New Energy News
New Energy News - Continued
VOLUME 10, NUMBER 10 ISSN 1075-0045
October 2003 Part 2 of 3
Editor: Patrick Bailey
Web Page: ine/
E-mail: ine@ and eemf@
*******************************************************
LETTERS AND EMAILS - Continued
*******************************************************
Subject: Surfin For TV Stations
From: LeRoy Pea
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 20:33:19 -0700 (PDT)
Welllll, I cancelled my cable tv subscription and went with SBC DSL.
In the meantime, I don't get anymore cable TV.
Soooo, I went surfing for TV stations on the Internet and got these...
BANANA TV, Australia. Good taped programs. Check out the UFO Channel.
Live 365, listen to internet radio stations.
WFMZ-TV CH69 news, sports, weather, school closings
N. Carolina, WRAL CH5 News.
Web TV Listing, large listing of Internet Channels
KNTV CH11, SAN JOSE news
WTVH CH5, Syracuse, NY news
ABC ch24, Memphis, TN news
The AUTO Channel, archived videos
SABC Johannesburg, S. Africa, news (English)
CTV, Burnaby, B.C., Canada news CH9
WWLTV CH4, New Orleans, world news
Saudi Aradia, Embassy News
WKBW CH7 Buffalo, NY news
KVIA CH7 El Paso, TX news
KLTV CH7 Tyler, TX news
SCOLA International TV home page
KTVB CH7 Boise, ID news and weather
NASA videos
FREE internet radio SPINNER for W2k98XP or Mac
Live radio from around the world
2000 live radio broadcasts in the USA (whoa, lots of inactive streams)
Streamin Audio, listen to radio by music format or by State
(way too manay adds)
Last of all, winmedia player9 has My Radio built in: all types of background music.
[Thanks LeRoy! Always, you are a pleasure! Ed.]
*******************************************************
Subject: Fwd: New Propulsion
From: Academy For Future Science
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 17:51:32 -0700
Delivered-To: affsweb@
From: "paul toomer"
To:
Subject: new propulsion
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2003 18:34:15 +0100
Dear Sir,
Please take a look at this new web site on how to challenge Newton's third law of motion at.....
Yours Paul..
*******************************************************
Subject: Laser Ignition For Internal Combustion Engines
From: RemyC
To: ETList
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 00:16:57 -0400
From:
(Click link for photo and diagram)
Laser spark ignition for lean-burn natural gas reciprocating engines
CONTEXT
Engines would run much cleaner if they could run leaner: in other words, use less fuel and more air. When a typical internal combustion engine runs, it burns fuel and air. The heat of combustion turns the nitrogen in that air into nitrogen oxides. These oxides are the precursors to what we call urban smog (ozone-pollution.htm). Running lean (lean-burn) lowers the combustion temperature and significantly reduces the amount of NOx produced. As the demand for higher engine efficiencies and lower emissions drive reciprocating engine combustion to leaner air/fuel operating conditions, increased spark energy is required to maintain stable combustion and low emissions.
PROBLEM
Delivering increased spark energy negatively impacts spark plug durability and the effectiveness of the spark plug in transmitting adequate energy as an ignition source. The lack of spark plugs with the required durability is quickly becoming the limiting factor for developing ultra low emission, high-efficiency natural gas engines. Laser ignition delivers the high energy required to ignite ultra-lean mixtures and eliminates the need for spark plugs.
PROCESS
NETL Researchers designed a laser ignition system and coupled it with a fully-instrumented internal combustion engine. Focusing a 10 nanosecond, 1.06 micron, laser pulse into the cylinder through the spark plug port generates a laser ignition spark. The laser pulse comes from a Quanta Ray DCR-2 Nd:YAG laser directed to the cylinder with high energy laser mirrors. A two-meter focal length lens is placed 1.7 meters from the final focusing lens to reduce the diameter of the laser beam before entering the lens tube. The laser is focused into the cylinder with a 6 millimeter diameter, 36 millimeter focal length lens through a 3.2mm thick sapphire window. The lens is positioned on a 20 cm long, 7.9 mm diameter lens tube aligned radially to the crankshaft axis of the engine. The final mirror directing the laser beam to the lens is positioned directly above the tube and 45 degrees to the tube axis such that the beam incident on to the mirror is perpendicular to the laser plug axis and tangent to an arc centered on the crankshaft. A schematic of the laser ignition system experimental setup is shown, followed by a photo of the actual setup in operation.
A comparison of engine emissions and combustion using a Ricardo Proteous, single-cylinder, 4-stroke, spark ignited natural gas engine using both a conventional spark system and a laser spark system was conducted. The engine was operated at a constant speed of 1200 rpm and at moderate load conditions. The emissions and combustion performance data for each ignition system at three equivalence ratios and three timing conditions were compared.
The NETL research provides the first lean-burn natural gas engine data using a laser-spark ignition source and the first laser-spark ignition engine operation since the effort of Dale et al*, in which gasoline was used as the test fuel
* (Dale, , J.D., Smy, P.R. and Clements, R.M., "Laser Ignited Internal
Combustion Engine - An Experimental Study," SAE Paper 780329, 1978)
MEDIA CONTACT
Damon Benedict damon.
benedict@ netl.
TECHNICAL CONTACT
Dr. Mike McMillian
michael.mcmillian@ netl.
+*+*+*+*
From:
Laser ignition for lean-burn engines
Researchers at the National Energy Technology Laboratory have successfully operated a laser-spark lean-burn natural gas reciprocating engine. Development of lean-burn engines is driven by demand for higher efficiencies and lower emissions, but delivering the high energy required to ignite an ultra-lean mixture destroys even the hardiest spark plugs. Plug durability is rapidly becoming a barrier issue. According to team leader Mike McMillian, laser-spark ignition solves heat loss problems and provides focused energy capable of ignition even under ultra-lean conditions unignitable with conventional systems.
Media contact: David Anna
412/386-4646
david.anna@ netl.
+*+*+*+*+*+*
From:
Vol. 9, No. 7 September 24, 2001 Page: 360 - 372
Visualization of laser-induced breakdown and ignition
Ying-Ling A. Chen and J. W. L. Lewis, Univ. of Tennessee Space Institute
Abstract
Laser-induced gas breakdown and ignition of atmospheric pressure NH3/O2 mixtures are investigated. The nanosecond-pulsed, 1064-nm Nd:YAG laser is used to create the cascade-type optical breakdown. The post-breakdown plasma and ignition are studied using spectroscopic techniques that include spontaneous emission and NH planar laser-induced fluorescence (PLIF). These time-resolved two-dimensional images provide not only radiative and gas dynamic information but also the space-time loci of the temperature and transient species concentrations. The results provide an understanding of the plasma kernel dynamics and the flame development that is essential to verify on-going simulation modeling of laser-ignition.
View Full Text (2275 KB)
Classifications
(140) Lasers and laser optics (140.3440) Laser-induced breakdown
(190) Nonlinear optics (190.1900) Diagnostic applications of nonlinear optics
(300) Spectroscopy (300.6500) Spectroscopy, time-resolved
(280) Remote sensing (280.1740) Combustion diagnostics
History
Original Manuscript: August 10, 2001
Revised Manuscript: September 23, 2001
Citation
Y. A. Chen and Lewis, "Visualization of laser-induced breakdown and ignition," Opt. Express 9, 360-372 (2001),
References
1. A. H. Lefebvre, Gas Turbine Combustion (Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, New York, 1983), pp 221-256.
2. B. Lewis and G. von Elbe, Combustion, Flames, and Explosions of Gases, Third Edition, (Academic Press, Orlando, FL) pp 333 - 361.
3. D. R. Ballal and A. H. Lefebvre, "The influence of flow parameters on minimum ignition energy and quenching distance," In 15th International Symposium on Combustion, (Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, 1974), pp.1473-1480.
4. P. S. Tromans and R. M. Furzeland, "An analysis of Lewis number and flow effects on the ignition of premixed gases," in 21st International Symposium on Combustion, (Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, 1986), pp.1891-1897.
5. G. G. DeSoete, "The influence of isotropic turbulence on the critical ignition energy," in 13th International Symposium on Combustion, (Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, 1970), pp. 735-743.
6. F. J. Weinberg and J. R. Wilson, "Preliminary investigation of the use of focused laser beams for minimum ignition energy studies," Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. Series A 321, 41-52, (1971).
7. G. F. Carrier, F. E. Fendell, and M. S. Chou, "Laser-initiated conical detonation wave for supersonic combustion. III," AIAA, 28th AIAA/SAE/ASME/ASEE joint propulsion Conference and exhibit, (Nashville, 1992), paper 92-3247.
