1995.03.07 / Nicholas Rich / Re: The Farce of Physics Originally-From: ncrich@ix.netcom.com (Nicholas Rich) Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci. stro,sci.edu,sci.energy,sci.engr,sci.logic,sci.misc,sci.physics,sci.phys cs.computational.fluid-dynamics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusio ,sci.physics.particle,sci.research Subject: Re: The Farce of Physics Date: 7 Mar 1995 06:35:01 GMT Organization: Netcom In <3jgamd$op0@acasun.eckerd.edu> wallace@acasun.eckerd.edu (Bryan Wallace) writes: >If one prefers to obtain a copy of the ASCII version by email they can send >the request to my wallace@eckerd.edu address, and if their system has a size >limit for email I can send the book in segments, with the largest being 55KB >for Chapter 3. > >Bryan Mr Wallace I intend to check out your book. I'd also be interested to know if you or anyone else has read the book _The Big Bang Never Happened_, Eric J Lerner, Vintage Books, A Division of Random House. I came across a copy a few days ago and haven't been able to put it down. Though I'm not at all technically proficient, it's written so the layman can understand. Based on the research of Hannes Alfv'en, it points out multitudes of apparently irreconcilable contradictions in the BB theory--which are resolved by postulating fantacies like dark matter (apparently 99% of the universe), cosmic strings, etc. Instead, it seems to reasonably explain the observable by means of a matter-energy plasma which is effected far more by electricity and magnatism than gravity. It apparently explains things like super-clusters and the like (ming you, this is what I understand from the reading). Finally, it likens todays BB religion to the geocentricism of old. Anyone knowledgeable on the subject have any comments? I'd love to know since I've never heard mention of this book before, and this month's time magazine seems to indicate that the BB notion is more alive than ever. Guess it's hard to change and face reality when you've invested your life's work in a fantasy. Nick Rich cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenncrich cudfnNicholas cudlnRich cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Bryan Wallace / The Farce of Physics Originally-From: wallace@acasun.eckerd.edu (Bryan Wallace) Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci. stro,sci.edu,sci.energy,sci.engr,sci.logic,sci.misc,sci.physics,sci.phys cs.computational.fluid-dynamics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusio ,sci.physics.particle,sci.research Subject: The Farce of Physics Date: 6 Mar 1995 08:00:23 -0500 Organization: Eckerd College, St. Petersburg, Florida This post is in reply to the Steve Carlip carlip@dirac.ucdavis.edu 27 Feb 1995 18:40:02 post in the Thread "The Farce of Physics" in the newsgroup "sci.physics". Steve wrote: > ... In other words, we may not be able to compute the exact >trajectory of a falling apple, but we can calculate the tension in the >stem that holds it to the tree. ... Most physicists would argue that Einstein's General Relativity theory is superior to Newtonian theory, yet it can't compute the trajectory of a falling apple or the orbit of a spacecraft in the solar system and Newtonian theory can. S. Chandrasekhar in his article titled "Einstein and general relativity: Historical perspectives" (Am.J.Phys.,47(3),212-1979), wrote: ... On this account, it would have been entirely sufficient to generalize the Newtonian theory to allow for such small departures which may arise from the finiteness of the velocity of light since we expect the Newtonian theory to be exact if the velocity of light could be considered as infinite. ... R. A. Waldron in his article titled "Gravitational forces"(Speculations Sci. Technol.,7,177-1984) wrote: That the anomaly in the precession of the planet Mercury could be accounted for by a modification to Newton's law of gravitation has been known for a long time. Einstein's general theory of relativity can, in this respect, be expressed as a factor [1 + (3v^2/c^2)] in the gravitational force law [22]. ... Before he died, Einstein realized that the fundamental first postulate that gave the name to his relativity theories, was false. In an article by I. Bernard Cohen titled "An Interview with Einstein" that starts on page 69 of the July 1955 issue of the journal Scientific American, Cohen wrote: ... Einstein said, he thought that Newton's greatest achievement was his recognition of the role of privileged systems. He repeated this statement several times and with great emphasis. This is rather puzzling, I thought to myself, because today we believe that there are no privileged systems, only inertial systems; there is no privileged frame--not even our solar system--which we can say is privileged in the sense of being fixed in space, or having special physical properties not possible in other systems. Due to Einstein's own work we no longer believe (as Newton did) in concepts of absolute space and absolute time, nor in a privileged system at rest or in motion with respect to absolute space. ... On page 84 of the double-spaced manuscript of my book "The Farce of Physics" we find that near the end of his life in 1954, Einstein wrote to his dear friend M. Besso: I consider it quite possible that physics cannot be based on the field concept,i.e., on continuous structures. In that case, nothing remains of my entire castle in the