1996.02.21 / Larry Wharton / The end of the CETI saga draws near Originally-From: Larry Wharton Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: The end of the CETI saga draws near Date: 21 Feb 1996 15:29:55 GMT Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA It looks like the end of the great CETI free energy drama is close at hand. By simple high school physics I have concluded that if the heat power output of the Patterson cell exceeds the total input power, then the output heat must have some negative potential energy embedded in it such that the total power output equals the total power input. My candidate for this negative potential energy is salt crystals. This is very simple to test. One has only to divert the output flow into a container, seal it, shake it up a bit so that salt crystals disolve, and then measure the temperature. The excess delta T should then vanish. This is most likely exactly what would happen if this test were done. An indication of the result of such a test was obtained at the PowerGen 95 demo but was not disclosed untill it came out in response to my theory. Lets look at the following message from Jed Rothwell: "Larry Wharton writes: "Recall that Frank Znidarsic did this test in a sense. He took his graduated flask and diverted the PowerGen 95 demo cell outflow into it. He was checking the flow rate but also noticed that the delta T went from 15 C to about 5 C. This factor of 3 decrease seems much higher than could be explained by the absorption of heat in the flask surface." It is not higher than can be explained this mechanism. This can be shown in several ways: 1. I, and others, tested the cell water temperature a dozen times using other containers, and we saw no similar temperature drop. These other containers were made of lighter material. We used at least two other containers. This evidence cannot be dismissed. 2. Frank's flask remained quite warm for a while even after we dumped out the warm water whereas the other containers cooled down rapidly. 3. Frank's flask was a precision graduated cylinder, meaning it was a tall, thin container with the ml markings farther apart. So it has more surface area compared to volume, so it absorbs more heat. 4. I tested a similar heavy plastic cup back here in Atlanta and found a similar large temperature drop compared to a light cup, and similar retention of heat after dumping out the warm water. Try it!" So the CETI aficionados saw that Frank Znidarsic did his test and the delta T dropped too much. Then they did a dozen tests in an attempt to obtain a lower temperature drop and convinced themselves that the temperature drop was due to heat absorption in the surface of the graduated clyinder. All this then remained unreported untill now. I have never seen a graduated cylinder which such a large mass that its specific heat would overwhelm the specific heat of water contained in it. That must be quite a cylinder. The most likely explanation here is that Frank has uncovered evidence that the heat output of the Patterson cell is, in fact, fool's heat. The total energy output is about the same as the energy input and one has only to do a little shaking of a sample of the outflow water to make the heat vanish. Frank's cylinder provided enough turblance and shears at the cylinder surface to get most of the way there - a factor of three reduction is a lot, 66% of the apparent heat excess went away. The fact that the TB's followed on with larger volume to surface ratio containers proves nothing. The flow into these containers would have been with much less mixing, turbulance and shear stresses. The output water must be placed in a closed container and it must be shaken like a mixed drink is shaken in a tumbler with ice to cool it. Anyone tried to disslove salt crystals in water by gently pouring in water on them? It dosent't work too well. You have to mix them in. It really looks like the CETI free energy saga is drawing to a close now. The thermos jug test is just too simple to do. You take a thermos jug, fill it up with CETI heated water, shake it up a bit, measure the temperature and find out that the apparent heat was really fool's heat. Frank Znidarsic took us most of the way there. Someone will do the whole thing and we will hear about it sometime. And that will be the end of the CETI saga. Lawrence E. Wharton wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov NASA/GSFC code 913, Greenbelt MD 20771 work (301) 286-3486, home (301) 595-5038 cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenWharton cudfnLarry cudlnWharton cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Larry Wharton / Re: What's the secret? Originally-From: Larry Wharton Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: What's the secret? Date: 21 Feb 1996 15:58:34 GMT Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA John, I can guess what Steve Jones is up to. He plans to rig up a controll cell that produces no energy but instead pumps heat into the water from a phase change or chemical reaction. Then the output would contain heat plus some negative energy salt crystal or chemical. You heard that idea first from me not Steve Jones. I guess this will be another one of thoes cases where someone comes up with an idea, announces it, and then it turns out that Steve Jones claimes he has thought of it first but did not announce it. Lawrence E. Wharton wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov NASA/GSFC code 913, Greenbelt MD 20771 work (301) 286-3486, home (301) 595-5038 cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenWharton cudfnLarry cudlnWharton cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / rsimmans / Announce: New Electrical Web site Originally-From: rsimmans@pavilion.co.uk (rsimmans) Newsgroups: sci.engr.lighting,sci.energy,sci.physics.fusion,misc.industr .utilities.electric,alt.energy.renewable,sci.chem.electrochem,alt.engine ring.electrical,comp.home.automation,sci.energy.hydrogen,sci.physics.ele tromag Subject: Announce: New Electrical Web site Date: 21 Feb 1996 19:27:56 GMT Organization: None Electrical Review is now on the Web Electrical Review, the UK's leading electrical engineering magazine, now has its own Web site. The magazine, published every two weeks, covers technical and commercial aspects of electricity production and use. Its coverage ranges from power generation and distribution to end uses of electricity such as lighting and heating. It also deals with topics such as industrial and building automation. The Web site contains news items, technology reports, feature articles and job advertisements from the two most recent issues. It also has links to more than 100 sites of interest to electrical