12:03:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, Joe Guokas writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=3DCITE style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT=
: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px"><BR>
After the first equation, everything showed up in Greek text.&nbsp; (See bel=
ow.)&nbsp; It might just be on my computer, since my browser is AOL version=20=
5, which is as old as the Greek alphabet.&nbsp; But you might want to check=20=
if others are seeing it this way.&nbsp; Your previous messages on this were=20=
very interesting.&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Thanks for sharing your efforts,<BR>
Joe<BR>
</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
Thank you Joe.&nbsp; I tried to transmitt a HTML E-mail.&nbsp; I guess it di=
d not work<BR>
My paper was rejected by the Jouranl of Applied Physics.&nbsp; I have now se=
nt it to the Journal of Low Temperature Physics.&nbsp; Miley sent me a Chris=
tmas card that outlined his year in review.&nbsp;&nbsp; It was very nice.<BR=
>
<BR>
My work with Schrodings equation is in the appendix of chapter 10 of my work=
.<BR>
<BR>
 <A HREF=3D"http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.cnt">logos cnt dec=20=
27 start</A> <BR>
<BR>
I am very prowd of my paper and what it means. I came up with the idea, that=
 the constants of the motion converge in a Bose condensate that is stimulate=
d at a dimensional frequency of one megahertz meter, in 1996.&nbsp; After th=
at I found out that 50 nano meter partclies are best for cold fusion.&nbsp;=20=
I also saw that cold fusion had a positive temperature coefficient.&nbsp; Th=
e frequency of thermal energy is about 10 exp 14 hertz.&nbsp; The product of=
 diameter and thermal frequency is one megahertz-meter.&nbsp; I tell the sto=
ry in Chapter five of : <BR>
<BR>
 <A HREF=3D"http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?=
userid=3D2XW7BTTO5T&btob=3DY&isbn=3D1892062313">Barnes=A0&amp;=A0Noble.com -=
 Nicola Tesla Journey to Mars=A0</A> <BR>
<BR>
50 nm x&nbsp; to 10 exp 14 hertz =3D one megaherz - meter<BR>
<BR>
Upon my trip to Nasa Marshall in 1996.&nbsp;&nbsp; I discovered that Podklet=
nov stimulated his 1/3 of meter disc with 3 megahertz radio signal.&nbsp; On=
ce again the megahertz-meter relationship appeared.<BR>
<BR>
3 mega hertz x 1/3 meter =3D one megahertz-meter.<BR>
<BR>
I believed that this concept was limited to a Bose condensate under special=20=
conditions.&nbsp; This Ocotober I applied it to the atom.&nbsp; I found that=
 quantum states change with stimulated at a dimesional frequency of one mega=
hertz meter.&nbsp; The idea is connected to Planck's constant.&nbsp; <BR>
<BR>
Take electron capture for example.&nbsp; The very large electron goes into t=
he small proton.&nbsp; The gravity associated with the electron is transferr=
ed to the proton.&nbsp; The electron, graviton, and proton are very differen=
t fields of motion.&nbsp; The motion is described with motion constants.&nbs=
p; Dring the capture process the motion constants must converge.&nbsp; It ob=
vious.&nbsp; My therom is fundamental.&nbsp; Now I must get it published.<BR=
>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic</FONT></HTML>

--part1_192.132935ff.2b4305c9_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 06:47:24 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA13525;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:45:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:45:25 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <68.2ae74d97.2b43075f aol.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:44:47 EST
Subject: opps wrong link
To: vortex-l eskimo.com, JoeGuokas@aol.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_68.2ae74d97.2b43075f_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"zhtak3.0.CJ3.4sQ4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48655
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_68.2ae74d97.2b43075f_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

The other link was the page hit counter. 

<A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html">Chapter 10</A>


Frank Znidarsic 

--part1_68.2ae74d97.2b43075f_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica>The other link was the page hit counter. <BR>
<BR>
<A HREF="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html">Chapter 10</A><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Frank Znidarsic </HTML>

--part1_68.2ae74d97.2b43075f_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 06:53:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id GAA16513;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:52:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:52:01 -0800
Message-ID: <20021231145126.2069.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 06:51:26 -0800 (PST)
From: Charles Ford <cjford1 yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Piezoelectric Brainhurt
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
In-Reply-To: <000d01c2b0d6$bfb9a5e0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Resent-Message-ID: <"FYn2-.0.d14.FyQ4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48656
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Nick:

I seem to remember similarly except...  It was table salt.  

Also.  Salts are almost never pure.  It is possible that an observation
of PZ was made using rock salt when it was actually some dopant impurity
that caused the effect.


--- Nicholas Reiter <nreiter woh.rr.com> wrote:
> Gentlemen,
> 
> Das Brainhurt on New Years Eve.  Argh.

Usually another drink makes "it" go away.  :-)  "it" is the ambigious
variable.  
 
