1995.05.24 / Dieter Britz /  Re: "Self-Moderating" s.p.f
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: "Self-Moderating" s.p.f
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 09:01:02 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

On 21 May 1995, Robert F. Heeter wrote:

[...]
> As an unmoderated group we have to put up with unmoderated ideas, but
> there's no reason at all why we need to put up with off-charter postings.
> I think a form of "self-moderation" might work.  I don't advocate 
> responding to the *content* of off-charter posts (or at least one should 
> yank sci.physics.fusion from the newsgroups line so the thread leaves this
> group), but I think occasionally it might be useful to post a short
> followup 
> article to indicate that a given post was off-charter (and to indicate
> which 
> group it belongs in).  Also, if enough people EMAIL replies to the
> posters 
> of off-charter articles, that might help people see the errors of their
> ways.
> This would be similar in style (if not in magnitude) to the
> "email-bombings"
> of the people who spam the net and/or post the "MAKE MONEY FAST" articles.
> It seemed to work in the two cases where I tried it on people posting
> "books for sale" type articles.
> 
> Does anyone else think this might work?

I have tried this, with varying degrees of success. A few months ago, I
suggested (fairly politely) to someone to please stop, and got a very rude
reply, to the effect that anyone has the right to post what and where they
like. I am negotiating with Bryan Wallace at the moment; he is reasonable,
and tells me that something like half of the replies to him come from this
group (I don't know how he knows this but I take his word). He has in fact
reduced his list from an initial 200 (!) to just 14, including this one,
on the basis of interest. The message is plain: don't respond. Actually,
I can remember only about one reply posted by someone who also posts on 'cold
fusion' to this group, so it seems there are people reading this group just
to read Bryan Wallace's stuff.

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Dieter Britz /  Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 09:07:37 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

On Tue, 23 May 1995, MARSHALL DUDLEY wrote:

> Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk> writes:
>  
> -> Just to complete the info on cells with metal film covered beads: you are
> -> quite right here, Dick. What you are talking about is the bipolar electrode.
> -> People use them, they are metal plates simply in the path of a current, and
> -> such a plate (or, a bead) acts as a cathode on one side and an anode on the
> -> other. I am sure that Cravens would avoid this like the plague (hence the
> -> packed bed, no gaps), because if ever there was a scenario for recombination
> -> this would be it; a cell in which hydrogen and oxygen are produced throughou
> -> the cell volume, and Pd film to catalyse their recombination.
>  
> I think you are missing something major here.  What you are proposing is
> electrically equivalent to multiple cells in series.  Each cell will have the
> normal voltage drop associated with that electolyte and metal, typically
> around 1.5 volts. Thus it is impossible for current to flow in and out of
> multiple beads unless the driving emf is at least twice that value, or around 3
> volts. I don't believe that Cravens is running that high a voltage.
>  

Well, as I said, I was only completing the picture; Cravens (or is that
Patterson?) uses a tightly packed bed, we are told, so there is nothing
bipolar going on here. I also neglected to mention that the bipolar effect,
in a fluidised bed of these beads, would be very slight because bypass
currents through the electrolyte would dominate. People who use bipolar
cells do their best to minimise these bypass currents, and they certainly
don't use beads floating around.
It's all academic, what we have here is a packed bed. 

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Dieter Britz /  Re: Good news: PPPL funding will be gutted
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Good news: PPPL funding will be gutted
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 09:24:55 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

On 23 May 1995, Tom Droege wrote:

[...] 
> But it is not very efficient.  I have spent 40 years in government labs.
> It is hard to turn off something once it is started, even though many 
> recognize it is folly.  But on the whole a net plus. 

Inmates of USA seem to have the idea that business operates on a completely
logical basis, and doesn't make mistakes. Try to get the book "The Carpet
Makers" (I forget the authors but can find out), a story of how a good
business was run into the ground. I got disillusioned with this myth while
working in Germany in an applied electrochemistry research lab. In that lab,
two very good ideas were developed, one of them clearly of great potential
benefit. It was a process for copper etching to make printed circuits; it
allowed finer detail than conventional procedures, and all the copper stayed
in the apparatus, as the metal, and could be reclaimed just by taking it out.
A printed-circuit etching business was approached; they were not interested,
what they had was good enough for them, they were making a profit so why
rock the boat? Don't tell me that business has no momentum.

> >  Sorry that this is not directly about fusion, but general, non-specific
> >and destructive criticism is a pet peeve of mine.
> >
> >John Vetrano

Don't apologise, this is not so far off topic. Science politics impinges on
fusion. Actually, the propagandists speak with forked tongues on this. It is
they who have bleated about the US government's refusal to donate money to
CNF research, and now they seem to be saying that it should all be done by
private enterprise. So: which is it? If the latter, well, get your finger
out, then, and show us your products.

