I got the link to this video from the Talk:Energy Catalyzer page on Wikipedia.
Someone (ip address only) put the video up and the above title was the response to it. It wasn't given much respect. I would hope that they would take down such posts as abusive. If it isn't relevant as Grump also said, the post should be deleted.
If you were to look at this as a court case, would Mats Lewan be considered as a reliable witness to what he saw? His opinions would probably not be accepted as expert testimony. Would a scientist from Upsalla be considered reliable? His opinions may have some weight. Given his opinion and what Lewan saw, I don't think that it should be considered unreliable as to what they saw and the one scientists' opinion. If it was put before a court, and I was in a jury asked to decide upon it, I would need more than what I've read in criticism about it in order to give the criticisms any importance. Those who were there are to be given more credibility.
Krivit inspected the device once before, but what he said this time is not to be taken seriously. That was a different demonstration. And Krivit is not a scientist, so I have noticed. If he is, he is not mentioning it on the website he contributes to. This means that his words carry less weight than Lewan's and definitely less weight than the scientist.
You may disagree as to the significance of what the video represents, but treating it with disrespect is a bit out of bounds.
Al Fin: "Cowboy Commentary", aka "Eat your veggies" The Flag banner is posted in order to defy those who would make patriotic symbols illegal or disreputable.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
John Lennon, global warming skeptic?
Don Surber
Lennon's song "Imagine" could also refer to the solar system. He said people could live on the Moon. To paraphrase his song:
Imagine people living on the moon.
It isn't hard if you try.
Only Earth below us,
and above us there's no sky!
Lennon's song "Imagine" could also refer to the solar system. He said people could live on the Moon. To paraphrase his song:
Imagine people living on the moon.
It isn't hard if you try.
Only Earth below us,
and above us there's no sky!
What makes something popular, revisited
This is a continuation of the post originally made on July 23rd.
It seemed appropriate to revisit this post since this is a goal that is paramount in this kind of business- blogging, that is. After all, if nobody visits your blog, what's the point?
I've been doing this on a full time basis for over a year now, and I still don't know what brings people here. Or how to get more people. I have a faint idea of how to get more pageviews, but that's about it. But, I don't know the real reason why those people find my stuff interesting to read. In fact, outside of a few comments, I don't know how many people are actually reading my stuff at all.
Popularity is not a simple subject. I found that out when I went to the Wikipedia, which is one of my habits. Yeah, it may not be the best source of information in the world, but it is handy. The entry on the subject of popularity was quite short, amazingly enough. Now, unpopularity is a very long post. Perhaps popularity needs no explanation, but unpopularity does.
But you have to click on their links provided in the body of the entry to get the full flavor of it. It mentions value systems. Funny, I never thought that popularity and value systems went together. Yet, here is Wikipedia saying that it does. There is a claim of cult of personality that gets mentioned in the entry as well. But Wikipedia has a warning at the top of that linked page about too many weasel words.
A little digging and we find political religion. That's an offshoot of the cult of personality entry. I think Obama was headed down the cult of personality path. Evidently, he couldn't pull it off. Now, he is just another politician, not the "Messiah".
I just read Parapundit's post, in which he claims that Democracy has failed. I recall that he favored Obama in 2008. Now, he doesn't seem to be happy. Has Democracy failed, or has he failed? He compares California with the rest of the country. Yet the rest of the country isn't as financially irresponsible as California. Obama and the Democrats want to keep bailing out states like California. That's why they, in California, or in Washington, won't ever do anything about their failed government. If you stop bailing them out, they will have to fix their broken state. This is true in all cases. If you don't fix it, it will break down. There's no reason to fix it if there are those who won't allow it to be fixed.
Popularity may mean telling people what they want to hear. But what if they need to hear what they don't want to hear? Should you sacrifice the truth in order to remain in their good graces? If they are in bad enough shape, they will be forced to listen to what they don't want to listen to. No need to cater to their whims. Just stop doing that, and they will clean up. In the late seventies, New York went bankrupt, or nearly bankrupt. They weren't bailed out. The newspapers said: New York, drop dead. They didn't drop dead. They fixed up the mess and went on about their business.