air, gravitation theory included, [and of] the rest of modern physics. On page 192 of my book, I presented Einstein's former research associate Peter G. Bergmann's argument with regard to the first postulate: In the foregoing, I have pinned the breakdown of the principle of relativity to the background radiation: but this is only by way of emphasis. One can construct local frames of rest also by averaging over the observed proper motions of the surrounding galaxies; the field of direction obtained by this procedure will not deviate grossly from the one gained from observing the background radiation. Either way, permitting large-scale samplings to enter, one is led inexorably to the breakdown of the principle of relativity. One must realize that in 1905 when Einstein wrote his first published paper on relativity, it was long before we knew the true nature of galaxies or had any evidence of the background radiation. It was before the age of modern electronic technology and space flight, and our ability to send light signals through empty space over large distances from fast moving spacecraft. On page 84 of my book we learn that in 1920, after Einstein had become famous, he made an inaugural address on aether and relativity theory for his special chair in Leiden. In the address he states: The aether of the general theory of relativity is a medium without mechanical and kinematic properties, but which codetermines mechanical and electromagnetic events. If Einstein's ether argument was true, and light was a wave in the ether, we would expect that there would be very large differences in the transit time of one way light signals from spacecraft moving relative to the ether. Because there is no evidence that modern radio astronomers evaluate their data based on motion relative to the ether, this must be considered as evidence that Einstein's ether argument is not true! My book "The Farce of Physics" explores and documents the fact that modern physics is little more than an elaborate farce. The book contains 156 references to the published literature with extensive quotations of arguments from many prominent people including Albert Einstein. It is meant for anyone who is interested in this subject, and I have attempted to reduce the technical jargon and mathematics to a minimum in order to reach the widest possible audience. The term physics was derived from the Greek word "physis" for nature, and the roots of physics lies in the first period of Greek philosophy in the sixth century B.C., where science, philosophy and religion were not separated. The aim of physics is to discover the essential nature of all things, and it lies at the base of all of natural science, religion, and technology. Richard Feynman was one of a relatively small number of modern physicists with the intelligence and courage to challenge the current sacred relativity doctrine that argues that empty space is an invisible solid with infinite mass and energy that can create the universe in a Big Bang. Feynman argued that Isaac Newton was right and that a photon of light is a particle composed of a drop of dynamic ether fluid moving through empty space at the speed of light. My 1969 paper showed that an analysis of the Venus radar data was consistent with the Newtonian particle model of light, and my computer simulation research of the dynamic ether showed the proper magnitudes for the gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear forces using simple reasonable algorithms, and it was also possible to make the heavier particles from positive and negative electrons, just as John Archibald Wheeler suspected. I expect that some time in the future, man will discover some cute technological trick that will upset the balance of the positrons and electrons and mass annihilation will be man's principle energy source, perhaps even leading to space travel at near light speeds. This book is now archived in many Internet libraries and can be found by using Gopher and World Wide Web and will be available from Project Gutenberg archives and on their CDROM's. The free standard 311KB ASCII version can be obtained by anonymous ftp from ftp.germany.eu.net in the directory /pub/books/wallace by using "get farce.txt". The file in the directory is in a compressed form and called farce.txt.gz but if you leave off the .gz the system will send you the uncompressed text. Unix computer systems have a command called "gunzip" that will uncompress the .gz format. The HTML/World-Wide Web Hypertext version of the book is available via URL:http://www.Germany.EU.net/books/farce/farce.html If one prefers to obtain a copy of the ASCII version by email they can send the request to my wallace@eckerd.edu address, and if their system has a size limit for email I can send the book in segments, with the largest being 55KB for Chapter 3. Bryan cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenwallace cudfnBryan cudlnWallace cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszL cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Bryan Wallace / The Farce of Physics Originally-From: wallace@acasun.eckerd.edu (Bryan Wallace) Newsgroups: alt.philosophy.objectivism,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,sci. stro,sci.edu,sci.energy,sci.engr,sci.logic,sci.misc,sci.physics,sci.phys cs.electromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.particle,sci.research Subject: The Farce of