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Dieter Britz /  Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
     
Originally-From: Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 09:53:16 +0200
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University

On Tue, 23 May 1995, mitchell swartz wrote:

>   In Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.950523091231.16365A-100000@kemi.aau.dk>
> Subject: Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
> Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk> writes:
> 
[...]
> -Just to complete the info on cells with metal film covered beads: you are
> -quite right here, Dick. What you are talking about is the bipolar electrode.
> -People use them, they are metal plates simply in the path of a current, and
> -such a plate (or, a bead) acts as a cathode on one side and an anode on the
> -other. I am sure that Cravens would avoid this like the plague (hence the
> -packed bed, no gaps), because if ever there was a scenario for recombination,
> -this would be it; a cell in which hydrogen and oxygen are produced throughout
> -the cell volume, and Pd film to catalyse their recombination.
> 
>   Would cause some corrosively generated ions added to the
> to the solution, too.

What? What sort of ions? Please elaborate. Actually, and I hate to say this,
what with the small overpotentials, you might get some peroxide... in the
alkaline solution, they would be peroxide anions... oh no. Fortunately, it's
hypothetical, it's a tightly packed bed. Phew.

> -Good point. In a packed bed, I'd say that there would be significant iR drop
> -along the length of the bed, and therefore quite a dispersion of 
> -overvoltage, leading to a current density dispersion. If indeed 'cold 
> -fusion' (or hitherto unknown bla bla bla) depends on some minimum current 
> -density, this would mean the exotic process would be happening in some parts 
> -of the cell and not in others. 
> 
>    Packed beds of metallic spheres might actually give a small IR drop,
> an insignificant IR drop, over the bed; but they would also tend
> to distort the E-field distribution because of the equipotential lines
> therein.
 
You have to distinguish between two kinds of iR drop (and this DOES apply
to the packed bed): the one along the metal films touching each other
(quite small, I'd say, metal is a good conductor), and the one in the
electrolyte. The latter could be quite a bit, causing an electrode
potential gradient along the cell. I don't know how Cravens supplies the
cell with voltage/current. If it is, say, a plate at either end, then you
would get higher cathodic current densities on the beads near the cathode
supply plate and progressively smaller cd's as you move away from it.
 
> -I must say, nevertheless, that I like this cell. I have said many times 
> -that if there be such an exotic nuclear process, it is very likely to be 
> -a near-surface effect, and one ought to maximise surface; a packed bed is
> -one good way to do that.
> 
> "near-surface effects" depend upon the ratio of loading and internal
> diffusion.  right, mate?  Therefore a function of material and other
> physical issues.

Yes? True. That is why I have also said that, IF this thing exists and is
- as would be most probable - a near-surface effect, then it might be a
mistake to use a metal like Pd that swallows the deuterium; better to use
something like Ni, Fe or Cu, that resists the ingress of deuterium, and thus
favours high concentration near the surface. Or, if you must have Pd, a thin
film on a backing of something that blocks deuterium would be best.
 
>   Dieter, where are reviews of the ICCF4 papers located? looked at 
> sunsite in cnf-com, cnf-pat, and cnf- peri ...   and did not see them?
> is there a better ftp site for your copious good work?

The file is fusion.iccf4. I'd prefer it to have a name consistent with the
other bibliography files but am limited by the number of characters I am
allowed. So, fusion.cnf-iccf4 is 1 char too long. If you have any good
ideas, please say so.

I don't think there is anything wrong with vm1.nodak.edu as an ftp site.

-- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk

cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenbritz cudfnDieter cudlnBritz cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Your Planner /  The Key To Organizing Your Health Records
     
Originally-From: 675270.426639416(Your Lifetime Health Planner)
Newsgroups: control,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics.plasma
Subject: The Key To Organizing Your Health Records
Date: 24 May 1995 05:37:20 GMT
Organization: Your Lifetime Health Planner

	THE KEY TO ORGANIZING YOUR HEALTH RECORDS

"If you care about yourself and your children, you will do everything you
can to know your family's medical history. It can save your life, and the
lives of those who are dear to you." -- Dr. Aubry Milunsky, Director,
Boston University's Center for Human Genetics (Life Magazine, March,
1995). 

Your Lifetime Health Planner offers the simplest, most effective way to
take charge of your health.  Enter important facts about your health
history, keep a record of the names of medications and their effects,
document each doctor visit and diagnosis.  You will have the information
you need, and in the event of an emergency, so will your family. 

Your Lifetime Health Planner, 198 pages in a compact, loose-leaf binder,
contains a variety of sections which include "Doctor Visits,"
"Medications," "Family Health History," and "Doctors and Specialists." 
The Planner is a must for the busy executive who needs to stay organized,
for seniors who are receiving care and for newborns who need a record of
their health care. 

Parents Magazine recommended the Planner to its readers (April, 1994) and
MCI called it "a useful resource in managing your personal health
records."  Margie Smotherman, Coordinator, Employee Health and Wellness,
Blue Shield/Blue Cross of Iowa, said: "The employees felt that these
(Planners) were great tools to not only record their pertinent numbers,
but to plan for doctor's visits." 

