1995.04.23 / David Cook /  Re: WALLACE IS ANNOYING!!!
     
Originally-From: dcook@utpapa.ph.utexas.edu (David M. Cook)
Newsgroups: alt.alien.visitors,alt.paranet.ufo,alt.philosophy.objectivis
,alt.sci.physics.new-theories,misc.books.technical,sci.astro,sci.energy,
ci.misc,sci.physics,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physic
.particle,sci.research,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: WALLACE IS ANNOYING!!!
Date: 23 Apr 1995 05:27:58 GMT
Organization: Physics Department, University of Texas at Austin

In article <3n87kj$jcp@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
N.McKnight <postbox@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wrote:

>I'm just sick of trying read about real science and having to scroll
>for an hour through one of his threads. [...] 

Well, then killfile him already.  

I don't think Wallace knows diddly about physics, but he's still entitled 
to post here.

Dave Cook
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudendcook cudfnDavid cudlnCook cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 / Sven Wiesen /  Re: Warm Fusion
     
Originally-From: meadows@newswire.gun.de (Sven Wiesen)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Warm Fusion
Date: 23 Apr 1995 12:26:00 +0200
Organization: Newswire Mailboxsystems, Germany

In article "Warm Fusion"
visor@globalcom.net wrote on 23 Apr 95:


> In an experiment using sonic stimulation of plain water I had some
> interesting results. Anyone working along the same lines ?

In the german version of "American Scientific" (Spektrum der Wissenschaft)  
I've read an article about sonic stimulation. (sonoluminiscence or so).

I've thought about ignition of fusion.

I'm very interested about that, but I haven't any experience, because, I  
going to start my physics-study on October _this_ year :)


Jibby...
--- email: meadows@newswire.gun.de
...risin high, risin high, let your will fly high...

## CrossPoint v3.02 ##
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenmeadows cudfnSven cudlnWiesen cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 / John Logajan /  Re: Bill Page's Highlights of ICCF5 report
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Bill Page's Highlights of ICCF5 report
Date: 23 Apr 1995 16:28:18 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

ElliotKenl (elliotkenl@aol.com) wrote:
: I don't understand the Prevenslik paper either.  I gather that the wall
: must be collapsing at relativistic speed in order to produce a Doppler
: shift of this magnitude.

Apparently from their graphics in the first issue of Infinite Energy
in an article by Tom Benson, E-Quest claims that sono-bubbles collapse
within 0.1 micro-second.  So unless the bubble started out near 30 meters
in diameter, the average collapse speed would not approach a significant
fraction of the speed of light.

And according to my calculations, it would take a reflection from an
object moving 0.98C to Doppler shift a 5 micron infared wave to a
0.5 micron visible blue wave -- in a single reflection.  I picked
5 micron because the calculation was easy, but note that infared is
generally considered to extend from about 300 microns down to about
one micron.  It would take even a higher speed to Doppler upshift those
wavelengths longer than 5 micron, but a lower speed for those wavlengths
between 5 and 1 micron.  What is the average wavelength of room temperature
thermal infared?

An alternative to upshifting in a single reflection is through multiple
reflections off slower moving objects which incrementally upshift the
photon frequency.  The question here is simply how many times the
average photon in such a situation will be reflected and not absorbed
or allowed to escape. If you had that info then you could work backward
to find the required "wall" speed needed for such an infared to blue
Doppler shift.

--
 - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com  --  612-633-0345 -
 - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA -
 -   WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan    -
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 / v guruprasad /  Re: too many insults
     
Originally-From: v guruprasad <71155.3116@CompuServe.COM>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: too many insults
Date: 23 Apr 1995 17:11:18 GMT
Organization: yours truly uninc.