Physics Date: 6 Mar 1995 10:25:08 -0500 Organization: Eckerd College, St. Petersburg, Florida My book "The Farce of Physics" explores and documents the fact that modern physics is little more than an elaborate farce. The book contains 156 references to the published literature with extensive quotations of arguments from many prominent people including Albert Einstein. It is meant for anyone who is interested in this subject, and I have attempted to reduce the technical jargon and mathematics to a minimum in order to reach the widest possible audience. The term physics was derived from the Greek word "physis" for nature, and the roots of physics lies in the first period of Greek philosophy in the sixth century B.C., where science, philosophy and religion were not separated. The aim of physics is to discover the essential nature of all things, and it lies at the base of all of natural science, religion, and technology. Richard Feynman was one of a relatively small number of modern physicists with the intelligence and courage to challenge the current sacred relativity doctrine that argues that empty space is an invisible solid with infinite mass and energy that can create the universe in a Big Bang. Feynman argued that Isaac Newton was right and that a photon of light is a particle composed of a drop of dynamic ether fluid moving through empty space at the speed of light. My 1969 paper showed that an analysis of the Venus radar data was consistent with the Newtonian particle model of light, and my computer simulation research of the dynamic ether showed the proper magnitudes for the gravitational, electromagnetic, and nuclear forces using simple reasonable algorithms, and it was also possible to make the heavier particles from positive and negative electrons, just as John Archibald Wheeler suspected. I expect that some time in the future, man will discover some cute technological trick that will upset the balance of the positrons and electrons and mass annihilation will be man's principle energy source, perhaps even leading to space travel at near light speeds. This book is now archived in many Internet libraries and can be found by using Gopher and World Wide Web and will be available from Project Gutenberg archives and on their CDROM's. The free standard 311KB ASCII version can be obtained by anonymous ftp from ftp.germany.eu.net in the directory /pub/books/wallace by using "get farce.txt". The file in the directory is in a compressed form and called farce.txt.gz but if you leave off the .gz the system will send you the uncompressed text. Unix computer systems have a command called "gunzip" that will uncompress the .gz format. The HTML/World-Wide Web Hypertext version of the book is available via URL:http://www.Germany.EU.net/books/farce/farce.html If one prefers to obtain a copy of the ASCII version by email they can send the request to my wallace@eckerd.edu address, and if their system has a size limit for email I can send the book in segments, with the largest being 55KB for Chapter 3. Discussion of the book can be found on the Thread "The Farce of Physics" in the newsgroup "sci.physics". Bryan cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenwallace cudfnBryan cudlnWallace cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Scott Little / Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little) Newsgroups: sci.engr.semiconductors,sci.fractals,sci.materials,sci.math, ci.med,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Date: 7 Mar 1995 06:08:16 GMT Organization: EarthTech Int'l >> ============================ >>The URL is: http://slsg1:8080/quest.html >> ============================ Yeah...Netscape sez "Unable to locate Host" when I try it. cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Harry Conover / Re: And finally... ball lightning and weirdness. Originally-From: conover@max.tiac.net (Harry H Conover) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: And finally... ball lightning and weirdness. Date: 6 Mar 1995 03:55:08 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company Savage Henry (daryl@weaver.dungeon.com) wrote: : Reports of spontaneous human combustion often evidence : an intense heat source with a restricted area of effect, sufficient : to incinerate bone while leaving nearby fabrics untouched. : Poltergeist reports often include evidence of unusual electromagnetic : phenomena. In Manchester a poltergeist has been blamed for a fire : in a pub, where one wall was left completely untouched (Manchester : Evening News, 2.4.1994.). The haunting included another localised : fire, noises and misbehaving electrical equipment. Alas, you are a victim of the media babble! Consider spending more time absorbing the basics of man's scientific knowledge, and less on populous pulp! Harry C. cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenconover cudfnHarry cudlnConover cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Scott Little / Re: Signature of Stored Energy Originally-From: little@eden.com (Scott Little) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Signature of Stored Energy Date: 6 Mar 1995 14:30:25 GMT Organization: EarthTech Int'l Barry Merriman wrote: >Not ok---you are still being far too indirect for my taste. You are >defining a long run to be ~ 2 hours. What is long is not something to >be pulled from a hat---you need to estimate the stored heat in the >rotor and the