To get your copy, send a check or money order for $19.95 (plus shipping
and handling) to : 

Your Lifetime Health Planner
1955 W Grant Rd., # 230
Tucson AZ  85745
USA

Shipping and handling charges:  $4.95 US; $8 Canada/Mexico; $14 Europe;
$18 Asia/Pacific Rim. 

Include your name, address and telephone number.*  

Visa/MasterCard orders, call 520-798-1530.

*Large corporate discounts available for orders of 1,000 copies or more.

Your Lifetime Health Planner
1955 West Grant Road, #230
Tucson, AZ  85747

Enclosed is $______  for ______ copies of Your Lifetime Health Planner.

Please ship to:

YOUR NAME		 _____________________________________________

YOUR ADDRESS 		_________________________________________
 		  	Street
			__________________________________________________
			City     State       Zip or Postal Code     Country

YOUR TELEPHONE NUMBER 	____________________________________
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudfnYour cudlnPlanner cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Mark Beeson /  cmsg cancel <3pugmg$h5r@baygull.rtd.com>
     
Originally-From: mark@rtd.com (Mark Beeson)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: cmsg cancel <3pugmg$h5r@baygull.rtd.com>
Date: 24 May 1995 09:13:05 GMT
Organization: RTD Internet Access, a division of RTD Systems & Networking, Inc.

This is a perl-generated script that is cancelling spam from trasoff@rtd.com.

--Mark
--
  Mark Beeson | Same Broken   (MB178)     President, Neural InterNetworking
      "I've seen the enemy, and the enemy is me." -- Sister Machine Gun
                URL: <a href="http://www.nin.com/">here</a>.
                 - If you have to ask, you'll never know. -
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenmark cudfnMark cudlnBeeson cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Robert Heeter /  Conventional Fusion FAQ Section 0/11 (Intro) Part 1/3 (Overview)
     
Originally-From: Robert F. Heeter <rfheeter@princeton.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion,sci.energy,sci.physics,sci.environment,sc
.answers,news.answers
Subject: Conventional Fusion FAQ Section 0/11 (Intro) Part 1/3 (Overview)
Date: 24 May 1995 12:47:13 GMT
Organization: Princeton University

Archive-name: fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
Last-modified: 26-Feb-1995
Posting-frequency: More-or-less-biweekly
Disclaimer:  While this section is still evolving, it should 
     be useful to many people, and I encourage you to distribute 
     it to anyone who might be interested (and willing to help!!!).

 ----------------------------------------------------------------
### Answers to Frequently Asked Questions about Fusion Research
 ----------------------------------------------------------------

# Written/Edited by:

     Robert F. Heeter
     <rfheeter@pppl.gov>
     Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

# Last Revised February 26, 1995


 ----------------------------------------------------------------
*** A.  Welcome to the Conventional Fusion FAQ!  
 ----------------------------------------------------------------

* 1) Contents

  This file is intended to indicate 
     (A) that the Conventional Fusion FAQ exists, 
     (B) what it discusses, 
     (C) how to find it on the Internet, and
     (D) the status of the Fusion FAQ project


* 2) What is the Conventional Fusion FAQ?

  The Conventional Fusion FAQ is a comprehensive, relatively
  nontechnical set of answers to many of the frequently asked
  questions about fusion science, fusion energy, and fusion
  research.  Additionally, there is a Glossary of Frequently
  Used Terms In Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy Research, which 
  explains much of the jargon of the field.  The Conventional 
  Fusion FAQ originated as an attempt to provide 
  answers to many of the typical, basic, or introductory questions 
  about fusion research, and to provide a listing of references and 
  other resources for those interested in learning more.  The
  Glossary section containing Frequently Used Terms (FUT) also
  seeks to facilitate communication regarding fusion by providing
  brief explanations of the language of the field.


* 3) Scope of the Conventional Fusion FAQ:

  Note that this FAQ discusses only the conventional forms of fusion
  (primarily magnetic confinement, but also inertial and 
  muon-catalyzed), and not new/unconventional forms ("cold fusion",
  sonoluminescence-induced fusion, or ball-lightning fusion).  I 
  have tried to make this FAQ as uncontroversial and comprehensive
  as possible, while still covering everything I felt was 
  important / standard fare on the sci.physics.fusion newsgroup.


* 4) How to Use the FAQ:

  This is a rather large FAQ, and to make it easier to find what
  you want, I have outlined each section (including which questions
  are answered) in Section 0, Part 2 (posted separately).  Hopefully it 
  will not be too hard to use.  Part (C) below describes how to find
  the other parts of the FAQ via FTP or the World-Wide Web.


