| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Benj
Guest
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:23 am Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
 |
|
On Jul 30, 8:06 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]So how many books on atomic weapons or power have you written ?
[/quote]
None, of course. But I have corrected blatant errors in numerous
Wikipedia articles! :-)
[quote]What>s your view on fast and slow neutrons and suitable moderators ? The
Wigner effect is a bitch isn>t it ?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wigner_energy
[/quote]
My "view"? Gosh, I don>t know. Giant blocks of paraffin always seemed
to work pretty well for me. But then I wasn>t trying to build a bomb.
The point, Graham, is that I said that the mistake in physics over
things like "cold fusion" and "low energy transmutations" is that all
the establishment "debunkers" immediately go on a tirade (like you
are) dragging up all manner of "high energy" facts that are supposed
to "disprove" these proposed effects. Clearly, these effects cannot
be part of the high energy handbook of reactions. You are all trying
to prove to me that heavier than air aircraft can never fly! Just
weigh some metal and then try to get it to float! I tell you guys
that ONLY when you come over to my house and demonstrate a huge block
of Aluminum that is lighter than air, will I EVER believe that heavier
than air aircraft will EVER be possible and even then it will probably
take a hundred years for a working version to actually be developed.
So just where is this so-called "flying machine" that the Wright
brothers claim they have invented? It>s been years since they said
they could build it and I haven>t seen anything yet! It>s all bunk I
tell you!
Do you have ANY sense at all of the point I>ve tried to make here? |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Richard Schultz
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 7:51 am Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
In sci.physics.fusion Benj <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote:
: The point, Graham, is that I said that the mistake in physics over
: things like "cold fusion" and "low energy transmutations" is that all
: the establishment "debunkers" immediately go on a tirade (like you
: are) dragging up all manner of "high energy" facts that are supposed
: to "disprove" these proposed effects.
What part of "fusion has been observed at low temperature and behaves
exactly as it does at high temperature" is too difficult for you to follow?
If you can>t get that, then asking you to compare the average kinetic
energy of a 4He nucleus at, say 10^6 K, to the excitation energy of a
4He* nucleus is probably a waste of time.
-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
". . .Mr Schutz [sic] acts like a functional electro-terrorist who
impeads [sic] scientific communications with his too oft-silliness."
-- Mitchell Swartz, sci.physics.fusion article <EEI1oz.43q@world.std.com> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ken S. Tucker
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:17 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
Hi Rich
On Jul 30, 9:33 pm, schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
[quote]In sci.physics.fusion Ken S. Tucker <dynam...@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
:> What, if anything, has this to do with the questions that I asked?
:
: You may not understand the answer, or I may
: not be up to your level of understanding.
Since answers to the questions that I asked the amount of time that occurred
between two events, and in one case a number, I>m guessing that I>ll be
able to understand your answer.
[/quote]
I was invited to NASA>s MSFC, Advanced Concept Office
to opine and observe this experiment,
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/anti_grav_000928.html
NASA was absolutely forthright.
I wish I could have been more helpful, so I>m
still working on the study.
The theory really does require a working
knowledge of GR and QT.
You can see Ning Li>s work on "gravitomagnetism"
has been published in peer reviewed articles.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bill Snyder
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:55 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 22:23:26 -0700 (PDT), Benj
<bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote:
[quote]On Jul 30, 5:53Â pm, Odysseus <odysseus1479...@yahoo-dot.ca> wrote:
2. It is generated by some non-fusion process that I do not understand.
3. It is/was generated by some natural "cold" fusion process.
I won>t say categorically that it>s impossible, but AFAIK it>s never
been observed in nature -- and #2 is well enough attested to render such
a hypothesis unnecessary.
What? You seem to be saying that the two main ideas are A. We don>t
have a clue and B. "cold" nuclear reactions about which we also don>t
have a clue. Then you say that not having a clue is so "well attested"
that we don>t need to go to "cold" reactions as a hypothesis.
Duh. If one doesn>t have a clue, the procedure is to try to buy a clue
or at least visit the cluefish desk! "3." has been theorized by some
persons and suggested that the known isotopic variations in IDENTICAL
chemicals derived from plants (eg. sugar) indicates that low energy
reactions may be creating various isotopic reactions that might
explain the various isotopes found on earth.
[/quote]
It has been "theorized by some persons and suggested" that they
need to wear tinfoil to ward off the mind control rays.
[quote]The suggestion is that
these may not have been made in the so-called bogus "big bang" but
[/quote]
Ah, you also know the big bang to be a hoax, eh? Do you prefer
shiny-side-in or shiny-side-out? Why haven>t we heard the
anti-Einstein rant yet?
[quote]rather may have been the result of hundreds of millions of years of
plants engaging in low energy nuclear reactions.
Obviously the so little is known here that there are no proof of
anything, just speculations. But they are interesting speculations to
those of us with more open minds.
[/quote]
"Open mind" is not actually synonymous with "hole in the head,"
but don>t let me stop you.
--
Bill Snyder [This space unintentionally left blank] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Benj
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:42 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
On Jul 31, 11:17 am, "Ken S. Tucker" <dynam...@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
[quote]I was invited to NASA>s MSFC, Advanced Concept Office
to opine and observe this experiment,http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/anti_grav_000928.html
NASA was absolutely forthright.