housing, OK: dia=12in, thickness=6 in, mat'l=Al. this yields 2.8x10^4 joules/°C for the heat capacity of the rotor (neglecting the holes in it). If your hypothesis were correct, the thing would have to heat up to, say, 100°C at first, undergo the viscosity reduction, and then put out heated water at, say 75°C, for a while with the 100°C rotor supplying some of the energy...so you might have a working delta-T of 25°C... The energy available then is 7.0*10^5 joules, which at the reported 15% over-unity with a 50hp input would last 2.1 minutes. >and define long to be a run that shows ecesses >several times beyond the stored heat. OK, 1 hour. > >But in any case, I don't think going for the "long run" is the right >approach anyway. Instead, just do the same old 0.5--1 hour runs, >but monitor electric power in and heated steam/fluid out from the >start (room temp) to finish (room temp), so there is no issue >of stored heat. Great idea..I just think it would be relatively difficult to implement, hence my lazy suggestion. If it is pretty easy to do it your way, I second the motion as it is clearly the "correct" way to make an energy-balance measurement. In fact, I designed and built a calorimeter for measureing the heat output of electrically driven devices that works in exactly that way. cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenlittle cudfnScott cudlnLittle cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Harry Conover / cmsg cancel <3je12s$hvh@sundog.tiac.net> Originally-From: conover@max.tiac.net (Harry H Conover) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: cmsg cancel <3je12s$hvh@sundog.tiac.net> Date: 6 Mar 1995 15:03:16 GMT Organization: The Internet Access Company Article cancelled from within tin [v1.2 PL2] cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenconover cudfnHarry cudlnConover cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Lance Purple / Re: And finally... ball lightning and weirdness. Originally-From: lpurple@netcom.com (Lance Purple) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: And finally... ball lightning and weirdness. Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 15:16:01 GMT Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) >Savage Henry (daryl@weaver.dungeon.com) wrote: > [ descriptions of spontaneous human combustion, "poltergeist" fires, etc ] Harry H Conover wrote: >Alas, you are a victim of the media babble! Consider spending more time >absorbing the basics of man's scientific knowledge, and less on populous pulp! Savage Henry had posted an article in alt.forteana.whatever, asking for SCIENTIFIC studies of ball lightning, to explore as a possible explanation of "populous pulp" phenomenon like spontaneous human combustion, pyrokinesis, etc. I recommended he search this newsgroup, since Paul Koloc frequently posts here about his PLASMAK(tm) theory of ball lightning. Besides, what about the "media babble" over cold fusion, fracto-fusion, aluminum-rotors-and-steam fusion, etc. Almost all of the media coverage I have seen to date (and even a few articles from this newsgroup) have been COMPLETE pulp. Aren't you used to it by now... :) L. Purple (lpurple@netcom.com) cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenlpurple cudfnLance cudlnPurple cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Doug Shade / RE: Sonoluminescence and Fusion Originally-From: rxjf20@email.sps.mot.com (Doug Shade) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: RE: Sonoluminescence and Fusion Date: 6 Mar 1995 15:49:35 GMT Organization: Motorola LICD In article <1995Mar2.133216.2080@vanlab.byu.edu> jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu writes: > Our work continues on searching for > neutron emissions associated with bubble cavitation... Thanks for the update, but just telling us what you haven't seen is a bit of a tease... have you seen *anything* interesting? Was is it difficult to get SBSL using D2 (as compared to air)? Are you monitoring other parts of the spectrum? Thanks again... I'm sure many of us have been waiting anxiously for news from Provo. Doug Shade rxjf20@email.sps.mot.com cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenrxjf20 cudfnDoug cudlnShade cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / lauper@lgmhp1. / ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Originally-From: lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch () Newsgroups: sci.engr.semiconductors,sci.fractals,sci.materials,sci.math, ci.med,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Date: 6 Mar 1995 16:10:58 GMT Organization: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne Two students of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology of Lausanne have written a small questionary about internet. Its purpose is to better know internet's users. Your answers will be used to make some statistical analyses. We guarantee the privacy of your answers. You can access it with your habitual client (Mosaic, Netscape, ...) and we would really appreciate if you take the time to fill it. ============================ The URL is: http://slsg1:8080/quest.html ============================ Thanks. Fabrice Lauper Pierre Fridez lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenlauper cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Tom Droege / Last Chance for Griggs Questions Originally-From: Droege@fnal.fnal.gov (Tom