> Quite a few years ago, I recall seeing some references to rock salt
> (halite)
> NaCl as being piezoelectric.  Second guessing myself on these memories,
> I
> did some serious digging on-line yesterday and this morning, and I can
> find


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

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 09:06:18 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id JAA08419;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:05:33 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:05:33 -0800
Message-Id: <5.1.1.6.2.20021231090600.00aad168 mail.dlsi.net>
X-Sender: stevek mail.dlsi.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1.1
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:06:20 -0800
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: stevek <stevek dlsi.net>
Subject: Re: opps wrong link
In-Reply-To: <68.2ae74d97.2b43075f aol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="=====================_791906==.ALT"
Resent-Message-ID: <"2KaGR.0.Q32.SvS4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48657
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

--=====================_791906==.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

This is the link you want, yes?

http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html



At 09:44 AM 12/31/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>The other link was the page hit counter.
>
><http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html>Chapter 10
>
>
>Frank Znidarsic

Thanks,

Steve
--=====================_791906==.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"

<html>
This is the link you want, yes?<br><br>
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html" eudora="autourl">http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html</a><br><br>
<br><br>
At 09:44 AM 12/31/2002 -0500, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite><font face="arial">The other link
was the page hit counter. <br><br>
<a href="http://www.angelfire.com/scifi2/zpt/chaptera.html">Chapter
10</a><br><br>
<br>
Frank Znidarsic </blockquote>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
Thanks,<br><br>
Steve</font></html>

--=====================_791906==.ALT--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 10:01:49 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id KAA07620;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:00:09 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 10:00:09 -0800
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 09:59:26 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <003301c2b0f6$5bd7ade0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id KAA07556
Resent-Message-ID: <"-2wFP3.0.ws1.eiT4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48658
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
 
> >But is there any air-tight proof that warming of the planet would not be 
> >beneficial to earth's population somewhere down the road ?
 
> YES THERE IS!!! I do not know about the human population, but many other 
> species would be disrupted or gravely endangered. It is certain that many 
> would be wiped out. 

There are two distinct issues here that have muddled your perception. These issues should be kept apart in these kinds of analyses. "Global warming" and "habitat displacement due to expanding human populations" are different and distinct issues with their own sets of variables, despite the fact that in the recent past the two issues were statistically linked in a direct fashion. Technology can and will alter that linkage to the degree that future society demands it.

The distinction is important because expanding human populations are to blame for most of the problems that occur with habitat displacement, and these will inevitably mushroom into premature extinction, while in contrast, global warming without habitat displacement, up to a point, should allow for not only greater mass of biota but greater biological diversity as well. The very large biological diversity of the rain forest is a good example of this.

Technology in the future will theoretically permit expanding human populations without the same global warming impact that has occurred in the past. But that is not necessarily good. It might be better, in terms of total mass of biota, to have fewer humans but at the same time *more* global warming.

Again, as I stated before, I am not advocating this exact solution - only advocating that our governmental planners use intelligent scientific analysis, and most impotantly, that they try to clearly understand the relevant issues. Your confused response is evidence of this difficulty.

 
> NO, NO, NO!!!! Not when it comes to things like nature, small children, or 
> historic preservation. Some things should be sacred and OFF LIMITS to 
> change. Anti-entropy is fine for the computer business, food synthesis, and 
> most medical care, but we must NEVER change the way we give birth to babies 
> and raise them. 

This is typical of the knee-jerk response that one expects of Falwell or the religious right, but what does "the way we give birth to babies and raise them" have to do with negentropic principles? This must be some kind of carry-over reaction to the Raelians, but is irrelevant as to the application of negentropy to long-term planning.

>  From my point of view this discussion is species centered. In any case, we 
> have no business whatever planning or interfering with other species. What 
> happens to them is their business. If we stop massacring them and taking 
> away their land, they will be fine.

Would you tell this to your own child if he/she were, say, graduating from college and wanting to build a new house? 

NO, NO, NO!!!!  son... no new housing on open land because the Georgia green toad will suffer habitat pressure...

Ha, I doubt if such charity begins at home.

Regards,

Jones
 

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 11:22:39 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA12068;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:21:23 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:21:23 -0800
X-Sent: 31 Dec 2002 19:21:21 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021231132643.02098c58 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:21:28 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
In-Reply-To: <003301c2b0f6$5bd7ade0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"L2OBi3.0.Uy2.puU4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48659
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:

>There are two distinct issues here that have muddled your perception. 
>These issues should be kept apart in these kinds of analyses. "Global 
>warming" and "habitat displacement due to expanding human populations" are 
>different and distinct issues . . .

These are distinct issues, but I have not confused them.


>The distinction is important because expanding human populations are to 
>blame for most of the problems that occur with habitat displacement, and 
>these will inevitably mushroom into premature extinction, while in 
>contrast, global warming without habitat displacement, up to a point, 
>should allow for not only greater mass of biota but greater biological 
>diversity as well.