8. R. G. Kingdon and F. J. Weinberg, "Effect of plasma constitution on laser ignition energies," in 16th international Symposium on combustion, (Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, 1976). pp. 747-756.
9. J. A. Syage, E. W. Fournier, R. Rianda, and R. B. Chen, "Dynamics of flame propagation using laser-induced spark initiation: ignition energy measurements," J. Appl. Phys. 64, 1499-1507, (1988).
10. J. H. Lee and R. Knystautas, "Laser spark ignition of chemically reactive gases," AIAA J. 7, 312-317, (1969).
11. H. M. Thompson, J. W. Daiber, and R. G. Rehm, "Two-dimensional growth of laser-driven waves in a hydrogen free jet," J. Appl. Phys., 47, 2427-2432, (1976).
12. V. F. Klimkin, R. I. Soloukhin and P. Wolansky, "Initial stages of a spherical detonation directly initiated by a laser spark," Combust. Flame, 28, 61-66, (1977).
13. B. E. Forch, and A. W. Miziolek, "Ultraviolet laser ignition of premixed gases by efficient and resonant multiphoton photochemical formation of microplasma," Combust. Sci. Tech. 52, 151-159, (1987).
14. B. E. Forch, and A. W. Miziolek, "Laser-based ignition of H2/O2 and D2/O2 premixed gases through resonant multiphoton excitation of H and D atoms near 243 nm," Combust. Flame, 85, 254-262, (1991).
15. M.-S. Chou, F. E. Fendell, and H. W. Behrens, "Theoretical and experimental studies of laser-initiated detonation waves for supersonic combustion," Proc. SPIE, 1862, 45-58 (1993).
16. R. A. Hill, "Ignition-delay times in laser-initiated combustion," Appl. Opt. 20, 2239-2242, (1981).
17. D. H. Plemmons, "Laser-spark ignition and the NH radical," (PhD thesis, The University of Tennessee Space Institute, 1996)
18. J. D. Few and J. W. L. Lewis, "Gas turbine engine photon ignition system," (U.S. Patent number 4,947,640, Aug. 14, 1990)
19. J. D. Few and J. W. L. Lewis, "Laser-initiated non-linear fuel droplet ignition," U.S. Patent number 5,485,720, Jan. 23, 1993, Patent number 5,404,712, April 11, 1995, Patent number 5,497,612, March 12, 1996, Patent number 5,524,429, June 11, 1996.
20. Y.-L. Chen, J. W. L. Lewis, and C. G. Parigger, "Spatial and Temporal Profiles of Pulsed Laser-Induced Air Plasma Emissions," J. Quant. Spectr. & Radiat. Trans. 67, 91-103, (2000).
21. Y.-L. Chen, J. W. L. Lewis, and C. G. Parigger, "Probability Distribution of Laser-Induced Breakdown and Ignition of Ammonia," J. Quant. Spectr. & Radiat. Trans. 66, 41-53 (2000).
22. I. G.Dors, C. G.Parigger, and J. W. L.Lewis, "Fluid Dynamics Effects Following Laser-Induced Optical Breakdown," 38th Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, paper AIAA 2000-0717, (Reno, NV 2000).
23. R. J. Kee, J. F. Grcar, M. D. Smooke, and J. A. Miller, A FORTRAN program for modeling steady one dimensional flames (Technical Report SAND85-8240, Sandia National Laboratories, 1985).
24. R. G. Root, "Modeling of the post breakdown phenomena," in L. J. Radziemski and D. A. Cremers, editors, "Laser-induced plasma and applications," (Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York, 1989).
25. D. H. Plemmons, C. Parigger, J. W. L. Lewis and J.O . Hornkohl "Analysis of Combined Spectra of NH and N2," Appl. Opt. 37, 2493-2498 (1998).
26. E. Sher, J. Ben-Ya'ish, and T. Kravchik, "On the birth of spark channels," Combust. Flame 89, 186-194, (1992).
27. T. Kravchik and E. Sher, "Numerical modeling of spark ignition and flame initiation in a quiescent methane-air mixture," Combust. Flame 99, 635-643, (1994).
28. J. O. Hornkohl, C. Parigger, and J. W. L. Lewis, "On the use of line strengths in applied diatomic spectroscopy," in Optical Society of America for presentation in the conference on Laser Applications to Chemical and Environmental Analysis, (March 1996).
29. J. O. Hornkohl, C. Parigger, and J. W. L. Lewis, "Computation of Synthetic diatomic spectra," in Laser Applications to Chemical Analysis, OSA 1994 Technical Digest Series, 5: 234-237, (Optical Society of America, Washington, DC, 1994).
+*+*+*+*+*
More:
*******************************************************
Subject: OPENS FRIDAY - A MOVIE ABOUT THE DALAI LAMA AND TIBET
From: peaceprophet@ananzi.co.za
Date: 18 Sep 2003 06:14:58 –0700
[I included this, as it pertains to government control and overt secrecy… Ed.]
Ten years in the making, TIBET: CRY OF THE SNOW LION is a provocative look at the Tibetan people's struggle for freedom. The dark secrets of Tibet's recent past are chronicled through a powerful combination of personal stories and undercover footage.
The film takes audiences to the long forbidden "rooftop of the world" with remarkable imagery captured during nine journeys throughout Tibet, India, and Nepal.
Narration by: Martin Sheen
Voiceovers by: Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Ed Harris, Frank Christopher, Edward Edwards, Shirley Knight, Lynn Marta
OPENING DATES
San Francisco - October 3rd - Landmark Opera Plaza
and Landmark Shattuck Cinema
Boston - October 17th - The Coolidge Corner
Tickets & times @ Yahoo Movies
*******************************************************
Subject: Re: Flying Saucer Physics
From: ISEP
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 12:44:47 -0700
[Once again the INE states that the INE is not interested in antigravity or UFOs. These technologies may be in the subject domain of other organizations. The INE position on UFOs, flying saucers, and ET technologies is stated here: . Ed.]
Actually I am back in London at Starbucks on Queensway Rd Sat Nite invited to Trinity College, Cambridge first part of this week More on Up and In Rome, Paris and London The Good, The Bad and The Beautiful
Anon
Work in progress
Einstein’s Gravity and Dark Energy/Matter as Macro-Quantum Emergent Phenomena
Report on the 2003 Vigier IV Conference in Paris
Jack Sarfatti
Internet Science Education Project
San Francisco, CA
Abstract
A brief synopsis of some of the papers presented in Paris September 15 ¡V 19 at Pierre et Marie Curie University is followed by the author’s new theory of the exotic virtual off-mass-shell¡¨ macro-quantum vacuum that is in accord with the new observations of precision cosmology¡¨ that our large scale spatially flat accelerating expanding universe is approximately 3/4 anti-gravitating dark energy¡¨ and 1/4 gravitating dark matter¡¨ with ordinary real on-mass-shell¡¨ lepto-quarks and gauge force bosons a miniscule top of the iceberg¡¨ not more than 4% of the total and possibly less. The lepto-quarks are extended spatial structures with negative zero point energy density of positive quantum pressure that form strongly attractive dark matter cores. These dark matter cores, are the Abraham-Lorentz stresses¡¨ that confine the electric self charge. They are analogous to superfluid vortex rings, perhaps, in the sense of the Regge Trajectory¡¨ Kerr-Newman/D Brane metric-string model of Alex Burinski and also the extended electromagnetic soliton model of Bo Lehnert. The lepto-quarks appear as approximate point charges less than 10-17 cm across in deep inelastic electron scattering from the strong spatial curvature warping of the zero point energy density induced dark matter cores. The Kerr-Newman ring singularity at the Compton radius a = h/Mc ~ 10-11 cm has a vortex dark matter exotic vacuum core for the spatially extended electron at the classical electron radius m = G*M/c2 ~ e2/Mc2 ~ 1 fermi ~ Lp* = Lp2/3(c/Ho)1/3 superconductor ground state phase transition where the attractive exchange of a virtual phonon between two real electrons overpowers the repulsive exchange of a virtual photon. In the present problem we do not need phonons at all and the virtual vacuum superfluid has zero or null proper electric 4-current, i.e. £lc2 ¡V j2 = 0 the same as in Bo Lehnert’s vacuum soliton theory.
