Discussion of the Charge Sheath Vortex
Message Board:
See the charge sheath vortex theory
All Messages by Topic:
| Hurricanes and eddy currents | Posted by Steve on 2008-07-15 (message id=3561 ) |
|
You are so right. I think it is likely that hurricanes having rotating charges will induce eddy currents in the warm salt water. Warmer water being more conductive this would be more noticeable in the tropics. The eddy currents should support the hurricane and keep it out of electrical contact with the water, allowing it to float over the ocean and accumulate energy. When hitting the continetal shelf the eddy currents would not reach as deep and the hurricane would dump it's charge. feel free to add this to your work if you think it has merit. I do not understand why tornados sometimes do not touch down, but I will read through your work as time permits. there must be a similar mechanism. Thanks
Steve See more of this discussion:Hurricanes and eddy currents
|
| Ultrasonic Transducer veggie oil, produces plasma | Posted by ea2233 on 2007-09-07 (message id=2957 ) |
|
http//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-641221540345626139&q=ultrasonic&total=625&start=10&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=9
She gets the reaction within the first minute. It is a 4 minute clip Notice the color of the flame they clearly have a plasma from atomized veggie oil combusting in a 22.5 khz sound field. 25 watts. It seems pretty straight forward that one could produce stable plasma this way. Of course this example is highly unscientific. You can hear the sound of the plama arc. She take the wave guide dips it is veggitable oil and then heats it in a candle. Once the reaction starts she is able to carry the white plama off the candle away from the candle flame. -- See more of this discussion:Ultrasonic Transducer veggie oil, produces plasma
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by Francisco Liszt Nunes Jr on 2007-06-29 (message id=2982 ) |
|
Hello Marcus!
I think you will have funds to get the invention antigravity to make succces! The problem is to get the correct compannies, aviation compannies are the most probably interested the petroleuym companny not, its only to get the correct colaboration and with Jesus Christ you will get ! From Brazil! I would like tp know better your tests with inertia changing! Thanks! See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Heat of reactions for nitric acid | Posted by Asad Meer on 2007-06-01 (message id=2789 ) |
|
Dear,
I have been searching for the heat of reaction for the production of Nitric acid from Ammonia and Air through Ostwald Process i.e., 4NH3 + 5O2 -----(1-8atm)---(catalyst)----> 4NO + 6H2O dH = -903 KJ/Mol 2NO + O2 ----------------------> 2NO2 dH = -116.3 KJ/mol At lower temparature : 2NO2 --------------------> N2O4 3NO2 + H2O -----------------------------> 2HNO3 + NO dH = -134,7 KJ/mol All I had found that the heat of reactions are given in KJ/Mol. I just want to know that these heats are per Mol of what one of the reactants (such NH3 in the first reaction) or the Products (such as NO in th first reaction). I also want to know, that either these Mols are g-Mols, Kg-Mols or lb-Mols. Thanks! :) See more of this discussion:Heat of reactions for nitric acid
|
| Re: Tornado in a petri dish | Posted by Michael Gmirkin on 2007-02-13 (message id=2893 ) |
|
Hmm, seems the previous poster was not serious, seeing as it's 4 years later and no desktop fusion as yet... *wink*
See more of this discussion:Re: Tornado in a petri dish
|
| Re Welcome | Posted by Peter on 2006-11-18 (message id=2956 ) |
|
This is difficult to measure because the standard instrumentation for measuring a magnetic field is based on a Hall effect device. This assumes no charge gradient. The charge sheath clearly has a high charge, so Hall effect devices cannot be used.
Magnetic recording devices tend not to work when use with instrumentation in a tornado - this could be because the magnetic fields are much higher than expected. See more of this discussion:Re Welcome
|
| Question | Posted by Mike on 2006-11-08 (message id=2955 ) |
|
Hey, my name is Mike and am a student at CMU. I wanted to know how many times more intense is a charge sheath vortex's magnetic field in comparison with earth's?
See more of this discussion:Question
|
| Re A ring plasma (non-vortex | Posted by Tesladownunder on 2006-07-30 (message id=2890 ) |
|
I should be able to create a 3-6 inch ring plasma from an exploding wire at perhaps 2-4kJ. At these levels the fine wire that forms the initial path explodes apparently uniformly rather than segmentally. The two ends of the wire will be forced together due to the forces acting on the coil of axial compression and radial expansion and short circuit the ring. So a ring with perhaps 50kA is formed which will (I presume) expand rapidly and dissipate.
I can put this in a field of perhaps 0.5 - 1 Tesla (70kg electromagnet). Any suggestions/predictions? Peter http://tesladownunder.com/Pulse_Power.htm See more of this discussion:Re A ring plasma (non-vortex
|
| calza nere | Posted by calza nere on 2006-06-26 (message id=2914 ) |
|
http://ciwux.itpagina.info calza nere
See more of this discussion:calza nere
|
| Retornado and ozone | Posted by Peter on 2006-04-25 (message id=2839 ) |
|
Electrical discharges from the tops of thunderstorms may help to regenerate ozone in the upper atmosphere. These may be more intense above a tornado.
This is one positive effect from the tornado. Peter See more of this discussion:Retornado and ozone
|
| Tornadoes and Our Environment | Posted by Christie Hale on 2006-04-25 (message id=2838 ) |
|
Do tornadoes contribute to the problem with the ozone layer and the green house effect? If so, then how.
See more of this discussion:Tornadoes and Our Environment
|
| Re Welcome | Posted by Peter on 2005-10-04 (message id=2975 ) |
|
Thanks for that reference.
Mr Michaud's vortex would, I think fail to generate any power. It is true that power can be generated by collecting the suns heat in extensive plastic grenhouses, and generating power as this air rises up through a tall tower. Mr Michaud thinks that by creating a vortex he can dispense with the enclosing tower. I would suggest that without the charge sheath of a tornado, his rising vortex will have no coherence, so there is no mechanism to transmit the energy released as the warm air rises back to his turbines at the base. There is also no way of causing the turbulence vortex at ground level to grow upwards and stay attached to his base. If he were correct then dust devils would naturally grow into tornados, and grow upwards into the sky to create storm clouds, but the opposite is observed. A tornado is observed to form in a spinning storm cloud and then extend both upwards and downwards along the axis of the storms spin. A tornado will descend into a strong lateral air flow at ground level and still remain coherent. Peter See more of this discussion:Re Welcome
|
| Artificial tornadoes as energy sources | Posted by Nic M on 2005-10-04 (message id=2974 ) |
|
Peter
You may be intersted in this article from "the Economist" discussing the potential of using artificially generated tornadoes to drive turbines for power generation. http//www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=4455446 See more of this discussion:Artificial tornadoes as energy sources
|
| Re Thank you for the Invitation | Posted by Bill Robinson on 2005-07-13 (message id=2826 ) |
|
Hello--I also need to procure 22" aluminum hemispheres of about this thickness--actually I need a sphere, but am assuming my local machine shop could weld the two together; do you use a weldable alloy?
Could you let me know how much you might charge to spin a couple of hemispheres? I also need one of thicker aluminum (minimum 1/8", more likely 1/4") with 24" i.d.; can you spin something like this also? I have a quote from a shop that makes stock aluminum hemispheres 1/4" thick. Thanx! bill See more of this discussion:Re Thank you for the Invitation
|
| Re: Welcome | Posted by Peter on 2005-03-28 (message id=2923 ) |
|
Welcome to the updated board.
Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Welcome
|
| Re: Additionally | Posted by Peter on 2005-03-19 (message id=2882 ) |
|
I read wally's paper with interest when he published it - and we have been in correspondence. To quote from his paper: "It is proposed here that the driving source of the tornado is a toroidal electric current field (or a partially toroidal field) that may be generated by the apparently random atmospherics of some storms, and its interaction with the earth's magnetic field. The toroidal electric current in this static electric field is very similar to the vorticity toroidal field. If the core of the tornado is considered to be the core of the electric current toroid, the reduced pressure in the core would tend to increase the electric current density (J) due to the increase in air conductivity. Air conductivity increases as the air pressure falls. The inflow (or outflow) of current, in air, to the base of the tornado core is almost at right angles to the earth's magnetic field and the interaction of the two provides a tangential J x B force" Yes there is a lot of common ground - particularly in our dissatisfaction of the conventional explanations. However I haven't seen the concept of the charge sheath proposed anywhere else. Should anyone know of any prior publications and discussion I would be grateful for the references. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Additionally
|
| Re: Experiments update | Posted by on 2005-02-28 (message id=2817 ) |
|
Sir, i would like to know method to make bismuth powder. pl revet back See more of this discussion:Re: Experiments update
|
| Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity | Posted by dustin on 2005-02-01 (message id=2751 ) |
|
I know i'm back tracking a bit ,to the first entry in fact, but I think that you shouldn't totally through away the Idea of a mercury powered engine because isn't it true that mercury would be the easiest metal to turn into a plasma
See more of this discussion:Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity
|
| Re: DUST VORTEXES FORMATION IN THE NUCLEAR - INDUCED PLASMA | Posted by on 2005-01-30 (message id=2889 ) |
|
Man is a spirit within a body, and therefore man thinks outside of his body also, which means that man does not think with the so called "brain", because outside of the physical human body the person has not the "brain". Also, physical particles do not have a "self-knowledge", or "self-recognition" therefore, because man does have a self-knowledge and self-recognition man is not physical and does not think with a physical mechanism (aka, brain). Sincerely, TRUTH, Jonathan See more of this discussion:Re: DUST VORTEXES FORMATION IN THE NUCLEAR - INDUCED PLASMA
|
| Additionally | Posted by on 2005-01-30 (message id=2881 ) |
|
I also want to add that I do not think that "PT" or Peter is the "inventor" of this "theory" of a "charge sheath vortex". Logically, there have probably been at least tens of humans who have thought of this theory, maybe hundreds or thousands even. Not to discourage Peter from continuing in studying this topic; I think it to be good to clarify this perspective. And here is a website of supposedly an "Aerodynamicist" and the dates on his website look to be about 3 years prior to Peter Thomson's website http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm speaking of what seems to be quite a similar if not the same topic. If Peter is aware of this, it is not good to claim origination rights like this. I am glad though that there are a few more people here to add to the number of those who believe that "tornadoes" here on Earth are likely or mostly cause by the static electricity in lightning/thunderclouds. Jonathan See more of this discussion:Additionally
|
| Additionally | Posted by on 2005-01-30 (message id=2880 ) |
|
I also want to add that I do not think that "PT" or Peter is the "inventor" of this "theory" of a "charge sheath vortex". Logically, there have probably been at least tens of humans who have thought of this theory, maybe hundreds or thousands even. Not to discourage Peter from continuing in studying this topic; I think it to be good to clarify this perspective. And here is a website of supposedly an "Aerodynamicist" and the dates on his website look to be about 3 years prior to Peter Thomson's website http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm speaking of what seems to be quite a similar if not the same topic. If Peter is aware of this, it is not good to claim origination rights like this. I am glad though that there are a few more people here to add to the number of those who believe that "tornadoes" here on Earth are likely or mostly cause by the static electricity in lightning/thunderclouds. Jonathan See more of this discussion:Additionally
|
| Something I've noticed | Posted by on 2005-01-08 (message id=2797 ) |
|
Well, I have finally gotten around to publishing my webpage depicting the phenomena in the Pacific that I discussed a while back. Here it is: http://home.comcast.net/~peacerevol/phenom.html Would love to discuss with anyone, pro or con See more of this discussion:Something I've noticed
|
| just a question | Posted by on 2005-01-05 (message id=2926 ) |
|
Hi! my name is Cami Martin and my friend and I are doing a science project on interstellar clouds.....and we need some help gathering information. Can you help us? you seen like you know what you're talking about. Thanks, Cami Martin and Edie Bucar See more of this discussion:just a question
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by on 2004-12-20 (message id=2981 ) |
|
If the Marcus device is only a concept device, it appears to be a good concept. At least from the standpoint of the kind of effects one might expect to see for a fully funcional AG device. I am amassing a small body of evidence which suggests that the Marcus/Hammel/Searl/Roschin&Godin/Philidelphia Efforts and others are supportive of Scalar Bursts due to a change in motion of a rotational mass. Considering that: 12 grams of carbon has 6.02 x 10^23 atoms. If you add up all the positive AND negative charges and move them past one point per second that equates to an equivalent amperage of over 1.146666 million amps of current. It is producing a canceled magnetic field however. Yet it is precisely that which is responsible for the inertia of the 12 grams of mass of carbon!!!! Similarly. the Marcus Device had powered canceled magnetic fields. The largest portion of the field was infact canceled. The canceled field due to both magnetic alignment and mass in motion is enormous. Yet, all but detectable. The effect of multiple canceled field sources energizing out of phase with each other at high frequencies would have to produce an environment where inertial effects would differ from those outside of that environment. I hope to build one to test in 2005. Perhaps I can get one to scoot along the floor as well See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Re: Penning Trap | Posted by on 2004-11-24 (message id=2834 ) |
|
Well I was wondering about a completely different thing how could a person destroy a tornado? I maintain that atoms have a part to play and what would happen if a de-ionizing pulse was created just as the tornado is starting. Also I believ this could be done with cyclones, and almost any other storm. please write back Ban3 See more of this discussion:Re: Penning Trap
|
| tornado Killer Technology | Posted by and no substantive proof is offered except for the study of on 2004-11-21 (message id=2790 ) |
|
This paper explores the possibility of a technology that would possibly prevent and or disable a tornado. Thomas Allgood 7 November 2004 Technology -VS- Tornados Introduction Tornadoes are destructive oddities of nature that have killed more than 18,000 people in the U.S alone from 1875 to 2000. Property losses amount to a billion dollars yearly and the cost goes much higher in some years. Scientifically, tornadoes are more an enigma than an oddity. Today millions of dollars are spent annually on tornado warning systems and tornado research. This science only protects some of the people at risk and does nothing to eliminate the property damage. For a many years scientists have tried to understand the mechanism that drives a tornado’s destructive power. Questions of: From where does the tornado derive its energy? How is the energy supplied and distributed to this destructive vortex? Another intriguing question is: Is it possible to prevent or disable a tornado? Now imagine a new technology that could stop or prevent this devastating destruction of life and property. Tornado Science Only limited research has been done in the realm of electro-static and electro-magnetic fields associated with a tornado. New ideas suggest that the energy source that drives a tornado may be large stores of electricity stored as a potential difference between the clouds and the ground. “It is proposed here that the driving source of the tornado is a toroidal electric current field (or a partially toroidal field) that may be generated by the apparently random atmospherics of some storms, and its interaction with the earth's magnetic field. This is the same force that drives electric motors and would imply that the tornado is a "natural" electric motor. (1) The above is only one of the theories that may prove to be the correct science; much remains to be done. Electrostatic Energy Generation The energy used by a tornado is thought to be created by large storm systems through a process known as electrostatic induction. The induction process is simple; the only thing that has to happen is for water droplets to pass through a charged electrostatic field. (2) This process is accomplished when the sun evaporates large quantities of water vapor and carries it aloft, as the moisture condenses and is carried to the ground by gravity. The electrostatic field is accomplished though the voltage gradient that is part of the earth’s ionosphere and magnetosphere. The voltage gradient in normal non-storm conditions are about 100Volts per Meter, cloud and ground charging is accomplished by this natural process. (3) The induction process will generate voltages that can exceed the breakdown voltage of the air. A capacitive (Leyden Jar) effect occurs between the clouds and the ground where the plate size of the capacitive unit is limited only by the size of the cloud system above the earth. When large storm systems occur, the voltage gradient can increase very rapidly in and around these super-cells. The reason for this is that the capacitance of a capacitor is directly proportional to the distance between the plates or in this case the distance between the clouds and the ground. (Capacitance =0.2249* (Plate Area)/ (Plate Separation)). The altitude of clouds are somewhat fixed to an elevation due to the layering that occurs because of atmospheric temperature, pressure and dew point. So when a cloud system above the ground is blown toward an area where the elevation of the ground is higher, the distance between the cloud and ground decrease and the charge between them increases proportionally. (4) The theory presented here is that of the Energy Dissipation One theory is that a tornado is a natural equalization mechanism that discharges large amounts of electrical energy to ground. The second law of thermodynamics states that systems move towards equilibrium, a state of lower free energy. (6) If it is true that large stores of electrical charge are responsible for the formation of a tornado vortices then it may be possible to prevent it’s formation by discharging or “shorting out” the energy source behind a tornado. Lighting is one of nature’s ways of discharging high potential electrostatic energy stored in thunder clouds. Sometimes extreme voltage gradients occur when a dry air mass undercuts a large charged cloud system. The dry air prevents normal