engineers. You can find us at: http://www.reedbusiness.com/electricalreview Any comments or on the site, or suggestions for improvements, would be welcomed. Richard Simmonds Features Editor, Electrical Review cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenrsimmans cudlnrsimmans cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.19 / DavesRadio / Re: Plans to test/Hydrogen onlycell... Originally-From: davesradio@aol.com (DavesRadio) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Plans to test/Hydrogen onlycell... Date: 19 Feb 1996 23:25:03 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) A hydrogen only cell WOULD work, if the VOLTAGE was high enough to ionize the gaseouos hydrogen (5kV+/-). I have plans to test such a cell in the future, hoping that I don't cause a major explosion in my cellar! Dave Copeland davesradio@aol.com cudkeys: cuddy19 cudendavesradio cudlnDavesRadio cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Anonymous / Just a Question Originally-From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Just a Question Date: 21 Feb 1996 02:54:53 +0100 Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited Well have people like Dr. Miles checked out the Patterson Cell or what. cudkeys: cuddy21 cudennobody cudlnAnonymous cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Larry Wharton / Re: Fool's heat for CF output Originally-From: Larry Wharton Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Fool's heat for CF output Date: 21 Feb 1996 20:50:10 GMT Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA I guess you don't know anything about thermodynamics. You seem not to be able to grasp the concept of a heat pump which would pump heat associated with the heat of fusion of salt crystals from the crystals to the salt solution. Other people with little more than a high school education seem to be able to understand it. My education is a Phd in statistical physics. Your foolish blather does give me an idea though. Here at NASA we are encouraged to interact with the educational system and I thought that I might give a lecture at a local high school physics class ( I assume that your competancy in physics is somewhere at the high school level) about the CETI results. It would be indeed a challange to see if one could make a high school class understand the basic concepts involved. I think it could be done. I would start the lecture with a flask of water at room temperature and then mix some ammonia nitriate with it and show how it gets quite cold. That would be an example of the first law of thermodynamics. Some heat in the flask is combined with the negative potential energy of the salt crystals to give a solution with higher potential energy and lower heat such that the total energy is conserved. The same experiment would work with hot water mixed with salt crystals. As the crystals dissolved the heat would be reduced. This is a so called irreversable reaction and cannot be reversed unless ordered energy, such as electrical energy is input. If we do chose to reverse this reaction heat may be pumped into the water from formed crystals with an efficiency limit determined by the Carnot cycle limit. The Carnot cycle efficiency is just a mathematical expression of the second law of thermodynamics. So then the basic ingredients of a CETI machine are in place. Salt water is input into a machine, electrical energy is input and used to force the reversal of some of the absorbed salt. The solution heats up much more than the amount of electrical energy input with the limit of the heating given by the Carnot cycle limit. The hot water comes out of the device and as the salt crystals dissolve the solution cools off untill it is ready to be input once again to the machine. If there are any parts of this concept that you don't understand I would appreciate hearing from you. This may be useful in developing an approach to reach some of the slower members in the class should I go ahead with my lecture. Lawrence E. Wharton wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov NASA/GSFC code 913, Greenbelt MD 20771 work (301) 286-3486, home (301) 595-5038 cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenWharton cudfnLarry cudlnWharton cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.20 / Seth W / Re: Plans to test the Patterson cell Originally-From: sethw@access5.digex.net (Seth W.) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Plans to test the Patterson cell Date: 20 Feb 1996 08:03:18 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA MARSHALL DUDLEY (mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com) wrote: : sethw@access5.digex.net (Seth W.) writes: : : -> I do have a few questions that have been swimming around in my head the : -> past few days. One question I have concerns the hydrogen within the : -> metal lattice--are the protons as free to move around within the lattice : -> as I've read the electrons are? Another question is whether or not there Do you know if either of these things is true? Are the electrons, or the protons, or both, free to move around within the lattice? : When you use electrolysis, an electric field at the cathode's surface causes : the hydrogen to be pulled inside the metal. I forget what the conversion is, I don't understand why this should be the case, but I'll work with it. You have provided me, at least, with an answer to that question. Thanks. : However, if you use a thin layer on a bead you get around these problems. : of bulk material. I believe all of these factors play together to enhance the : P&F effect, and avoid the pitfalls. Have experiments using "thin layers" been done in the past? Do you believe a plate with thin layers of nickel and palladium deposited onto it would be just as effective as the beads? sethw@access.digex.net cudkeys: cuddy20 cudensethw cudfnSeth cudlnW cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / edwardsg@cc5.c / RE: Radiation Detecting Wristwatch Originally-From: edwardsg@cc5.crl.aecl.ca Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.environment,sci.engr.biomed,sci.engr.safety,s i.med.dentistry,sci.med.deseases.cancer,sci.med.immunology,sci.med.occup tional,sci.med.,radiology,sci.physics.accelerators,sci.physics.fusion,sc .physics.particle,sci.space.pocicy,s Subject: RE: Radiation Detecting Wristwatch Date: Wed, 21 Feb 1996 19:12:59 GMT Organization: AECL Research agmiller@ee.cuhk.hk (Miller_Alan_George) wrote: >Anthony Potts (potts@afsmail.cern.ch) wrote: > > >: On Thu, 8 Feb 1996, ppm wrote: > >: > Introduction of the first wristwatch that measures, detects, and counts >: > radioactive radiation and x-rays. Instant Alarm when treshold surpassed; >: > Dose Rate in