* 5) Claims and Disclaimers:  

  This is an evolving document, not a completed work.  As such, 
  it may not be correct or up-to-date in all respects.  
  This document should not be distributed for profit, especially 
  without my permission.  Individual sections may have additional 
  restrictions.  In no case should my name, the revision date, 
  or this paragraph be removed.  
                                             - Robert F. Heeter


 -------------------------------------------------------------------
*** B. Contents (Section Listing) of the Conventional Fusion FAQ
 -------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************************************************************
                What This FAQ Discusses
*****************************************************************

(Each of these sections is posted periodically on sci.physics.fusion.
 Section 0.1 is posted biweekly, the other parts are posted quarterly.
 Each listed part is posted as a separate file.)

Section 0 - Introduction
     Part 1/3 - Title Page
                Table of Contents
                How to Find the FAQ
                Current Status of the FAQ project
     Part 2/3 - Detailed Outline with List of Questions
     Part 3/3 - Revision History

Section 1 - Fusion as a Physical Phenomenon

Section 2 - Fusion as an Energy Source
     Part 1/5 - Technical Characteristics
     Part 2/5 - Environmental Characteristics
     Part 3/5 - Safety Characteristics
     Part 4/5 - Economic Characteristics
     Part 5/5 - Fusion for Space-Based Power

Section 3 - Fusion as a Scientific Research Program
     Part 1/3 - Chronology of Events and Ideas
     Part 2/3 - Major Institutes and Policy Actors
     Part 3/3 - History of Achievements and Funding

Section 4 - Methods of Containment / Approaches to Fusion
     Part 1/2 - Toroidal Magnetic Confinement Approaches
     Part 2/2 - Other Approaches (ICF, muon-catalyzed, etc.)

Section 5 - Status of and Plans for Present Devices

Section 6 - Recent Results

Section 7 - Educational Opportunities

Section 8 - Internet Resources

Section 9 - Future Plans

Section 10 - Annotated Bibliography / Reading List

Section 11 - Citations and Acknowledgements

Glossary of Frequently Used Terms (FUT) in Plasma Physics & Fusion:
  Part 0/26 - Intro
  Part 1/26 - A
  Part 2/26 - B
  [ ... ]
  Part 26/26 - Z


 --------------------------------------------------------------
*** C.  How to find the Conventional Fusion FAQ on the 'Net:
 --------------------------------------------------------------

*****************************************************************
###  The FAQ about the FAQ:
###          How can I obtain a copy of a part of the Fusion FAQ?
*****************************************************************

* 0) Quick Methods (for Experienced Net Users)

   (A) World-Wide Web:  http://lyman.pppl.gov/~rfheeter/fusion-faq.html

   (B) FTP:  rtfm.mit.edu in /pub/usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq


* 1) Obtaining the Fusion FAQ from Newsgroups

  Those of you reading this on news.answers, sci.answers, 
  sci.energy, sci.physics, or sci.environment will be able to 
  find the numerous sections of the full FAQ by reading 
  sci.physics.fusion periodically.  (Please note that not 
  all sections are completed yet.)  Because the FAQ is quite
  large, most sections are posted only every three months, to avoid
  unnecessary consumption of bandwidth.

  All sections of the FAQ which are ready for "official" 
  distribution are posted to sci.physics.fusion, sci.answers, 
  and news.answers, so you can get them from these groups by 
  waiting long enough. 


* 2) World-Wide-Web (Mosaic, Netscape, Lynx, etc.):

   Several Web versions now exist.

   The "official" one is currently at

     <URL:http://lyman.pppl.gov/~rfheeter/fusion-faq.html>

   We hope to have a version on the actual PPPL Web server 
      (<URL:http://www.pppl.gov/>) soon.

   There are other sites which have made "unofficial" Web versions 
   from the newsgroup postings.  I haven't hunted all of these down 
   yet, but I know a major one is at this address:

 <URL:http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu:80/hypertext/faq/usenet/fusion-faq/top.html>

 Note that the "official" one will include a number of features
 which cannot be found on the "unofficial" ones created by
 automated software from the newsgroup postings.  In particular
 we hope to have links through the outline directly to questions,
 and between vocabulary words and their entries in the Glossary, 
 so that readers unfamiliar with the terminology can get help fast.

 (Special acknowledgements to John Wright at PPPL, who is handling
  much of the WWW development.)


* 3) FAQ Archives at FTP Sites (Anonymous FTP) - Intro

  All completed sections can also be obtained by anonymous FTP 
  from various FAQ archive sites, such as rtfm.mit.edu.  The
  address for this archive is:

    <ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq>

  Please note that sections which are listed above as having
  multiple parts (such as the glossary, and section 2) are 
  stored in subdirectories, where each part has its own
  filename; e.g., /fusion-faq/glossary/part0-intro. 

  Please note also that there are other locations in the rtfm
  filespace where fusion FAQ files are stored, but the reference
  given above is the easiest to use.

  There are a large number of additional FAQ archive sites,
  many of which carry the fusion FAQ.  These are listed below.


* 4) Additional FAQ archives worldwide (partial list)

  There are other FAQ archive sites around the world
  which one can try if rtfm is busy; a list is appended
  at the bottom of this file.