lightning strikes to ground that would in normal conditions allow the lightning to equalize the huge amount of potential energy stored in the upper clouds. Scientists have noted that: “Around most tornadoes there are few lightning strikes in the vicinity of the tornado, and recent satellite data has revealed that lightning in the vicinity of a tornado mysteriously ceases when the tornado is being spawned.” (7) This suggests that when climatic conditions preclude natural lightning from discharging the clouds, another of nature’s mechanisms takes over, the result is a tornado. If one could provide an alternate method of producing lightning strikes to “short out” the energy source that drives a tornado, the tornado would very quickly dissipate or not even form. New Laser Lightning Rod Technology Lasers have only been around for a little more than 4 decades and have grown into a huge industry because of there many uses. Laser lightning rod technology is a new use for the laser and its potential to be used to invite or more correctly pre-ionize a leader stroke of lightning. This is the key component of a system that could be used to short out the electrostatic energy stored in clouds. Today there are numerous groups of scientists doing research into the technology used to invite lightning strikes in a predictable manner. In 1977 Leonard M. Ball was issued a US patent for a “Laser Lightning Rod System”. In his patent abstract he states: “The applications of such a capacity to harmlessly discharge thunderclouds include forest fire prevention, protection of aircraft, protection of missiles and spacecraft (particularly at time of launch), protection of electric power transmission and distribution networks, protection of communications networks, and (to the extent that Vonnegut’s electrical theory of tornadoes may be valid) reduction of the destructive force of tornadoes.” (8) The US is not the only country working to develop laser lightning rod technology. Prof. Roland Sauerbrey reports “…the mobile, high-tech laser is probably suitable for use as a lightning arrester. … This means that if this type of high intensive laser beam is directed into a storm cloud, the lightning will in all probability strike there and then travel along the beam to earth in a controlled manner. …” (9) A new type of laser is being developed for commercial use it is known as a Free Electron Laser or (FEL). FEL’s are unlike common lasers in use today, common industrial lasers typically produce only one frequency of light. FEL’s are unique in that they are capable of producing a light at almost any wavelength and even above light wavelengths such as x-rays. This ability of the FEL is key component to the laser lightning rods capability to efficiently ionize an air channel along the beam. The air is mostly nitrogen and oxygen and the quantum energy level required to shift air (Nitrogen and Oxygen) to an ionized state is well known. When the air is ionized it becomes very conductive, this is a similar process as a leader stroke of lightening except the path is controlled and predictable. Laser lightning rod technology is a new and promising technology; however it is still in its infancy. Tornado Detection In the last three decades tornado detection has become a science that is well recognized and respected. Doppler radar is the premier technology today for tornado detection. This technology is shifting to include satellite imagery. In the future we may see the development of electrostatic field detectors and subterranean current detectors as tools that recognize the electrical component of tornadoes. These detection systems will be employed to fire the laser lightning rod technology into action at the appropriate locations and times. There will be new technologies arise as more is understood about the electrical aspects of tornadoes. Conclusion As tornado killer technology is developed there will be a possibility to develop hurricane and maybe even weather modification technologies. A couple of questions remain: How long will it take to develop this technology? And, is it possible to accomplish what may seem to be impossible by some? One thing is for sure, if we don’t develop these ideas then we will be relegated to higher insurance costs and more death and destruction as our population grows. This technology is exciting and on the leading edge of a new frontier of discovery. Just think about how this technology could benefit man. 1 “The Tornado from an Aerodynamicist’s Point of View” Wallace Luchuk, President of Penurious Engineering Inc. Tullahoma, Tennessee http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm Page3 Internet Access 9/12/2004 2 “Electrostatics exploring and controlling , using static electricity” A. D. Moore Pages 175-176 The Kelvin Generator An explanation of electrostatic induction. 3 Science and Technology Electrostatic Motors Are Powered By Electric Field of the Earth http://f3wm.free.fr/sciences/jefimenko.html 4 “Electrostatics exploring and controlling , using static electricity” A. D. Moore Pages 175-176 The Kelvin generator An explanation of electrostatic induction. 5 “Threadlike streams of "Electric wind” Created and maintained by Bill Beaty. Mail me at: billb@eskimo.com. “Small vortices created on a bench top with the use of a ion generator.” http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airthred.html 6 The University of Regina Geography 423 Advanced Geomorphology http://uregina.ca/~sauchyn/geog423/science.html Internet Access 11/8/04 Page 6 of 11 7 “The Tornado from an Aerodynamicist’s Point of View” Wallace Luchuk, President of Penurious Engineering Inc. Tullahoma, Tennessee http://www.cafes.net/wallytul/ttheory.htm Page3 Internet Access 9/12/2004 8 USPTO “Laser Lightning Rod System” US Patent # 4,017,767 http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/srchnum.htm Internet Access 9/13/2004 9 STP News Online “Mobile terawatt laser as atmosphere detector and lightning arrester” Prof. Roland Sauerbrey, University of Jena, Jena, Germany http://pclasim47.univ-lyon1.fr/press/stp_gateway0801/stp_gateway0801.html Internet Access 9/13/2004 See more of this discussion:tornado Killer Technology
|
| Re: Experiments update | Posted by on 2004-11-01 (message id=2816 ) |
|
See my theory at www.cafes.net/wallytul
See more of this discussion:Re: Experiments update
|
| Re: Experiments update | Posted by on 2004-11-01 (message id=2815 ) |
|
See my theory at www.cafes.net/wallytul
See more of this discussion:Re: Experiments update
|
| Re: Electron Spiral Toroids | Posted by on 2004-10-28 (message id=2913 ) |
|
Hello my name is Paul reason,I live in Liverpool England. I would like someone to give myself and my wife Diane a logical explaination for what we have just experienced early hours sunday 17 th October 2004 about 1 am.We were driving home from friends in Cheshire a rural of England [near Tatton Hall], no lights on the road exept our car lights,when suddenly from the left of our car a vapour appeared, i instantly thought we were entering some kind of mist but the vapour stayed in front of the car travelling equal speed,then suddenly it started to spin. I naturally thought some kind of vortex was forming and told my wife to slow the car down.The spinning continued and i noticed some blue flashes in it, the rest was just white but was not light,The next we knew it went on top of the car and lit the front bonnet up with light reflecting on the whole of windscreen some sort of cabbage shape blueish ether effect,we both started to panic as we entered a village which was lit up quite well.We turned right, back into the dark countryside when it re-appeared next to the car on the ! left hand side , it went up into the air above the car so i opened my window and could see underneath what appeared to be two rings ,one large wraith looking one[with some sort of a blue energy in it] , and inside smaller plasma [but not illumunous]like teardrop shapes chained together spinning and individually wobbling ,we done several right turns over a streach of about 7 miles but it stayed right in front of the car till we reaches the motorway. My wife and i are very shaken by the incident,it eventually ascended upwards into the clouds and i could see it vapourize into a sheet.This is genuine and was a very disturbing experience for us both.We would appreciate it if there was a scientific explanation,i have also reported the incident to NASA and other organisations.look forward to hearing from you.Paul drnw42150@blueyonder.co.uk See more of this discussion:Re: Electron Spiral Toroids
|
| Re: Experiments update | Posted by on 2004-09-23 (message id=2814 ) |
|
Dear Sir, It was interesting to read experiment updates while surfing on the net. I would like to know more about Bismuth Metal experiments and also how to make bismuth powder If you can guide me, then pl revert Regards Mehta See more of this discussion:Re: Experiments update
|
| Re: I disagree | Posted by on 2004-09-13 (message id=2879 ) |
|
You obviously never have met "Born Again Christians" and other primitive ilks, who told me that I would playing "God", if I would try to stop a tornado etc. Just the same, we could even control these hurricanes, but I found to my dismay that practically all electric/ electronic engineers and physicists are dumb. They all have gotten degrees in things that are known to be possible. Let anyone come up with a different idea, he or she is ridiculed, insulted etc. In 1947, while finishing High School in Holland, I found a circuit, in which an diode was amplifying the signal, while reducing the bandwidth. Later, when I worked for Philips in Holland as a Tech Writer, I suggested this idea and was told that every idiot knew that a diode could not amplify. When I decided to emigrate, Philips started to look into the 30 or so "stupid" ideas, that I had filed, put eight engineers on it, and Yes, a diode could be made to amplify. The Varactor is usd in all radar sets world-wide. Some of my other stupid ideas were patented by Americans. Philips forgot to pay me See more of this discussion:Re: I disagree
|
| Re: I disagree | Posted by on 2004-09-12 (message id=2878 ) |
|
That last post was in reply to Joseph Hiddink. Jonathan See more of this discussion:Re: I disagree
|
| I disagree | Posted by on 2004-09-12 (message id=2877 ) |
|
First, "brains" are physical and therefore do not have self-knowledge; therefore man is a spirit which thinks inside of a body, because man has self-knowledge. And also, why would you think that Christians do not want tornadoes to be stopped? Christianity is not against stopping natural fires, natural floods, etc., etc. Also, I think that the ground there is probably negative as an effect of tornadoes causing the positive ground to gain a negative charge if you measured the ground shortly after a storm. As I think I recall reading that gasses (most on Earth I suppose) when in contact with "solid" objects cause the "solid" objects to gain a negative charge. And I suppose much more that ionized gas should have a stronger effect of similar nature upon "solid" objects. It also seems that maybe you have done none of these things you say you have done. As in addition to what I have said so far, I suppose that the electrons in the lightning would be more attracted to a positive ground than a negative, which you were referring to as being prone to tornadoes. Sincerely, TRUTH, Jonathan See more of this discussion:I disagree
|
| Re: Electron Spiral Toroids | Posted by on 2004-09-11 (message id=2912 ) |
|
Dear Peter, I thought that the descriptions of density, behavior and energies of the EST reactor were quite complete, with several peer reviewed papers of support for the hydrogen-boron reaction. Did you go over all the links on EPS's web site? Dr. Chen's paper? The supporting work of Dr. Well's? Am I just naive? Seemed like strong work to me. thanks for the reply Erich See more of this discussion:Re: Electron Spiral Toroids