Another reason for posting is, if like my screwed up self,
one's able to post but unable to mail.  Happens to me at work,
something I haven't seriously considered changing  (let's
me hide from flames and spams -- the ol' stones and glasshouses thing!).
Admittedly naughty, naught the thing to do, etc.  :)
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cuden3116 cudfnv cudlnguruprasad cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 / Bill Page /  Re: Bill Page's Highlights of ICCF5 report
     
Originally-From: wspage@ncs.dnd.ca (Bill Page)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Bill Page's Highlights of ICCF5 report
Date: 23 Apr 1995 17:37:54 GMT
Organization: Daneliuk & Page

In article <USE2PCB352782871@brbbs.brbbs.com>, mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com
(MARSHALL DUDLEY) says:
>
>jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan) writes:
> 
>-> There was an interesting paper by T. V. Prevenslik rather mysteriously
>-> titled "Biological Effects of Ultrasonic Cavitation" but really a
>-> refutation of the notion that sonoluminescence necessarily implies high
>-> temperatures. Prevenslik points out that the mean free path of gas/water
>-> vapour molecules within a bubble easily exceeds the dimensions of the
>-> bubbles considered by Putterman, et. al. and argues, therefore that the
>-> energy of the collapsing bubble can not be transferred to thermal energy.
>-> Instead, he calculates that the Doppler driven energy shift of infrared
>-> photons reflected within the collapsing cavity provide the luminescence
>-> specturm observed by Putternam, et. al.
> 
>Somehow I don't see this.  What does the mean free path have to do with
>anything?  If I take a tennis ball that is bouncing around a room, and
>suddenly shrink the room, the ball will gain energy every time it hits the
>wall while the walls are moving in.  Whether there are other tennis balls for
>it to interact with seems to me to be irrelavent.
> 
>I have never heard any evidence or theories which indicate that Boyles law
>does not apply for small volumes (or rarefied gases in larger volumes).  Any
>idea on what such a hypothesis is based?
> 
>                                                                Marshall
> 

Marshall,

I think the problem is that your model of a tennis ball in a shrinking room
is too crude to apply to nanometer sized bubbles in water. The "tennis ball"
is on the same order of size as the particles which make up the "walls" of the
room. If the mean free path of the tennis ball exceeds the dimensions of the
room, it seems likely that the tennis ball will no longer, in fact, be in
the room!

In principle, in going from a mechanical model to thermodynamics, one must
deal with probabilities and statistical mechanics. In practice, this is too
difficult and so thermodynamics is formulated as an essentially distinct
discipline. What Prevenslik is really saying is that thermodynamics is being
applied inappropriately by Putterman et. al. in this case.

Prevenslik gave me a copy of his paper, so I can quote in detail from it
if necessary. For now, here is the exact text of the abstract:

Biological Effects of Ultrasonic Cavitation

T.V. Prevenslik

Abstract
--------

Cavitation energy in a nearly evaculated bubble is shown to *not likely* reside
in the thermal state of the water molecule. In a spherical bubble compression
and until the bubble assumes a pancake collapse shape, a temperature increase
does not occur in the bubble gas because the mean free path likely exceeds the
bubble diameter. The subsequent collapse of the pancake shape to liquid density
occurs with only a negligible volume change so that the temperature increase
for compression heating of bubble gases is insignificant. Even near liquid
density, a temperature increase does not occur as the energy transfer by
molecular collisions is in the adiabatic limit for both vibrational and
rotational modes. Instead, the IR radiation energy density present within the
bubble is increased as required to satisfy standing wave boundry conditions
with the bubble walls in the direction of collapse. For biological tissue in
an opaque environment, bubble collapse is found to increase the 5 - 10 micro-m
IR thermal radiation at ambient temperatur to about 3 - 5 eV that is capable
of dissociating the water molecule and forming the chemically reactive hydroxyl
radical. Hence, the biological effects of ultrasonic cavitation are proposed to
be caused by the chemical reaction of the organisms with the excited
electronic states of dissolved oxygen and water molecules.

--------------

And here a few highlights from the paper:

"Bubble collapse is an unstable process following a minimum energy path. Since
the collapse of a spherical bubble follows a path of maximum energy, a spherical
collapse shape is an unlikely event during ultrasonic cavitation. Instead a
pancake-like shape of characteristic dimension delta following a minimum
energy path is likely ...".

...

"During bubble compression, changes in the thermal energy state of the
water moleculre depend on intermolecular collisions and may be quantified by the
mean free path mfp in relation to the bubble radius D0/2 prior to collapse,

             _
           \/2 Kb Tvapor
    mfp =  --------------                                    (1)
                       2
             2 Pvapor d

where Pvapor, Tvapor are the water vapor pressure and temperature, Kb is
Boltzmann's constant.