Professor Du Bois of Leige University presented some interesting insights on the above retardation¡¨ controversy. He claimed that the observed advance of the perihelion of Mercury around the Sun and the essential effective black hole potential¡¨ of the Schwarzschild solution of general relativity can be obtained from Newtonian gravity with the Wheeler-Feynman symmetric sum of past to present retarded and back from the future advanced time delayed potentials. Thomas Angelides and Gregory Hunter gave theoretical and experimental presentations of the locality/nonlocality controversy of Karl Popper’s experiment now actually performed. A back-to-back photon pair is emitted toward two single-slit screens. The experiment is changed to eliminate one of the single-slit screens and the coincidence counting rates from the two different total experimental arrangements are compared. When both single-slit screens are present both photons show the same wave diffraction pattern. What happens when one single-slit screen is removed? Entanglement by a Bohm quantum potential might seem to suggest that the photon that does not pass through a slit will mirror diffract in synchronicity with its twin that did pass through a single slit. In fact, this does not happen experimentally. No consensus among the Pundits on how to understand this fact from the points of view of the different interpretations of quantum theory was reached in the short time available. Angelides did point out that Vigier’s prediction for Popper’s experiment was falsified.
Daniel S. presented a close packing theorem that, in the context of my 4D world crystal¡¨ (13) macro-quantum vacuum theory gives a fundamental reason why the dark energy to dark matter ratio is approximately 3 to 1.
to be continued
(1) W. Walker,
(2) S. Carlip,
(3) H. Puthoff et-al,
(4) T. Van Flandern, Phys Lett A, 250 (1998)
(5) P.S. Laplace, Mechanique
(6) W. Walker,
(7) Including, perhaps, the single-electron qubit nano-SET networks in the hydrophobically caged protein dimer infrastructure of the sub-neuronal micro-tubules of living cells as qualitatively discussed by Stuart Hameroff and Roger Penrose in Shadows of the Mind¡¨ independently of Penrose’s graviton¡¨ OR speculation. I think Penrose is fundamentally wrong here in his intuition in trying to make a micro-quantum gravity explanation of our inner consciousness, which is obviously a macro effect, albeit nonclassical¨ in the sense of P.W. Anderson’s generalization of micro to macro-quantum ground state spontaneous symmetry breaking as the More is different¡¨ principle of emergent complexity in non-equilibrium open systems.
(8) Shannon’s sampling theorem for c-bits.
(9) Igor Novikov, River of Time¡¨.
(10) Scientific American, May 2003
(11) The center of the Fermi sphere has energy ~ -1019 Gev with momentum ~ hHo/c.
(12) The non-classical ground state entropy of a many-particle quantum system is the log of the volume of phase space. The effective phase space volume of an unstable micro-quantum Fermi sphere is larger than that of the macro-quantum condensate superfluid¡¨ with its residual normal fluid¡¨ or, as the case may be, zero point vacuum fluctuation local field £Nzpf(x). This explains the origin of the irreversible arrow of time at the beginning of the universe when the macro-quantum vacuum condensate inflation field forms in the spontaneous broken symmetry phase transition from the high entropy unstable micro-quantum vacuum to the relatively lower entropy of the macro-quantum vacuum.
*******************************************************
Subject: Fusion Energy Research
From: Valentin Manoliu
Date: 21 Sep 2003 11:21:44 -0000
Hello, I'm Valentin Manoliu and I would like you to visit my webpage,
Physics of isolated and unisolated atomic systems who are not anymore in thermodynamic equilibrium
the accelerator of particles the nuclear fusion the great unification the "corona" efect the negative mass energienucleara@go.ro
THE NUCLEAR FUSION
The nuclear fusion is realized by photo-electric-magneto-thermal effect.
The electronic cover is being removed by the COMPTON effect and the photons operate directly over the atomic nucleus.
The electrical field accelerates the particles but their trajectory will be curved by a magnetic field except for neutrons which don’t have any electrical charge, but only magnetic moments. This iswhy the neutrons move straight ahead, parallel to the axis of the chamber.
The electrons and the protons will move in spiral, but in opposite directions, as their electrical charges are opposed. The diameter of the spiral differs because of the difference of the masses.
The bigger being the energy of the particle, the bigger being the diameter.
The absorption of one atom of nitrogen and one of oxygen - predominant particles in the terrestrial atmosphere - takes place in the accelerating chamber.
In the first stage, the electrons orbiting the two atoms are being bombed simultaneously by the photon fascicle and, as a result of this interaction, they are pulled out from their orbits and moved along spiral trajectories having the same direction that the electromagnetic fields has, and located on a peripheral orbit in the accelerating chamber.
The loose electrons will appear inside the chamber providing the weak nuclear force.
In the second stage, the atoms are ionized, generating in this way the powerful nuclear force. It consists in loose cuclei unwrapped from their electronic cover.
The photons interact with the protons, pulling them out from their position. These protons will move in their turn on spiral trajectories in the same direction as that of the electromagnetic field, but opposite to the movement of the electrons.
The loose protons will appear inside the accelerating chamber.
In the third, the neutrons are bombed in their turn by the photon fascicle being spread in this way. They will move in the direction of the electromagnetic field.
The existence of these loose neutrons marks the end of the process meant to create plasma wich, it’s well known, is being characterized as a mixture of loose charges.
In the fourth stage, following the above mentioned process and by the directing the particles inside the accelerating chamber, the phosphorus is formed: an atomic structure composed of 15 electrons, 15 protons and 15 neutrons. An energy of 235 MeV is produces at the same time. Along with it we could obtain the union of the weak and strong nuclear force with the electromagnetic force.
THE GREAT UNIFICATION
For the scientists, the Unified Field represents the union of the weak nuclear force and the powerful nuclear force with the electromagnetic force and the force of Gravity.
In the Great Union case, there is supposed the possibility of the union of the weak nuclear force (representing the electronic cover of the atom) with the powerful nuclear force (representing the atomic nucleus composed by protons and neutrons) with the electromagnetic force. The nuclear force and the electromagnetic force are milions and milions times biger than the Gravity force, negligible in this case.
THE QUANTIC GENERATOR
The radiant energy produced under the form of light or heat can be absorbed and transformed into electric current.
The first two levels transform the light into electric current and the other three levels take over that heat from the first two levels.
The heat lost by the cooling process transforms itself into electric current.
By closing the space between the coil and the photo/thermo/electric panels, we obtain two atomic systems, one isolated with N and S electromagnetic polarities forming a quantic generator.
The quantic generator has three electric circuits: U1, U…, U2. The electrical circuit to start operating is the circuit U2 composed of the source G, the ballast L, inducing resistors R1 and R2 and switches K1, K2, K3 and K4.
The source G of continuous electric current feeds the coil with electric energy. This produces energy as well on its external surface in the isolated atomic system, as on its internal surface of the non/isolated atomic system.
The luminous radiant energy and the thermic energy produced by the isolated atomic systems is absorbed by the photo-thermo- electric panels that transform it into electric current.
The circuit U will indicate the presence of a tension T. At that moment the circuit U2 is closing and the circuit U1 is opening.
The circuits U1 is equipped with a potentiometer P connected to clamps A - B of the circuit U, so as to utilize only part of its tension to feed the coil with electric energy.
The value of the tension depends on the position of the cursor C, which grows when the cursor moves towards A and decreases when the cursor moves towards B.
THE NUCLEAR PHOTO-TERMAL-ELECTRIC GENERATOR
That eses the radioactive ofval that is transformed in electric current. 1590 years is the life of one gram of radium: that is half of the existing nucleus will disintegrated and tne other half needs 1590 years more.
Using the principales of emission of radioactive energy and that of absorption of energy by the photo-thermo-electric panels, we suppose that we could achieve a photo-thermo-*electric nuclear generator which would transform radioactive energy into the electric current.
The photo-thermo-electric generator could be formed out of: metal or radioactive waste, photo-thermo-electric panels, electric clamps and two protecting layers.
THE QUANTIC PROPULSED SHIP
A space program is very expansive but 80% of the weight of the ship is represented by the tanks of fuel. The solution would to find a system or a mechanism that could allow us to use the energy from the particles of the environment that we want to move into then the cost of such a research program would be really cheaper.
The quantic propulsed ship is composed out of the main part of the vessel, the auxiliary device and the quantic device of propulsion.
The auxiliary mechanism is composed out of two electromagnetic shells located on the external part of the vessel, one on the upper part and the other on the lower part, and they are put into action by the electromagnets.
The quantic device of propulsion is composed out of eight horiyontal quantic generators (1) which are fixed into the conecting star (2), and to a vertical quantic generator (3) that is fixed to the lower part of the connecting star.
The quantic generators end outside the vessel with the tips of the mechanism (4).
The vertical movement can take place putting into action the external electromagnetic shells, so that they should rotate each in an opposite direction. The non/isolated atomic systems have on the external part of the vessel a positive electromagnetic polarity S and inside, a negative electromagnetic polarity N.
A vertical propulsion of energy is obtained which is composed out of a few nuclear particles issued under the form beta, alpha and gamma radiation.