* 5) Mail Server

   If you do not have direct access by WWW or FTP, the 
   rtfm.mit.edu site supports "ftp by mail": send a message 
   to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with the following 3 lines
   in it (cut-and-paste if you like): 

send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview
send usenet-by-group/sci.answers/fusion-faq/section0-intro/part2-outline
quit

   The mail server will send these two introductory 
   files to you.  You can then use the outline (part2)
   to determine which files you want.  You can receive
   any or all of the remaining files by sending another
   message with the same general format, if you substitute
   the file archive names you wish to receive, in place of the 
   part "fusion-faq/section0-intro/part1-overview", etc. used above.


* 6) Additional Note / Disclaimer: 

  Not all sections of the FAQ have been written
  yet, nor have they all been "officially" posted.

  Thus, you may not find what you're looking for right away.

  Sections which are still being drafted are only
  posted to sci.physics.fusion.  If there's a section 
  you can't find, send me email and I'll let you know 
  what's up with it. 


 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
*** D. Status of the Conventional Fusion FAQ Project
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------

* 1) Written FAQ Sections:

  Most sections have been at least drafted, but many sections are still
  being written.  Sections 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, and 9
  remain to be completed.

  Those sections which have been written could use revising and improving.
  I am trying to obtain more information, especially on devices and 
  confinement approaches; I'm also looking for more information on 
  international fusion research, especially in Japan & Russia.

   *** I'd love any help you might be able to provide!! ***


* 2) Building a Web Version
                
  A "primitive" version (which has all the posted data, but isn't
  especially aesthetic) exists now.  Would like to add graphics and 
  cross-references to the Glossary, between FAQ sections, and 
  to other internet resources (like laboratory Web pages).  
 

* 3) Nuts & Bolts - 

  I'm looking for ways to enhance the distribution of the FAQ, and
  to get additional volunteer help for maintenance and updates.
  We are in the process of switching to automated posting via the 
  rtfm.mit.edu faq posting daemon.


* 4) Status of the Glossary:

 # Contains roughly 1000 entries, including acronyms, math terms, jargon, etc.

 # Just finished incorporating terms from the "Glossary of Fusion Energy"
   published in 1985 by the Dept. of Energy's Office of Scientific and
   Technical Information.

 # Also working to improve technical quality of entries (more formal.)

 # World Wide Web version exists, hope to cross-reference to FAQ.

 # Hope to have the Glossary "officially" added to PPPL Web pages.

 # Hope to distribute to students, policymakers, journalists, 
   scientists, i.e., to anyone who needs a quick reference to figure out 
   what we're really trying to say, or to decipher all the "alphabet 
   soup."  Scientists need to remember that not everyone knows those 
   "trivial" words we use every day.  The glossary and FAQ should be 
   useful in preparing for talks to lay audiences.  Students will 
   also find it useful to be able to look up unfamiliar technical jargon.


 ---------------------------------------------------------------------
*** E. Appendix: List of Additional FAQ Archive Sites Worldwide 
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------

(The following information was excerpted from the "Introduction to 
the *.answers newsgroups" posting on news.answers, from Sept. 9, 1994.)

Other news.answers/FAQ archives (which carry some or all of the FAQs
in the rtfm.mit.edu archive), sorted by country, are:

[ Note that the connection type is on the left.  I can't vouch
for the fusion FAQ being on all of these, but it should be
on some. - Bob Heeter ]


Belgium
-------

  gopher                cc1.kuleuven.ac.be port 70
  anonymous FTP         cc1.kuleuven.ac.be:/anonymous.202
  mail-server           listserv@cc1.kuleuven.ac.be  get avail faqs

Canada
------

  gopher                jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca port 70

Finland
-------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.funet.fi/pub/doc/rtfm

France
------

  anonymous FTP         grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq
                        grasp1.insa-lyon.fr:/pub/faq-by-newsgroup
  gopher                gopher.insa-lyon.fr, port 70
  mail server           listserver@grasp1.univ-lyon1.fr
  
Germany
-------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.Germany.EU.net:/pub/newsarchive/news.answers
                        ftp.informatik.uni-muenchen.de:/pub/comp/usenet/news.answers
                        ftp.uni-paderborn.de:/doc/FAQ
                        ftp.saar.de:/pub/usenet/news.answers (local access only)
  gopher                gopher.Germany.EU.net, port 70.
                        gopher.uni-paderborn.de
  mail server           archive-server@Germany.EU.net
                        ftp-mailer@informatik.tu-muenchen.de
                        ftp-mail@uni-paderborn.de
  World Wide Web        http://www.Germany.EU.net:80/
  FSP                   ftp.Germany.EU.net, port 2001
  gopher index          gopher://gopher.Germany.EU.net:70/1.archive
                        gopher://gopher.uni-paderborn.de:70/0/Service/FTP

Korea
-----

  anonymous ftp         hwarang.postech.ac.kr:/pub/usenet/news.answers

Mexico
------
  anonymous ftp         mtecv2.mty.itesm.mx:/pub/usenet/news.answers