The condition for a change in the thermal state is the likelihood of
intermolecular collisions with the bubble where mfp < D0/2. Conversely, if
mfp > D0/2, a change in the thermal state of the gas molecules within the
bubble is unlikely as the molecules are likely to be found in the walls of
the bubble."

-----------------

Cheers,

Bill Page
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenwspage cudfnBill cudlnPage cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 / MARSHALL DUDLEY /  Infinate Energy and the Huffman device
     
Originally-From: mdudley@brbbs.brbbs.com (MARSHALL DUDLEY)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Infinate Energy and the Huffman device
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 1995 13:01 -0500 (EST)

After reading the review of the first copy of Infinate Energy, I ordered a
subscription.  I received my fist copy yesterday, and I am fairly impressed
with it.

Compared with Green's publication "Cold Fusion" I find a number of differences
which for me make it much better.  It is printed like a magazine, not a
newsletter.  The figures are printed at a finer resolution.  Except for one
Figure 3 being incorrect with respect to the text (In very hot cold fusion),
the figures were all there. The articles seemed to be rather mainstream (well
as mainstream as you can get in this field anyway), avoiding some of the real
weirdness I saw in Cold Fusion.  There were many more articles, and at least
one of them was more up to date.  Specifically it appears that the article
"Cold Fusion Testing, at CETI" was almost exactly the same article in "Cold
Fusion", but in "Infinate Energy" it was followed by "A report on Testing the
Patterson Power Cell Technoloty" by Dr. Dennis Cravens.

As I had reported earlier the original article which I read in "Cold Fusion"
left me arguing that the excess could easily be explained by recombination.
The follow up article in "Cold Fusion" has now convinced me otherwise.

There are a couple of negative points though on "Infinate Energy".  Although
most articles were very readable, the publisher really needs to run a spell
checker and get a good proof reader.  The number of errors in spelling or
misuse of words (ie. "and experiment" instead of "an experiment" is probably
the highest I have ever encountered.  The other objection is the changes in
fonts and font sizes from article to article.  It appears that the articles
were typeset by a dozen different people using a dozen different fonts.  This
tends to lack professionalism for a magazine.  Font variances should be for
emphasis not convenience.

There is one other area I think could help the magazine.  It should list the
EMAIL addresses of the authors.  Many magazines are now doing this, and since
much of the action in this area is via newsgroups such as this, it seems that
would be very helpful for corresponding with the authors.

That said, I think Eugene Mallove has done a fine job on the first issue.

I would like to comment on the article By Micheal T. Huffman, "From a Sea of
Water to a Sea of Energy?".  As most of the readers of this group know, Mr.
Huffman was working on a machine similar to the Griggs machine for some time
without knowing anything about the Griggs device.  The device is manufactured
from a thermoplastic, which unfortunately had a fairly low melting point.

The device's rotor has holes which curve as they approach the center of the
rotor.  The shape of the spiral of holes when viewed in cross section could
best be described as the shape of the fins in a typical water turbine.  If
water were to suddenly be expelled from these channels, it would cause an
angular force on the rotor, just like a spinning water sprinkler does.  This
arrangement allows the holes to be longer as well.

Now, when the device was spun up the rotor spun itself off the shaft.  This
implys that the rotor actually was delivering energy to the motor.  I don't see
this as unexpected.  If you assume that the water in the channels were to boil,
then the water near the center is under much less pressure and would be
expected to boil first.  The operation being similar to the operation of a
geyser. There would be a rapid expulsion of water through channels which
duplicate the curvature of a turbine, and the turbine would have energy
imparted to it by classical laws of action and reaction.

Now, this device was operated twice in which the rotor spun off the shaft.
Then Mr. Huffman tightened the rotor sufficiently that it could not spin off
any more.  This time when he tested it, the RPMs of the motor increased, he
claims to about 8000 RPM, and maintained this level until he removed power from
the motor.

