@Adrian Ashfield Glad you like it - we have been cleaning house somewhat. All who stay civil and have some interesting technical insights (now and then) are welcome wherever they stand on the main issues. And, just a reminder - we do not cover climate science in any shape or form. Your last link was not about GW of course, but I am just offering a reminder.
Ken Shoulders ; The Man Who Made Black Holes
-
The knowledge that EVOs range from meter sized weaponized spheromaks to tiny nanometer sized charged clusters emerging from cracks during fracto-emission fascinates me. All sizes seem to display anomalous properties.
-
@Adrian Ashfield
QuoteCan't resist adding there is apparently doubt that black holes really exist. News to me, but read Mike Rowe's entertaining response to a critic.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/s…mapped-by-nasa-satellite/
-
So what we can actually conclude from that:
"
Exactly how that final plunge happens still rankles astrophysicists. The black holes must be losing orbital energy; otherwise they would circle forever, like a perpetual motion machine. Simulations suggest that they should be shedding most of their energy in the form of gravitational waves. So why hasn’t anyone found the gravitational wave background yet?
There are plenty of possible explanations. Maybe supermassive black holes aren’t so common after all, or perhaps it takes galaxies and their black holes longer to merge than astrophysicists thought. Maybe nearby gas or the kinetic slingshot action of nearby stars speeds up the process, and the gravitational waves to quickly slip out of detectable range. Or perhaps the black holes prefer egg-shaped orbits over circular ones, leading them to merge more quickly. Pulsar timing array measurements aren’t yet able to discriminate between these scenarios, but as the experiments continue, researchers hope to be able to zero in on the likeliest explanations."
Very helpful.
-
The situation when contradicting theories are both correct are current scientific norm. Is there dark matter or not? Who cares we have explanation for both and you are free to use or not use dark matter as long as your data model fits nicely observable metric.
-
I can of course only speculate on the reasons.
- It was never intended to work as claimed;
- It never really produced excess energy, but the inventor realized it too late (measurement error);
- Unpredicted effects resulted from the reactor operating as intended, causing the inventor to eventually die of illness;
- TPTB?
In all seriousness, if the inventor is still alive it would help clarifying things up to contact him for details about any ongoing work; if he died (he doesn't look very healthy in the photos after all), if any relative could provide more background behind his efforts, although I would not expect a prompt response on the subject, if any at all.
The concept of Lawrence Nelson's technology seems solid to me, and we have someone who alledged a total COP of 5 from the system in a third party lab. I expect that Lawrence Nelson was either bought off or had a retroactive secrecy order slapped on him after the powers that be realized that his tech worked. I know for an absolute fact there have been military labs that continually ask around for leads on exotic energy or propulsion technologies. His was probably too good to allow to be commercialized openly.
-
His was probably too good to allow to be commercialized openly.
Why not just accept what Nelson said in his letter?
-
-
I found this excerpt from the paper at Alan's link fascinating, and an explanation of why Andrea Rossi may need such a high amount of active cooling in his power supply. Please note that Paulo and Alexandra Correa noticed the same effect with their Pulsed Abnormal Glow Discharge Generator and the Russian physicist (Alexander "something) that Harold Puthoff went to go see burnt out a power station with his backwards AC spikes.
Colgate's results showed clearly that the neutrons proceeding in the anode-cathode direction were, on the average, definitely of higher energy than the neutrons proceeding in the cathode during the pinch, and, therefore, that deuterons were average, the center of mass of the pairs of reacting deuterons in the reaction D(D,n) He3 was moving from the anode to the cathode during the pinch, and, that therefore, deuterons were being accelerated in the anode-cathode direction and reacting with other deuterons which had not been so accelerated and were thus acting as targets. It was hypothesized that a rapidly
12 WINSTON H.BOSTICK
pinching sausage instability in the channel produced a high back electromotive force (=-IdL/dt) and that the resulting choking of the current built up a high positive potential toward the anode and a high negative potential toward the cathode end of the pinched channel. (Such high voltage spikes from the back EMF could be seen on the oscilloscopes which recorded the voltage signals from capacitance dividers.) These high potentials were thought to be able to accelerate a few of the deuterons into other deuterons to produce the neutrons. X-rays (approximately 5 kev to 200 kev) were also generated simultaneously with the neutrons. At any rate the results showed that energetic deuterium ions (and electrons) did not represent a thermal ensemble, and therefore the fusion reactions were judged to be nonthermonuclear and hence theologically "impure" as far as the CTR program was concerned. These results were a chastening blow to the ardor of those people working on the pinch effect at Los Alamos.
Here is another quote.
The Soviet results told of neutrons and xrays and voltage spikes from their pinch effect apparatus which was similar to that in use in the USA.