mrem/h and cumulative Dose in mrem recorded over last 12 >: > months. For details: >: > >: > http://gn2.getnet.com/~ppm/ >: > >: > Scientific feed-back appreciated. >: > >: > >: I can give you some feed-back. > >: This product is absolutely worthless. If you are working in an >: environment with sources of ionising radiation ,then you will be given a >: dose meter (usually a film badge) to wear. If you are not working in such >: an environment then you do not need something to measure the dose that yo >: are getting. > >I would totally agree that this is a worthless item since what is >important is radiation dose to the thorax (mediastinum is more sensitive >than your wrist to exposure). >Film badges are worn on the thorax for this reason and all dosage >calculations assume dose to thorax or body trunk. You can not colate >exposure readings from the wrist with actual dosage to whole body or >thorax. >I doubt that many medical physicists or any government agency would >accept this item since it does not actually do what they want. They want >to know exposure to radiation on trunk (thorax) not the wrist... This seems pretty silly to me. If you are handling radioactive material then, sure, you will get a much larger dose to your hands than to your trunk. (And people who do so *do* wear the equivalent of film badges on their hands, because knowledge of the dose to your extremeties is *not* worthless information). If you are simply moving around in an environment filled with ionizing radiation, then it hardly matters where the film badge is placed on your body as long as it isn't shielded. As to whether the general public needs film badges -- probably not. Only because they're overkill, though, not because they're worthless. Remember that news story last year about the Russian bureaucrat who was killed over the course of several weeks by a powerful Co-60 source placed in the back of his chair at work? A film badge could have saved him. GeoffE cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenedwardsg cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / John Logajan / Re: Patterson beads as heat source Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Patterson beads as heat source Date: 22 Feb 1996 02:43:06 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. Richard A Blue (blue@pilot.msu.edu) wrote: : The obvious question then is whether they could be transfering : a kilowatt to the electrolyte without getting hot enough to : be damaged. : John assumes that the heat transfer from bead to water presents : no problems. My experience makes me just a little skeptical about : that. It's true I am using intuition. But recall that the metalic coating is on the order of (allegedly) 6 microns thick on a millimeter diameter plastic. That's very thin. Except at the contact points, the water surrounding the immediate vicinity of the beads has a huge thermal mass in comparison to the metal coating. And that huge comparable thermal mass is flowing by. : Suppose the beads are coated with bubbles as a result of the electrolysis. : Now how good is the heat transfer from bead to water? Is anyone : up to doing a back-of-the envelope estimate to see if we are in : the ball park or off the wall on this question? Of course some : real data would hurt. I think you could get hot spots when bubbles stick (as they are apt to.) So points of damage could occur (don't know if they do, don't even know if anything is generating heat. :-) -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / John Logajan / Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Date: 22 Feb 1996 02:48:13 GMT Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc. Bob Sullivan (bsulliva@sky.net) wrote: : ->: ->Clearly you had implied that they *had* investigated experimentally and : ->: ->the experiments failed. : -> : ->: No, John, you inferred that. : -> : ->Okay, I think that settles the issue. There are no known groups that : ->have investigated experimentaly the CETI device and rejected it. : inference (many and experimentally) that was not implied in the original : statement, you now make the unjustified leap to 'no one who investigated : experimentally rejected the CETI cell.' Well, I am less interested in the original statement you made than in the interpretation I came away with. By a series of questions I was able to come to the final interpretation, which I believe has not been demonstrably refuted. And that is: We don't know of any groups that have run experiments on the CETI cell and thereby have rejected it. That is a true statement whether you said it, intended to say it, didn't intend to say it, or whether you even exist or not. So don't take it personally. -- - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com -- 612-633-0345 - - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA - - WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan - cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / mitchell swartz / Re: Ice maker CF experiment Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Ice maker CF experiment Subject: Re: Ice maker CF experiment Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 02:48:26 GMT Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA In article <4fstvf$2hc@post.gsfc.nasa.gov>, Subject: Re: Ice maker CF experiment Larry Wharton wrote: >I propose to do an experiment to see if an ice maker can produce excess >heat by CF or zpe or whatever. I propose to obtain an ice maker that >will continiously produce and eject ice. I will put this ice maker in a >vat of water with a flow of water that would carry away the ice. The >outflow water would be heated up by the electrical power input to the >ice maker plus the latent heat of fusion of the water crystals. ... >Lawrence E. Wharton wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov >NASA/GSFC code 913, Greenbelt MD 20771 >work (301) 286-3486, home (301) 595-5038 IMHO you occasionly get a sign wrong here in your fervor. Water crystals require heat to melt. It has to do with supplying energy to break the hydrogen bonds. They cost ~4.5 kilocalories per mole. To melt the ice uses up the energy to break a small fraction of those hydrogen bonds. Uses up -- as in -- removes. The heat replaces that which was removed in your gendanken ice maker. Therefore, how about: "Therefore the outflow water would be heated up by the electrical power input to the ice maker minus the latent heat of fusion of the water crystals." Also, what do you do at NASA? why be so motivated to divert NASA funds to attempt to disprove cold fusion anyway? Cold fusion will help space research and exploration. Best wishes. Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com) cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Mountain Man / WATER Originally-From: Mountain Man Newsgroups: alt.fan.publius,sci.energy,sci.physics,sci.physics.fusion,al .physics.new-theories Subject: WATER Date: 22 Feb 1996 10:44:25 GMT Organization: Mountain Man Graphics, Australia publius@gate.net (Publius) wrote: > I know enough chemistry to agree with what you say but - just as there > is the atomic reaction way of using water - > I like to believe > there is some other elegantly simple way of harnessing the energy > potential of water. PUBLIUS And you would not be alone in this belief ... The natural properties of WATER are "elemental" in a sense which are not now today appreciated by the wonderous disciplinic academies of intelligentia, yet it is this "element" upon which they, their families, their parents and ancestors, and their children's children turn for their *very survival* on each and every day of their lives - as does most other living beings of this planet, in its binary helical path with the moon - about the central fire. You will be proved correct, and the learned will be left amazed at the natural properties of water - however the question is to be asked: Supposing indeed that WATER does have some hitherto "hidden & miraculous" potential energy which could be harnessed .... To what END would you harness this energy ?????????????????????? To what WORK - to what labour - could this energy be applied? Air and water are the two natural "elements" of the terrestrial weather, just as electricity and magnetism are the two natural "aspects" of the cosmic (EMR - solar) weather ... Generically, the human natural scientist has had over (perhaps) a million years to suss out the nature of the terrestrial weather, and today it is still very much an "unknown art". Generically, the human natural scientist has had not much more than one or two centuries to revise "belief systems" in accordance to the *new* understanding of the cosmic environment (heliocentric) and to entertain the odd thought that the known earth (and in particular the THEORIES thereon) was *not* the center of all things in the cosmos .... Quite clearly, man has a lot to learn - and I would not be surprised, O Publius, if indeed your belief will be proved sound after all is said and done. ;-) Keep the faith Pete Brown ------------------------------------------------------------------- BoomerangOutPost: Mountain Man Graphics, Newport Beach, {OZ} Webulous Coordinates: http://magna.com.au/~prfbrown/surf0.html QuoteForTheDay: "As unto the bow the cord is, So unto man is woman, Though she bends him she obeys him, Though she draws him, yet she follows, Useless each without the other!" Thus the youthful Hiawatha Said within himself and pondered ..." - Longfellow (1855) -------------------------------------------------------------------- cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenprfbrown cudfnMountain cudlnMan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / AndersonBD / Re: Fool's heat for CF output Originally-From: andersonbd@aol.com (AndersonBD) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Fool's heat for CF output Date: 21 Feb 1996 11:11:04 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Like you actually know a damn thing about the CETI cell tests. Sure, it's likely a fraud, but your ramblings provide no insight into whether or not it works. Do you actually know anything about chemistry? It sure doesn't sound like it. - AndersonBD@aol.com cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenandersonbd cudlnAndersonBD cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Jim Carr / Re: What's the secret? Originally-From: jac@ds8.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: What's the secret? Date: 21 Feb 1996 18:08:06 -0500 Organization: Supercomputer Computations Research Institute Larry Wharton writes: > > ... I guess this will be another one of >thoes cases where someone comes up with an idea, announces it, and then >it turns out that Steve Jones claimes he has thought of it first but did >not announce it. This borders on libel unless you have a specific example of a previous case in mind. Given the level of documentation on what Steve knew and when he knew it, such a claim about his role in CF would appear to be a reckless disregard of the facts. I, for one, have seen the notarized log book where he documented his ideas and plans. In addition, you can read the origins of that idea in the published (1986) paper of Van Siclen and Jones. I trust you have your ideas in a bound log book and that you have the key ones notarized or otherwise documented internally at NASA. Since Steve is being very careful what he says, you can be sure that his ideas are recorded to document his motivation and goals in the expt. -- James A. Carr | Rave On! Check out "Rave Boy" at http://www.scri.fsu.edu/~jac/ | the Tallahassee Democrat Online: Supercomputer Computations Res. Inst. | Florida State, Tallahassee FL 32306 | http://www.tdo.com/ cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenjac cudfnJim cudlnCarr cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / AndersonBD / Re: Plans to test/Hydrogen onlycell... Originally-From: andersonbd@aol.com (AndersonBD) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Plans to test/Hydrogen onlycell... Date: 21 Feb 1996 20:56:27 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) I don't know exactly how you expect to ionize hydrogen with a high voltage in the presence of palladium, but good luck to you. Unless you manage to heat it into a plasma and jet it at a palladium electrode, I would think that ionized hydrogen would simply recombine into molecular hydrogen if it was not heated into plasma. Of course, I could be wrong... - AndersonBD@aol.com cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenandersonbd cudlnAndersonBD cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Jed Rothwell / Question for Dr. Wharton Originally-From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@CompuServe.COM> Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Question for Dr. Wharton Date: 22 Feb 1996 21:11:28 GMT Organization: CFRA Larry Wharton writes: "I guess you don't know anything about thermodynamics. You seem not to be able to grasp the concept of a heat pump which would pump heat associated with the heat of fusion of salt crystals from the crystals to the salt solution. ... the basic ingredients of a CETI machine are in place. Salt water is input into a machine, electrical energy is input and used to force the reversal of some of the absorbed salt. . . If there are any parts of this concept that you don't understand I would appreciate hearing from you." Yes, I have