Droege) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Last Chance for Griggs Questions Date: 6 Mar 1995 16:42:34 GMT Organization: fermilab Last chance to send me things to look for during the Griggs visit. I do not intend to make measurements. But I will look carefully and ask Griggs questions. I do have a big file already. But a reminder might cause me to bring up something I would overlook. I will be here until about 6 PM central time 6 March. Tom Droege cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenDroege cudfnTom cudlnDroege cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.03 / jonesse@vanlab / Re: Solar -VS- Fusion Originally-From: jonesse@vanlab.byu.edu Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Solar -VS- Fusion Date: 3 Mar 95 13:23:33 -0700 Organization: Brigham Young University I just received private e-mail berating me for suggesting that biomass could serve as an alternative for power production -- since plants have "incredible inefficiency" (he said) for capturing solar energy. This objection is ill-founded. In fact, "some algae can convert nearly 10% of available light energy to biomass. Sugar cane is about 2% efficient, and corn about 1% efficient." Source: Gordon J. Aubrecht II, _Energy_, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995, p. 487. --Steve Jones cudkeys: cuddy3 cudenjonesse cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / MARSHALL DUDLEY / Griggs literature and Confidentiality Agreement Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Griggs literature and Confidentiality Agreement Date: Mon, 06 Mar 1995 14:08 -0500 (EST) I just received the packet Griggs promised me. Enclosed in it was a marketing package on the company and the Griggs Pump, a Confidentiality Agreement, and a paper titled "A Brief Introduction to the Hydrosonic Pump and The associated "Excess Energy" Phenomenon. The Confidentality agreement reads as follows: First there are several Whereas paragraphs, typical of a document drawn up by an attorney. Then it gets to the meat of the agreement. 1. The Undersigned agrees to hold all disclosed information as confidential or proprietary or trade secrets in trust and confidence and agrees that it shall be used only for the contemplated purpose, and shall not be used for any other purpose nor disclosed to any third party without the written consent of the Company. 2. No copies or abstracts will be made or retained of any written information supplied. Upon demand by the Company, all information, including written notes, photographs, video tapes, or memoranda shall be returned to the Company. 3. The disclosed information shall not be disclosed to any employee, consultant or third party unless said party agrees to execute and be bound by this agreement. 4. The Undersigned acknowledges the information disclosed herein constitutes proprietory and trade secrets and in the event of unlawful use or wrongful disclosure, the Company shall be entitled to injunctive relief as a cumulative and not necessarily successive remedy without the need to post bond. The Company may also seek any and all remedies available to it at law. 5. This agreement shall be binding upon and insure to the benefit of the parties, their successors, assigns and personal representatives. SPECIAL PROVISIONS: ______________________________________________ {About 2 inches of blank area for filling in.} ______________________________________________ Under special provisions, I would add that any and all information already in the public domain would not be restrained by this agreement. I am not happy with this agreement. If fact I don't think I can do what I was wanting to do under it. If I am going to report on what I find, I cannot give up my notes, data, pictures and so forth. I will have to contact Griggs and determine if we can delete some sections of this agreement or at least come to some type of Gentleman's agreement. __________________________________________________________________________ Previously several people have asked exactly what Griggs claims. The paper he sent me was authored by him, and when I had asked him verbally what his views were on possible over unity opertaion, he referred me to this paper. I can find no copyright notice on this paper, so I feel free to spread this information. The following are quotes from this paper: "ENERGY PHENOMENON" Testing completed to date by both the Company and independent agencies indicates that the Hydrosonic Pump has a significant energy efficiency advantage over conventional boiler(s) or hear transfer processes. Numerous tests conducted by the Company as well as independent third parties contiune to reveal an as yet unexplained phenonmenon occurring within the patented process relating to energy input and output. Shortly after the Hydrosonic Pump is operational, the "measurable energy" required to operate the Hydrosonic Pump is less than the measured energy output of the pump. Present during such tests have been representatives from large utility compaines as well as independent engineers and consultants. The initial reaction from the "experts" when reviewing these results is almost always the same--impossible! On the surface, these results would seem to violate the second law of thermodynamics; however, the Company believes that because of ultrasonic fields and other unknown forces possibly affecting fluids flowing throught he Hydrosonic Pump, it