But values should have some objective meaning aside from the cult of personality. Popularity is like the shifting sands of the desert. You can't count on it to last for the long term. You need some permanence, so as not to get lost in the maze of shifting circumstances. A cult of personality is no way to run your life, nor a railroad, nor a country for that matter.
Maybe my blog doesn't ever catch on. But I won't surrender my own values in order to succeed at this business. I write whatever is consistent with that. If nobody likes it, well, I'm sorry. Like Flip Wilson used to say. What you see is what you get!
Reverse-engineering visual data out of brain!
Say what???
the next step would be a device that can send visual signals into the brainUh, oh! Now that's what I'd call "mind control".
Space Companies Hatch Plans for Reusable Rockets
Technology Review
- In a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., in late September, Elon Musk, the CEO and chief technology officer of SpaceX, announced plans to develop a fully reusable version of the company's Falcon 9 rocket. ...I've come to the conclusion that it can be solved, and SpaceX is going to try and do it."
- Musk is backing up his speech with development work.
- SpaceX is not the only company actively working on an orbital reusable launch vehicle. Blue Origin, the secretive aerospace company founded by Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos, has NASA funding to mature the design of a space vehicle that could be launched on existing expendable rockets, such as the Atlas V.
Subscribed videos, 10/15/11
Philip DeFranco
Learn how to play electric blues guitar lesson in the style of Chuck Berry part 2
part 1 here
Annoying Orange: Microwave Effect
Learn how to play electric blues guitar lesson in the style of Chuck Berry part 2
part 1 here
Annoying Orange: Microwave Effect
Bill Maher bets $1 million Herman Cain won't be Republican nominee
Examiner.com
If Maher goes broke paying on this bet, will he go away? I'll be broken hearted. /snark
If Maher goes broke paying on this bet, will he go away? I'll be broken hearted. /snark
Sonarluminescence- is this nuclear fusion? (video)
I wonder if there's a connection between this phenomenon and Rossi's device. The reason is that the experiment of October 6th mentioned a "frequency" being produced, and this coincides with a significant increase in the energy production. This event of a frequency occurs just as the device goes into self sustain mode. This increase in energy also reminds me of Godes' demonstration video. Godes refers to it as "Q".
When "Q" is applied to the device, the reaction became much more energetic. So much so, it was easily observed. Watch the videos and see for yourself. The one below and the ones indicated to in the links above.
When "Q" is applied to the device, the reaction became much more energetic. So much so, it was easily observed. Watch the videos and see for yourself. The one below and the ones indicated to in the links above.
Friday, October 14, 2011
Are we on the Brink of an Energy Revolution?
Andrea Rossi to Build 1MW Power Plant --- by Al Fin, Oil Price.com via Real Clear Energy
Key quote:
Cold Fusion is going to cause a lot of people's heads to explode. Professors hate to rewrite their textbooks.
Key quote:
...want to know if an entire new branch of physics is about to be opened, with all the possibilities for new scientific knowledge and technology which that might meanComment:
Cold Fusion is going to cause a lot of people's heads to explode. Professors hate to rewrite their textbooks.
Congress, Governors Nix Obama's High-Speed Trains
Barone
Obama's belief in this stuff is misplaced. It will cost him votes.
...freight rail has squeezed out costs and made shipped goods much cheaper for all of us. Europe and Japan have lousy freight rail and pay more for things.
The reason that's important is that truly high-speed trains cannot use freight rail tracks. Freight trains travel slower and have a hard time getting out of the way of passenger trains traveling 200 miles per hour.
Obama's belief in this stuff is misplaced. It will cost him votes.
Nissan fuel cell stack with 250% of the energy density versus 2005 version
Next Big Future
Comment: But that shouldn't be a show stopper. You can reform hydrocarbons for the hydrogen. Someone mentioned sulfur poisoning. If that's the last remaining hurdle, we may see hydrogen powered vehicles soon.
The Nissan Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle (FCEV) is ready to go. They just need the hydrogen distribution network.