For a horiyontal movement the electromagnetic polarities of the non/isolated atomic systems have to changed. There should exist five atomic systems with positive electromagnetic polarity S, external to the vessel in the direction of the progress, and inside the vessel the negative electromagnetic polarity N in the opposite direction of the course: there should exist inside the vessel threee non-isolated atomic systems with positive electromagnetic polarity S and outside the vessel, there should be a negative electromagnetic polarity N obtaining in this way a jet of propulsion under the form of reaction.
THE "CORONA EFFECT"
The "Corona Effect" represents the emission of the radiations surrounding the ship. That radiation forms a lighting spectrum of electromagnetic wave.
According to the Theory of Relativity, the mass of an object would increase of its speed. At the reach of the light-speed, the mass of the ship would be infinite. In this case, the mass of the ship will be constant, being used only the mass of the radiation that protects the ship of the outside factors; that would be negative and infinite.
I would like you to confirm the receiving of this message.
Thanks you for understanding.
Best regards, Manoliu Valentin
Home, no matter how far...
*******************************************************
Subject: The Energy Digest Vol I Issue 10
From: "Joseph John Rothengast"
To: "Group List"
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:25:48 -0400
The Energy Farms’ Energy Digest
Newsletter
By
The Energy Farms Group
09/19/2003
Vol. I No. 10
This newsletter promotes energy independence, independent living and environmental stewardship.
The Idea in brief
We want to encourage the development and support of Renewable Electric sites distributed along the power grid to:
- Reduce Pollution and health costs incurred from fossil fuel pollution
- Provide jobs for thousands of people
- Develop areas for energy production
- Reduce the need for military actions to guard oil supplies
- Become energy independent
- Greater availability of electric and less outages
- Lower and more stable electrical costs
- Promote it as a stable independent family small business
- Broaden the tax base in rural areas
- Help encourage research for electrical energy for the world
- Promote a self dependent life styles
EDITORIAL –
Items in this issue’s Editorial
An example of the financial aspects of an Energy Farms
Renewable Energy Clubs
Short Notes
Icon – we are looking for a futuristic icon for the group, no financial awards but your name will appear on the Newsletter and Web site. The concept is a farm outline with a bolt of electric, maybe RE sources too.
Jobs in the Energy Field
Jobs in the Energy Fields – Over 500 jobs for people to build a career
Latest News and Articles
Latest News – News Highlights from various sources
Recent articles – Latest articles related to our goals
Friends (companies and groups that just joined in with us)
Newsletters – From energy, environmental and other groups
Energy Sites and Information
Sample Sites for Solar, Wind, Micro-Hydro, Geothermal and Biomass
Wind Products
Hydro-Power Quiz
RE-Communities and Developments
Tour Energy Sites
Components
Conservation
Groups - Groups in the same area as we are promoting
Emergency Kit – What to keep on hand for a power outage
RE Pictures – Free pictures you can use from the National Renewable Energy Lab.
Additional Permanent Sections
State Activities – New section looking for correspondents from each state to send in latest information.
Energy Foundations – A list of Foundations interested in renewable energy.
Phantom Loads – Do you really KNOW your electric device is OFF or just SLEEPING?
Alternate Energy Company Stocks
CHALLENGES
The Manufactures/Dealers $200,000 - $500,000 Challenge – Promote and sell your solution(s)
Financial Challenge
Financial
US Banks – A list of US banks along with a link to The World Bank
Venture – Venture Capital Companies
Additional Financial Planning – A liaison effort between the seekers and money suppliers.
Master Contract – Edison Electric Institute’s
Team with NON-Profit
Legislation, Government Contacts
Legislation
Government
Federal
State – We also started a new section for state information and need representatives to send in reports.
See States….
Local
The Grid – Interstate Renewable Energy Council
DOE's Clean Cities Program
Promote The Effort of Changing the World
Brochure - A simple brochure you can print and distribute to support the Energy and Environmental issues
Presentations – A page dedicated to adding presentations and links to appropriate presentations
Alternate Fuels Data Center – Information on alternate fuels
Financial Planning – Banks, Start up funding, and venture capital companies interested in RE
Suggested Actions - Things you can do to support the project!
Awards – We plan on sending out an awards certificate to people/groups/organizations/companies that have contributed to the promotion of Energy Farms or Renewable Energy. There is no timetable or limits on the number. We are following the Dr. W. Edwards Demming concept of continuous improvements and not the Malcolm Balridge National Quality Award of just rewarding the top performer. Please feel free to send in your candidates along with a brief description as to why we should consider them.
Misc.
Sponsors
Shops – Renewable Energy Sales
FOR SALE – RE products
RE Education – Learn about electric and a possible career
Grant Information – Public and Private sector grants funding sources
Questions, Answers, Feedback and Events
Product Feedback Section – Have you used a RE product and would like to tell us your experiences.
The “Q” Page – The question to the readers, and from the readers (FAQs’ and Qs’ and As’)
Contacts
Feedback
Events / Fairs – RE happenings
Sign-up
Sign-up for Newsletters
THE END
*******************************************************
Subject: Tech Museum Awards Environmental Defense
From: RemyC
To: End Secrecy List ,
LuMag List , ETList
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 21:39:22 -0400
From: "Environmental Defense"
Thursday, September 18, 2003 9:39 AM
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE HONORED AS FINALIST IN PRESTIGIOUS GLOBAL 2003 TECH
MUSEUM AWARDS COMPETITION
Top five finalists to share $250,000 award for applying technology to improve quality of life
New York -- September 18, 2003 --Environmental Defense, a leading national nonprofit organization, was recently named one of 25 laureates for the prestigious 2003 Tech Museum Awards: Technology Benefiting Humanity presented by Applied Materials, Inc. The Tech Museum of Innovation, located in San Jose, California announced the laureates. In Silicon Valley where technology is considered a way of life, The Tech Museum Awards were developed to recognize the need to bridge existing technology in emerging countries and emerging technologies in developed countries.
Environmental Defense has been selected as a laureate for the Intel Environment Award.
"Environmental Defense is very honored to be selected as a Tech Museum laureate," said Environmental Defense program director Gwen Ruta. "Through innovative private-sector partnerships, Environmental Defense has quickened the pace of delivering healthier air by leveraging the power of business to develop cleaner truck technology."
Environmental Defense teamed up with industry leaders, FedEx Express and Eaton Corporation, to develop and bring to market a next-generation delivery truck that will cut air pollution significantly while boosting fuel economy. Using the innovation of hybrid diesel-electric engine technology, the new vehicle will decrease cancer-causing particulate emissions by 93% and reduce smog-causing emissions by 75%. In addition, the cleaner trucks will increase fuel efficiency by 50% while meeting high standards of functionality and cost-effectiveness.
This project is the first time that hybrid electric technology has been commercially applied to the medium-duty truck market. The benefits to the environment and human health will be measured through significant reductions in toxic air pollution, respiratory ailments, pre-mature death, and acidification of lakes. The public health benefit of this technology will grow even faster as more truck fleets convert to hybrid trucks for their business transportation needs.
On October 15, at a black tie Awards Gala, Silicon Valley leaders and delegates from the United Nations will join together to honor all 25 laureates, and one laureate from each category will be awarded a $50,000 cash honorarium.
The awards, presented in partnership with the American Council for the United Nations University and Santa Clara University's Center for Science, Technology, and Society, are designed to honor individuals, for-profit companies, and public and not-for-profit organizations from around the world who are applying technology to profoundly improve the human condition in the categories of education, equality, environment, economic development, and health.
This year, an esteemed panel of judges considered more than 500 nominations, representing 70 countries. The 25 2003 Tech Laureates come from Bangladesh, Canada, Costa Rica, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nicaragua, Nepal, and the United States.
For more information on the awards and laureates, visit
About Environmental Defense
Environmental Defense, a leading national nonprofit organization, represents more than 300,000 members. Since 1967, Environmental Defense has linked science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships to create breakthrough solutions to the most serious environmental problems. The work of Environmental Defense in developing this technology was supported by a three-year grant from the Richard and Rhoda Goldman Fund. Additional support was received from The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, the Oak Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, and the David H. Smith Foundation.
For more information, visit
About The Tech Museum Awards
The concept for The Tech Museum Awards and its five categories was inspired in part by The State of the Future at the Millennium report of The Millennium Project of the American Council for the United Nations University, which recommends that award recognition is an effective way to accelerate scientific breakthroughs and technological applications to improve the human condition. The Awards were inaugurated in 2001.
Judging for The Tech Museum Awards is independently conducted by Santa Clara University's Center for Science, Technology and Society, a global network of academic and industry experts dedicated to understanding and influencing how science and technology impact society. They assemble five panels of judges from around the world, recruited from research institutions, industry and the public sector, who judged the nominations on five set criteria.