Absolutely, positively NOT! That is completely wrong. Any significant, long 
term change in temperature, or any other major parameter, will cause mass 
extinction, massive dislocations, and continent-scale catastrophic 
destruction of the ecology. There is no way elevated temperatures will 
"help" any but a handful of species -- and none of those species are 
"desirable" from the human point of view. Only a few fast growing, 
destructive weed plants, bacteria, and a few hardy, widespread species such 
as cockroaches will benefit. All others would be disastrously impacted. To 
get a feel for how this would work, imagine what would happen if you could 
transplant an acre of woods from Pennsylvania or New York to Florida or 
Costa Rica. The oaks and other trees would be wiped out by Florida native 
fungi and bacteria. Northern plants and animals only survive when they are 
subjected to months of freezing weather. That is why northern species do 
not grow in Florida, and vice versa.

In the ocean, where the temperature has already risen slightly, the change 
is devastating vast areas of coral reef and other fragile environments, and 
it will soon destroy a large fraction of the world's food supply.

If the temperature goes up and then stays at some level for 10,000 or 
20,000 years, then the ecology will recover, obviously. It always does. 
However, the earth will be unrecognizable to us -- assuming we survive the 
change. New sets of species occupying the niches vacated by the ones that 
were destroyed by the catastrophic change. It will look like the Cretaceous 
Period.

I do not think any naturalist would consider this issue debatable. I have 
read and studied natural science for a long time, albeit as an amateur, 
except for a year and half in college in Japan. I do not think you will 
find any legitimate naturalist or biologist who thinks changing the 
temperature would be a good idea. A few coal industry flacks have published 
statements in favor of warming, but their knowledge is risible.


>  The very large biological diversity of the rain forest is a good example 
> of this.

Rain forests would all -- without exception -- be wiped out by this change. 
They are actually fragile, desert-like environments, with few nutrients and 
shallow soil. The production of biomass in a rain forest is limited by 
water and nutrient availability, and despite the mythology, it is about the 
same as North American forest. With severe global warming rain forests 
would soon resemble deserts. In 10,000 years (or perhaps 100,000 years), 
new rain-forest-like environments might arise farther north than the old ones.


> > NO, NO, NO!!!! Not when it comes to things like nature, small children, or
> > historic preservation. Some things should be sacred and OFF LIMITS to
> > change. Anti-entropy is fine for the computer business, food synthesis, 
> and
> > most medical care, but we must NEVER change the way we give birth to 
> babies
> > and raise them.
>
>This is typical of the knee-jerk response that one expects of Falwell or 
>the religious right, but what does "the way we give birth to babies and 
>raise them" have to do with negentropic principles?

Nothing. I just mentioned that as an example of what we must not do. I 
meant we should not raise babies entirely in test tubes, as portrayed in 
"Brave New World." Also, we should never allow immortality medication, 
because then we will be stuck with people like Robert Park in charge of 
physics forever, and progress will come to a halt.


>  This must be some kind of carry-over reaction to the Raelians . . .

I have no objection to the Raelians or cloning humans, except -- as I said 
in another message -- cloning is not yet safe for humans. It will require 
many years of animal experimentation before it can certified for use with 
humans.


> >  From my point of view this discussion is species centered. In any 
> case, we
> > have no business whatever planning or interfering with other species. What
> > happens to them is their business. If we stop massacring them and taking
> > away their land, they will be fine.
>
>Would you tell this to your own child if he/she were, say, graduating from 
>college and wanting to build a new house?

Yes, I would, she is, and I do. But houses have little to do with the 
problem. We can easily make enough comfortable houses for the present 
population without having much of an impact on other species. It depends on 
how we make the houses, where we put them, how far apart they are, how we 
commute to them, how and where we work and shop, and many other issues. It 
would not be difficult to rearrange U.S. lifestyles a little in a way that 
would greatly reduce destruction, urban sprawl, empty bankrupt shopping 
malls, and millions of hours per year wasted in traffic jams. This would 
save everyone tons of money and give many people back their lives and their 
sanity -- especially children. It would also reduce obesity, which is 
reaching epidemic proportions. We do not do it because we lack imagination 
and guts.


>NO, NO, NO!!!!  son... no new housing on open land because the Georgia 
>green toad will suffer habitat pressure...
>
>Ha, I doubt if such charity begins at home.

Charity has nothing to do with it. I much prefer to live in world safe for 
green toads. It is a great luxury, in a sense. (Actually, it is vital 
necessity. After the frogs and toads die, we will surely die as well.) I 
would rather have toads than a fleet of mansions and luxury cars, and other 
vapid, useless manufactured garbage. Future generations will say we were 
poverty stricken and our children were deprived, because we do not have 
enough toads and frogs. I spent a delightful childhood playing with toads 
in the dark woods. There is no better, richer, healthier environment for a 
child. Someday all children will have a place to play in the woods where 
streams and rivers are clean enough to drink from. That will be worth more 
than all the electronics learning gadgets, oversized houses and useless 
toys we burden our children with today.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 11:58:34 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id LAA32170;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:57:14 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 11:57:14 -0800
X-Sent: 31 Dec 2002 19:57:11 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021231143315.00b18bb0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:57:12 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: LENR-CANR year end statistics
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"R6jjy2.0.as7.QQV4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48660
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

The statistics for LENR-CANR use become available around midday every day, 
so here are the year end totals.