is possible that an energy source is being tapped that has to date not been identified. We at Hydro Dynamics believe that further testing will prove that such an aditional source does exist and, most importantly, will identify the source. {The paper ends with the following paragraph}: Hydro Dynamics Inc. as as company and I myself personally invite any input in the form of recommendation, possible explainations, and criticism as to our process or testing techniques. We realize that we do not have the final answer, but the question remains open, what is the source of the "excess"? We invite anyone to our facility at anytime for a demonstration, or an attempt to prove us wrong. cudkeys: cuddy06 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.06 / Alan M / Re: Solar -VS- Fusion Originally-From: Alan@moonrake.demon.co.uk ("Alan M. Dunsmuir") Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Solar -VS- Fusion Date: Mon, 6 Mar 1995 10:27:30 +0000 Organization: Home In article: <1995Mar4.154832.421@Princeton.EDU> Robert F. Heeter writes: > Fusion researchers have made better progress in advancing the key > parameter (fusion power output from the reactor, or even the ratio > of fusion power out to heating power in) than the semiconductor > industry has in advancing, say, the number of bytes of RAM that > can be stored on a single chip. (Fusion power production has > increased by roughly 8 orders of magnitude in the last 25 years. > Chips have increased by maybe 6 orders of magnitude.) > A slight difference, of course, is that chips have been profitable from the start, and have been entirely self-financing over that quarter century. Why do you think the same has not been true of fusion research? -- Alan M. Dunsmuir [@ his wits end] (Can't even quote poetry right) I am his Highness' dog at Kew Pray tell me sir, whose dog are you? [Alexander Pope] PGP Public Key available on request. cudkeys: cuddy6 cudenAlan cudfnAlan cudlnM cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Hans Vreught / Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Originally-From: hdev@cp.tn.tudelft.nl (Hans de Vreught) Newsgroups: sci.engr.semiconductors,sci.fractals,sci.materials,sci.math, ci.med,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 08:44:16 GMT Organization: Delft University of Technology (TN FI-CP) HJSmith@ix.netcom.com (Harry J. Smith) writes: >In <3jfc6i$939@info.epfl.ch> lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch () writes: >>The URL is: http://slsg1:8080/quest.html >I got "Host slsg1 Not found: Not an Internet host (11001)." They forgot to append .epfl.ch to the name of the machine. The URL is: * http://slsg1.epfl.ch:8080/quest.html -- Hans de Vreught | John von Neumann: J.P.M.deVreught@CP.TN.TUDelft.NL | Young man, in mathematics Delft University of Technology | you don't understand things, The Netherlands | you just get used to them. cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenhdev cudfnHans cudlnVreught cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Paul Koloc / Re: PLASMAKtm Refs for Heeter & Def of Aneutronic Originally-From: pmk@prometheus.UUCP (Paul M. Koloc) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: PLASMAKtm Refs for Heeter & Def of Aneutronic Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 09:29:50 GMT Organization: Prometheus II, Ltd. 1st Section -- Refs 2nd Section -- Aneutronic Interact --1 > >From rfheeter@princeton.edu Sun Mar 5 21:08:50 EST 1995 > > Paul - I was looking for information on the Plasmak concept, > so that I could add some references to the FAQ section on it. > > However, a search through both the online catalog and the > card catalog here at PPPL failed to turn up a single entry > with your name on it. Do you have any publications on the > Plasmak? If so, could you give me the references? > > Thanks, and sorry to bother. Gee, I've been PURGED !!! Ahhhhggggg! blip @ Actually Robert, I don't publish as a rule; rare exceptions exist. Koloc, P. M. "Fusion Implications of Free-Floating PLASMAK(TM) Magnetoplasmoids" Proceedings of The First International Symposium on Evaluation of Current Trends in Fusion Research", Oct 10-15, 1994 to be published FUSION TECHNOLOGY Koloc, P. M. "PLASMAK(tm) Star Power for Energy Intensive Space Applications" FUSION TECHNOLOGY Vol. 15, Mar 89, pp 1136-1141 P. Koloc, "The PLASMAK(tm) Configuration and Ball Lightning," presented at the First International Symposium on Ball Lightning, Tokyo, Japan, July 1988. Published in Y. H. Ohtsuki (ed.), Science of Ball Lightning (Fire Ball). Teaneck, NJ: World Scientific Press, 1989. P.M. Koloc and J. Ogden, "The All Plasma Spheromak: The PLASMAK," Proc. U .S.- Japan Joint Sym. on Compact Toruses and Energetic Particle Injection, Princeton Univ., 216, Dec. 1979 (No Relativistic Corrections). P.M. Koloc and J. Ogden, "The PLASMAKtm: Its Unique Structure, the Mantle," Proc. Third Symposium on the Physics and Technology of Compact Toroids, LASL, LA-8700-C, 204, Dec. 1980. P.M. Koloc, "Plasmak Formation," Proc. of the U.S.-Japan Jt. Symposium on Compact Toroid Research, PPPL, 20-23 February 1984. P.M. Koloc, U.S. Patents 1977 to 199? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Also the following include references to or acknowledgement of Koloc or PLASMAK(tm) config. Other junk cited as purely Ball Lightning excluded. M. Bussac, H. Furth, et al., "Low-Aspect Ratio Limit of the Toroidal Reactor: The Spheromak," IAEA CN-37, Innsbruck, 1978. H. Furth, The Compact Torus, Jrnl Vac Sci and Technology 18, 1073, 1981. M. Rosenbluth and M. Bussac, " MHD Stability of Spheromak," Nuclear Fusion 19, 489, 1979. R. Roth, "Ball Lightning as a Route to Fusion Energy" Proceedings of the IEEE, THE 13TH SYMPOSIUM ON FUSION ENGINEERING, Knoxville (Oct. 2-6, 1989), Cat. No. 89 CH 2820-9 Vol 2, pages 1407-1411 --2 In article <1995Feb25.035404.10771@Princeton.EDU> Robert F. Heeter writes: >In article Paul M. Koloc, >pmk@prometheus.UUCP writes: >> Fusion is radioactive. >Not necessarily, as you yourself essentially point out below: >> Aneutronic energy is a different reaction than either fusion or fission >> since unlike the other two it generates no neutrons. However, some >> aneutronically burning fuel mixtures will have side reactions of one >> fuel species with itself and that may produce a few neutrons. For >example, >> D-^3He with the 2-5% side reaction of D-D. p-^11B, however, is clean. >> So fusion is dirty, Aneutronic energy is clean or essentially clean. >Earth to Planet Paul: What sort of reactions occur in your "aneutronic >energy"? Let me answer for you, to save time, since there is only >one correct answer: fusion reactions. Wrong! it is a fission reaction just as well as a fusion reaction, if you insist on being "Reality Correct". It is just that the fusion reaction comes first. Then it fissions into multi-nuclei with no neutrons, (unlike heavy isotope fission). Hydrogen isotope fusion reactions do NOT split into multi-nuclei. Apparently, the CF folks can fuse d-d WITHOUT fission or particles. Well, Robert, there is your chance to give a unique nuclear reaction a distinctive name. What would you call it? .. . Magic?? Why not! Ah darn there I go again. So at the light end we have fusion; a bit heavier -- aneutronic reactions; and at the heavy end -- fission. The latter heavy splitting is absolutely forbidden by the higher authority. >That's right, p + B11 is a fusion >reaction. Yes, to the indiscriminating. But I accept your usage, as long as you realize it was historically applied in the more general sense. This was likely due to the fact that fusion measurements and estimates began with the simpler element, H and its isotopes. >So is D+3He (which is not really "aneutronic", just reduced in >neutrons relative to D-T). This idea that you can invent some entirely >new thing called "aneutronic energy" which is independent of either >fusion or fission just doesn't make physical or semantic sense. I didn't say it was independent.. in fact it's a combination! Of course, it does make sense. They are defineably different categories. As it is, I didn't invent aneutronic reactions, I didn't even name it, I'm just describing what already exists and was named by another (Maglich?? or Miley?? or Dawson??). The fact that I just happen to see discriminating features or details that haven't been called to YOUR attention before, doesn't mean I invented them. They are plainly obvious to you, notwithstanding, your dogmatic interpretations and accompanying denials that anything else can be added to our vocabulary (pppl's that is) or that anything new can be discovered. For example: "Plasmas can confine magnetic fields". I've more junk than that. But it's good junk, because it Works and gives me the freedom to make something (even just to think of something) that is far more elegant than that ugly monster duck you affectionately refer to as tokamak. Hell has to be - being the tokamak engineer responsible for satisfying Physicists wishes for a commercial burn operation. >Anyone interested in understanding the distinction Paul is trying >to draw between the D-T fusion reaction and D-3He, p-B11, etc, >is encouraged to consult Section 1 of the FAQ. Why?? technically speaking it's wrong! :-) Your FAQ has quite a PPPL slant. I noticed the Spheromak definition was that of the idealized Spheromak, and didn't include the implications suggested by the following corrective paper from the *Institute for Advanced Study* and *Ecole' Polytechnique*. Your interpretations of a Spheromak having vertical field coils was a difficulty that HP Furth had with leaving the tokamak configuration completely behind. Thus, the S-1 was a kind of half breed tokamak- Spheromak on its side. BTW please take both papers, but remember the second supercedes the first on variances and together they render the better and more accurate picture of a Spheromak. They are listed above in my "cited Plasmak/Koloc" list of papers. > This can be obtained >via email, ftp, or WWW; see the Intro posting (Section 0 Part 1) >for more details. The principal problem is that the D-3He and >p-11B fuels require *much* *much* more stringent plasma >conditions - higher temperatures and better confinement. Give me a break. DT requires the far more stringent conditions due to it's radioactivity. The plasma conditions for burning D^3He make it ideal as a first demonstration commercial burn. Of course, your right, it does depend on within what compressor you are stuck to burn the fuel. A tokamak (an INVERSE compressor) will never get close to a Commercial burn. Now there I go thinking of PLASMAK burners. I forgot for a moment that we are still playing fusion with that white elephant, the tokamak. But you didn't forget, Did you? >It would be nice someday to be able to burn these fuels, but I don't >think we can become Olympic sprinters without learning to walk >first. Yawn! If you don't you will be eaten alive by fast congress persons. How long does it take freshly born hooved animals of the Khalaihari to begin running. 