|
| Re: Crash of flight 587 | Posted by on 2004-09-08 (message id=2800 ) |
|
Could a charge be intentionally induced in a wing tip vortex, and if it were, would it persist under more normal humidity levels? I think you see where I'm going with this, right? Kyle See more of this discussion:Re: Crash of flight 587
|
| Re: Electron Spiral Toroids | Posted by Peter on 2004-09-06 (message id=2911 ) |
|
In any discussion of fusion that has scientific credibility I would expect to see mention of the energy of the individual particles involved in the fusion, and the energy of the particles coming out of the fusion process. It is very simple to make a small working fusion device, and the fusor is an excellent example of this. http://www.fusor.net The articles which explain how this works are excellent. The only problem is getting it up to unity. It is impossible to evaluate any claim for a fusion device unless it can explain exactly how individual nucleii are brought together. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Electron Spiral Toroids
|
| Re: Electron Spiral Toroids | Posted by ed numerous professional papers describing their work on 2004-08-29 (message id=2910 ) |
|
Dear Folks, In my searches for efficient home technology I came across EPS. I E-mailed EPS about the obvious synergies for their home generator with the power chips of Borealis. I also contacted Borealis. I have been mediating an argument between Clint Seward of Electron Power Systems http://www.electronpowersystems.com with Rodney T. Cox of http://www.powerchips.gi/. Basically Rodney said they got the math wrong and NASA is right and Clint says MIT doesn't get their math wrong. I thought you may have an interest and be of help. Both companies are proposing very disruptive technologies, Borealis in thermoelectrics and EPS in micro fusion. Mediating, in this case, means in the middle of e-mail exchanges. The issue seems to be Dr. Chen's paper and whether his assumptions of the aspect ratio for the plasma toroids, match the model of Clint Seward proposed device. Will the ion stability condition be satisfied to maintain equilibrium? I'm in way over my head here and have been seeking help from interested parties, if you know any plasma physicist that may help that would be great. I guess you are familiar with Eric Lerner's work, Focus Fusion http://integrityresinst.crosswinds.net/FocusFusion-Ver5.htm#_Toc42793577 , His theories on quasars, his book, The Big Bang Never Happened are very interesting. I spoke with him about my concerns regarding EPS's fusion model. Below are his points and Clint Seward's responses. Please share any thoughts you have. Focus Fusion seems to making progress, they got threw gate 1 for a 2 million NIST grant for a spin off of their fusion technology to build a low cost X-ray source. "Hi Erich, I glanced at the NASA analysis and the reply, neither of which address the fusion application. A few points: 1)NASA is right that plasmoids, smoke rings of plasma can easily be crated by many approaches. The photos don’t prove that anything else is happening. As seen in our experiments, you need a lot of diagnostics to understand what is going on in a plasma and the EPS experiments don’t seem to use many other than the photos. 2)The NASA report pointed out VERY serious algebraic errors, leading to errors of many orders of magnitude in Chen's work. This is of concern to say the least. 3)NASA's stability analysis seems a bit simple minded, so I would not fully trust it. 3) Shooting two plasmoids at each other will not necessarily lead to net fusion energy. Dan Wells worked on this idea for quite some time, but he also used an external magnetic field to compress the plasmoids when they hit and to keep them together. The problem is that if to plasmoid hit each other at high velocity, it is not clear that they will stick together. If they merely collide or pass through each other, the collision time will be short. With a velocity of 3x10^8 cm/sec, you only have a collision time of a few nanoseconds with a plasmoid a few cm across. To get net energy, you need to have about 3\% of the particles fusing. For pB11 this will require ion densities in excess of 3x10^22/cc. This is close to 100 times more than the densities claimed by EPS. Also, this means that the initial energy has to be nearly a GJ-- a billion joules. That is a lot of energy. But to make it work, either you have to get the density up by a factor of 100 or make the plasmoids stick together for 100 times longer. There does not seem to be any experimental or theoretical reasoning shown that would indicate that much longer confinement times will happen. Over all, the EPS project is at a much earlier stage of development than focus fusion. They have some experiments with a few diagnostics and some theoretical ideas, but they have not demonstrated even theoretically that net energy could be produced. Our project has a detailed theory, published for the most part in peer-reviewed journals (or favorably reviewed through the NIST process), and experiments with good diagnostics that confirms at least part of the theory. We are also extrapolating from the huge data base of experimental studies with the dense plasma focus. Of course, they, like us would need money to do the diagnostics. But they should at least demonstrate theoretically that they can reach break even. I don't see how they can justify the 1\% or 10\% collision they claim. I hope this is of some use. That's all I have time for on EPS. Glad to answer questions on focus fusion when you get them. Eric" And Clint's response: "Dear Erich, Thanks for the info from Eric Lerner. We have information to respond to each of his points. 1. First, be a bit careful of the NASA report. It was based on the papers we had published up until 1999. They did not include any information MIT gave in response to their comments and questions. NASA was correct. You need a lot of diagnostics. We have proposals to our sponsors to fund the diagnostics. We shall see. 2. The NASA report did find algebraic errors. We corrected them all. But since it was not done before 1999 they elected not to include them or acknowledge them intheir report. In fairness, the reviewer, MSE engineering, did request further NASA funding to begin research into our technology, where they planned to include some of the information they omitted, but NASA did not fund any further work. 3a. NASA's stability analysis is not complete. MIT completed such analysis, and NASA elected to not include it in the report. MIT subsequently published it in a peer reviewed journal. That paper is on our website. 3b. Eric's concern about shooting plasmoids is well founded. Our method is much different, and we have found a way around this. Eric points out that it is not clear the plasmoids will "stick together." Actually, this is not the case. Well's data shows clearly that two toroids will indeed "stick together." Read his paper that I have referenced in our documents. 3c. Eric is correct as to the ion density. We can demonstrate that the ion density is in the range that he has noted. I might have sent you a copy of this paper, but will do so if you have interest. 3d. We have completed theory and density of the order of magnitude Eric is calculating. In addition, we have calculations, not yet published, that demonstrate that two toroids will adhere together, will persist for several seconds, and will pass break even. We can make this discussion available if you have interest, but caution that it is highly proprietary. Eric is correct that from what we have published and from what he can see it looks like we are in an early stage. Actually, the EST is quite a bit further along. The theory is complete enough to show break even with a simple apparatus. Hopefully this helps. Clint Seward" Clint Seward recently sent me this e-mail, the applications, across such a broad spectrum, deserve your attention. Delphi.....Wow! "An independent consulting group in Washington,DC has just reviewed our technology for the Office of the Secretary of Defense. They just sent me a draft for comments, and I have included it below. It is based on their having talked with our technology partners. Since it is a full page of technical detail before the conclusion, I have copied the conclusion here first so you get the idea of their review. "MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and EPS have jointly . Revolutionary Impact: High - reliable generation and acceleration of these plasmas using compact mobile machinery could provide US forces with a unique generic defense against ballistic and cruise missiles, manned and unmanned aircraft, and kinetic-energy projectiles of all sizes, velocities and compositions." Please let me klnow what you think. Clint Technology Review of Electron Power Systems (by an independent consulting group) for Office Of The Secretary Of Defense July 2004 Technology Title: Electron spiral toroids (EST) as kinetic-energy weapons (KEWs) Development Organization: Electron Power Systems, Inc., Acton, Mass. Description: EPS teamed with MIT's Plasma Science and Fusion Center under an STTR grant to develop a theoretical framework and laboratory methods for reliably creating small (0.5-1.0 cm diameter) self-organized plasmas, called "electron spiral toroids" (ESTs) or "spiral plasma toroids" (SPTs). EST electrons travel in parallel orbits around a torus in densities sufficient to create a stable, self-sustaining internal magnetic field. These novel laboratory-level plasmas, whose physics resembles that of ball lightning, are unusual in that they remain stable in partial atmospheres without requiring external magnetic fields for their containment, yet can also be accelerated in a directed fashion to potentially very high velocities (e.g., 600 km/sec) and kinetic energies. Parallel work on formation and magnetic acceleration of "compact toroids" is also underway at DoE's Livermore lab and at Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) at Kirtland AFB, NM, although these plasmas - which can only exist in vacuum - require large (multi-meter long) machinery that uses magnetic field pressures associated with "Tokamak" fusion reactors to create large-diameter (0.5-1.0 meter) plasmas, which must then be greatly reduced in diameter and volume to be useful. By contrast, EPS uses much smaller, cheaper hardware to repeatably generate high-ion-density plasmas that have remained stable in air for up to 0.6 seconds at 1-Torr atmospheric pressures. The EPS/MIT work has drawn interest from MDA and DTRA for DEW/KEW applications and from Delphi Corporation, a major automotive electronics firm, which envisions an automotive mini-fusion reactor that would collide two small toroids generated by 1-meter-long "neutron tubes" and capture the heat from their collision. Potential Operational Payoff: used as KEWs, even a tiny (microscopic-scale) EST would generate enough kinetic energy to destroy any military vehicle or projectile operating in the atmosphere, including solid-rod anti-armor penetrators. These charge-neutral plasmas would be produced in large numbers in rapid succession to form a steerable beam. Impact velocities of 600 km/sec, possibly several times higher, may be possible, based on MIT's extrapolation of AFRL's compact-toroid acceleration experiments for vacuum. Metrics: - Effects: target destruction by kinetic impacts far above hyper velocities (defined by the speed of sound in metal and nonmetal targets) - Speed: up to 600 km/sec (MIT estimate), possibly up to 2000 km/sec (EPS estimate) - Range: endoatmospheric line-of-sight up to space/atmosphere boundary (officially defined as 62 miles) - Power requirements: EPS proposes using EST mini-fusion reactors, whose initial power could be provided by a car battery, to produce and accelerate its ESTs. Cost: no cost data available. The complexity of reliable mini-toroid formation and acceleration with compact, relatively low-cost equipment remains to be determined. Yet the fact that the EPS/MIT STTR work this technology has attracted interest from Delphi is very significant, as the automotive electronics industry is considered to be extremely demanding of functionality per dollar and pound (e.g., mil-spec performance at Wal-Mart-class 'commodity' prices). Estimated Development Funding, FY 2005-2011 (combined KEW, mini-reactor) - appr. $2M so far (Army Research Office, NASA SBIR, NASA-IAC (Institute for Advanced Concepts) grant, BMDO STTR for $1M). EPS estimate: over FY 2005-2009, would need $0.5-$1.0M/yr (not including funding for MIT support), but with a Phase 1 and 2 SBIR, could achieve a lab demonstration (TRL 4-5) within 2.5-3 years of a proof-of-principle device that hits targets with visible kinetic damage. Industrial co-funding from strategic partners (agreements with Raytheon, Delphi (formerly GM Delco) and Titan Pulse Power) could accelerate this. -MIT estimate: with adequate staff and facilities funding ("at least $2-$5M/year"), could demonstrate basic physics within 2 years, followed by development of an integratable engineering package. TRL 3-4. MIT considers these plasmas a revolutionary breakthrough, with Delphi's chief scientist and senior manager for advanced technology both agreeing that EST/SPT physics are repeatable and theoretically explainable. MIT and EPS have jointly 289-9750 See more of this discussion:Re: Electron Spiral Toroids