Since we moved LENR-CANR to its present ISP on October 7, 2002, readers 
have visited 9,173 times. They have downloaded 14,782 papers.

Readers have logged in from 77 countries. Most readers worldwide seem to 
have .com ISPs, so I cannot tell where they are coming from, but I have 
statistics for ISPs broken down by national extensions such as .it (Italy) 
and .jp (Japan). They show 177 visitors from Canada (.ca) in First Place, 
and 151 visitors from Japan (.jp) in Second Place. Italy, India and several 
other countries are well represented. Iceland (.is) is last, with 1 visitor.

For the past few weeks, readership has been low because of Christmas and 
New Year holidays. Around 1,500 papers per week have been downloaded. 
Totals for peak week, December 7, were 2,703 papers downloaded. I hope that 
activity returns to that level after the New Year, as people get back to work.

So far, results are very pleasing. The project has succeeded better than I 
hoped. In the coming year, I hope it has some impact on the national level 
in the U.S., Japan or Italy, and more funding for CF research is made 
available.

This project would be impossible without the Internet. The cost would be 
prohibitive. Most papers have 5 to 7 pages. As I said, we distributed 
14,782 papers in three months. I would have to run a good copy machine 1 to 
3 hours per day to make this many paper copies. The postage would be $0.60 
in the U.S., and $1.70 overseas. The postage alone would cost approximately 
$14,000.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 13:00:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id MAA00358;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:58:47 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:58:47 -0800
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 12:46:51 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <001101c2b10d$bf0719c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021231132643.02098c58 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id MAA00304
Resent-Message-ID: <"gLjrc3.0.U5.7KW4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48661
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>

> >Would you tell this to your own child if he/she were, say, graduating from 
> >college and wanting to build a new house?
> 
> Yes, I would, she is, and I do. ***But houses have little to do with the 
> problem.*** 

Thanks for the clarification. I see it clearly now. 

The real problem here is not global warming nor the misleading arguments that confuse "drastic changes" with moderate sustainable change. The real problem is a certain kind of selfish rationalization, "houses have little to do with the problem," or "SUVs have less impact on the rest of the world than peat fires." Oh my, isn't that the same sentiment as saying  "let's make those other guys in third world countries make the real sacrifices".... "they have the population problem, not us" ...

You personally may be socially responsible to a fault, and I wouldn't question that... but this argument, "houses have little to do with the problem,"  plays right into the hands of George Bush (and to be fair, the Cadillac liberals, as well). This "not in my back yard"  hypocrisy IS the real problem, not a one degree Fahrenheit of global warming.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 13:21:43 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA12355;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:20:45 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:20:45 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <20.6024e31.2b43640a aol.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:20:10 EST
Subject: Re: opps wrong link
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 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"5upzY2.0.w03.ieW4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48662
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

yes that is it.

we seen this before, however, I just now got the Schrodinger equation right.

Frank

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 13:32:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA17843;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:31:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:31:12 -0800
From: FZNIDARSIC aol.com
Message-ID: <41.28eb1436.2b43666c aol.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:30:20 EST
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_41.28eb1436.2b43666c_boundary"
X-Mailer: AOL 7.0 for Windows US sub 10634
Resent-Message-ID: <"OiBp91.0.jM4.WoW4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48663
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 


--part1_41.28eb1436.2b43666c_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In a message dated 12/31/02 4:00:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jonesb9 pacbell.net writes:


> 
> You personally may be socially responsible to a fault, and I wouldn't 
> question that... but this argument, "houses have little to do with the 
> problem,"  plays right into the hands of George Bush (and to be fair, the 
> Cadillac liberals, as well). This "not in my back yard"  hypocrisy IS the 
> real problem, not a one degree Fahrenheit of global warming.
> 
> Jones

We a specious becomes numerous predators have more opportunity to find a way 
to exploit that specous.  The American Chestnut tree was once very numerous 
until a fungi found a way to attack it.  Man kind is subject to the same 
rules of nature.
Are we in danger of extinction due to Aids?  Jed what is going to happen?