Comment: But that shouldn't be a show stopper. You can reform hydrocarbons for the hydrogen. Someone mentioned sulfur poisoning. If that's the last remaining hurdle, we may see hydrogen powered vehicles soon.
Without Independents, Obama Has No Chance of Victory
Morning Jay | The Weekly Standard
Comment: He may have a bigger problem than just independents. He is in trouble with Jews. And he may be in bigger trouble if Cain wins the nomination and can get some of the black vote, which typically goes 95 percent or more Democrat.
Comment: He may have a bigger problem than just independents. He is in trouble with Jews. And he may be in bigger trouble if Cain wins the nomination and can get some of the black vote, which typically goes 95 percent or more Democrat.
Star Parker: Herman Cain candidacy uplifts many Americans
Scripps Howard News Service
Well, I don't know about that, but what about this?
What is particularly frustrating is that the party out of power, the Republican Party, is supposed to be carrying the torch for these values. But it's barely happening. The Party has become bogged down with careerists, rearview-mirror thinkers and its own inside-the-beltway elite.
Well, I don't know about that, but what about this?
FRESNEL LENS HD plus additional optical secondary magnifying glass
Question: Can a magnifying glass improve the performance of a fresnel lens?
For the answer, watch this video:
For the answer, watch this video:
Pale Blue Dot as Seen from Angry Red Planet
I remember going to the movies when I was a kid and seeing this movie.
You can laugh now, but in the early sixties, people thought there were canals on Mars. We've come a long way, but there's still a long way to go.
Update:
YouTube has this small segment of the movie.
 |
| This image was snapped back in October 2007, from a distance of 142 million kilometers, and if you look closely, you can make out a few features on Earth. |
Update:
YouTube has this small segment of the movie.
Is Mining Rare Minerals on the Moon Vital to National Security?
Space.com
If all we want from the moon is water, we may as well not go.
- "Yes, we know there are local concentrations of REE on the moon," Pieters told SPACE.com, referring to rare earth elements by their acronym REE.
- KREEP is an acronym based on element symbols for the geochemical component in lunar rocks rich in potassium (K), rare-earth elements (REE), phosphorus (P), thorium, and other incompatible elements, Gertsch explained.
- KREEP is exposed on the lunar surface in certain areas, Gertsch said. Although rare earth elements are not themselves presently detectable by remote instruments, spotting thorium sharpens the ability to spot associated rare-earth elements on the moon's surface due to similar geochemical properties that caused them to crystallize under the same conditions, she added.
- "For rare earths, they are called rare for their low abundance, not economic value. However, some do have practical use in manufacturing, as in superconducting magnets," said Paul Spudis, a planetary scientist and leading advocate for exploring the moon at the Lunar and Planetary Institute in Houston.
- "The only possible use of such I have heard of is the possibility of mining lunar thorium not a rare earth, strictly speaking, but associated with them to fuel nuclear reactors for power generation at a lunar base. Quite a distant prospect, I suspect," Spudis advised.
- For Spudis, the real strategic lunar commodity is water.
If all we want from the moon is water, we may as well not go.
Czechs plan to heavily expand nuclear power, angering anti-nuke neighbors
Washington Post
Good for the Czechs. This Green stuff is for the birds. I don't have a problem with reducing carbon dioxide and reducing radioactive hazards, but eliminating these energy sources altogether is foolhardy. Those countries that are doing that are going to regret that decision.
Good for the Czechs. This Green stuff is for the birds. I don't have a problem with reducing carbon dioxide and reducing radioactive hazards, but eliminating these energy sources altogether is foolhardy. Those countries that are doing that are going to regret that decision.
Bad Idea: Group wants to retire the Electoral College
Radio Iowa
People can't get George Bush out of their system. The election of 2000, which saw Bush win even without a majority of the votes cast, has gotten into the heads of these people. It is hampering their judgment. There's at least one problem with their proposition, which is this: the Electoral College exists so as to make it a federal election.
The presidential election is not just one election, it is 50 state elections. A requirement that the popular vote becomes the deciding factor will change the federal nature of the election to a national one. How does that preserve liberty and justice? It won't, and it can't.