a question about this hypothesis. It is very simple, really. If the CETI device is a heat pump, why is the entire device, including the reservior, tubes and cell, much warmer than the surroundings? How do you reconcile this fact with the Second Law of Themodynamics? If you freeze frame the ABC broadcast, you will note that the reservior temperature is 41 deg C. That's much hotter than the room. I assure you from first hand observation that the tubes are warm and inlet temperature is much higher than ambient. But you know that: at these power levels the tubes would soon be blocked with ice otherwise. In short, my question is: How can a refrigerator cooling coil be hotter than the surroundings? Just thought I'd ask. - Jed cudkeys: cuddy22 cuden1256 cudfnJed cudlnRothwell cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Jed Rothwell / Re: The end of the CETI saga draws near Originally-From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@CompuServe.COM> Originally-From: Larry Wharton writes: Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: The end of the CETI saga draws near Date: 22 Feb 1996 13:57:48 GMT Organization: CFRA Originally-From: Larry Wharton writes: "So the CETI aficionados saw that Frank Znidarsic did his test and the delta T dropped too much. Then they did a dozen tests in an attempt to obtain a lower temperature drop . . ." No, you have it backwards. First we did a dozen tests and saw no temperature drop, then after we saw the drop we did one or two other tests to confirm the source of it. "All this then remained unreported untill now." No, actually all of this was reported extensively by me a week after it happened, over on Vortex-L "I have never seen a graduated cylinder which such a large mass that its specific heat would overwhelm the specific heat of water contained in it." How much water have you tested chum? 100 ml? 50 ml? Are you sure about that? How many tests have you run, at what temperature? - Jed cudkeys: cuddy22 cuden1256 cudfnJed cudlnRothwell cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / dcwhite / Re: How to keep ice/water in it's solid state at 40degrees celcius? Help Originally-From: dcwhite@phoenix.net (dcwhite) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: How to keep ice/water in it's solid state at 40degrees celcius? Help Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 00:39:33 GMT In article , Ziad Rahayel wrote: >Hello everybody, > >I am not sure I am posting to the right group for this! >I am looking for a way to keep ice/water in it's solid state at >temperatures up to 40degrees celcius. Any means to do this is welcome, >thermodynamics, chemical... Whatever. > >Thank you very much >Ziad Rahayel > > No problem. Go down to the grocery store, buy you a box of Jello, mix it with the water, cool until it jels, and warm up substantially above 0 deg. C. You will find that this mixture should meet your requirements. Not what you had in mind? If you want ice (from pure water) at 40 deg C, you may have to violate one or two physical properties of water to get it. I don't think that hydrogen bonds will hold together at this temperature. dcwhite@phoenix.net cudkeys: cuddy22 cudendcwhite cudlndcwhite cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / dcwhite / Re: Ice maker CF experiment Originally-From: dcwhite@phoenix.net (dcwhite) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Ice maker CF experiment Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 00:47:08 GMT In article <4fstvf$2hc@post.gsfc.nasa.gov>, Larry Wharton wrote: >I propose to do an experiment to see if an ice maker can produce excess >heat by CF or zpe or whatever. I propose to obtain an ice maker that >will continiously produce and eject ice. I will put this ice maker in a >vat of water with a flow of water that would carry away the ice. The >outflow water would be heated up by the electrical power input to the >ice maker plus the latent heat of fusion of the water crystals. If you >ignore the ice in the outflow then every ice maker will give apparent >o-u heat production - guaranteed. Also no part of the flow need be >cold. Some parts would be hot and would cool off to a temperature above >ambient as the ice melts. This experiment would produce excess heat >using the same flow calorimerty technique that is used for the Patterson >cell. The error, of course, is in neglecting the ice in the water >outflow but this is the same as CETI and supporters ignoring the >possiblity of salt crystals in the cell outflow. > >Lawrence E. Wharton wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov >NASA/GSFC code 913, Greenbelt MD 20771 >work (301) 286-3486, home (301) 595-5038 > > You will not listen to this reply, but here goes. You are wasting your time with this experiment. The refrigerant compressor that provides cooling to supply the ice generates a net surplus of heat in generating the ice, because it is not 100% efficient. Thus, your vat of water will heat up. This heating has nothing to do with the particular process involved, so you will not be able to draw relevant conclusions from this experiment. Nevertheless, go for it! dcwhite@phoenix.net cudkeys: cuddy22 cudendcwhite cudlndcwhite cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Jed Rothwell / Thermal equilibrium question Originally-From: Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@CompuServe.COM> Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Thermal equilibrium question Date: 22 Feb 1996 13:50:11 GMT Organization: CFRA ts_zemanian@pnl.gov (Thomas S. Zemanian) (or maybe someone else) wrote: "I think the implication was that the cell is run at higher power, allowing it to heat up, and then the input power turned down for the gain measurement, thereby counting the heat built up during the preceding period as output for the low power session. IOW, the steady state condition is being circumvented." Well, the longest steady state experiment that I am aware of lasted two months. That's probably not long enough to satisfy the "skeptics" but I am sure the cell reached thermal equilibrium in that amount of time. Most of the measurements I took at Power-Gen were done when the cell and circulating electrolyte was still heating up, not when it was coming down from high power. In case nobody has noticed, the thermal equilibrium argument works the other way in that case. In any case "high power" is 1.4 watts. That's the highest power the transformer could generate. After the effect turns on, output ranges from 400 to 1300 watts, which is a lot more than 1.4 watts, so I do not see how "running it at higher power" first could be considered a method of hoaxing or fooling anyone. How do you get up to 1300 watts in