Frank

--part1_41.28eb1436.2b43666c_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=2>In a message dated 12/31/02 4:00:15 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"><BR>
You personally may be socially responsible to a fault, and I wouldn't question that... but this argument, "houses have little to do with the problem,"&nbsp; plays right into the hands of George Bush (and to be fair, the Cadillac liberals, as well). This "not in my back yard"&nbsp; hypocrisy IS the real problem, not a one degree Fahrenheit of global warming.<BR>
<BR>
Jones</BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
We a specious becomes numerous predators have more opportunity to find a way to exploit that specous.&nbsp; The American Chestnut tree was once very numerous until a fungi found a way to attack it.&nbsp; Man kind is subject to the same rules of nature.<BR>
Are we in danger of extinction due to Aids?&nbsp; Jed what is going to happen?<BR>
<BR>
Frank</FONT></HTML>

--part1_41.28eb1436.2b43666c_boundary--

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 13:34:13 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA19366;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:33:31 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:33:31 -0800
Reply-To: <knagel gis.net>
From: "Keith Nagel" <knagel gis.net>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:50:29 -0500
Message-ID: <NDBBLHBMKKFMAIAFAAKMEEMNDGAA.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
In-Reply-To: <001101c2b10d$bf0719c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
Importance: Normal
X-Rcpt-To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Resent-Message-ID: <"yj00n3.0.Qk4.gqW4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48664
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Hi.

Although I think Jones is overreaching here, I agree with his
basic idea. The problem is fundamentally a total lack of
empathy for anything outside of one's own head. What's truely
remarkable to me is that the least empathetic of people are
often those with children, who must suffer the consequences
of this selfishness. I often wonder myself why I care so much about
some of these issues, as I have no children and thus little
stake in the future.

As far as solving the political problems previously mentioned,
it's instructive to consider the recent flap concerning the
catholic church in Boston. When the scandal broke, there was
a great public desire to see Cardinal Law step down from his
position. This finally happened a few weeks ago. What caused
this to occur? Not all the publicity, nor the lawsuits and
protests from outraged parishioners. None of the standard
"protest" actions caused a change in the institution. So
what caused his departure????

Simply this. The parishioners decided that if the Catholic
Church refused to listen to their complaints, they'd stop
PAYING THE CHURCH TO IGNORE THEM! After a few weeks of no donations
in the basket, the formerly recalitrant Church came around
right smartly.

Imagine if the American public started demanding that the
Federal Government actually adhere to their wishes in return
for funding the government? I'm guessing that W might have
to rethink a few policies.... Something to think about come
April.

K.

PS: I agree with Jed that global warming will produce far
more harm than good, at least in the short term. Eventually
the biosphere will adapt to the changes, but great suffering
will accompany the adaptation. Is this such a radical opinion?
Perhaps things have finally come to pass such that common sense
is the exclusive domain of the iconoclast.


-----Original Message-----
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jonesb9 pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 3:47 PM
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality


From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>

> >Would you tell this to your own child if he/she were, say, graduating
from
> >college and wanting to build a new house?
>
> Yes, I would, she is, and I do. ***But houses have little to do with the
> problem.***

Thanks for the clarification. I see it clearly now.

The real problem here is not global warming nor the misleading arguments
that confuse "drastic changes" with moderate sustainable change. The real
problem is a certain kind of selfish rationalization, "houses have little to
do with the problem," or "SUVs have less impact on the rest of the world
than peat fires." Oh my, isn't that the same sentiment as saying  "let's
make those other guys in third world countries make the real sacrifices"....
"they have the population problem, not us" ...

You personally may be socially responsible to a fault, and I wouldn't
question that... but this argument, "houses have little to do with the
problem,"  plays right into the hands of George Bush (and to be fair, the
Cadillac liberals, as well). This "not in my back yard"  hypocrisy IS the
real problem, not a one degree Fahrenheit of global warming.

Jones


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 14:00:14 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id NAA30472;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:59:25 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:59:25 -0800
Message-ID: <001501c2b117$950397c0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <20021231145126.2069.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Piezoelectric Brainhurt
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:57:14 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"GbToy1.0.2S7.zCX4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48665
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

Gentlemen,

Thanks Jones and Charles for the input.

Well, to see for myself what could be happening, I headed out to the garage
a little while ago between beers, and sifted through my bag of sidewalk
halite until I found some maybe .5 to 1 cc crystals that had reasonable
faces.  I rigged up a little jig with some aluminum foil pads, and connected
it to my Fluke 87, set to mVDC.  I then tried tapping and pressing with a
punch and hammer, in different directions, on four different pieces.

Results:  It did look like for a couple of the pieces, with foil pads on
opposing facets, there did seem to be a low voltage piezo-response.  Not
much V, though - maybe 10 to 12 millivolts at most.  But definitely there.
I tried it on a piece of broken window glass as a control - no effect.

Well, shoot.  Space group and lattice says no way.  Crunched halite says "a
little!"  I may have to fall in line here with Charles and say that rock
halite is pretty impure, so it may be a doped lattice instead of the
pristine one.

By the way, did you know that rock collectors prize large halite crystals
that have a pink color?  Like rose quartz.  However, the dopant in pink
halite is not what you might think.  It is actually bacteria... of the
halogen consuming nano- sort!  All hail those Archaean life forms!  For
anybody who wants a little weird with their alcohol tonight, see thus:
http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/achaeus.htm

Thanks again, all.