So, why does that happen?
Small states will lose influence. All of the attention will then focus in on large population centers which is where most of the votes are. Most parts of the country, consisting of small populations, will seem to disappear, and become irrelevant. This is not what was intended during the Constitutional Convention. In fact, before the Constitution could be ratified, small states had to be enpowered. That's why there are only 2 Senators for each state. That means every state has equality in the Senate. By having an Electoral College, smaller states have more influence than what would be indicated by their population alone. This gives the election its Federal quality. The Founding Fathers believed that the principle of federalism was a key to preserving liberty.
There's another problem with this. Let's say a blue state votes overwhelmingly for the Democrat, but the candidate loses anyway. By this law, all of their Electoral votes will go to the Republican even though the people of that state didn't vote for that candidate. How is that fair? Some people might figure that their votes don't matter anymore because it will be ignored anyway. Is that what we want? Do we really want to disenfranchise voters in that way? How does that preserve justice?
You can't retire the Electoral College by this method. You need an amendment to the constitution. The first time the above scenario occurs will be the last, and it must happen immediately, because states will often vote for the loser, and therefore it is impossible to avoid the above scenario.
For these two reasons alone, it is a bad idea. George Bush is gone, so forget about it. You can't do anything but cause even worse outcomes, judging by your own standards. For example, how does disenfranchising millions a fair outcome? Forget about Bush, he's history.
People can't get George Bush out of their system. The election of 2000, which saw Bush win even without a majority of the votes cast, has gotten into the heads of these people. It is hampering their judgment. There's at least one problem with their proposition, which is this: the Electoral College exists so as to make it a federal election.
The presidential election is not just one election, it is 50 state elections. A requirement that the popular vote becomes the deciding factor will change the federal nature of the election to a national one. How does that preserve liberty and justice? It won't, and it can't.
So, why does that happen?
Small states will lose influence. All of the attention will then focus in on large population centers which is where most of the votes are. Most parts of the country, consisting of small populations, will seem to disappear, and become irrelevant. This is not what was intended during the Constitutional Convention. In fact, before the Constitution could be ratified, small states had to be enpowered. That's why there are only 2 Senators for each state. That means every state has equality in the Senate. By having an Electoral College, smaller states have more influence than what would be indicated by their population alone. This gives the election its Federal quality. The Founding Fathers believed that the principle of federalism was a key to preserving liberty.
There's another problem with this. Let's say a blue state votes overwhelmingly for the Democrat, but the candidate loses anyway. By this law, all of their Electoral votes will go to the Republican even though the people of that state didn't vote for that candidate. How is that fair? Some people might figure that their votes don't matter anymore because it will be ignored anyway. Is that what we want? Do we really want to disenfranchise voters in that way? How does that preserve justice?
You can't retire the Electoral College by this method. You need an amendment to the constitution. The first time the above scenario occurs will be the last, and it must happen immediately, because states will often vote for the loser, and therefore it is impossible to avoid the above scenario.
For these two reasons alone, it is a bad idea. George Bush is gone, so forget about it. You can't do anything but cause even worse outcomes, judging by your own standards. For example, how does disenfranchising millions a fair outcome? Forget about Bush, he's history.
Obama Calls Boehner On Trade Bills, Gets Dressed Down
Right Wing News
Yes, this jobs bill is just political, not economic.
In reality, we haven’t seen a real world jobs plan from Obama and/or Democrats as of yet.
Yes, this jobs bill is just political, not economic.
Huckleberry Hound is not just barking at the Moon
The joint NASA and defense department mission known as Clementine was named after the song (see video below) which had the words- "lost and gone forever". Clementine found evidence of water on the moon. Since then, additional missions have verified the presence of water on the moon in permanently shadowed craters.
Huckleberry Hound sings "Clementine"
Huckleberry Hound sings "Clementine"
Morning Summary, 10/14
Good morning. A short post to let you know that I'm still out here.