The Netherlands
---------------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.cs.ruu.nl:/pub/NEWS.ANSWERS
  gopher                gopher.win.tue.nl, port 70
  mail server           mail-server@cs.ruu.nl

Sweden
------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.sunet.se:/pub/usenet

Switzerland
-----------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.switch.ch:/info_service/usenet/periodic-postings
  anonymous UUCP        chx400:ftp/info_service/Usenet/periodic-postings
  mail server           archiver-server@nic.switch.ch
  telnet                nic.switch.ch, log in as "info"

Taiwan
------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.edu.tw:/USENET/FAQ
  mail server           ftpmail@ftp.edu.tw

United Kingdon
--------------

  anonymous ftp         src.doc.ic.ac.uk:/usenet/news-faqs/
  FSP                   src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 21
  gopher                src.doc.ic.ac.uk port 70.
  mail server           ftpmail@doc.ic.ac.uk
  telnet                src.doc.ic.ac.uk login as sources
  World Wide Web        http://src.doc.ic.ac.uk/usenet/news-faqs/

United States
-------------

  anonymous ftp         ftp.uu.net:/usenet
  World Wide Web        http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu:80/hypertext/faq/usenet/top.html



cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenrfheeter cudfnRobert cudlnHeeter cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 /  jedrothwell@de /  Questions about Potapov from Parsec and Dunsmuir
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Questions about Potapov from Parsec and Dunsmuir
Date: Wed, 24 May 95 09:07:02 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

I mentioned that Potapov has installed more than 6,000 CF heaters in Russia
and Eastern Europe. I talked about this in my "Highlights of ICCF5" paper.
Parsec@worf.netins.net asks:
 
     "Who manufactures them?"
 
Vizor, Inc., Kishinev, Moldavia.
 
 
     "At what price?"
 
For the core heating elements of the machines, prices start at US$260 for the
12 KW units, in quantity. I do not know the cost of additional hardware like
the pumps, control units and heat exchangers. Much larger units are available.
 
 
     "Upon what principle do they operate?"
 
I have no idea. It must have something to do with ultrasound, the same as the
Griggs and Schaefer devices. I presume it is some sort of nuclear reaction,
but I have no proof of that. It cannot be chemical or stored energy.
 
 
     "What thermodynamic efficiency is claimed?"
 
I would like to quibble with the term "thermodynamic efficiency." That seems
to imply the machines are in the class of heat pumps, which store or move
heat. I think that what you want to know here is how much energy you get out
for each kilowatt-hour you put in, and that is not related to thermodynamic
efficiency per se, it is the efficiency with which the device can set up what
Storms calls "a nuclear-active state." Sometimes it takes a lot of energy to
set up and maintain that state, and sometimes it takes hardly any. As I said
to Droege, a CF device is not an amplifier. There is no fixed one-for-one
proportional relationship between input and output.
 
Having clarified that point, I will report that the input to output ratio for
the Potapov device ranges from 1:2 to 1:10, depending on various parameters
like flow rate, fluid temperature, and so on. It is similar to the Griggs
device, which has a definite range of operating conditions, and a recognizable
reaction onset. With the Potapov device, the effect turns on much more easily
and efficiency is far higher. I have not yet learned about the control
parameters in detail, and I cannot discuss them in depth for the reasons ably
enumerated by Alan Dunsmiur, who wrote:
 
     "Expect reply b(3) from Jed here. "I'm not going to do your damned
     research for you. Ask them yourself. It's all confidential information".
 
I think it is time for us to put Dunsmiur on the spot. I gather that Mr.
Dunsmiur is a scientist or an engineer at some corporation in the U.K. He says
he is in favor of open sharing of information. That is, he constantly demands
that *I* share information, including details of my personal finances, and
information I have received from corporations under secrecy agreements. I
think the readers of this forum should demand the very same thing from
Dunsmuir. Go ahead, Alan, tell us:
 
     Exactly what you do for a living, how much you earn, and how much you
     pay in taxes.
 
     Tell us about your company. ALL about it. Specifically, tell us about
     your work, including everything you know about: technical trade secrets;
     competitive information; the specifications for products now under
     development; troubles with current products; impending lawsuits and so
     on. Tell us everything! Let it all hang out! Let us see all your secrets
     and all your dirty corporate laundry.
 