I don't have specs on the motor, but his description of it allows me to make an
educated guess as to it's characteristics.  It was a 1/3 horsepower induction
motor.  It may have been resistance or capacitor start, but since the motor
was operating at speed (or above) that does not matter, the capacitor or
resistance winding would have already kicked out.  I do not know if it was a 2
pole (3600 RPM) or 4 pole (1800 RPM motor);

These motors have a pretty standard torque vs. speed curve.  Without the
secondary winding energized they experience no torque at locked rotor, and the
torque increases as they approach the syncronous speed.  50 or so RPM before
syncronous speed the torque suddenly drops, crossing 0 at the syncronous speed,
and then the torque reverses, turning the motor into a generator.  As you
increase the speed the torques once again drops becoming 0 I believe at 2 times
the syncronous speed.

Now, I have never seen the torque characteristics of such a motor at speeds
greatly in excess of the syncronous speed.  For the most part I would expect
the motor at high overspeeds to be "free wheeling".  That is on the average
there would be no coupling between oscillating magnet field and the rotor which
would impart a torque.  However I am not certain about speeds which are
harmonics of the normal speed.  If there is interaction at any of the harmonic
speeds (ie. 2x, 3x, 4x and so forth), the torque's charactistics should mimic
those around the syncronous speed.  That is, it will act like a motor just
below the syncronous harmonic, and a generator just above the syncronous
harmonic, and approach 0 between the harmonics.

Now getting back to the article.  On the third try the motor suddenly increased
greatly in speed.  If we assume that the motor at the higher RPM's becomes
"free wheeling" then I would expect that the motor would have slowed down again
from frictional losses once the water was expelled from the quasi turbine.
However, apparently it did not, since Mr. Huffman reports that he had to pull
the plug before the mechanism stopped.  That leads me to believe that the motor
started running at a harmonic of the syncronous speed, and contiuned to do so
until power was removed.  The loading on the motor was probably quite small
since the water around the rotor in the pump most likely was mostly steam.

I believe this explains this experience using ordinary physics.  Even without
excess energy we simply have a case in which water is stored in a spiral
turbine.  The water is under high pressure along the periphery, and low
pressure toward the center.  The boiling point of the water near the center is
depressed, so it initially boils first.  This causes the water to be expelled
very rapidly (like in a geyser), giving a thrust to the turbine.  This thrust
was sufficient to overposer the 1/3 horsepower motor momentarily, and the motor
then resycnronises at a speed which is slightly less than a harmonic of the
syncronous speed.

Thus the entire episode, I believe, can be explained using normal physical
laws.

                                                                Marshall
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenmdudley cudfnMARSHALL cudlnDUDLEY cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 /  Visor@globalco /  A question
     
Originally-From: Visor@globalcom.net
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy.hydrogen,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: A question
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 95 13:40:02 PDT
Organization: GlobalCom



My question is one of concern. I worked on a project a number of years ago 
where there was a need to raise the temperature of a large area of soil so that 
a certain Bio-active element could survive. In an experiment using sonic energy 
we were able to heat the soil, but also noticed other effects. This created in 
my head thoughts of what if. 

My question is what do you think? What would the impact be on our world if we 
could use a small amount of energy, say 1 watt per cubic cm, to disasosiate H 2 
O into its H and O components? What effect would this have on life, the 
universe and well, everything?  

cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenVisor cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 /  mthorpe@ibm.ne /  Is it worth it?
     
Originally-From: mthorpe@ibm.net
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Is it worth it?
Date: 23 Apr 1995 18:29:02 GMT
Organization: Charterhouse

As the research into fusion continues, it is apparent that huge amounts 
of money are being spent, and has been spent on research in this field. 
However, relatively little progress has been made, as the original ideas 
of fusion power are yet to be realised. This brings about the question 
of whether is is right to fund this research which has "been on the verge 
of a breakthrough" for many years now. Instead, would it be better to 
fund alternative research into other energy sources. As studies that the 
world could face an energy crisis in the next 30 years, is research into 
power source that could arouse protest from the rapidly growing "green" 
movement justifiable. Can the scientists and engineers searching for the 
"holy grail" claim that at the end they will be able to use their discoveries 
in a way that will help the planet, or will it be largely redundant.
	
	I would be very grateful for any input you would have to offer.