-
Here's another quote from the paper:
"The very high I i | peaks at "pinch time" and the very high voltage peaks on the electrodes (5x the voltage originally applied) are very likely due to the rapid destruction of these current-carrying filaments with their local Bz's. It is as if the "super conducting" filaments had suddenly lost their superconductivity; since their local Bz's have been destroyed, they must suddenly face the authority of the Alfven limit."
This tells us at least two things that have been confirmed by Shoulders, the Correa's, and other researchers. First, the structure of an EVO is superconducting, carrying a gigantic current. Secondly, upon destruction a huge voltage spike can appear. My guess is that this strike will be of higher intensity with more energy dense spheromaks such as those produced by Shoulders or the E-Cat QX.
-
This pdf covers the work of Bostick, who was around long before KS started work in the field. See page 20 for more direct comments on the nature of plasmoids. Bostick also wrote an article for 'Scientific American' in 1956(?) entitled 'Plasmoids' which seems to be paywalled for me. If anybody has access, I would love to see a copy.
Bostick was indeed way ahead of his time, thanks for sharing. For those interested in the rebirth of this field, here are recent articles that I found much interesting:
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4886135
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.3554701
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4989845
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4903906
all published in Physics in Plasma but behind a paywall (they are also available on sci-hub or libgen though the latter may be forbidden/blocked in some countries). Finally, for those interested in a highly controversial model of the electron that fits in with other helical/zitterbewegung views of the electron, I highly recommend the paper that Bostick wrote in Physics Essays a few months before his death in 1991: Mass, Charge, and Current: The Essence and Morphology, Physics Essays, 1991 (I only have a print copy, maybe someone can find an electronic copy).
-
Display More
Bostick was indeed way ahead of his time, thanks for sharing. For those interested in the rebirth of this field, here are recent articles that I found much interesting:
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4886135
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.3554701
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4989845
http://aip.scitation.org/doi/10.1063/1.4903906
all published in Physics in Plasma but behind a paywall (they are also available on sci-hub or libgen though the latter may be forbidden/blocked in some countries). Finally, for those interested in a highly controversial model of the electron that fits in with other helical/zitterbewegung views of the electron, I highly recommend the paper that Bostick wrote in Physics Essays a few months before his death in 1991: Mass, Charge, and Current: The Essence and Morphology, Physics Essays, 1991 (I only have a print copy, maybe someone can find an electronic copy).
We need that document! It is very important! Here is the abstract.
-
There is a 1957 plasmoids article from Physical review here
-
We need that document! It is very important! Here is the abstract.
I would not be so exited about this paper.
"All mass, momentum, and energy are electromagnetic in character" is going wrong direction. All energy is kinetic.
You should be able to see that yourself since you said you like the ether theories.
I would suggest to read Milesmathis.com material. Despite his controversial status his explanation of charge, gravity, spins helps to bring physics home. There is no need to use ether surrogates like fibers in this paper.
I believe many will like Miles article on Stern-Gerlach experiment explaining how sci-fi things like fractional spins were invented.
-
Don’t be afraid of the toxicity of mercury during experiments. You have probably more mercury in your mouth than on your benchtop. (The dental amalgam are an alloy of 50% silver and 50% mercury)
During all you life, it release mercury vapour in your mouth.
-
lenr-forum.com/attachment/4357/
Here is a marking Matsumoto published long ago that I think is beautiful. That marking seems to show behavior reminiscent of how whirlwinds and tornadoes scrape the ground and hop. I wrote an article about this in the 1990s. http://www.padrak.com/ine/ELEWIS3.html
Instead of writing out all kinds of ideas about how to model these microbl plasmoids, and definitely instead of believing or accepting any particular model as valid based on your limited understanding of plasmoid behavior, I want to encourage people to focus on the physical evidence and think about whether a model fits all known plasmoid behavior including galactic and astrophysical plasmoid behavior. If the model doesn't fit, then it isn't a valid model. For example, consider whether a model can explain how a plasmoid behaved like the one did that made that marking.
It would be great if people could get some new results past the point reached by Shoulders as evidenced from his published articles last decade. Technology has advanced since then. Perhaps experimental techniques utilizing video cameras and good telefocal lenses would help people capture plasmoid activity in real time.
Of various methods people might use to research plasmoids, people seem to get the best results per time and effort spent via doing discharge experiments. It seems the easiest method to learn to do to make plasmoids.
It would be so cool if someone could video the little plasmoids. Also cool if an experiment is preformed with target sheets showing how the little plasmoids make tracks. That means that someone has to learn how to image the plasmoid markings quickly and be able to show the tracks on a monitor or something for real-time results. Doing things like like would help people to get past the point of disbelief or agnosticism they seem to be in such as if they watch plasmoid marks being made real time.
Finding the little markings with a microscope is time consuming and not suitable for a live demonstration unless someone practices the technique adequately.
-
There are a few ways to get a small working model set up, what would be the first thing needed.? and how?