Mind you, I have no intention of following suit. I would just like to see if
Dunsmuir is stupid enough to destroy his career and permanently mess up his
life by revealing information he is paid to shut up about. That's what he
keeps demanding from people in the CF business. I wonder if he is stupid
enough to do it himself.
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenjedrothwell cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 /  jedrothwell@de /  Re: Newsgroup reorganization fails
     
Originally-From: jedrothwell@delphi.com
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Newsgroup reorganization fails
Date: Wed, 24 May 95 09:12:36 -0500
Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice)

Steven Piet <RXFN56A@prodigy.com> writes:
 
>I'd welcome well written technical papers with data.  If they exist, I 
>would enjoy reading them and updating my judgements. It is certainly 
 
Good. Read Fusion Technology, and the following articles from other journals:
 
M. McKubre et al., "Isothermal flow calorimetric investigations of the D/Pd
and H/Pd systems,"  J. Electroanal. Chem. 368 (1994) 55
 
M. H. Miles (Naval Air Weapons Center), B. F. Bush (SRI), D. E. Stillwell
(CAES), "Calorimetric Principles and Problems in Measurements of Excess Power
during Pd-D2O Electrolysis," J. Phys. Chem. 1994, 98, p. 1948-1952
 
M. Fleischmann (Univ. Southampton), S. Pons (IMRA Europe), "Calorimetry of the
Pd-D2O system: from simplicity via complications to simplicity," Physics
Letters A, 176 (1993) 118-129
 
- Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenjedrothwell cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / mitchell swartz /  More of Dick Blue's super remarks
     
Originally-From: mica@world.std.com (mitchell swartz)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
Subject: Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
Date: Wed, 24 May 1995 13:31:08 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

Xref: world sci.physics.fusion:20126
  In Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.950524093615.27000A-100000@kemi.aau.dk>
Subject: Re: More of Dick Blue's super remarks
Dieter Britz <britz@kemi.aau.dk> wrote:

  >  I am sure that Cravens would avoid this like the plague (hence the
  > -packed bed, no gaps), because if ever 
  > -there was a scenario for recombination,
  > -this would be it; a cell in which hydrogen and oxygen are produced throughout
  > -the cell volume, and Pd film to catalyse their recombination. 
  >   Would cause some corrosively generated ions added to the
  > to the solution, too.
-What? What sort of ions? Please elaborate. Actually, and I hate to say this,
-what with the small overpotentials, you might get some peroxide... in the
-alkaline solution, they would be peroxide anions... oh no. Fortunately, it's
-hypothetical, it's a tightly packed bed. Phew.

  If a portion of metal becomes anodic, there is corrosion.
The nickel generates nickel cations and so forth.  They are 
solvated, and may form carbonate and hydroxide
precipitates.
   without 'sacrificial anodes' such effects wrecked havoc
in boston when the MBTA (underground subway with DC)
was turned on.  (check Uhlig's book on this, mate    ;-)
 
> -I must say, nevertheless, that I like this cell. I have said many times 
> -that if there be such an exotic nuclear process, it is very likely to be 
> -a near-surface effect, and one ought to maximise surface; a packed bed is
> -one good way to do that.
> 
> "near-surface effects" depend upon the ratio of loading and internal
> diffusion.  right, mate?  Therefore a function of material and other
> physical issues.


- I don't think there is anything wrong with vm1.nodak.edu as an ftp site.
--- Dieter Britz  alias  britz@kemi.aau.dk
  Thank you, will check it out.

   Mitchell Swartz (mica@world.std.com)



cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenmica cudfnmitchell cudlnswartz cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Steven Lucas /  interested in jobs, I have Phd in engr fluid mech.
     
Originally-From: nslucas@ix.netcom.com (Steven Lucas )
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.energy.hydrogen,sci.engr,sci.engr.civil,sci.e
gr.mech,sci.engr.fluids,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: interested in jobs, I have Phd in engr fluid mech.
Date: 24 May 1995 16:41:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom

PLEASE email me at 102057.2046@compuserve.com

currently senior engineer, looking for a challenge. 
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudennslucas cudfnSteven cudlnLucas cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Steven Lucas /  4sale...Gen network process thermal fluid sim prog with GUI for windows
     
Originally-From: nslucas@ix.netcom.com (Steven Lucas )
Newsgroups: sci.energy,sci.energy.hydrogen,sci.engr,sci.engr.civil,sci.e
gr.mech,sci.mech.fluids,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: 4sale...Gen network process thermal fluid sim prog with GUI for windows
Date: 24 May 1995 16:46:04 GMT
Organization: Netcom

send your emails to:

102057.2046@compuserve.com

i have an incredible general network process thermal fluid simulation 
program with graphical user interface

reply asap!
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudennslucas cudfnSteven cudlnLucas cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / John Logajan /  Re: Good news: PPPL funding will be gutted
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Good news: PPPL funding will be gutted
Date: 24 May 1995 16:26:38 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

Dieter Britz (britz@kemi.aau.dk) wrote:
: Inmates of USA seem to have the idea that business operates on a completely
: logical basis, and doesn't make mistakes....  Don't tell me that business
: has no momentum.

Well I can't speak for all of the inmates, but many of us recognize the
superiority of private versus public business *without* needing to assert
that private business is always right.  The distinction is that as often
as private business is wrong, public business is wrong far more often.

Human economic activity is a discovery process -- trying to discover
the best efficiencies, the best utilization of resources, the most
consistent with our wants and desires.

Such a discovery process depends wholly on multi-parallelistic "experiments"
and a feedback mechanism to cull out the misfires.