The Tech Museum Awards Partners
The Tech Museum Awards represent a collaborative effort among educational institutions and business. Among Silicon Valley's leaders supporting The Tech Museum Awards are presenting sponsor, Applied Materials, Inc. and Santa Clara University's Center for Science, Technology and Society. Category sponsors are the NASDAQ Stock Market, Knight Ridder, Intel, and Accenture.
About The Tech Museum of Innovation
Located in the heart of downtown San Jose, Silicon Valley, Calif., The Tech, a non-profit organization, engages people of all ages and backgrounds in exploring and experiencing the technologies affecting their lives and aims to inspire the innovator in everyone. For more information, visit or call (408) 294-TECH
Media contact:
Jessica Mendelowitz, Environmental Defense communications director, 212-505-2100; jmendelowitz@
Gary Summers, The Tech Museum of Innovation, 925-284-7004; gary@
Ryan Donovan, Ketchum Public Relations, 415-984-6138; ryan.donovan@
*******************************************************
Subject: A Universe Of Scale - Stars Edge Closer
From: Josef Hasslberger
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 16:10:28 +0200
A Universe of Scale - Stars edge closer
Can communication be transmitted over distance without the need for electromagnetic radiation "travelling" to carry the message? Hartmut Mueller of the Institute for Space-Energy-Research in Wolfratsthausen, Germany, says it can.
Mueller has developed a theory of global scaling, which states that matter and energy organize in accordance with principles of scale. The "nodes" or preferred points of concentration, may be distant in linear space, but adjacent in "logarithimic space", allowing for instant connectivity over distances that are difficult to bridge with today's radio technologies.
First experiments have been successful. This is a future technology worth watching out for - it could well revolutionize communications (and more) in the coming decades.
Read the whole article here:
If link does not work, enter the home page and scroll down until you see the headline:
Kind regards
Josef
*******************************************************
Subject: Antony C. Sutton and Cold Fusion
From: RemyC
To: ETList
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 11:15:56 -0400
From: "Leslie R. Pastor"
via:
Sat Sep 20, 2003
Subject: Antony C. Sutton and Cold Fusion
Hello Remy C.
It was with great interest, that I viewed your comments about Antony C. Sutton and his book on Cold Fusion. Dr. Sutton and I spent several month emailing each other regarding future research about Nikola Tesla [National Archives] before his died on June 17, 2002.
It was because of his memory that I furthered the research into cold fusion, by viewing Jean-Louis Naudin's marvelous demonstrations of cold fusion in Paris, France via the internet. I posted my research at his JLN group and it was picked up by the French and posted at the following website:
It was a significant moment for me, to be able to successfully verify that Cold Fusion was real science and real technological innovation. I list my sources for your edification.
All the Best,
Leslie R. Pastor
Sources:
Cold Fusion Research: US Dept. of Energy
What If Cold Fusion is Real
Alternative Energy Institute On Cold Fusion
Cold Fusion Research Laboratory
Edmond Storms: Taking the Chill out of Cold Fusion
An Objective Assessment of Cold Fusion Research by Edmond Storms
Cold Fusion Data Base
Discovery of the Cold Fusion Phenomenon
Cold Fusion Research: Models and Potential Benefits
Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Research Prevailed [Book]
Really Cold Fusion: Notes On A Different Approach
Cold Fusion: The Sun In A Bottle
Whatever Happened To Cold Fusion?
LENR-CANR
Eugene Mallove Quote on Cold Fusion
Cold Fusion: The Miracle Is No Mistake [Eugene Mallove]
Eugene Mallove: Breaking Through
US Navy Supports Cold Fusion
Negative on Cold Fusion
Cold Fusion: New Experiments and Theories
Books: Cold Fusion
Excess Heat: Why Cold Fusion Prevailed [Book]
An Attempted Replication of a CETI Cold Fusion Experiment
Death of Cold Fusion Experiments In America
The War Against Cold Fusion: What's Behind It
The Cold Fusion Story
Cold Fusion Rides Again
Ten Years of Cold Fusion
Stephen Kaplan's Letter to President Clinton
Origins of Cold Fusion
Interesting Books on Cold Fusion
Where Do We Stand On Cold Fusion?: Edmond Storms
Cold Fusion: An Objective Assessment: Edmond Storms
Cold Fusion: A War Story [My Personal Encounter] by Harold Aspden
Research of Anomalous Excess Heat in Cold Fusion Type Experiments
The Cornell Cold Fusion Archive
A Tempest In A Test Tube Ten Years Later
Navy Confirms Cold Fusion
The Etheric Force and Cold Fusion
Star In A Jar: Hints of Nuclear Fusion Found-Maybe
Tchubb Home Page on LENR Cold Fusion
Cold Fusion Reactor by Jean-Louis Naudin
Cold Fusion FAQs
US Cold Fusion Patent [Harold Aspden]
Do Powerful Scientists Suppress Research Findings-You be the Judge
Facimale: Original Paper on Cold Fusion by Pons and Fleischmann
Experimental Setup for Low Temperature Fusion
George H. Miley
George H. Miley on LENR
Lightening Key to Natural Cold Fusion-The Neltron
Mentor and Apprenticeships in Science and Engineering on Cold Fusion
Bob Park: Is Cold Fusion A Fraud?
Caroline H. Thompson's reaction to Bob Park's Voodoo Science
Sir Arthur C. Clarke Challenges the Scientific Community [Eugene Mallove]
Significant Links
Cold Fusion Motor
Resource Links-NASA
Nov. 17, 2000 Workshop on LENR
Comments From An Assistant Professor
Dr. Mitchell R. Swartz US Court of Appeals [Cold Fusion]
Cold Fusion The Scientific Fiasco of The Century [Book]
Russ George Interview on Cold Fusion
Cold Nuclear Fusion: Fleischmann / Pons
Unveiling the Mystery of Nuclear Cold Fusion by Russ George
Frontiers of Cold Fusion [Book}
Experimental Energy Links:
FMBR Scientific Papers
The Farnsworth Fusor
Cold Fusion Research: Models and Potential Benefits
Dr. David Nagel: What Ever Happened to Cold Fusion? [US Navy]
[What a great resource! Thanks to Leslie! Ed.]
*******************************************************
Subject: Typical "Letts & Cravens Effect" Results? A " Nominal" Scenario? And How Much $...
From: "Bass, Robert W (IDS)"
To: "Dennis Cravens (E-mail)"
Cc: "Hal Fox (E-mail)" , "Eugene F. Mallove (E-mail)" , "Mitchell Swartz (E-mail)" , "Mike McKubre (E-mail)" , "Peter Hagelstein (E-mail)" , "Peter L. Hagelstein (E-mail)" , "David Nagel (E-mail)" , "Shang-Xian Jin (E-mail)" , "Graham Hubler (E-mail)" , "Edmund K. Storms (E-mail)" , "Jed Rothwell (E-mail)" , "Tom Valone (E-mail)" , "Sharon Begley (E-mail)" , "Ken Shoulders (E-mail)" , "Pat Bailey (E-mail)" , "Tom Dolan (E-mail)" , "Tom Claytor (E-mail)" , "Don A. Baker (E-mail)" , "Leaf Turner (E-mail)" , "Bob Budica (E-mail)" , "Scott Chubb (E-mail)" , "Scott ICCF Chubb (E-mail)" , "Scotty Chubb (E-mail)" , "Talbot Chubb (E-mail)"
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:22:35 -0400
Dennis,
I hope that you have forgiven me for inadvertently & UNINTENTIONALLY
plagiarizing you a few years ago! I had seen something about experts in _Hot_ Fusion using spin-polarized deuterons to enhance the thermonuclear fusion process, and I reacted "THAT's a great idea!" and rushed to publish it in one of Hal Fox's media as a suggestion for Cold Fusion, completely forgetting that the reason I had thought it was a good idea was that a few years earlier I had read a paper by _you_ which persuasively presented a case for this very thing! And then, some years later, I was looking through my old issues of something and saw your paper, and REMEMBERED that THIS was what had caused me to think it a good idea! I think that this is the most embarrassing thing I have ever done in my life! I remember apologizing to you verbally on the phone, but I am sending this to Hal Fox and some of his colleagues as a form of _Public_ Apology. MEA CULPA!
Incidentally, here below is a letter which I just sent to your erstwhile collaborator, Dennis Letts:
---
Dennis,
I was very pleased to have met you and hope to stay in touch. But I am confused by the claims of "multiplication by a factor of 10 or more" because this refers just to the LASER input power rather than the total power.
Also, I see that Ed Storms is of the opinion that the laser doesn't increase the magnitude of the total energy out, it just speeds up the F&P Effect from what it "normally" does. Do you agree?