the first place, with only 1-watt input? It reminds me of the old joke about the guy in the bar with the box. He opens the box and brings out a mouse, a miniature piano, and a canary. The mouse begins to play the piano and the canary sings an aria in Italian. A guy sitting down the bar looks on with a amazement and says "hey, buddy, that's amazing!" The guy with the box looks embarrassed, shakes his head. "It *is* amazing! You could millions with it!" The guy says "No, not really. You see, it's fake. The mouse is a ventriloquist." The claim here is that the CETI demonstration is a fake because it is coming down from 1300 watts. That's amazing, given that the power supply can only produce a watt or two. - Jed cudkeys: cuddy22 cuden1256 cudfnJed cudlnRothwell cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Anomaly / Re: The end of the CETI saga draws near Originally-From: anomaly@usa.pipeline.com(Anomaly) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: The end of the CETI saga draws near Date: 22 Feb 1996 13:58:38 GMT Organization: Pipeline USA If the CETI excess energy is polluted with negative potential energy, i.e. salt crystals, then one should only be required to extract the pollutant to retain the excess energy. Some type of filter should do the trick. Perhaps one could use the salt crystals on the driveway next winter. -- Joseph Grove cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenanomaly cudlnAnomaly cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Jeff Candy / Re: Tokamak Originally-From: jeff.candy@jet.uk (Jeff Candy) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Tokamak Date: Thu, 22 Feb 96 20:17:30 GMT Organization: Joint European Torus Kent Thuresson wrote: >Does anyone know where I can get hold on information about the >construction of tokamaks or anything else regarding fusion/plasma? Try "http://www.jet.uk" and links to other major fusion labs therein. Jeff Candy ---------------------------------- Analytic Theory Group http://hagar.ph.utexas.edu/~candy/ JET Joint Undertaking ---------------------------------- =============================================================================== The above article is the personal view of the poster and should not be considered as an official comment from the JET Joint Undertaking =============================================================================== cudkeys: cuddy22 cudencandy cudfnJeff cudlnCandy cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Seth W / Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Originally-From: sethw@access5.digex.net (Seth W.) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Date: 22 Feb 1996 20:29:00 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA Bob Sullivan (bsulliva@sky.net) wrote: : If you want something really 'interesting' to ponder consider this: CETI : unknowingly provided the experimental evidence to disprove its own claims. : Self-immolation, while distasteful, does provide a certain crowd-attracting : 'interest'. Where did they provide this information? sethw@access.digex.net cudkeys: cuddy22 cudensethw cudfnSeth cudlnW cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Seth W / Re: Jed is wrong and libelous/Jones and Recombination Originally-From: sethw@access5.digex.net (Seth W.) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Jed is wrong and libelous/Jones and Recombination Date: 22 Feb 1996 21:15:23 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA jonesse@plasma wrote: : to test. If we are correct, then it is understandable why the so-called : "control" cell at the PowerGen demo gave "excess heat", and why the : effect is totally uninteresting as an energy source! : : --Steven Jones Well, then, with no disrespect intended--I hope you're wrong! If you are correct, though, will it at least be an INTERESTING reason why there's no heat? sethw@access.digex.net cudkeys: cuddy22 cudensethw cudfnSeth cudlnW cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / GeorgeRW / January issue of IE? Originally-From: georgerw@aol.com (GeorgeRW) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: January issue of IE? Date: 22 Feb 1996 16:40:53 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Does anyone know whatever happened to the Jan. issue of Infinite Energy? Last I heard It was supposed to be out mid-January. I at least have never received it? Anyone know what is going on? George Wisniewski cudkeys: cuddy22 cudengeorgerw cudlnGeorgeRW cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / vehicles@u-net / VehiclesALL lowestPrices WORLDWIDE at Net direct from Originally-From: vehicles@u-netsys.com.br ("SO ZERO VEICULOS-ALL"LtdCo -Vehicles Search Machine) Newsgroups: sci.engr.chem,sci.engr.civil,sci.engr.mech,sci.environment,s i.geo.geology,sci.geo.meteorology,sci.lang,sci.lang.japan,sci.materials, ci.math,sci.med,sci.med.nutrition,sci.optics,sci.philosophy.meta,sci.phy ics,sci.physics.fusion,sci.skeptic,sci.space.shuttle,soc.bi,soc.couples, oc.culture.african,soc.culture.african.american,soc.culture.arabic,soc.c lture.asian.american,soc.culture.australian,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.c lture.brazil,soc.culture.british,soc.culture.bulgaria,soc.culture.canada soc.culture.caribbean,soc.culture.celtic,soc.culture.china,soc.culture.e peranto,soc.culture.europe,soc.culture.filipino,soc.culture.french,soc.c lture.german,soc.culture.greek,soc.culture.hongkong Subject: VehiclesALL lowestPrices WORLDWIDE at Net direct from MAKERS Consults free of charge Date: 22 Feb 1996 22:16:00 GMT Organization: "SO ZERO VEICULOS-ALL" VEHICLE+ALL+CHEAPEST+REQUEST+NET Organization: "SO ZERO VEICULOS-ALL" VEHICLE+ALL+CHEAPEST+REQUEST+NET no reply . VEHICLE+ALL CHEAPEST :PUBLIC UTILITY Vehicles"MINIMUM PRICES worldwide" Organization: "SO ZERO VEICULOS-ALL" VEHICLE+ALL+CHEAPEST+REQUEST+NET IP Address -Host: 200.246.214.10 ( available for TALK :soft:http://www.elf.com/elf/wintalk.html named software:WTALK125.ZIP ( you could ask a TALK to us by E-MAIL giving your computer address: @) i n t e r N E T NEWS,only to people that like lowest prices to pay: and without any extra prices : only factories/ Official minimum Resellers Prices,and MINIMUM NOW AVAILABLE FOR ALL at NET PRICES: REAL: UNPUBLISHED - UP TO DATE SERVICES by our : 1 st WORLDWIDE "Vehicle SEARCH MACHINE" vehicle data bank host - access free for "ALL", to "ALL": FIRST TYPE OF SERVICES AT NET :( see at all rescue:Search Engines) "SO ZERO VEICULOS-ALL" - representatives of ALL transport ways : ALLMakes at *****Highest quality, safe products, warranted directly by Manufacturers / Services: Maximum Discounts based on prices was normally available only for Co. fleets or owners of shop / store / dealers, Internet NEWS : now available also for ALL at Net - see and full fill in desired vehicle data, at our query form there, and RESULTS TO CLIENTS PROFITS, as we supply public utility - internet business - Business and Economy category : services of supply 3 prices ( options or 3 vehicles ) , "NO COSTS TO CONSULT US THERE", or by fax: "know 3 lowest prices : WORLDWIDE OR BRASIL,preference to indicate. ************************************************************* URL:http://www.embratel.net.br/infoserv/online/VEHICLE+ALL/SOZERO.html URL:http://www.ghgcorp.com/ftnet/pubserv/VEHICLE.ALL/SOZERO.html Houston-Texas / USA our provider :"FOREIGN TRADE NETWORK- Company" ( IMPORTERS & EXPORTERS at Internet WWW Services ) URL - note: ( be carefull to ask for exactly same LOW+ HIGH FONTS: up written ) ******************************************************************** Visit us, we'll be very much gratefull to inform ALL you need "about ALL transports"; DETAILED PROCEDURE:at URL / NET, and , for ALL Vehicles Needs. You'll be solving your transports - purchases needs by our worldwide services, which we'll greatly appreciate to supply to you, or to your COMPANY Fleets/or your only Best FRIENDS, ( DON'T TELL THESE NEWS to anyone else, only nice people ) Wellcome to: our upper URLs to send us *OUR QUERY FORM* full filled in. cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenvehicles cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.23 / Bob Sullivan / Re: Thermal equilibrium question Originally-From: bsulliva@sky.net (Bob Sullivan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: Thermal equilibrium question Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 02:45:08 GMT Organization: SkyNET Online In article <4ghsaj$ohm$1@mhade.production.compuserve.com>, Jed Rothwell <72240.1256@CompuServe.COM> wrote: ->ts_zemanian@pnl.gov (Thomas S. Zemanian) (or maybe someone else) wrote: -> -> "I think the implication was that the cell is run at higher power, -> allowing it to heat up, and then the input power turned down for the -> gain measurement, thereby counting the heat built up during the -> preceding period as output for the low power session. IOW, the steady -> state condition is being circumvented." -> ->Well, the longest steady state experiment that I am aware of lasted two ->months. That's probably not long enough to satisfy the "skeptics" but I am ->sure the cell reached thermal equilibrium in that amount of time. -> ->Most of the measurements I took at Power-Gen were done when the cell and ->circulating electrolyte was still heating up, not when it was coming down from ->high power. In case nobody has noticed, the thermal equilibrium argument works ->the other way in that case. In any case "high power" is 1.4 watts. That's the ->highest power the transformer could generate. After the effect turns on, ->output ranges from 400 to 1300 watts, which is a lot more than 1.4 watts, so I ->do not see how "running it at higher power" first could be considered a method ->of hoaxing or fooling anyone. How do you get up to 1300 watts in the first ->place, with only 1-watt input? It reminds me of the old joke about the guy in ->the bar with the box. He opens the box and brings out a mouse, a miniature ->piano, and a canary. The mouse begins to play the piano and the canary sings ->an aria in Italian. A guy sitting down the bar looks on with a amazement and ->says "hey, buddy, that's amazing!" The guy with the box looks embarrassed, ->shakes his head. "It *is* amazing! You could millions with it!" The guy says ->"No, not really. You see, it's fake. The mouse is a ventriloquist." -> ->The claim here is that the CETI demonstration is a fake because it is coming ->down from 1300 watts. That's amazing, given that the power supply can only ->produce a watt or two. -> ->- Jed Jed, just in case folks are confused about which part of your post is the joke, let's take a look at the ENECO/CETI representations. Quoting from an article by Hal Fox in the October 1995 issue of (Con) Fusion Facts (page 3): Continuing with Fig. 2, if the cell has been operated for some time at high current levels and the current is decreased, the power amplification factor (PAF) can go to very high values. He then attributes this effect to protons 'loaded' into the surface platings of the spheres continuing to supply the _nuclear_ reaction 'even after the current applied reaches zero.'. Yes, it was a nuclear reaction that month, but I'm not sure they're claiming nuclear reactions this month. cudkeys: cuddy23 cudenbsulliva cudfnBob cudlnSullivan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.23 / Bob Sullivan / Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Originally-From: bsulliva@sky.net (Bob Sullivan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 02:54:53 GMT Organization: SkyNET Online In article <4gglhd$f6h@stratus.skypoint.net>, jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) wrote: [. . .] ->We don't know of any groups that have run experiments on the CETI ->cell and thereby have rejected it. That is a true statement whether you ->said it, intended to say it, didn't intend to say it, or whether ->you even exist or not. Based on the flow of the discussion, your statement above appears to be true at a primitive level: We don't know of any groups that have run experiments on the CETI cell and thereby have rejected it. However, it may well be an incomplete statement of the facts. It simply describes a shared state of knowledge that appears to apply to s.p.f in general but which doesn't preclude individuals from having knowledge of experiments and rejections. How about just declaring this to be an impasse. I've told you all I can tell you at this point. Continued probing on your part will be met with continued circumlocutions on my part. That's the way it's got to be for the time being. ->So don't take it personally. How can anybody stay around s.p.f for very long if they are inclined to take things personally -- with the possible exception of someone whose first initial is Jed? cudkeys: cuddy23 cudenbsulliva cudfnBob cudlnSullivan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.23 / Bob Sullivan / Re: What's the secret? Originally-From: bsulliva@sky.net (Bob Sullivan) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: What's the secret? Date: Fri, 23 Feb 96 03:07:10 GMT Organization: SkyNET Online In article <4gek82$bea@stratus.skypoint.net>, jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) wrote: ->jonesse@plasma wrote: ->: I think there is something else going on -- which we are about ->: to test. If we are correct, then it is understandable why the so-called ->: "control" cell at the PowerGen demo gave "excess