Public businesses start out, just as private businesses do, on an uncertain
path.  But the feedback mechanism for public businesses is totally
screwed up.  It is massively delayed, politicized, unanswerable to its
direct customers, is never expected to show a profit or loss statement,
etc etc etc.

Add to that the coercive nature of tax collection and you have a real
recipe for a ethical and practical nightmare.

--
 - 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:
cuddy24 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 / Your Planner /  cmsg cancel <3pugmg$h5r@baygull.rtd.com>
     
Originally-From: 675270.426639416(Your Lifetime Health Planner)
Newsgroups: control,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.particle,sci.physics.plasma
Subject: cmsg cancel <3pugmg$h5r@baygull.rtd.com>
Date: 24 May 1995 16:59:38 GMT

Excessive multi-posting (aka spam) cancelled by clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudfnYour cudlnPlanner cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.24 /  jonesse@plasma /  Re: "CF heater" available for purchase -- and testing!
     
Originally-From: jonesse@plasma.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: "CF heater" available for purchase -- and testing!
Date: 24 May 95 16:37:36 -0600
Organization: Brigham Young University

In article <R87fEYW.jedrothwell@delphi.com>, jedrothwell@delphi.com writes:
> I mentioned that Potapov has installed more than 6,000 CF heaters in Russia
> and Eastern Europe. I talked about this in my "Highlights of ICCF5" paper.
> Parsec@worf.netins.net asks:
>  
>      "Who manufactures them?"
>  
> Vizor, Inc., Kishinev, Moldavia.
>  
>  
>      "At what price?"
>  
> For the core heating elements of the machines, prices start at US$260 for the
> 12 KW units, in quantity. I do not know the cost of additional hardware like
> the pumps, control units and heat exchangers. Much larger units are available.
>  

--> Suggest that the funds remaining from Tom Droege's inspection of the
Griggs device be used now to purchase one of these "CF heaters" as Jed calls
them.  And that Tom inspect the machine relative to claims which follow:

>  
>      "Upon what principle do they operate?"
>  
> I have no idea. It must have something to do with ultrasound, the same as the
> Griggs and Schaefer devices. I presume it is some sort of nuclear reaction,
> but I have no proof of that. It cannot be chemical or stored energy.
                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>  
>  
>      "What thermodynamic efficiency is claimed?"
>  
> I would like to quibble with the term "thermodynamic efficiency." That seems
> to imply the machines are in the class of heat pumps, which store or move
> heat. I think that what you want to know here is how much energy you get out
> for each kilowatt-hour you put in, and that is not related to thermodynamic
> efficiency per se, it is the efficiency with which the device can set up what
> Storms calls "a nuclear-active state." Sometimes it takes a lot of energy to
> set up and maintain that state, and sometimes it takes hardly any. As I said
> to Droege, a CF device is not an amplifier. There is no fixed one-for-one
> proportional relationship between input and output.
>  
> Having clarified that point, I will report that the input to output ratio for
> the Potapov device ranges from 1:2 to 1:10, depending on various parameters
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> like flow rate, fluid temperature, and so on. It is similar to the Griggs
> device, which has a definite range of operating conditions, and a recognizable
> reaction onset. With the Potapov device, the effect turns on much more easily
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and efficiency is far higher. I have not yet learned about the control
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> parameters in detail, and I cannot discuss them in depth for the reasons ably
> enumerated by Alan Dunsmiur ...
[snip for brevity]  
> - Jed


How about it, Tom?  Any comments from those on s.p.f. who contributed to the 
previous exposee?   At least we have a claim of a working (light) water heater,
available for purchase.  Makes for a definitive test, one supposes.  And cheap,
too.  (Speaking of the cost of the device, not of the value of Tom's time.) 
cudkeys:
cuddy24 cudenjonesse cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.05.25 / John Logajan /  Re: "CF heater" available for purchase -- and testing!
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: "CF heater" available for purchase -- and testing!
Date: 25 May 1995 03:32:09 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

jonesse@plasma.byu.edu wrote:
: > prices start at US$260 for the 12 KW units, in quantity. I do not know the
: > cost of additional hardware like the pumps, control units and heat
: > exchangers.

: Suggest that the funds remaining from Tom Droege's inspection of the
: Griggs device be used now to purchase one of these "CF heaters" as Jed
: calls them.

I'd like to nominate Scott Little as a recipient, but a major problem
is actually taking possession of a device.  I think the $260 price
belies the actual cost of getting a device in hand.  And then you have
to buy the pumps etc.  A device capable of giving 12KW out (assuming
a factor of x3 gain) is going to require 4KW of pumping power, or
about 5-6 HP (my guess.)

Somehow I doubt the money remaining in the fund is going to put much
of a dent in the acquiring and testing the Potapov device.  But have
fun on your flight to Moldavia. :-)

--
 - 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:
cuddy25 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo5 cudqt2 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Thu May 25 04:37:04 EDT 1995
------------------------------