First thing, I did a little housekeeping. The blog is getting a lot of posts, so there's a continual need to improve navigation of this thing. Well over 2000 posts.
I created a new category so as to break up the Space Colonization category into a sub category called "Moon Madness". Why use that as a label? I try to have a sense of humor here. People probably think colonizing the moon is insane, hence the self deprecating humor. Perhaps it really is crazy for me to spend my time on something that I will never do. But it is interesting to me, even if nobody else seems to be interested in it.
Here's some discussion of mild interest to me about the E-cat. No need to belabor the obvious. There needs to be more tests, but will Rossi do it? His mistake may be in trying to cast his skeptics as evil. He gives that impression because he uses the term "snakes" in order to describe his skeptics. Sometimes people are just incompetent, not evil. To his skeptics, Rossi may be the one who is evil. Some of what they are accusing him of doing would mean that he would be evil indeed, if they were right. But, I don't see Rossi as evil, nor his opponents. We need to be more dispassionate about these things. Science should be about reason, not emotion.
Can people be more reasonable? Or is that asking too much? Maybe comparable to expect that cats should bark, and dogs should go "meow".
First thing, I did a little housekeeping. The blog is getting a lot of posts, so there's a continual need to improve navigation of this thing. Well over 2000 posts.
I created a new category so as to break up the Space Colonization category into a sub category called "Moon Madness". Why use that as a label? I try to have a sense of humor here. People probably think colonizing the moon is insane, hence the self deprecating humor. Perhaps it really is crazy for me to spend my time on something that I will never do. But it is interesting to me, even if nobody else seems to be interested in it.
Here's some discussion of mild interest to me about the E-cat. No need to belabor the obvious. There needs to be more tests, but will Rossi do it? His mistake may be in trying to cast his skeptics as evil. He gives that impression because he uses the term "snakes" in order to describe his skeptics. Sometimes people are just incompetent, not evil. To his skeptics, Rossi may be the one who is evil. Some of what they are accusing him of doing would mean that he would be evil indeed, if they were right. But, I don't see Rossi as evil, nor his opponents. We need to be more dispassionate about these things. Science should be about reason, not emotion.
Can people be more reasonable? Or is that asking too much? Maybe comparable to expect that cats should bark, and dogs should go "meow".
Thursday, October 13, 2011
NASA Lunar Temperature Maps
Science Daily, Sept 2009
I wanted to see about temperature differences in order to determine if there was a way to exploit that for energy. It would be a Stirling device. The hot side would be in the sun and the cold side in the shade. The great difference in temperatures would offer an opportunity to exploit a temperature gradient for energy production.
Update:
I created a new category called "Moon Madness", which will also be a sidebar entry so that the history of the blog can be followed.
- "Most notable are the measurements of extremely cold temperatures within the permanently shadowed regions of large polar impact craters in the south polar region,"
- "Their presence greatly increases the likelihood that water or other compounds are frozen there. Diviner has lived up to its name."
- The moon's surface temperatures are among the most extreme of any planetary body in the solar system. Noontime surface temperatures near the lunar equator are hotter than boiling water, while nighttime surface temperatures on the moon are almost as cold as liquid oxygen.
- In the moon's polar regions, temperature maps also point to the locations of cold traps where water ice and other volatile materials may have accumulated.
- Diviner determines the temperature of the moon by measuring the intensity of infrared radiation emitted by the lunar surface. The hotter the surface, the greater the intensity of emitted infrared radiation.
I wanted to see about temperature differences in order to determine if there was a way to exploit that for energy. It would be a Stirling device. The hot side would be in the sun and the cold side in the shade. The great difference in temperatures would offer an opportunity to exploit a temperature gradient for energy production.
Update:
I created a new category called "Moon Madness", which will also be a sidebar entry so that the history of the blog can be followed.