NR

----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Ford" <cjford1 yahoo.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 9:51 AM
Subject: Re: Piezoelectric Brainhurt


> Nick:
>
> I seem to remember similarly except...  It was table salt.
>
> Also.  Salts are almost never pure.  It is possible that an observation
> of PZ was made using rock salt when it was actually some dopant impurity
> that caused the effect.
>
>
> --- Nicholas Reiter <nreiter woh.rr.com> wrote:
> > Gentlemen,
> >
> > Das Brainhurt on New Years Eve.  Argh.
>
> Usually another drink makes "it" go away.  :-)  "it" is the ambigious
> variable.
>
> > Quite a few years ago, I recall seeing some references to rock salt
> > (halite)
> > NaCl as being piezoelectric.  Second guessing myself on these memories,
> > I
> > did some serious digging on-line yesterday and this morning, and I can
> > find
>
>
> =====
> Charles Ford
> KC5-OWZ
> cjford1 yahoo.com
> cjford1 swbell.net
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
> http://mailplus.yahoo.com
>
>

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 14:47:53 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id OAA22118;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:47:03 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:47:03 -0800
X-Sent: 31 Dec 2002 22:46:59 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021231165613.02e1fba0 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 17:46:55 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
In-Reply-To: <001101c2b10d$bf0719c0$0a016ea8 cpq>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021231132643.02098c58 pop.mindspring.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"ON9RW1.0.RP5.cvX4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48666
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jones Beene wrote:


> > Yes, I would, she is, and I do. ***But houses have little to do with the
> > problem.***
>
>Thanks for the clarification. I see it clearly now.
>
>The real problem here is not global warming nor the misleading arguments 
>that confuse "drastic changes" with moderate sustainable change. The real 
>problem is a certain kind of selfish rationalization, "houses have little 
>to do with the problem," or "SUVs have less impact on the rest of the 
>world than peat fires." . . .

I am not making excuses or inventing this stuff. It is true: houses are 
less of a problem than other structures. Look at an aerial photograph of a 
suburban area. The roofs of houses take up considerably less space than 
highways, supermarket parking places and so on. Per capita there is more 
space devoted to asphalt than to roofs. Furthermore, roofs are amenable to 
improved, environmentally beneficial, money-saving  technologies. For 
example, in Japan many gutter systems are now being retrofitted with cheap 
and effective rainwater collection systems, which are used to water gardens 
and lawns. (These are available in the U.S. too; my sister gave me one for 
Christmas.) You can collect water that runs off of streets, but that is 
more expensive and complicated.

Also, wildlife is less harmed by houses than by roads.


>You personally may be socially responsible to a fault, and I wouldn't 
>question that... but this argument, "houses have little to do with the 
>problem,"  plays right into the hands of George Bush (and to be fair, the 
>Cadillac liberals, as well). This "not in my back yard"  hypocrisy IS the 
>real problem, not a one degree Fahrenheit of global warming.

No it does not play into anyone's hands. It is a statement of fact, easily 
verified and described in the literature. Structures and lifestyles are not 
all equally bad. Yes, we are all "guilty" of causing pollution, but not 
equally guilty. If everyone lived as I do, the pollution problem would soon 
disappear, along with the traffic problem, talk radio and obnoxious music 
videos. The air would be orders of magnitude cleaner, and our remaining 
fossil fuel in North America would last for hundreds of years without 
imports. I have made no sacrifices whatever to achieve this. I don't go for 
hairshirts or mindless busywork.

"Responsibility" is not the issue here. If more people followed my example, 
we would all be much wealthier, not poorer. We would have more free land, 
peace, quiet and free time. Our children would be a lot happier outside 
playing in streams and fields than they are shut up indoors chained to 
Nintendo machines. I do not seek to set a virtuous example, but rather one 
that should make other people envious. If people would wake up and realize 
what a "good life" really is, most of our problems would vanish. People are 
seduced by idiotic television advertising. They waste their money on shoddy 
goods and absurd SUVs that bring no happiness. They arrange their houses 
and communities in ways that make them miserable, and leave them gasping 
with obesity and ill health. If they would only *think anew*, look at other 
countries and other communities, and put their minds to it, most of these 
social problems would go away.


Here is a clarification of an earlier statement I made: "You could not 'tie 
up' enough water in the land even if you converted the Sahara and the Gobi 
back into verdant land." Evidence for this is the fact that much of the 
Sahara and the Gobi were verdant land, within historic times, that is 
within times for which reliable written records exist. Yet the sea level 
was not measurably lower then. With large scale CF desalination plus tree 
planting campaigns, these deserts could be converted back into stable land 
much sooner than with tree-growing alone. The desalination would have be 
more effective than it is with today's technique, or salt would accumulate 
in the irrigated land.

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 15:12:25 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA04297;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:11:44 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:11:44 -0800
X-Sent: 31 Dec 2002 23:11:45 GMT
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20021231181141.0209a288 pop.mindspring.com>
X-Sender: jedrothwell pop.mindspring.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:11:56 -0500
To: vortex-L eskimo.com
From: Jed Rothwell <JedRothwell mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Resent-Message-ID: <"1APA9.0.231.mGY4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48667
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

Frank wrote:

>We a specious becomes numerous predators have more opportunity to find a 
>way to exploit that specous.  The American Chestnut tree was once very 
>numerous until a fungi found a way to attack it.  Man kind is subject to 
>the same rules of nature.