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-08-26 (message id=2973 ) |
|
A body needs to have its energy level changed while mass stays constant in order to travel through time (or vice versa). Kinetic energy(speed) is only one way to achieve time travel. Until we fully understand the energy flows associated with tornados, I hold out that anything is possible
See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Tornados and infra red technology | Posted by on 2004-08-26 (message id=2945 ) |
|
well, its hurricane season now and as I was studying upcoming Hurricane Fran, it dawned on me that we use a great deal of infrared technology to study hurricanes. I have also made a practice of studying tornadic activity via infra red sattelite imagery. I am curious if anybody knows of any studys of tornados that have been performed using infra red imagery taken from the ground See more of this discussion:Tornados and infra red technology
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by on 2004-08-26 (message id=2788 ) |
|
during birkeland eyde nitrogen oxide was burt on air to form nitric oxide the heat suppiled by electric arc NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 The modern process use ammoni with water 4NH3 + 8H2O ------------------------> 2NO2 + 6H2O enclosed space for the burning of fuel. There are many kinds of furnaces, the type depending upon the fuel and the use to which the heat produced within it is put. Most familiar are the furnaces used in the heating of buildings. In the hot-air furnace, fuel is burned within an inner wall and air, led into a space between the inner and the outer wall, is heated and is led away to the various rooms of the building. Hot-water furnaces, by which water is heated to be led through pipes to radiators, and furnaces that turn water to steam for heating purposes are common. The kiln is a kind of furnace. In metallurgy, the separation of many metals from their ores is accomplished by the use of various kinds of furnaces, e.g., the blast furnace and the reverberatory furnace. The structure of these furnaces makes possible a good control of temperature. In the production of steel, however, the open-hearth furnace and the Bessemer converter are used in the treatment of cast iron. The electric furnace is extensively employed in the production of high-grade steels for use in making steel alloys and for the manufacture of high-speed tools. Heat may be generated in such a furnace by using an electric arc or by sending an electric current through resistive elements in the furnace. If the material to be processed is electrically conductive, heat may also be generated by creating an electric current in the material by induction or by inserting into it electrodes to which a voltage is applied. In the preparation of phosphorus from calcium phosphate, this compound of phosphorus is mixed with sand and coke and treated in an electric furnace. An electric current is sent from one electrode to another through the mass to create the extremely high temperature needed to bring about the chemical action that results in the production of free phosphorus. Graphite is produced from coal or coke in an electric furnace, and the extremely hard substance carborundum is made there by the combination of carbon and silicon (from sand). Nitrogen is obtained from the air (in the Birkeland-Eyde process) by passing a stream of air through an arc. The nitrogen and oxygen of the air combine to form nitric oxide. NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 USES OF NITRIC ACID PREPARATION OF DYES PREPARATION OF AMMONIUM NITRATES PREPARATION OF FERTILIZERS See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by on 2004-08-26 (message id=2787 ) |
|
during birkeland eyde nitrogen oxide was burt on air to form nitric oxide the heat suppiled by electric arc NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 The modern process use ammoni with water 4NH3 + 8H2O ------------------------> 2NO2 + 6H2O enclosed space for the burning of fuel. There are many kinds of furnaces, the type depending upon the fuel and the use to which the heat produced within it is put. Most familiar are the furnaces used in the heating of buildings. In the hot-air furnace, fuel is burned within an inner wall and air, led into a space between the inner and the outer wall, is heated and is led away to the various rooms of the building. Hot-water furnaces, by which water is heated to be led through pipes to radiators, and furnaces that turn water to steam for heating purposes are common. The kiln is a kind of furnace. In metallurgy, the separation of many metals from their ores is accomplished by the use of various kinds of furnaces, e.g., the blast furnace and the reverberatory furnace. The structure of these furnaces makes possible a good control of temperature. In the production of steel, however, the open-hearth furnace and the Bessemer converter are used in the treatment of cast iron. The electric furnace is extensively employed in the production of high-grade steels for use in making steel alloys and for the manufacture of high-speed tools. Heat may be generated in such a furnace by using an electric arc or by sending an electric current through resistive elements in the furnace. If the material to be processed is electrically conductive, heat may also be generated by creating an electric current in the material by induction or by inserting into it electrodes to which a voltage is applied. In the preparation of phosphorus from calcium phosphate, this compound of phosphorus is mixed with sand and coke and treated in an electric furnace. An electric current is sent from one electrode to another through the mass to create the extremely high temperature needed to bring about the chemical action that results in the production of free phosphorus. Graphite is produced from coal or coke in an electric furnace, and the extremely hard substance carborundum is made there by the combination of carbon and silicon (from sand). Nitrogen is obtained from the air (in the Birkeland-Eyde process) by passing a stream of air through an arc. The nitrogen and oxygen of the air combine to form nitric oxide. NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 NO + O ---------3000-d/c)--------> NO2 USES OF NITRIC ACID PREPARATION OF DYES PREPARATION OF AMMONIUM NITRATES PREPARATION OF FERTILIZERS See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by on 2004-08-25 (message id=2786 ) |
|
PREPARATION OF NITRIC ACID BY BIRKELAND-EYDE PROCESS Nitrogen on air combines with Oxygen to produce nitrogen monoxide in heat 3000degree celcius. N2 + O2 ---[(3000)DegreeCelcius]---------> 2NO dH= 180.7 KJ/Mol the heat of formation is provided by electric arc at the rate of about 15000 kwh/tone,which is very expensive. modern process produce nitrous oxide by high-pressure oxidation of Ammonia: 4NH3 + 5O2 -----(1-8atm)---(catalyst)----> 4NO + 6H2O dH = -903 KJ/Mol on cooling by providing a steam,NO combines with oxygen: 2NO + O2 ----------------------> 2NO2 dH = -116.3 KJ/mol At lower temparature : 2NO2 --------------------> N2O4 Nitric Oxide reacts with water to form Nitric Acid: 3NO2 + H2O -----------------------------> 2HNO3 + NO dH = -134,7 KJ/mol the products are Nitric Acid and Nitrogen oxide which is also acid. BIRKELAND-EYDE process is not common due to its expensiveness and because its products are polluting agent. NO is found also in Acid rain. USES OF NITRIC ACID Nitric acid is used in the manufacture of AMMONIUM NITRATE,SODIUM NITRATE AND POTASSIUM NITRATE fertilizers. Nitric acid is also used in manufacturing of explosives such as NITROGLYCERINE AND TNT(2,4,6-Trinitrotoluene) It is also used in the production of DYES See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by on 2004-08-24 (message id=2785 ) |
|
nitrogen gas react with oxygen and hearted at 3000c to produce nitrogen monoxide. N2+O2=2NO The heat formation is provided by electric ac at the rate of about 15000 kwh/tone,which is very expensive.mordern process produce Nitrous oxide by high-pressure oxidation of Ammonia 4NH3 + 5O2(1-8atm and a catalyst)= 4NO+6H2O WHERE dH=-903KJ/MOL On cooling,NO combines with oxygen 2NO + O2= 2NO2 dH=-116,3 At lower temparature 2NO2=N2O4 The nitric oxide reacts with water to form nitric acid. 3NO2+H2O= 2HNO3+NO WITH dH=-134.7KJ/MOL See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by Peter on 2004-08-21 (message id=2808 ) |
|
All matter is mad up of charged particles. protons positive, electrons negative. Most of the time these charges are in balance- the overall charge of a volume of air is neutral. When we talk of charge separation we are talking of a slight imbalance of charge - not that there is any total separation of charge. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by febby on 2004-08-21 (message id=2784 ) |
|
please send complete information about BIRKELAND EYDE PROSES FOR PREPARATION OF NITRIC ACID
See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-08-19 (message id=2972 ) |
|
Hmmm... What would be the impetus for this action? Though a tornado may be very powerful I can't imagine it producing speeds nearing the speed of light See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-08-18 (message id=2971 ) |
|
Another possible explanation, one which can only be imagined by those who believe Einstien, is that the straw actually passed thru time for just a brief moment. When it appeared in the future, the earth's rotation placed it in the same coordinates as the pole. Just some food for thought
See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by on 2004-08-18 (message id=2807 ) |
|
I have to agree with Allen on this one. my experience leads me to believe that there are two types of oppositely charged particles in the atmoshpre at all times, sometimes more of one than the other. Allan calls them (+) and (-). I call them red and yellow
See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Radial Axial Implosion | Posted by on 2004-07-28 (message id=2776 ) |
|
what is radial axial implosion
See more of this discussion:Re: Radial Axial Implosion
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by on 2004-07-27 (message id=2980 ) |
|