I am seeking a "before & after" ideally "Nominal" scenario which might go something like this:
_BEFORE_
F&P Effect
Electrolytic Power Input: 1 watt
Excess Heat Output: 100 milliwatts (i.e. 10% excess power)
_AFTER_
L&C Effect:
Electrolytic Power Input: 1 watt
Laser Power Input: 25 milliwatts [making total Power Input
1.025 watts]
Excess Heat Output 250 milliwatts (i.e. 24.39 % excess power)
I know that these numbers are just hypothetical, but I would like to hear some "defensible" numbers that I could show to a potential Patron/Investor as a "nominal scenario." The numbers should be rounded off and easily remembered.
Thanks in advance,
Bob
P.S.
How much would you charge me, and how long would it take, to test my theoretical prediction that ~40 nm would work much better than 680 nm? Could you do it in 1 month after buying or renting the tuneable dye laser and nonlinear optics for "frequency doubling" (in my case it would require multiplying available visible monochromatic coherent light by more than one frequency doubling)? Could you do it in ? time for $35,00? for $45,000? for $50,000?
Dr. Robert W. Bass
Engineer III
Identification Systems Department
BAE SYSTEMS
44414 Pecan Court
California, MD 20619
Phone: (301) 863-0687
FAX: (301) 863-0755
e-mail: < robert.w.bass@ >
Dr. Robert W. Bass < donquixote@ >
45960 Indian Way (#612)
Lexington Park, MD 20653
(301) 866-9657; FAX .../9674
*******************************************************
Subject: Scientific Instrument Survey - Win a 2003 MINI Cooper Car
From: ""
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:36:22 -0400
[FYI only… Ed.]
Here's How...
Each year over 15,000 scientists participate in the Industrial and Academic Laboratory survey.
Your participation in this survey will help scientific instrument manufacturers make effective business decisions. These manufacturers rely on your input to direct their future marketing and product development efforts. To provide them with up-to-date accurate information, please take a few minutes to tell us about yourself and any purchasing plans you have for the next two years. Just click here
[]
to reach the survey website.
We know your time is valuable. In appreciation, we will enter your completed survey in a random prize drawing to win a 2003 MINI Cooper S. Winners will be notified by phone during business hours.
Click here to begin.
Thanks for your support!
Sincerely,
JP Nicolais
Research Director
I&A Laboratory
BONUS: Free Feedback Report
Have you ever wondered how your merit increases compare with that of your peers? Now you have a chance to find out by completing the I&A survey.
*******************************************************
Subject: Re: FBI Monitoring Of Internet
From: LeRoy Pea
To: Bob Nelson , Rosana Pea , "Rosana O. Pea" , Trenton Pea , Mel Waters , Patrick Bailey , John Bedini , Sonney Chong , "David E. noAttachOrPhotos Cowlishaw" , Geoff Egel , Pea Hilary , Valerie Kruger , Michael McNelly
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 23:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Home Security--------
The new Homeland Security Bill has passed. Things will be different now.
Internet surfing will be tracked by the FBI with a non intrusive method.
The FBI says you will not notice anything different. For a demonstration
Click on the link below...
*******************************************************
Subject: Nov. Energy Seminars; Cold Fusion; Energy Bill; US Blackout Politics
From: "Integrity Research Institute, Thomas Valone"
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 01:27:32 -0400
Future Energy eNews
September 24, 2003
1) Cold Fusion Isn't Dead - Wall Street Journal analyzes the details and outcome of a decade of research.
2) FirstEnergy 550 MW Generator was East Coast Blackout Culprit - Politics now prevent official acknowledgement, reparation.
3) Republicans Want to Control New Energy Bill - but omit automobile mileage, global warming, hydropower and other energy sources.
4) Reduce the Need for 1300 Power Plants to only 170 - Practical response to largest blackout in N. American history.
5) Pulsed Electricity: Opportunities for Wirelss Transmission and Bioelectrotherapy - Seminars at November's IRI 2003 energy conference.
*******************************************************
Subject: Einstein's Physics Of (Zero-Point) Illusion
From: RemyC
To: End Secrecy List
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:10:12 -0400
Light Eye
Though this article is somewhat old it's still worth reading. There's info about among other things zero point.
(click for images)
Einstein's Physics Of Illusion
Copyright © 1980 by John Dobson
This essay was delivered by John Dobson as a lecture at the Vedanta Society, Berkeley, USA, on 12th October 1980 and has been reprinted from:
The Vedanta Kesari
May, 1988 (pages 181-189)
Some of you may think from the title "Einstein's Physics of Illusion," that I'm going to talk about the physics which underlies what we think of as magic. That is not what I expect to talk about. Some of you may think that I suspect that Einstein had some special physics of illusions. If he did, I don't know anything of it. Instead, what I want to do, with Einstein's help, is to trace our physics all the way back to square one, and to find out whether, underlying it, there may possibly be something akin to magic.
George Valens has written a charming book called The Attractive Universe. It is subtitled "Gravity and the Shape of Space", and on the very first page he says that when a ball is thrown straight up, after a while it comes to a stop, changes its direction and comes back. He says it looks like magic, and probably it is. Now what he is taking for granted is that it should have gone off on a straight path without any change in speed or direction. But you see, that also would have been the result of magic. We do not understand in physics why the ball comes back. But we also do not understand in our physics why the ball should have continued without any change in the direction of its speed.
Now in the title, and in the remarks that I have made so far, what I mean by magic or illusion is something like what happens when, in the twilight, you mistake a rope for a snake. And this sort of thing was analyzed very carefully by some people in North India long, long ago, and they said that when you make such a mistake there are three aspects to your mistake. First, you must fail to see the rope rightly. Then, instead of seeing it as a rope, you must see it as something else. And finally, you had to see the rope in first place or you never would have mistaken it for a snake. You mistook it for a snake because the rope was three feet long, and you're accustomed to three foot long snakes.
But before I speak further about illusion, I want to say a few words about what we do understand in physics, and I also want to point out a few gaps in that understanding. When we talk about the universe, or when we look out and see it, what we see is that the universe is made out of what we call matter. It's what we call a material universe. And what we want to do, first of all, is to trace that material back, not quite to square one, but to square two at least. We want to find out whether we can think of all these things which we see as being made out of matter, as really being made out of only a few ingredients. And the answer is that we can. Long ago the chemists pointed out that all these things that we see are made out of not more than 92 ingredients. Those are the 92 chemical elements of the periodic table. It was suggested in 1815 that all those different chemical elements are probably made out of hydrogen. That was Prout's hypothesis, because in those days no one knew how to do it. But now, in modern times, we do know how to do it, and we do know that that's what happens. All the other chemical elements are made out of hydrogen, and it happens in the stars.
The universe, even as it is today, consists mostly of hydrogen. And what it is doing is falling together in the gravitational field. It falls together to galaxies and stars, and the stars are hot. Falling together by gravity is what makes them hot. And they get hot enough inside so that the hydrogen is converted to helium. Now helium is a very strong atomic nucleus, and so the main line in building up the atoms of the atomic table goes this way: First, four hydrogens make one helium. Then three heliums make one carbon. Two heliums won't stick. That would be beryllium-8. There is no beryllium-8. It won't last. But three heliums will stick, and that's carbon. Four is oxygen. Five is neon. That's the way it goes in the stars; the other nuclei are built of helium nuclei. Six makes magnesium. Then silicon, sulfur, argon, calcium, titanium, chromium and iron.
In big stars it goes like this. But in small stars like our sun it goes only up to carbon or possibly carbon and oxygen. That's where our sun will end, at about the size of the earth, but with a density of about four concrete mixing trucks in a one pint jar. Larger stars get too hot by their own gravitational squeeze, and the carbon cannot cool off like that. They go right on to oxygen and so on, until they get, in the center, to iron. Now iron is the dumbest stuff in the universe. There is no nuclear energy available to iron -- nothing by which it can fight back against gravitational collapse; so gravity collapses it, this time to the density of a hundred thousand airplane carriers squeezed into a one pint yogurt box. One hundred thousand airplane carriers in a one pint box! And, when it collapses like that, the gravitational energy that is released to other forms blows the outer portions of the star all over the galaxy. That's the stuff out of which our bodies are made. Our bodies are all made out of star dust from such exploding stars.
We do know that the main ingredient of the universe is hydrogen and that the main usable energy in the universe is gravitational. We know that the name of the game is falling together by gravity (hydrogen, falling together by gravity), but what we don't know is why things fall together by gravity. We do know that the stuff out of which this universe is made is hydrogen, but we do not know from where we get the hydrogen. We know that the hydrogen is made of electrical particles, protons and electrons, and we know that the total electrical charge of the universe is zero, but we do not know, you see, why it is made of electricity. We do not know why it falls together. And we do not know why, when things are moving, they should coast. There are these gaps in our understanding. We know how things coast. We know how things fall. We know how the electrical particles behave, but we don't know any of the why questions. We don't have any answers to the why questions.