Solar thruster calcs
Given that 25 kw of electrical power can be created and, assuming that this will lift 25 times 100 kg/kw equals 2500 kg giving a thrust to mass ratio of 1 to 1:
Let's break down the various components to see what we can come up with:
Allow 500 gallon tank, stainless steel for hydrogen storage, plus insulation 1000 lbs or 454 kg, 400 kg hydrogen fuel equals 854 kg for fuel and tank, 35 kg for a suncube 1 square meter times 64 suncubes to generate 25 kwh of electrical power in space. We don't need as much mass, because it is in space, no weather issues. So let's assume that you can cut the cubes weight down by 75%. That gives 560 kg. for the cubes. Together, the fuel and the power takes up 1414 kg.
Need a heat exchanger and a nozzle, pumps and plumbing. I am wondering if the heat exchanger and the nozzle can be combined. That would save mass, hopefully. Some of the plumbing will be inside the heat exchangers. This may not be comparable in weight, but this engine here would probably be powerful enough to lift off the moon. It's mass is 242 kg. If that is all it weighs, we don't need to worry about exotic new combination of heat exchange and nozzle. Double the mass for those two. That gives another 242 kg.
Summing up the two above paragraphs, we arrive at 1898 kg.
That leaves 602 kg. for all of the rest of your equipment before you even get to crew and crew hab.
But not to worry. The moon's gravitation is but 1/6 of Earth's, so the thrust to mass ratio can be less than 1 and still lift off. Perhaps it can be as low as 1/4 to 1. The Shuttle's thrust to mass at liftoff was 1.5 to 1, so if you take 1/6th of that, you get about 1/4. So, we have a lot of room left. Even if I underestimated by a factor of 2, it would still leave a ratio of 1/2, which is twice 1/4.
This exercise is speculative of course. I'm not qualified to do a thorough enough and accurate enough job for this, but given the possibility of not being too far off, it would appear that a lunar module could be constructed that would allow you to launch missions off the moon into lunar orbit and beyond. That could be back to Earth, or to a Lagrangian point where a more capable machine could take you to ??? Mars, maybe?
Let's break down the various components to see what we can come up with:
Allow 500 gallon tank, stainless steel for hydrogen storage, plus insulation 1000 lbs or 454 kg, 400 kg hydrogen fuel equals 854 kg for fuel and tank, 35 kg for a suncube 1 square meter times 64 suncubes to generate 25 kwh of electrical power in space. We don't need as much mass, because it is in space, no weather issues. So let's assume that you can cut the cubes weight down by 75%. That gives 560 kg. for the cubes. Together, the fuel and the power takes up 1414 kg.
Need a heat exchanger and a nozzle, pumps and plumbing. I am wondering if the heat exchanger and the nozzle can be combined. That would save mass, hopefully. Some of the plumbing will be inside the heat exchangers. This may not be comparable in weight, but this engine here would probably be powerful enough to lift off the moon. It's mass is 242 kg. If that is all it weighs, we don't need to worry about exotic new combination of heat exchange and nozzle. Double the mass for those two. That gives another 242 kg.
Summing up the two above paragraphs, we arrive at 1898 kg.
That leaves 602 kg. for all of the rest of your equipment before you even get to crew and crew hab.
But not to worry. The moon's gravitation is but 1/6 of Earth's, so the thrust to mass ratio can be less than 1 and still lift off. Perhaps it can be as low as 1/4 to 1. The Shuttle's thrust to mass at liftoff was 1.5 to 1, so if you take 1/6th of that, you get about 1/4. So, we have a lot of room left. Even if I underestimated by a factor of 2, it would still leave a ratio of 1/2, which is twice 1/4.
This exercise is speculative of course. I'm not qualified to do a thorough enough and accurate enough job for this, but given the possibility of not being too far off, it would appear that a lunar module could be constructed that would allow you to launch missions off the moon into lunar orbit and beyond. That could be back to Earth, or to a Lagrangian point where a more capable machine could take you to ??? Mars, maybe?
Solar powered thruster
It doesn't appear that you need that much energy to get off of the moon. It may even be possible to use a solar powered thruster, which uses hydrogen as a reaction mass, to do the trick. Landing may be a different matter, but taking off?