Hello, I have an anti-gravitational device that needs funding. It's called the Inertiamag propulsion system. A simple device that manipulates mass to exert a uni-directional force to overcome the gravitational pull of the earth, and can be easily mass produced. My web site is http://www.inertiamag.com/ . From what I have concluded from the marcus device , it is only a concept . Not an actual operating machine. The inertiamag prototype has actually propelled itself across the floor with internal thrust, using no friction. Thanks ,Carl (OKC See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by Peter on 2004-07-23 (message id=2806 ) |
|
Charge separation takes place in thunderstorms - the forces this produces results in lightning. Movement of charge particles results in complex electromagnetic fields. Think of the van de Graf generator - a device for moving charge apart and building up an electrostaic charge potential. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by on 2004-07-13 (message id=2805 ) |
|
According to Peter the charged sheath contains only one ion sign (+?). I believe there are similar numbers of each ion sign (+) and (-) in the atmosphere at all times. How could a charged sheath form from only one sign See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by on 2004-06-17 (message id=2979 ) |
|
You could try Prof. Fran de Aquino if he'll talk to you. He makes amazing claims of creating negative gravitational mass routinely by using extremely low frequency radiation applied to specific materials . For some reason his latest experiment takes 11 hours to work. If you're interested his theoretical document, including details of his latest experiment are here: http://users.elo.com.br/~deaquino//Kinetic.pdf Be nice to have a video and discussion of the experiment and the results. Make of it what you will See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Re: check out enterprisemission.com | Posted by on 2004-06-08 (message id=2937 ) |
|
I am trying to find info on the coral castle. Thanks for your help
See more of this discussion:Re: check out enterprisemission.com
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by on 2004-06-01 (message id=2978 ) |
|
I would like to corrospond with anyone who has had posetive results from any "anti-gravity" device other than lifters. + results dose not mean exploding, imploding, combusting, ionising or bits flying in every direction etc... + results could be vacume, movement (not vibration(internaly unbalanced)), perhaps even anti-gravity
See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-05-27 (message id=2970 ) |
|
Hi there, try the folowing: Tornados are electrical charged, which means they act like coils, creating strong electromagnetic fields. The fractal structure of the moving air and the synchronicity of all motions of all those self-similar subwhirls make many of these fields annihilate each other. This turns the tornado in a giant tesla coil, acting as a scalar wave antenna. For more detailed maths check Tom Bearden scalar electrodynamics. Strong scalar sources bend spacetime. If something bends spacetime, symmetry is lost, pointcare invarianz is lost, and the rules of thermodynamic are brocken, this is what is called the "energy problem of general relativity", this is why most of the promising free energy machines are vortex based technologies. For detailed maths check the basics of Matti Pitkänens Topological (TGD) Geometrodynamics. Once you are familiar with TGD you will learn to understand reality als multilayered spacetimesheet. In flat spacetime there is no interconnection inbetween the sheets, but in curved spacetime you get funny effects. Try to charge a room with tesla coils, you will experience that wood or organic matter is charged faster than metal, so the realities of the wood and of the metal disconnect, they exist on different spacetime sheets, that's all what John Hutchinsons work is about. Now this is exactly what happens in a tornado. The straw is charged very fast in the center of the tornado, exists on a lokaly higher energy density of quantum vakuum, (just to us the term of quantum physics once), an then it flies out of the center and hits a piece of something on a lower energy density, on an lower spacetimesheet. Both realities don't interact, the straw passes throw the target without interaction, like a ghost, unless the straw loose its energy at exactly the "wrong" moment, than it freeses into the target. John Hutchinson did all this in his labs, see an interview with him at http://www.americanantigravity.com/interviews.shtml. I stepped over your quenstion while searching for pictures of these effect, just in case you have some or find some in the net I would be thankfull for a link or an email. best regards Harald Kautz-Vella See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by on 2004-05-16 (message id=2804 ) |
|
In studying the history of tornados, two trends are evident, and I have been able to find any logical explanation for these trends. The first trend is the tendency of tornados to break out in straight line patterns across the surface of the earth. The second trend is the fact that tornado outbreaks are much more common when the jetstream follows the "classic" pattern, the pattern where it swoops up in the northern pacific before swooping down into the continental US. There have been two major tornado outbreaks in my home state of Virginia, August 6, 1993 and Sept 22, 2004. Both of these events included multiple "touchdowns", one after the other, cutting a straight line across the state. As I was surveying the paths of the 1993 tornados, it seemed apparent to me that some form of energy, traveling in a straight line overhead, had contributed to this outbreak. I have found that the direction of these straight line patterns closely follows the direction of the upper level (300mb jetstream) winds. It seems possible that the jetstream could be carrying charged clouds which interact with rising storm systems to create tornados. The classic jetstream pattern led me to believe perhaps something is happening in the Pacific Ocean which contributes to charged clouds into the jetstream. After studying the Pacific Ocean and the various geological and meteorological events which occur there, it is not difficult to perceive that some form of charged energy could be emmitted from a few fixed points beneath the surface. I have been studying the jetstream flow data and infrared satellite imagery of the Pacific Ocean for the majority of this year's tornado season, and I believe that I may have located a point where this outflow of energy may be occuring. I have begun to compile my findings for a web page to graphically show the recurring phenomenon I am observing. It was research for this webpage which led me to your site. It is comforting to know that there is advanced physical theory(yours) to support my ideas See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by Peter on 2004-05-16 (message id=2803 ) |
|
Any contribution that anyone can make towards supporting or refuting these theories is always appreciated. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Free Electrons and Ions | Posted by on 2004-05-15 (message id=2802 ) |
|
I find your Vortex Theory fascinating, and while my formal education in physics is limited two 200 level courses at the Virginia Military Institute, I managed to comprehend most of the details and can certainly envision the overall "big picture" you have painted. I too have theorized, in much less detail, that tornados are the result of massive electron/ion flow. I certainly do not intend to refute your ideas, I find them extremely believable, however, I do wonder if the quantity of free electrons/ions available in a storm cloud could produce the amount of energy released by a tornado. Has this question been posed before? Can the amount of available energy be correlated with the amount of spent energy? I have been studying tornados for eleven years now, and I believe that I have uncovered(with circumstantial evidence only) the possibilty of massive electron/ion flow into a tornadic storm cell. I am reluctant to go into details as many would consider my beliefs science fiction, however, if you are interested, I will be glad to discuss this further. Mackenzie Tabb Richmond, Virginia See more of this discussion:Free Electrons and Ions
|
| Re: Vortexes and UFO encounter 1875 | Posted by Peter on 2004-05-07 (message id=2954 ) |
|
The fortean times article is an interesting analysis of the possibilities. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Vortexes and UFO encounter 1875
|
| Re: Economy of Scale | Posted by on 2004-05-07 (message id=2756 ) |
|
who can tell me about internal economies of scale and internal economies of scale, thanks so much
See more of this discussion:Re: Economy of Scale
|
| Vortexes and UFO encounter 1875 | Posted by on 2004-04-30 (message id=2953 ) |
|
Hi, I have to say I found your website a thrilling read. 99\% of sites I find out there dealing with "fringe" subjects like ancient technological civilizations and the like don't seem to bother to screen their information or even care if it's true for that matter! I thought it was so refreshing to see a site from someone with real technical expertise as well as a discerning eye when it comes to spreading rumors. Anyway, while I was reading your work on the Charge Sheath Vortex, I recalled something I came across while reading a UFO account supposedly from 1873. This guy supposedly had an encounter with someone, toured a UFO, and had the impression that he was supposed to build one. Scroll three quarter of the way down and there's a drawing of a cloud with what looks like two twisting vortex shapes beneath and something in between that goes up and down. (check the picture out). The guy seemed to think his mission in life was to build a flying ship like the one he saw, and it seems like he was convinced this thing was a hint at the construction. The article was at: http://www.forteantimesmag.co.uk/articles/162_ozufo.shtml Dunno, probably hokum, but I thought it might be interesting to you. ps: obviously, the end my email address should be changed to .com instead of nospamrobots. I know all too well what having your email address up on a public mail-to link does to one's box. :P See more of this discussion:Vortexes and UFO encounter 1875
|
| Dust devils are charged too | Posted by on 2004-04-21 (message id=2801 ) |
|
I thought you might find this of interest, Peter. http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dust_devils_040420.html Antony See more of this discussion:Dust devils are charged too
|
| Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace | Posted by on 2004-04-17 (message id=2783 ) |
|
send me BIRKELAND EYDE PROSES FOR PREPARATION OF NITRIC ACID
See more of this discussion:Re: Birkeland-Eyde furnace
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-03-31 (message id=2969 ) |
|
Hello all, (after a long absence) Yesterday I read the story in the new National Geographic on tornados or tornado chasing. They had a photo of things stuck into wood! This time it was a coat hanger and a shelf bracket. Both metal, I noticed. They also mention that winds in the interior of a tornado may reach velocities equel to the speed of sound! It's getting odder and odder in the tornado. Roger See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Re: DUST VORTEXES FORMATION IN THE NUCLEAR - INDUCED PLASMA | Posted by on 2004-03-27 (message id=2888 ) |
|
Dear Sir, Please never ever forget that what you call a brain is a gross matter and is always independent of mind,which is a state between energy and matter and this mind is independent of intelligence,which is the pure cosmic energy. Thank you See more of this discussion:Re: DUST VORTEXES FORMATION IN THE NUCLEAR - INDUCED PLASMA
|
| Tunguska genetic anomaly | Posted by Zurab Silagadze on 2004-03-26 (message id=2927 ) |
|
An article about Tunguska: http://uk.arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0311337 (Tunguska genetic anomaly and electrophonic meteors See more of this discussion:Tunguska genetic anomaly