2hrs ??? For a tokamak maybe two to four yrs max, and operation within 10. Better sprint or quit, else you are to be eaten. The D-T campaigns on JET and TFTR have shown that fusion >can crawl, and hopefully it will be able to walk soon, but barring >a few incredible developments (which should be sought for by >more reliable funding of advanced-concepts research), Olympic >sprinting is still in the distant future. Want to bet? I think I have found some one to crush our balls. Campaigns ... another word borrowed from politics. More reliable?? How about at this late date, we just forget about all fusion funding, since the workable ideas will find the modest support they need in the private sector. So Robert, they are still funding tokamaks at the .5 billion level?? + -?? Keep me posted. GO! Get 'em Dana R. >*************************** >Robert F. Heeter, rfheeter@princeton.edu >Graduate Student in Plasma Physics, Princeton University >As always, I represent only myself, and not Princeton! +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Paul M. Koloc, Bx 1037 Prometheus II Ltd, College Park MD 20741-1037 | | mimsy!promethe!pmk; pmk%prometheus@mimsy.umd.edu FAX (301) 434-6737 | | VOICE (301) 445-1075 ***** Commercial FUSION in the Nineties ***** | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenpmk cudfnPaul cudlnKoloc cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszL cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Tom Droege / Re: Griggs literature and Confidentiality Agreement Originally-From: Droege@fnal.fnal.gov (Tom Droege) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Griggs literature and Confidentiality Agreement Date: 7 Mar 1995 01:29:02 GMT Organization: fermilab In article , mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY) says: > >I just received the packet Griggs promised me. Enclosed in it was a marketing >package on the company and the Griggs Pump, a Confidentiality Agreement, and a >paper titled "A Brief Introduction to the Hydrosonic Pump and The associated >"Excess Energy" Phenomenon. We shall see how much I can cross out when I get there. Remember the rules that I have set up. He has to sell me on doing the experiment for a "positive" result. So I can make my "report" without writing anything. But I hope to be able to give you all a good description of what is going on. Tom Droege cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenDroege cudfnTom cudlnDroege cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Gavin Burnell / Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Originally-From: gb119@cus.cam.ac.uk (Gavin Burnell) Newsgroups: sci.engr.semiconductors,sci.fractals,sci.materials,sci.math, ci.med,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Date: 7 Mar 1995 11:01:19 GMT Organization: University of Cambridge, England Harry J. Smith wrote: > In <3jfc6i$939@info.epfl.ch> lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch () writes: [most of original post deleted] > > ============================ > >The URL is: http://slsg1:8080/quest.html > > ============================ > I got "Host slsg1 Not found: Not an Internet host (11001)." [sigs gone] It seems they forgot to add the .epfl.ch onto the end of slsg1 - correct URL is http://slsg1.epfl.ch:8080/quest.html -- ********************************************************************* Gavin Burnell * King's College Dept of Materials Science and Metallurgy * Cambridge University of Cambridge * UK cudkeys: cuddy7 cudengb119 cudfnGavin cudlnBurnell cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1995 ------------------------------ 1995.03.07 / Harry Smith / Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Originally-From: HJSmith@ix.netcom.com (Harry J. Smith) Newsgroups: sci.engr.semiconductors,sci.fractals,sci.materials,sci.math, ci.med,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: ***** Small questionary about internet ***** Date: 7 Mar 1995 00:28:41 GMT Organization: Netcom In <3jfc6i$939@info.epfl.ch> lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch () writes: > >Two students of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology of Lausanne have written >a small questionary about internet. Its purpose is to better know internet's >users. Your answers will be used to make some statistical analyses. We guarantee >the privacy of your answers. >You can access it with your habitual client (Mosaic, Netscape, ...) and we would >really appreciate if you take the time to fill it. > > > > ============================ >The URL is: http://slsg1:8080/quest.html > ============================ > >Thanks. > > Fabrice Lauper > Pierre Fridez > > lauper@lgmhp1.epfl.ch > I got "Host slsg1 Not found: Not an Internet host (11001)." -- | Harry J. Smith | 19628 Via Monte Dr., Saratoga, CA 95070-4522, USA | Home Phone: 408 741-0406, Work Phone: 408 235-5088 (Voice Mail) | EMail: HJSmith@ix.netcom.com on the Internet via Netcom NetCruiser -- cudkeys: cuddy7 cudenHJSmith cudfnHarry cudlnSmith cudmo3 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1995 ------------------------------ processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Wed Mar 8 04:37:06 EST 1995 ------------------------------