Yes and no. Man transcended the limitations of nature thousands of years 
ago, and if he is clever enough and remains true to the better angels of 
his nature, he will never again be threatened by them. But that does not 
mean Malthus was wrong! As I wrote in I.E.: "This [would be] like saying 
the germ theory is wrong and bacteria does not cause disease because we 
discovered antibiotics. We have not escaped or nullified Malthusian laws in 
any sense, any more than people on an airplane escape the law of gravity. 
We take advantage of one phenomenon to counteract or suppress the effects 
of another."


>Are we in danger of extinction due to Aids?  Jed what is going to happen?

We are in danger of extinction due to stupidity, fear of change, greed and 
tyranny. If we can overcome these human faults, and find a way to let every 
person on earth live in quiet decency, with democracy, education and clean 
water, all of our other problems will be solved, and humanity will prosper 
for as long as the sun shines and earth supports life. AIDS and global 
warming are terrifying problems, and they will cost a great deal to fix, 
but we know how to fix them. We have met greater challenges in the past. We 
have conquered much worse diseases, such as smallpox. There is no question 
we have the technical means to fix these problems. The question is: Do we 
have the will? Do we have the imagination, and the courage? That remains to 
be seen. As Arthur Clarke wrote in 1963:

"The heavy hydrogen in the seas can drive all our machines, heat all our 
cities, for as far ahead as we can imagine. If, as is perfectly possible, 
we are short of energy two generations from now, it will be through our own 
incompetence. We will be like Stone age men freezing to death on top of a 
coal bed." - Profiles of the Future

- Jed


From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 15:30:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA12644;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:30:12 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:30:12 -0800
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Sender: rick mail.highsurf.com
Message-Id: <v04210101ba37cf7bf5f8 [192.168.123.4]>
In-Reply-To: <001501c2b117$950397c0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
References: <20021231145126.2069.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com>
 <001501c2b117$950397c0$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 13:29:47 -1000
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
From: Rick Monteverde <rick highsurf.com>
Subject: Archaens
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA12578
Resent-Message-ID: <"coxoH3.0.Q53.4YY4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48668
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 


<quote below is from website link further down>
>If Archaeus suspensions are vaporous, are they breathable? If they are breathable, can they temporarily or permanently inhabit or "possess" humans or other living systems? Could they be carriers for auditory or visual hallucinations previously thought to be the hallmark of psychosis or schizophenia?

That they inhabit out bodies is pretty much a given. That they are the source of many serious diseases seems like a possibility and evidence is leaning that way, with a few researchers and doctors checking that out now. Some claim positive results.    http://www.nanobaclabs.com/

Old story, in the Bible I think - Jesus meets a man possessed and addresses the entity: "What is your name?" he says. "Legion," says the entity, "for we are many".

Interesting to see I'm not the only one who has had these same speculations about a hive-mind or collective higher intelligence associated with these colonial life forms. Now - how do we communicate to them? Lear to "pray"? 

 =: 0

><snip>
>
>By the way, did you know that rock collectors prize large halite crystals
>that have a pink color?  Like rose quartz.  However, the dopant in pink
>halite is not what you might think.  It is actually bacteria... of the
>halogen consuming nano- sort!  All hail those Archaean life forms!  For
>anybody who wants a little weird with their alcohol tonight, see thus:
>http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/achaeus.htm
>
>Thanks again, all.
>
>NR

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 15:50:56 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id PAA24466;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:50:01 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:50:01 -0800
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:49:25 -0800
From: Jones Beene <jonesb9 pacbell.net>
Subject: Re: Global warming, SciFi and xeno-morality
To: vortex-l eskimo.com
Message-id: <000901c2b127$406384e0$0a016ea8 cpq>
MIME-version: 1.0
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-priority: Normal
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20021230160001.026a2e30 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021231132643.02098c58 pop.mindspring.com>
 <5.1.0.14.2.20021231165613.02e1fba0 pop.mindspring.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mx1.eskimo.com id PAA24434
Resent-Message-ID: <"_B23o3.0.7-5.eqY4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48669
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: O
X-Status: 

From: "Jed Rothwell" <JedRothwell mindspring.com>

 
> I am not making excuses or inventing this stuff. It is true: houses are 
> less of a problem than other structures. 

>From the web (and common sense):
"Embodied energy" is the energy consumed by all of the processes associated with the building of a home or other building, from the acquisition of land and natural resources to final delivery of the residence itself. This includes the mining and manufacturing of materials and equipment, the transport of the materials, labor costs, infrastructure and the administrative functions. Energy expenditure is a varying fraction of the cost at every level, including labor. Embodied energy is a significant component of the lifecycle impact of a home.