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult" | Posted by on 2004-03-07 (message id=2968 ) |
|
A bit on "flight moult": http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/poultry/5376.html " Moulting is the process of shedding and renewing feathers. During the moult the reproductive physiology of the bird is allowed a complete rest from laying and the bird builds up its body reserves, nutrients and constitution. The provision of new feathers or coat (a feature inherent in most animals) is a natural process, designed by nature to maintain the birds ability to escape enemies by flight and to provide greater protection against cold winter conditions. Normally, under natural conditions, moulting in adult birds will occur once a year, though it may occur in certain individuals twice in one year, and more rarely only once in a period of two years. " Moulting takes a long time. Growing feathers takes time and lots of energy which is why birds don't do it very often. Any bird that dropped feathers when it was scared would quickly spend more time on the ground than in the air, where it would be virtually defenseless against predators. ***BEGIN SARCASM BLOCK*** That must be why chickens can't fly, because they dump their feathers when they hear a loud bang or get lifted into the air by wind. Oh, and porcupines shoot quills. ***END SARCASM BLOCK*** har har See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl - "flight moult"
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl | Posted by on 2004-03-07 (message id=2967 ) |
|
Not sure why you think all the reports of plucked fowl are dubious. What's dubious is the lame explanations given, which range from exploding quills due to negative pressure to "flight moult" to plucking by wind. Here are just some examples of well-documented cases: http://www.urbanext.uiuc.edu/weather/6.html - "After the tornado was gone, a live chicken was found in a rolled up ball of barbed wire, still alive, but plucked clean." Interesting that this chicken was wrapped in a ball of barbed wire. I wonder how the wind did that magic. Spontaneous faraday cage? Did the barbed wire keep this chicken alive? http://www.asub.edu/feature/severe_weather_awareness_week/index.asp?p=4 - "...after a tornado, some chickens appear to be plucked of most of their feathers." This document claims the "exploding feathers" hypothesis is invalid, but that "flight moult" plucks chickens. http://www.rootsweb.com/~txclay/letters-journals/placeinthesun.htm - "Not an animal remained alive. Mrs. Shahan was found in a tree, her body decapitated, and a fourteen year old boy in another tree. Chickens plucked clean of feathers were strewn all about." http://www.communication.ilstu.edu/activities/CSCA2002/eval_training_packet.pdf " a. Within the damage descriptions of rural tornadoes, there are often stories of a chicken "stripped clean of every feather." b. It has long been thought that the feathers explode off the bird in the tornado's low pressure. c. The most likely explanation for the defeathering of a chicken is the protective response called "flight molt." As noted by Tornado Project Online!, "chickens are not stripped clean, but in actuality they lose a large percentage of their feathers under stress in this flight molt process." In short, when the chickens become scared their feathers become loose and are simply blown off. " I've seen chickens like this, and I've seen chickens with straw stuck in them as well as straw stuck in wood and through glass and metal. Something a lot more fundamental than cyclonic wind is going on here. The wind is one manifestation of this effect, it is not the driving force, obviously. Incidentally, "flight moult" is the moulting process that replaces nest feathers with flight feathers. There is no known process (except to some meteorologists, apparently) that could account for all of a chicken's feathers suddenly becoming loose "under stress" and falling out in a stiff breeze. Suggesting that chickens do shed feathers so easily is akin to suggesting porcupines shoot quills. It's an interesting story, but a fable See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl | Posted by on 2004-03-07 (message id=2966 ) |
|
I think the reports of plucked fowl are a little apocryphal. There are also reports of chickens being inserted into milk bottles and the like.I just don't see it happening. If it is true, however, then you may be on to something. The entire fowl industry could be using the "Plautus Feather Plucker" in the years to come
See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl
|
| Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl | Posted by on 2004-03-07 (message id=2965 ) |
|
There are also numerous reports of fowl entirely plucked and stone dead (any live ones observed plucked?). "Experiments" to uncover the reason were basically along the lines of shooting chickens out of cannons, which of course produced clouds of feathers, but not intact, featherless chickens. The "static electricity" effects of feathers are well-known. Are these fowl electrically plucked by the fields around a charge sheath? More importantly, if Maple Leaf discovers this effect, will they use it to pluck chickens and turkeys in their factories. (<- joke See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw (and plucked fowl
|
| particles are dipoles in charge cloud | Posted by Peter on 2004-01-31 (message id=2827 ) |
|
Just to make it clear that the particles discussed in the tornado are dipoles in a large charge cloud. If we ignore this charge cloud, the electrostatic forces between two particles travelling in parallel are very much greater than the electromagnetic attraction. In a large charge cloud the electrostatic forces on the particle are the same in all directions - they cancel out to zero. The much weaker electromagnetic attraction then predominates. Note also that the dipoles are collections of positive and negative charge, with one in a slight predominance. We are NOT talking about electrons travelling in free space where we need to consider that within their frame of reference there is no relative movement and hence no electromagnetic attraction See more of this discussion:particles are dipoles in charge cloud
|
| Re: Flying Straw | Posted by on 2004-01-19 (message id=2964 ) |
|
Roger, If you consider the Earth as the ground plane then a possible explanation would be that the straw is charged within a field and then accelerates, as it should, towards the ground plane. It stands to reason that not ALL straws are entrained in the field just as not ALL straws are found embedded in fence posts. Also note that this phenomenon would have to exist in an environment nearly void of turbulence. As you wrote earlier, the potato and straw trick doesn't work if there is significant pressure within (or behind, in this case) the straw See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw
|
| Re: Thank you for the Invitation | Posted by on 2004-01-19 (message id=2825 ) |
|
Well, Craig, looks like you threw the door wide open. Everybody wants aluminum spheres now
See more of this discussion:Re: Thank you for the Invitation
|
| Re: Thank you for the Invitation | Posted by on 2003-10-09 (message id=2824 ) |
|
Hi...Do you still have any of the aluminum shperes left?? I am building a Van DeGraff generator for a project I am working on. I would like to externally excit it and also place it in a containment vessel,,, Any plans or suggestions?? ThanX Hello..I am a student working on plasma induced coatings. Can you tell me how we would arrange shipping. I would be interested in as many as you'd like to get rid of...ThanX See more of this discussion:Re: Thank you for the Invitation
|
| Re: Thank you for the Invitation | Posted by on 2003-10-09 (message id=2823 ) |
|
Hi...Do you still have any of the aluminum shperes left?? I am building a Van DeGraff generator for a project I am working on. I would like to externally excit it and also place it in a containment vessel,,, Any plans or suggestions?? ThanX See more of this discussion:Re: Thank you for the Invitation
|
| Re: Marcus device | Posted by on 2003-09-08 (message id=2977 ) |
|
You can find information regarding it on www.americanantigravity.com
See more of this discussion:Re: Marcus device
|
| Re: Tornado in a petri dish | Posted by on 2003-08-30 (message id=2892 ) |
|
Peter, Your prediction of cheap stable fusion power from the plasma vortex is right on target. We plan to have it to the market in the next 6 to 8 months in fact See more of this discussion:Re: Tornado in a petri dish
|
| Re: Flying Straw | Posted by on 2003-08-12 (message id=2963 ) |
|
Peter, It would just be a problem with causes and effects. Like the stories that "primitive" people thought that the noise and fire of gunpowder were the lethal agents, (since they could not see the bullets). The wind may be the most destructive effect of a tornado but it may not "be" the tornado. I would assume that fence posts are transparent to charge. For that matter straws should be, but if they are flying maybe they can carry a charge causing them to be affected by the electrical cylonic activity. Anyway the transparent fence post would not be causing any turbulence in the electical field and the straw would whap into it. Or... if the post was acting as a ground maybe the straws would be sucked into it. If you have ever tried to push a string, you know that pulling something wiggly against resistance is a lot easier than pushing it. Well it is too early for this but it occurs to me if the fencepost is attracting straws then part of the charge tornado is in the ground. Sort of like a giant moving diode. The part we see is just half of the system. Is there any advantage to considering that the ground is something besides just part of the scenery? roger See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw
|
| Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity | Posted by on 2003-07-28 (message id=2750 ) |
|
Thanks for your comments. I appreciate them. I work as a university tutor, but this whole area of research is my private hobby. I don't believe in the patent system. Most developments are the result of many different groups of people working in different ways and pooling their knowledge. For one of them to apply for a patent and claim all rights to what all have contributed to seems a bizzare and counter productive system. I do believe in copyright - but anyone is welcome to quote my material for non-commercial purposes, provided they acknowledge my authorship. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity
|
| Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity | Posted by on 2003-07-23 (message id=2749 ) |
|
Much like Mr Lester, I came about this site in the same way. One site lead to another site and/or topic, then another and another, then finaly here. I am not a scientist, just a curious mind. I feel like an armchair scientist at times. haha Anyhow... I'd like to say that having read your (Mr Thomson) work on the charged sheet vortex and other works, I'm in awe. Great stuff!!! I don't think I saw any link for a bio of any type. Are you currently employed in some type of plasma research lab? What other reading material would you recommend to the armchair scientist in regards to this field of study? I truely respect the fact that you have posted this information on the internet for us to read. I do hate other sites / people who commercialize these endevours. Just send $19.95 to this address and... blah. To many scammers out there. The fact that you are not pushing the sale of any product is so refreshing, or the ever popular: "I can't say anything untill the patent comes through...". Many thanks for my hours well spent reading your site See more of this discussion:Re: Your work product is elegant in its simplicity
|
| Re: Plasma experiments | Posted by on 2003-07-15 (message id=2796 ) |
|