What I want to talk about next is a discovery made by Albert Einstein when he was 26 years old and working in the patent office in Bern. Then I want to talk about the consequences of that discovery and, through that, I want to trace our physics back, if possible, to answer those why questions.
Einstein noticed that we cannot have an objective universe in three dimensions. We all talk about 3-D. Hardly anybody talks about 4-D. But the universe is 4-D. It is not possible to have a universe of space without a universe of time. It is not possible to have space without time, or time without space, because space and time are opposites. I don't know that Einstein ever used the language that space and time are opposites, but if you look at his equations, it is very, very clear that that's exactly what they are. If, between two events, the space separation between them is the same as the time separation between them, then the total separation between them is zero. That's what we mean by opposites in this case. In electricity if we have the same amount of plus charges as we have of minus charges, say in the same atom or the same molecule, then that atom or that molecule is neutral. There is no charge seen from outside. Likewise here. If the space separation between two events is just the same as the time separation between those two events, then the total separation between those two events is zero.
I'll give you an example. Suppose we see an exploding star, say in the Andromeda galaxy. There's one going on there right now. It's been visible for about a month or so. Now the Andromeda galaxy is two and a quarter million light years away, and when we see the explosion now, we see it as it was two and a quarter million years ago. You see, the space separation and the time separation are the same, which means that the total separation between you and what you see is zero. The total separation, the real separation, the objective separation, that is, the separation as seen by anybody, between the event which you see and the event of your seeing it -- the separation between those two events is always zero. What we mean when we say that the space and time separations between two events are equal is that light could get from one of those events to the other in vacuum.
We see things out there, and we think they're really out there. But, you see, we cannot see them when they happen. We can't see anything when it happens. We see everything in the past. We see everything a little while ago, and always in such a way that the while ago just balances the distance away, and the separation between the perceiver and the perceived remains always at zero.
As soon as Einstein noticed that we cannot have a universe of space without a universe of time and vice versa, and that they are connected in this way, and that the only way to have an objective universe is in four dimensions, and not in two or three or one -- as soon as he noticed that, he had to redo our physics.
[I disagree with what follows. If you require time to be measured by the speed of light, then you will get the dubious Lorentz Transformation, that Einstein himself said that he did not understand. I am personally convinced that that line of thinking is all garbage. Ed.]
Now relativity theory is a geometry theory. It's not something else. It's a geometry theory. It's about the geometry of the real world. I'm sure that most if not all of you have been exposed, somewhere along your educational careers, to the geometry of Euclid. His geometry is in two dimensions and in three, but he didn't have any idea about introducing the fourth dimension. His geometry is a theoretical geometry about a theoretical space which does not, in fact, exist. Newton based his understanding of physics also on that understanding of geometry, and Newton's physics is a theoretical physics about a theoretical universe which does not, in fact, exist. We know now, you see, that Euclid was wrong in his understanding of geometry, and that Newton was likewise wrong in his understanding of physics. And we had to correct our physics in terms of Einstein's re-understanding of geometry. It was when Einstein went through our physics with his new understanding of geometry that he saw that what we had been calling matter or mass or inertia is really just energy. It is just potential energy. It had been suggested a few years earlier by Swami Vivekananda that what we call matter could be reduced to potential energy. In about 1895 he writes in a letter that he is to go the following week to see Mr. Nikola Tesla who thinks he can demonstrate it mathematically. Without Einstein's understanding of geometry, however, Tesla apparently failed.
It was from the geometry that Einstein saw that what we call rest mass, that which is responsible for the heaviness of things and for their resistance to being shaken, is really just energy. Einstein's famous equation is E = mc2. Probably most of you have seen that equation. It says that for a particle at rest, its mass is equal to its energy. Those of you who read Einstein know that there is no "c" in that equation. The c2 is just in case your units of space and time don't match. If you've chosen to measure space in an arbitrary unit and time in another arbitrary unit, and if you have not taken the trouble to connect the two units, then, for your system you have to put in the c2. If you're going to measure space in centimeters, then time must not be measured in seconds. It must be measured in jiffies. A jiffy is the length of time it takes light to go one centimeter. Astronomers are rather broad minded people, and they have noticed that the universe is quite a bit too big to be measured conveniently in centimeters, and quite a bit too old to be measured conveniently in seconds; so they measure the time in years and the distance in light-years, and the units correspond. That "c" in the equation is the speed of light in your system of units, and if you've chosen years and light-years then the speed of light in your system is one. And if you square it, it's still one, and the equation doesn't change. The equation simply says that energy and mass are the same thing.
Our problem now is that if we're going to trace this matter back, and find out what it is, we have first of all to find out what kind of energy makes it massive. Now we have only a few kinds of energy to choose from. Fortunately there are only a few: gravitational energy, kinetic energy, radiation, electricity, magnetism and nuclear energy. But I must allay your suspicion that nuclear energy might be very important. It is not. The nuclear energy available in this universe is very small. If all the matter in the universe began as hydrogen gas and ended as iron, then the nuclear energy released in that change (and that is the maximum nuclear energy available) is only one per cent of what you can get by letting that hydrogen fall together by gravity. So nuclear energy is not a big thing, and we have only five kinds of energy to choose from in order to find out what kind of energy makes the primordial hydrogen hard to shake. That, you remember, was our problem.
What we want is potential energy, because the hydrogen is hard to shake even when it's not doing a thing. So what we're after is potential energy, and that restricts it quite a bit more. Radiation has nothing to do with that. Radiation never stands still. And kinetic energy never stands still. And even magnetic energy never stands still. So we are left with electricity and gravity. There are only two. We don't have any choice at all. There is just the gravitational energy and the electrical energy of this universe available to make this universe as heavy or as massive as we find it.
Now I should remind you that the amount of energy we're talking about is very large. It's five hundred atom bombs per pound. One quart of yogurt, on the open market, is worth one thousand atom bombs. It just happens that we're not in the open market place. We live where we have no way to get the energy of that yogurt to change form to kinetic energy or radiation so that we can do anything with it. It's tied up in there in such a way that we can't get it out. But right now we're going to talk about the possibility of getting it out. We want to talk about how this tremendous energy is tied up in there. We want to talk about how this matter is "wound up".
First let's talk about watches. We know how they're wound up. They're wound up against a spring. Now when we wind up a watch, what I want to know is whether it gets heavier or lighter. If we have a watch, and if we wind it up, does it get harder to shake or easier? It gets harder to shake because when we wind it up we put more potential energy into it, and energy is the only thing in the universe that's hard to shake. So now we want to know in what way the whole universe is wound up to make it heavy and hard to shake. We know that it must be wound up against electricity and gravity. The question is: How?
We need to know some details on how to wind things up. How, for instance, do you wind up against gravity? You wind against gravity by pulling things apart in the gravitational field. They all want to go back together again. And if the entire universe were to fall together to a single blob, the gravitational energies that would be released to other forms would be five hundred atom bombs per pound. The universe is wound up on gravitational energy just by being spaced away from itself against the gravitational pull inward. And it turns out to be just the right amount. It really does account for the fact that it's five hundred atom bombs per pound.
How do we wind up against electricity? We push like charges toward each other. If you push two electrons toward each other you have to do work, and it gets heavier or more massive. If you push two protons toward each other it gets more massive. And if you take a single electrical charge and make it very small, since you're pushing like charge toward itself, it too becomes more massive. Now it turns out that the work that's represented by a smallness of all the teeny-weeny particles that make up the hydrogen atoms and all the rest of this stuff is, once again, five hundred atom bombs per pound. Some of you might think that it should come out to a total of ten hundred atom bombs per pound -- five hundred gravitational and five hundred electrical. No, it's only five hundred atom bombs per pound because winding it up one way is exactly the same thing as winding it up the other way. Coins have two sides, heads and tails. You cannot make coins with only one side. For every heads there is a tails. Plus and minus charges are like heads and tails. Space and time are like heads and tails. And electricity and gravity are like heads and tails. You cannot space things away from each other in the gravitational field without making them small in the electrical field.
I think that we're ready now to attack the consequences of this new understanding of physics. We want to find out whether, through this understanding, we can trace our physics all the way back to square one, to see whether, underlying it, there may be something akin to magic. We want to know why things fall. We want the answers to our why questions.