It was thought until recently that the embodied energy content of a building was small compared to the energy used in operating the building over its life. Most effort was therefore put into reducing operating energy by improving the energy efficiency of the building envelope. Research has shown that this is not the case and with large houses embodied energy can far exceed any possible energy savings over the lifetime of the house. Embodied energy can be the equivalent of many years of operational energy.

Research by CSIRO has found that the average household contains about 1,000 GJ of energy embodied in the materials used in its construction. This is equivalent to about 15 years of operational energy use. But as with so many things, it is the houses on the high end that are the problem. Why should any one individual in our society be permitted to consume an acre of land and 3000 ft^2 for personal use when this is 20 time the world average? There is little fairness there, even if we can "afford" it. The *real* costs (and the ecological impact) are seldom included in the over-indulgence that the rich of our country impose upon the third world.

In fact of all the life-style choices an individual can make in his life towards the common good (Gaia), the most important from a standpoint of ecological fairness in the global perspective are:
1) Giving up a vehicle in favor of public transportation
2) Minimizing the embodied energy of housing
3) Minimizing the energy cost of owned personal transportation


> "Responsibility" is not the issue here.

Personal responsibility is ALWAYS the issue. The only issue. I can't expect most Americans to give up automobiltes altogether, but fairness dictates that there should be enormous taxes on large vehicles and large houses IMHO. Government has failed us miserably here.

Jones

From vortex-l-request eskimo.com  Tue Dec 31 16:17:21 2002
Received: (from smartlst localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id QAA03432;
	Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:16:18 -0800
Resent-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 16:16:18 -0800
Message-ID: <000b01c2b12a$b0f23000$5e201f41 woh.rr.com>
From: "Nicholas Reiter" <nreiter woh.rr.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
References: <20021231145126.2069.qmail web40405.mail.yahoo.com> <001501c2b117$950397c0$5e201f41@woh.rr.com> <v04210101ba37cf7bf5f8@[192.168.123.4]>
Subject: Re: Archaens
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:13:59 -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 6.00.2600.0000
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Resent-Message-ID: <"89ZwB3.0.Yr.IDZ4-" mx1>
Resent-From: vortex-l eskimo.com
Reply-To: vortex-l eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <vortex-l eskimo.com> archive/latest/48670
X-Loop: vortex-l eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: vortex-l-request eskimo.com
Status: RO
X-Status: 

OOOHHH!

Thanks for the link!  Always appreciative of that which increases my
paranoia for another year!

I see from a quick perusal that the blood-borne variety of nanobacteria that
are the topic of the lab mentioned are said to be able to produce calcium
compound shells and structures.  This is eerie...

Earlier this past year, I had the chance to examine some finely divided
powder residue from a home in Holland where "sentient acting" plasma-like
blobs had supposedly been seen, along with some heavy duty poltergeist
activity and even some very local crop circles.  The powder had been found
near a telephone that had been incinerated in the house, and near the base
of a sliding glass storm door where said plasma ball had entered.  By EDS,
the powder appeared to be pretty pure CaCO3, with a mean particle diameter
well under a micron.  Odd stuff, although CaCO3 is commercially available in
nanoparticle mesh.  If a hoax, a very very good one.

Old traditions of "nature spirits", ghosts, pixies, elementals... humans
have always fancied that they were currying favors from these invisible
beings.  Maybe the hidden world of such lifeforms isn't some alternate
reality earth or nested dimension.  It's right here...but just very very
small.  And omnipresent enough to pretty much run all the shows it wants.
Makes ya feel something like a toadstool, huh.

NR

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Monteverde" <rick highsurf.com>
To: <vortex-l eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 6:29 PM
Subject: Archaens


>
> <quote below is from website link further down>
> >If Archaeus suspensions are vaporous, are they breathable? If they are
breathable, can they temporarily or permanently inhabit or "possess" humans
or other living systems? Could they be carriers for auditory or visual
hallucinations previously thought to be the hallmark of psychosis or
schizophenia?
>
> That they inhabit out bodies is pretty much a given. That they are the
source of many serious diseases seems like a possibility and evidence is
leaning that way, with a few researchers and doctors checking that out now.
Some claim positive results.    http://www.nanobaclabs.com/
>
> Old story, in the Bible I think - Jesus meets a man possessed and
addresses the entity: "What is your name?" he says. "Legion," says the
entity, "for we are many".
>
> Interesting to see I'm not the only one who has had these same
speculations about a hive-mind or collective higher intelligence associated
with these colonial life forms. Now - how do we communicate to them? Lear to
"pray"?
>
>  =: 0
>
> ><snip>
> >
> >By the way, did you know that rock collectors prize large halite crystals
> >that have a pink color?  Like rose quartz.  However, the dopant in pink
> >halite is not what you might think.  It is actually bacteria... of the
> >halogen consuming nano- sort!  All hail those Archaean life forms!  For
> >anybody who wants a little weird with their alcohol tonight, see thus:
> >http://www.alliancelink.com/users/avalon/achaeus.htm
> >
> >Thanks again, all.
> >
> >NR
>
>