I wish I could have been more helpful, so I>m
still working on the study.
The theory really does require a working
knowledge of GR and QT.
You can see Ning Li>s work on "gravitomagnetism"
has been published in peer reviewed articles.
Regards
Ken S. Tucker
[/quote]
Ken,
It>s very interesting that NASA is trying to test the old "anti-
gravity paint" idea! Einstein cobbled together the "warped space-
time" idea of gravity, but really it>s just a mathematical description
with no 'explanation". Much better is the Wheeler-Feynman "shadow'
theory of gravitation which fits perfectly with the "anti-gravity
paint" idea. The concept is that the universe is filled with radiation
of some kind bouncing around in all directions. As two masses approach
each other, each mass shields the other so that the "radiation
pressure" forces the two masses together. Hence, gravity is seen not
as an "attraction" between masses but rather as a "push" that forces
them together. Hence you are forced earthward by the "shielding" of
the mass of the earth beneath your feet!
Now here>s the food for thought. The so-called "disk" gravity shield
is actually working the "wrong" way! According to the Wheeler-Feynman
theory, if the super-conducting disk were truly "shielding gravity"
then to make an object lighter you>d have to have it OVERHEAD rather
than UNDER the object as is proposed with the old "anti-gravity paint"
idea. The disk should actually be making objects HEAVIER rather than
lighter! Just a couple of ideas for you to ponder in your
observations and opinions.
Of course, I>m sure you>ve read that I "know nothing about science",
so if you>d rather not think about these off-beat ideas, you should
probably simply adopt without proof the opinions of the people here
who are "smarter then Einstein". They will tell you exactly what to
think and what to say. Just accept everything they write without
question and they will like you!
I may have to poke my snoopy nose into these experiments! I wonder
how close the "test device" is to completion? |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Benj
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:49 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
On Jul 31, 6:55 am, Bill Snyder <bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
[quote]It has been "theorized by some persons and suggested" that they
need to wear tinfoil to ward off the mind control rays.
[/quote]
Liar. Everybody knows that tinfoil (aluminum foil) is transparent to
"mind control rays". One needs to wear a LEAD foil helmet to actually
be successful in shielding against them. You always have to be
spewing the disinformation, don>t you?
Shill and Moron!
[Yeah, Yeah, I know I shouldn>t be responding to this childish crap,
but sometimes I just can>t help myself! :0] |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Richard Schultz
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:08 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
In sci.physics.fusion Ken S. Tucker <dynamics@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
:> :> What, if anything, has this to do with the questions that I asked?
:> :
:> : You may not understand the answer, or I may
:> : not be up to your level of understanding.
:>
:> Since answers to the questions that I asked the amount of time that occurred
:> between two events, and in one case a number, I>m guessing that I>ll be
:> able to understand your answer.
:
: I was invited to NASA>s MSFC, Advanced Concept Office
What, if anything, has this to do with the questions that I asked? Do you
even remember what they were?
-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
". . .Mr Schutz [sic] acts like a functional electro-terrorist who
impeads [sic] scientific communications with his too oft-silliness."
-- Mitchell Swartz, sci.physics.fusion article <EEI1oz.43q@world.std.com> |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Ken S. Tucker
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:57 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
Hi Richie.
On Jul 31, 11:08 am, schu...@mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
[quote]In sci.physics.fusion Ken S. Tucker <dynam...@vianet.on.ca> wrote:
:> :> What, if anything, has this to do with the questions that I asked?
:> :
:> : You may not understand the answer, or I may
:> : not be up to your level of understanding.
:
:> Since answers to the questions that I asked the amount of time that occurred
:> between two events, and in one case a number, I>m guessing that I>ll be
:> able to understand your answer.
:
: I was invited to NASA>s MSFC, Advanced Concept Office
What, if anything, has this to do with the questions that I asked? Do you
even remember what they were?
[/quote]
Kindly restate your questions, and if I>m
in the area I>ll stop in on the university
and provide a lecture, at my pleasure sir.
Who is the boss?
Regards
Ken S. Tucker |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Bob Myers
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:02 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
"Benj" <bjacoby@iwaynet.net> wrote in message
news:4118b787-fe87-4534-b086-dd649d4e8cfb@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 30, 8:06 pm, Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelati...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]So how many books on atomic weapons or power have you written ?
None, of course. But I have corrected blatant errors in numerous
Wikipedia articles! :-)
[/quote]
Which, of course, is the rough equivalent of saying "I
have painted over graffiti I didn>t like the looks of
with my own."
Bob M. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Spaceman
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: Re: THE WORLD NEEDS COLD FUSION. |
|
|
Benj wrote:
[quote]On Jul 31, 6:55 am, Bill Snyder <bsny...@airmail.net> wrote:
It has been "theorized by some persons and suggested" that they
need to wear tinfoil to ward off the mind control rays.
Liar. Everybody knows that tinfoil (aluminum foil) is transparent to
"mind control rays". One needs to wear a LEAD foil helmet to actually
be successful in shielding against them. You always have to be
spewing the disinformation, don>t you?
[/quote]
All metals only increase the signal recieving allowance
and actually intensify the effect.
You must wear a rotating electromagentic beanie fan
to divert the signals.
:)
(sorry, could not resist)
:) |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