I'm going to draw you a quick map. This is a picture of the physics before Einstein:
Mass Space
Energy Time
In the last century we thought that mass was one thing; energy was another. Space was one thing; time was another. In our present understanding of physics that won't work. Space and time are just two sides of the same coin. Mass and energy are just two sides of the same coin. And there is no line through there:
Mass
Energy Space
Time
There is no line between mass and energy or between space and time. And we just talked about the way in which the universe is wound up in order to make the particles massive. They're wound up against space. They're spaced in against the electrical field, and they're spaced out against the gravitational field, which means that what we call matter and energy are also nothing but geometry, and the line down the middle goes too. But when the lines go, the picture goes. When the lines of demarcation between mass and energy and space and time are obliterated, we do not have a model of a physical universe. Every definition in our physics, every concept in our physics, requires measurements of length, or of time, or of mass; one or more of these measurements. And without the discrimination between length, time and mass we have no way to measure anything in physics, no way to define anything in physics. Our model of the universe does not hold up when we examine it from the standpoint of Einstein's equations. And what we are left with I shall indicate here by a question mark:
What is it that exists behind our physics? Relativity theory does not say exactly what it is, and our task is to find it out, if we can.
First let us understand a little bit about what we call causation in physics. What do we mean in our physics when we say that one thing causes another? We mean that there is a transformation of energy from one form to another. For instance, if the hydrogen falls together to galaxies and stars, the gravitational energy is first converted to kinetic energy in the falling; and then the kinetic energy is converted to radiation when the hydrogen falls together into stars. When radiation from stars like our sun is picked up by all these green leafy things which we call plants and trees, it's converted to electrical and magnetic forms. So all these things happen by changes in energy, by changes in the form of the energy. The amount of energy does not change. There is no such animal as the generation of energy. The amount of energy, whatever it is, seems to be completely unchangeable. It's one of our most basic observations in physics. And what we mean by causation is changes in the form of this energy. Matter itself is energy, and what we mean is that when something happens, whether it's hydrogen being converted to helium, or whatever it is, there's some change in the form of the energy. Now the universe cannot arise by this kind of causation simply because in any such change the amount of energy at the end is never any greater than the amount at the start. You cannot manufacture gold by remolding gold. You never finish with more than you started with.
With this understanding of causation in mind, I want to go back to our question mark. We want to see whether we can get some idea of the nature of what the equations of relativity theory say must exist behind the universe of our observations. And we want to see how, from that nature, we come to the world of our perception.
When we look at this question mark, what we see is that it has to be beyond space and time. Our physics is on our side of space and time, if you like, but Einstein's equations say that behind our physics there is this question: "What is it?" We know that it has to be beyond space and time. And for that reason we can get a negative statement about what it is. If it's beyond time, it must be changeless, because only in time could we have change. If it's beyond space, it must be both undivided and infinite, because only within space could we have things finite and divided. Without space you couldn't break a cookie in two. Without space you couldn't have cookie crumbs. And without time you couldn't do anything, because you couldn't have any kind of change. So whatever exists behind this universe must be changeless, infinite and undivided:
Changeless
Infinite
Undivided
The curious thing is this, that what we see is apparently not changeless, not undivided and not infinite. It is obviously finite. The teeny-weeny particles that make up the hydrogen atoms and all the rest of these atoms and molecules are really minuscule. The number of hydrogen atoms required to make a single drop of water is equal to the number of drops of water in a million cubic miles of ocean. They are certainly finite. And this matter is divided up into atoms. Why should it be so divided? And it's continually changing. You can look anywhere.
So what we see is changing, finite and divided, and now comes the question: By what kind of causation could we get from the changeless to the changing? From the infinite to the finite? And from the undivided to the divided?
We haven't proved that we can get there by magic, but we have proved that we can't get there any other way. We cannot get there by the causation of our physics, because that would require that we change the changeless to the changing, that we divide the undivided, and that we make the infinite finite. As I say, we can prove that we cannot get there any other way, but we have not yet proved that we can get there by magic. So now I want to ask: What happens if we look at this problem from the standpoint of what I'll call apparitional causation? My favorite word for this is not quite magic. It's not quite illusion. It's apparitional causation. It's the kind of thing you do when you mistake a rope for a snake.
Could we have mistaken the changeless for the changing? Could we have mistaken the infinite for the finite? Could we have mistaken the undivided for the divided? That's the question.
So let’s go back to that old analysis of apparitional causation to see if such a mistake could give rise to our physics. We want to know whether apparitional causation can answer our why questions. When we mistake one thing for another, you remember, there are three aspects to our mistakes -- three consequences, if you like. First, we must fail to see it rightly. In this case, we must fail to see the changeless, the infinite and the undivided. That's fine; we've failed. Then we must see something else in its stead, and that else must be different. And so it is. What we see is changing, finite and divided. Finally, you remember, we had to see the thing to start with. If we had not seen a three foot rope we would not have mistaken it for a three foot snake. When you mistake your friend for a ghost, if your friend is tall and thin then the ghost will be tall and thin. But if your friend is roly-poly you'll see a roly-poly ghost. Had you not seen your roly-poly friend you would not have seen a roly-poly ghost.
If, then, our physics has arisen by apparition, the changeless, the infinite and the undivided must show in that physics. But isn't that exactly what we see? The changeless shows as inertia, the infinite as electricity, and the undivided as gravity. Had we not seen the changeless, it would not have shown up in our physics. It is the changeless which we see, and, as a consequence, that changeless shows in what we see. That is why things coast. That is what we see as inertia. That is what we call mass. Likewise in order to see the undivided as the divided we had to see the undivided, and that is what we see as gravity. It is a consequence of having seen the undivided. You cannot see a universe of particles, all spaced out, without having them fall together again. You cannot make the mistake of seeing it as divided without having the undividedness show. And, finally, you cannot make the mistake of seeing the infinite broken up into teeny-weeny particles without the consequence of seeing those particles as electrical. Probably some of you don't know quite enough physics to understand what I mean by that, but every electrical particle has energy just because of its smallness, and if you let it get bigger, its electrical energy would go down. If it could get infinitely big, its electrical energy would go to zero. So you can think that electrical energy is just the tendency to go back to the infinite, just as the gravitational energy is just the tendency to go back to the undivided.
Now these two things are really the same thing. The wind up against gravity by being spaced out is exactly the same thing as the wind up against electricity by being spaced in. And these two things make up the rest mass. They make up the thing called inertia. It's the electro-gravitational energy of the particles which we see as their rest mass. It is that energy which is hard to shake.
It's impossible to see an apparition of this sort without having it wound up. It is not possible to see this universe except wound up. The infinite and the undivided must necessarily show as the electrical and gravitational energy. There is no such thing as matter. There is only this energy, and the energy is five hundred atom bombs per pound. The energy is the consequence of the apparition. It is the yearning for liberation in the apparently finite. It is the yearning for the undivided in the apparently divided. And it is the yearning for the changeless in the apparently changing.
With the help of this notion of apparitional causation suggested by Einstein's equations, we are able, you see, to trace our physics all the way back to square one to answer those why questions. With Einstein's help we are able at last to understand why matter falls, why it coasts, and why it is made of discrete electrical particles.
We have to look at it very carefully. We have completely to change our understanding of geometry. Our native understanding of geometry, or rather our native misunderstanding of geometry, is a genetic mistake. We make the mistake because it was never necessary not to. It was never necessary, in the long past history of our race, for us to see space and time correctly. It never was. It was definitely necessary that we have at least a dog's understanding of a three dimensional space, otherwise we wouldn't have had offspring, and the species would all have died out. But it was never necessary to understand that space and time are opposites. It was never necessary to understand the origin of gravity, or the origin of inertia, or even the fact that the atoms are made of electricity, or the fact there are 92 chemical elements. It's not necessary to understand any of these things in order to have offspring and have the perpetuation of the species go on. It works all right through many, many mistakes.
You must not think that just because it's a native perception on your part that it's true. That has nothing to do with it. Just look back and see how you got the way you are. You have to think that it's all a mistake, and you have to notice that our genetic misunderstanding of space and time is at the root of it. That's where the root is. It is within our mistaken notions of space and time that we see this universe the way we do. So what we have to do is to straighten out our misunderstanding.
Space is not really that which separates the many. It's that which seems to separate the one. There's only one. And in that space that oneness shines. Therefore falls whatever falls. Space is not that in which we see the finite. There is no finite. Space is that in which the infinite appears as small, and in that space that vastness shines. Therefore bursts whatever bursts. Therefore every electrical particle wants to become infinite. And therefore shines whatever shines. And time is not that in which we see change, but that in which the changeless seems to change, and in that time that changeless shines. Therefore rests whatever rests; therefore coasts whatever coasts.
Our problem is to discriminate between what's behind this notion of space and time and what's within it. Our problem is to discriminate between the real and the make believe.
*******************************************************
................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
Related searches
- news articles about new products
- what s new in the news today
- new tech gadget news today
- marijuana legalization news new york
- new york female news anchors
- new news 2017
- new york daily news jumble
- new technology news today
- new york daily news games
- new york university us news ranking
- us news new york university
- breaking news headlines new york