heat", and why the ->: effect is totally uninteresting as an energy source! -> ->Well, if you clue us in, maybe we spf'ers can bat it around and see what ->we come up with? I'll go with the tried and true 'bad temperature measurements.' The PowerGen 'demo' probably took this to a higher level with the new voltages applied to the control cell -- more opportunities for 'crosstalk' to the thermocouples. cudkeys: cuddy23 cudenbsulliva cudfnBob cudlnSullivan cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.22 / Bruce Liebert / Cold Fusion on the Discovery Channel Online Originally-From: liebert@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Bruce E. Liebert) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Cold Fusion on the Discovery Channel Online Date: Thu, 22 Feb 1996 20:03:23 GMT Organization: University of Hawaii I haven't seen this posted here before, so you might want to check out the Discovery Channel's Web page on Cold Fusion: http://www.discovery.com/DCO/doc/1012/world/science/fusion/marquee.html which has a section written by Bruce Lewenstein, keeper of the Cold Fusion archive at Cornell. There is even a "game" you can play in which, if you answer the right questions, you win a Nobel Prize! Have fun. -- *************************************************************** * Bruce E. Liebert liebert@hawaii.edu * * Materials Research Laboratory University of Hawaii * * 2540 Dole St., Holmes Hall, Rm. 302, Honolulu, HI 96822 * * Tel: (808) 956-6332 Fax: (808) 956-2373 * *************************************************************** cudkeys: cuddy22 cudenliebert cudfnBruce cudlnLiebert cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / A Plutonium / Anyone predict spin direction of 231PU ? Originally-From: Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics.electromag sci.chem,sci.astro,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Anyone predict spin direction of 231PU ? Date: 21 Feb 1996 05:04:54 GMT Organization: Plutonium College In article <4ge8mp$ot7@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Archimedes.Plutonium@dartmouth.edu (Archimedes Plutonium) writes: > There is a preference in a Atom Totality Universe, for envision a log > spiral is open ended and it is either a right or a left. Discuss this > in a different post. I like to keep on top and be the very first to post any and every fact concerning 231PU. Since I believe it is the universe itself. We have proved that there is Nonconservation of Parity. Which is the preference? Is it right or left relative to what element or isotope? Now then, a 231PU Atom Universe would explain this parity because a atom of 231PU is a logarithmic spiral. A log spiral spirals either leftwards or rightwards, not both. Noone has yet observed the isotope 231PU in any lab. But when they do, I make these predictions ahead of time. The Lee and Yang experiments of Nonparity with its preference must tie into , link or connect with the characteristics of 231PU in order for the Lee and Yang experiments to have given that outcome. In plain language, if the preferred parity was "rightwards" it is because 231PU is rightwards. cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenPlutonium cudfnArchimedes cudlnPlutonium cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Roger Wilcox / Re: final explanation of 2nd law of thermodynamics; entropy Originally-From: rogerw@tera.eng.sc.rolm.com (Roger M. Wilcox) Newsgroups: sci.physics,alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.physics.electromag sci.chem,sci.astro,sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: final explanation of 2nd law of thermodynamics; entropy Date: 21 Feb 1996 15:26:59 -0800 Organization: ROLM - A Siemens Company In article <312A5073.3EED@ww.co.nz>, Kevin Donnelly wrote: >Cooperation can create a more ordered state. >Healing is an example of co-operation. A Thermodynamicist would argue that, yes, so-called "dissipative systems" can exist whereby the system spontaneously organizes itself. But in order to achieve this greater level of organization, the system has to expend energy. It must get this energy from somewhere outside the system. A cooperating group of people expends energy in the process of cooperating. This is why people get hungry. In order to sustain itself, a dissipative system (such as a cooperating group of people) must have an outside energy source -- the local grocery store, for instance. The trick is that although entropy decreases within the system, the system is not closed to the environment. The system takes energy from its environment and in so doing increases its environment's entropy. The Second Law merely predicts that the TOTAL entropy -- the dissipative system's entropy plus the environment's entropy -- can never decrease. -- rogerw@robadome.com (Roger M. Wilcox) - AKA - tracer@zoom.com (Jeff Boeing) -------------+---- I'm not flying fast, just orbiting low ------------------- MSTie #38808 | Quick-N-Dirty Aviation | "Trading altitude for airspeed since 1992" cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenrogerw cudfnRoger cudlnWilcox cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / VCockeram / Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Originally-From: vcockeram@aol.com (VCockeram) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Re: CETI's Power Cell on ABC! Date: 21 Feb 1996 10:31:01 -0500 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) In article <4g8aj9$71k_002@ip163.sky.net>, bsulliva@sky.net (Bob Sullivan) writes: > >I suggest that it would be productive to exercise equal vigilance in >questioning >the ENECO/CETI claims of 'support'. It could be that you are mistaking >representations from 'gung ho' individuals (internal and external) for >institutional support. > > I suggest you stop waving your hands and just answer the question. Or..maybe you can't because you have no facts to back you up?? Not everyone has access to all that you do, so, if you can, please list that to which you have posted. Thanks, Vince Vince, Lost Wages, Nevada cudkeys: cuddy21 cudenvcockeram cudlnVCockeram cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszM cudyr1996 ------------------------------ 1996.02.21 / Anonymous / Just a Question Originally-From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion Subject: Just a Question Date: 21 Feb 1996 03:54:00 +0100 Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited Well have people like Dr. Miles checked out the Patterson Cell or what. cudkeys: cuddy21 cudennobody cudlnAnonymous cudmo2 cudqt1 cudszS cudyr1996 ------------------------------ processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Fri Feb 23 04:37:04 EST 1996 ------------------------------