	Richard Thorpe
	Robinites, Charterhouse, Godalming, Surrey, GU72DS, England
	mthorpe@ibm.net
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenmthorpe cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 /   /  Re: A question
     
Originally-From: ale2@psu.edu (ale2)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy.hydrogen,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: Re: A question
Date: 23 Apr 1995 23:32:03 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In article <NEWTNews.19005.798671933.visor@globalcom.net.globalcom.net>
Visor@globalcom.net writes:

[stuff deleted]
> My question is what do you think? What would the impact be on our world if we 
> 
> could use a small amount of energy, say 1 watt per cubic cm, to disasosiate H 2 
> 
> O into its H and O components? What effect would this have on life, the 
> 
> universe and well, everything?  
> 


You or the sun has to do work to split water apart.  Hydrogen burns
clean but is not as easy to store as say gasoline.  It must be kept
very cold to be stored at high density.  Hate to have my gas tank of
liquid hydrogen split open in an accident.  Don't think most gas
stations will be selling it very soon.  Try coming up with a better
storage battery.          ale2@psu.edu
cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenale2 cudln cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.20 / Travis Stone /  Questions from a Newbie
     
Originally-From: stone@cwis.unomaha.edu (Travis Stone)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Questions from a Newbie
Date: 20 Apr 1995 15:23:56 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska Omaha



Greetings to you all!

I just discovered this newsgroup, and much to my delight it seems to
permit discussion of a subject I find rather interesting: Cold Fusion.
As a newcomer to this forum---and not wishing to annoy those already
here with my ignorance on the subject _too_ much---I was wondering if I
might ask a few questions.....

I've read several books on the history of the Pons-Fleischmann CF
episode of six years ago, my favorite being Gary Taubes' "Bad Science:
The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion" (Random House, 1993).
I've been wondering---

(1 Whatever happened to Stan Pons and Martin Fleischmann after the
    events of 1989?  Did Dr. Fleischmann go back to England?

(2) Is it true that there are now (respectable) labs that are repeating
    the P-F experiment and seeing positive results?

(3) Is CF research proceeding along the lines established by Pons &
    Fleischmann in the use of palladium electrodes in heavy water?  If
    not, can someone tell me what the new approach is? 

(4 What's the current concensus opinion on CF?  I.e., what do most of
   the electrochemists/physicists think of it nowadays?

Thank you (in advance) for any and all patient replies to these
questions from a "newbie"....And if there's some FAQ file I've failed to
read, I apologize for coming into this forum inadequately prepared.

T.R. Stone
University of Nebraska-Omaha
stone@cwis.unomaha.edu

P.S.  A big "hello" to Dr. Jones of BYU, whose name I've seen here as a
      poster.  Hi, Dr. Jones!  How've you been?

 
cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenstone cudfnTravis cudlnStone cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.20 / Travis Stone /  Re: What's wrong with E-QUEST results?
     
Originally-From: stone@cwis.unomaha.edu (Travis Stone)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: What's wrong with E-QUEST results?
Date: 20 Apr 1995 20:09:39 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska Omaha



Is it possible that excess He could be coming from

(1) He adsorbed (absorbed?) into the glass of the beaker/flask/vessel
    used in the experiment?

(2) He generated by the decay of naturally-occurring radioactive
    isotopes indigenous to the material(s) that the beaker/flask/vessel
    is made of?

(3) [REALLY grasping at straws] He produced by the action of external
    agents like cosmic rays?


cudkeys:
cuddy20 cudenstone cudfnTravis cudlnStone cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.04.23 /  Visor@globalco /  Re: A question
     
Originally-From: Visor@globalcom.net
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy.hydrogen,alt.sci.physics.new-theories
Subject: Re: A question
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 95 21:17:06 PDT
Organization: GlobalCom






> 
> You or the sun has to do work to split water apart.  Hydrogen burns
> clean but is not as easy to store as say gasoline.  It must be kept
> very cold to be stored at high density.  Hate to have my gas tank of
> liquid hydrogen split open in an accident.  Don't think most gas
> stations will be selling it very soon.  Try coming up with a better
> storage battery.          ale2@psu.edu
> 


Let us say for fun that the unit that did the conversion was very small and 
used little power. Then no storage is needed, H is created as needed. All 
one needs is a small amount of water. 

I am not so interested the problems, more on the effect on the people, 
goverments and petro companys.

Any thoughts?

cudkeys:
cuddy23 cudenVisor cudmo4 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Mon Apr 24 04:37:05 EDT 1995
------------------------------