Dear Peter, I am engaged in the generation of ball lightning in open STP air. My web sites are listed in the signature below. I am have nearly completed another experiment to boost the energy and lifetime of the magnetoplasmoids referred as PMKs (all Plasma Mantle and Kernel magnetoplasmoids). Configuration is Spheromak like. Contact me if you have any interest. Cheers, Paul +----------------------------------------------------------------------- | Paul M. Koloc; Prometheus II, Ltd.; 9903 Cottrell Terrace, | Silver Spring, MD 20903-1927; FAX (301) 434-6737: Tel (301) 445-1075 | Grid Power -Raising $$Support$$ -;* http://www.neoteric-research.org/ | http://www.prometheus2.net/------ See more of this discussion:Re: Plasma experiments
|
| Marcus device | Posted by on 2003-07-07 (message id=2976 ) |
|
Greetings to all.: Has anyone in England ever heard of such a device called 'The Marcus device' ?A supposed invention of ' Marcus Hollinshead' in England. I'am located in the U.S.A. If so,I would like to corrospond with anyone of knowledge of this device. May GOD bless and protect.Respectfully , Tom Akin. wram_tech@yahoo.com See more of this discussion:Marcus device
|
| Re: Plasma experiments | Posted by on 2003-07-07 (message id=2795 ) |
|
Hello.: This area of study has much greater possibilities.Like nuturlizing gravity. Respectfully,Tom Akin. wram_tech@yahoo.com See more of this discussion:Re: Plasma experiments
|
| Re: Flying Straw | Posted by Peter on 2003-06-24 (message id=2962 ) |
|
If the straw is entrained in a charge sheath, then this will provide the rigid support for the straw that drives it into the wood. Since the newly published experiments show how you can confirm the basic physics of these theories, I hope that these explanations will be taken a little more seriously by the meteorologists. peter See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw
|
| Re: Flying Straw | Posted by on 2003-06-21 (message id=2961 ) |
|
Colin, The usual explanation involves poking drinking straws into potatoes or a reference to a cannon that shoots boards through brick walls. I think that these things miss the point. You would have to have a straw picked up by a wind, then carried in a fluid laminar flow of air traveling at the 200 miles an hour of tornados, and traveling end on. But, just before the straw sticks into the fence post, the air flows around the post ( without creating an area of turbulence), and the straw, rather than following the air sticks into the post, and is left sticking out. The mental picture seems to imply that either the tornado winds supply the velocity, and at the last moment the straw acts as if it is traveling through a vacuum, or the wind is acting as a supporting medium around the straw that prevents the straw from bending, and once the straw is in the wood, the air lets go of the straw and goes on it's way. Regards, Roger Q Callaway See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw
|
| Re: Flying Straw | Posted by on 2003-05-28 (message id=2960 ) |
|
Not just straws. I've read a few reports of other materials morphing or melting "into" different media during tornadoes. It might be due to a reduction of "binding energy" and this may be associated with various spin fields- perhaps sort of like the Hutchison effect where steel or wood merged into aluminum. Metals melting without heating etc. The weirdest report I've ever seen originated from Russia- where it was stated that a cow "merged" into a wooden wall. Believe no single reports, but add them all up- and a pattern starts to emerge. Best Regards Colin Quinney See more of this discussion:Re: Flying Straw
|
| Flying Straw | Posted by on 2003-05-17 (message id=2959 ) |
|
Hello, I am sure you are familiar with the reports of straw driven into fence posts. One explanation is the high velocity that the straw attains. Another is that the fence post somehow untwists then twists back to trap the straw. Do any of you all, "out there", have an explanation? The apparent movement of solids through (turbulent?) liquids with this sort of speed would be the best argument that something unique is happening. If it is not just a legend. Roger See more of this discussion:Flying Straw
|
| Re: tornadoes | Posted by Peter on 2003-05-16 (message id=2944 ) |
|
I have done very similar experiments, forcing a dusty air circulation, then putting a high voltage discharge through it. Results to appear here soon. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: tornadoes
|
| Tornado in a petri dish | Posted by Peter on 2003-05-16 (message id=2891 ) |
|
Pictures of a lab sequence showing a charged vortex in a plastic petri-dish http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/tornado/experiments/Tornado_in_a_petri-dish.html Peter See more of this discussion:Tornado in a petri dish
|
| Re: Radiation emission from tornados | Posted by on 2003-05-11 (message id=2837 ) |
|
Hello, All of these phenomena are mentioned in an Amatuer Scientist project in the Scientific Ameican Amatuer Scientist collection: May, 1963. How to Locate a Thunderstorm and Track It By Detecting the Radio Waves It Generates: Moire Patterns by C. L. Stong May, 1963 roger See more of this discussion:Re: Radiation emission from tornados
|
| Re: tornadoes | Posted by on 2003-05-08 (message id=2943 ) |
|
Mr. Peter, I wonder if you could wind pvc pipe in a coil in the same general geometry of a tornado, then blow dry air through the pipe at a high speed. The pvc would become charged, and I suppose the air also. If needed dust could be introduced into the air to improve the charge carrying capability. Anyway it seems like you would have a moving charge and you would then be able to observe the interior (or exterior) of the toroid to see if anything happened. Or have I completely missed the point? Roger See more of this discussion:Re: tornadoes
|
| Re: ionised air molecules | Posted by on 2003-04-27 (message id=2908 ) |
|
Hello Mr. Thomson, Receiving no answer from you to my message concerning the values of Lorentz and Coulomb forces, I'm not sure if the e-mail address phorum@peter-thomson.co.uk still in use. However, would like to tell you that the explanation for the specific rotation direction of tornadoes in northern and southern emisphere is really simple and perfect! Hope to have the occasion to share it with you. Adrian Bora See more of this discussion:Re: ionised air molecules
|
| Re: ionised air molecules | Posted by on 2003-03-14 (message id=2907 ) |
|
Hi, Peter Have found some interesting new information concerning the behaviour of oxygen and nitrogen ionised molecules when moving in a magnetic field. It is clear now the reason they remain together as far as they move with a certain velocity. (Indeed, the Lorentz force, which assures the internal cohesion of moving molecules sheath is bigger than Coulomb repulsive force.) If you are interested, please send me again your new e-mail address because I lost your last message. Greetings, Adrian See more of this discussion:Re: ionised air molecules
|
| Re: Powerful compression phenomena | Posted by on 2003-03-08 (message id=2906 ) |
|
Truly, it is relevant, because your work is NOT some fringe science. I was only trying to add some more wood on the fire See more of this discussion:Re: Powerful compression phenomena
|
| Re: Powerful compression phenomena | Posted by Peter on 2003-02-26 (message id=2905 ) |
|
Thanks for that reference to control of waves in Taylor-Couette flow. It is directly relevent to some of my own work. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Powerful compression phenomena
|
| Re: Powerful compression phenomena | Posted by on 2003-02-25 (message id=2904 ) |
|
http://www.physics.pacificu.edu/wiener/research.html This is very interesting detail: . Dan and I completed a beautiful experiment in which we discovered and investigated solitary waves in Taylor-Couette flow. Solitary waves are particle-like nonlinear waves that hold together and travel indefinitely without dispersing. These solitary waves were predicted to exist by Hermann Riecke of Northwestern University and Hans-Georg Paap of Universitat Bayreuth in Germany [2 See more of this discussion:Re: Powerful compression phenomena
|
| Powerful compression phenomena | Posted by on 2003-02-08 (message id=2903 ) |
|
One does not have to go to cold end of the Universe to see this. As a kid I was puzzled with such simple phenomena as straining wet T-shirt. No matter how much force I used to squeeze it as a whole more water came out if I “organised” the shirt. Twisted in a spiral it did not present much of the resistance till the very end.. Solitons in deep-water (“rouge waves”) do not start just because of shirr numbers of them as a pure chaos. Some type of “organisation” MUST happened before energy can be transferred from one wave to another. This was well understood for LASER-s where we call it “inversion of the population”. With advance of BEC (it looks like everybody is jumping on the bend wagon ) more and more examples of Bose- Einstein behaviour comes to light. My line of thinking goes more along the lines of “The Holly Grail of Physics”…FORCE. It came to physics to explain the origin of the acceleration, but nothing came to explain the origin of the force. To this day our understanding of the force is atrophopomorphic. We see ourselves as a source of the force. When faced with phenomena like path bending of the charged particle we (Lovrentz) concluded that no energy is dispensed, and therefore no work is done. The constant speed which charged particle had prior from entering uniform magnetic field could only be sourced to the electric field. The reality is that great deal of work is done, and same amount of energy dispensed. The particle did not increase it’s energy (kinetic) but it got “organised”!!! This “organisation” will take it to “the spiral of death”, if the bending force continues with it’s action, or it may bend the orbit to a perfect circle. If we picture layers, upon layers (infinite number) of these coaxially arranged plasma vortexes, which in transversal projection could be represented with an oscillating membrane of a drum, it is than not a chance, but causality that one of these plasma waves becomes “rouge wave”, and collapses to the centre, creating a new pacing order in a form of fusion. The all idea behind the fusion is in new pacing order, energy lower, and therefore more stable state. All present concepts in the field of plasma fusion look like understanding of distillation and heath energy prior to Carnot. Nobody could understand why bigger fire could not produce faster distillation or hotter steam. Media, be that steam, whisky, or plasma can transform only so much energy into the force at any given time See more of this discussion:Powerful compression phenomena
|
| Re: Tornadoes | Posted by Peter on 2003-02-03 (message id=2902 ) |
|
The soliton is a function of a wave. If you can show that the plasma ball is a wave function, then the idea of modeling it as a soliton is a useful one to explore. However there are good examples of colliding solitons that simply pass straight through each other - the meeting and passing of two solitons in a canal of water is a good example of this and the origin of soliton theory. Peter See more of this discussion:Re: Tornadoes
|
| Re: Tornadoes | Posted by on 2003-02-01 (message id=2901 ) |
|
If you could make them join togther, why would it not just be a bigger plasma ball? Really WHY? Simple because this is the very reason why "solitons" exist. If you take time to read this [http://homepages.tversu.ru/~s000154/collision/main.html] many ideas which are so loosely thrown in your concept ( theory???) will fall where they belong. What plasma “physicist” are discovering now is an old trick from 1923. [http://www.couette-taylor2001.nwu.edu/ct/program.htm]. May be this will explain why Westinghouse is using rotating magnetic field on their plasma See more of this discussion:Re: Tornadoes
|