I remember watching the lunar module taking off from the lunar surface in the Apollo era. That thing was small. It is amazingly small for the job it was required to do. Think of how big a rocket was required in order to get that little thing on the lunar surface so that it could blast off like this:
I remember watching the lunar module taking off from the lunar surface in the Apollo era. That thing was small. It is amazingly small for the job it was required to do. Think of how big a rocket was required in order to get that little thing on the lunar surface so that it could blast off like this:
Lunar launch system
This is the brainstorm that I was thinking about. The idea was to use Fresnel lenses in order to heat up a reaction mass for thrust. The reaction mass would be hydrogen obtained from lunar water, presumed to be found in permanently shadowed craters near the polar regions.
After considering this for a little while, cold reality began to make its presence known. The question arose: what is the maximum temperature that can be reached by such a device? I'm not sure. It seems apparent from the video link above that temperatures of over 1000 Farenheit are possible. But is this enough and is this the limit?
That's a question I can't get an answer to very quickly. So, I am dropping that idea in favor of another proposition, which would include heating the reaction mass. There doesn't appear to be much doubt that you could get sufficient power to a device that could heat up some hydrogen to levels of a nuclear thermal rocket. If you could do that, you could get an Isp of around 800 or 900, which is nearly twice that of the recently retired Space Shuttles' main engines. Not bad for a compact device, and it would take no nukes to do it.
I recalled Parkins' device, which I covered previously here.
In the comments section, there's a mention of the NERVA nuclear thermal rocket, which was scheduled to be tested on Apollo 20, which was canceled. It was space ready.
Back to Parkins: It appears that his device used what is called gyrotrons in order to produce the microwave energy which heats up a heat exchanger. Hydrogen is passed through it and expelled through a nozzle for thrust.
What if a gyrotron could be made small enough so that it could heat up hydrogen in this manner so that it could be used for thrust in a spacecraft? I looked up gyrotrons on the wikipedia. On portable application for these devices is in the Active Denial System for the military.
Could such a device could be modified to make it useful for rocket propulsion? I think the answer could be yes. Another question is its mass and how much energy does it take and how much does it make?
Mass is important because it imposes great penalties on a rocket. Another question is the loss in that penalty worth it in terms of performance? If a rocket could get a 900 Isp with a thing like this, you may be willing to pay for that performance especially since you won't have the mass penalty of having to carry oxygen on board.
Parkins device kept the gyrotrons on the ground, but that imposes its own limits. If you had a portable one onboard, you could generate your own thrust from solar power and by using hydrogen as a reaction mass. The advantage of hydrogen is that it can enable rocket engines of high Isp to be constructed. With the gyrotrons, you eliminate the nuclear power component, which has the advantage in that that you won't need radiation shielding.
Could a device such a this have enough thrust to get off the moon? I'm still thinking about the subject. Back to that later.
Update:
I'm not sure about the Apollo 20 reference. But the Nerva nuclear thermal rocket was deemed space worthy. It could have flown. It was canceled because it was feared that it would be a commitment to an expensive foray to Mars. Therefore, it was not due to a failure, but to its success. The government was afraid of it, in other words.
After considering this for a little while, cold reality began to make its presence known. The question arose: what is the maximum temperature that can be reached by such a device? I'm not sure. It seems apparent from the video link above that temperatures of over 1000 Farenheit are possible. But is this enough and is this the limit?
That's a question I can't get an answer to very quickly. So, I am dropping that idea in favor of another proposition, which would include heating the reaction mass. There doesn't appear to be much doubt that you could get sufficient power to a device that could heat up some hydrogen to levels of a nuclear thermal rocket. If you could do that, you could get an Isp of around 800 or 900, which is nearly twice that of the recently retired Space Shuttles' main engines. Not bad for a compact device, and it would take no nukes to do it.
I recalled Parkins' device, which I covered previously here.
In the comments section, there's a mention of the NERVA nuclear thermal rocket, which was scheduled to be tested on Apollo 20, which was canceled. It was space ready.
Back to Parkins: It appears that his device used what is called gyrotrons in order to produce the microwave energy which heats up a heat exchanger. Hydrogen is passed through it and expelled through a nozzle for thrust.
What if a gyrotron could be made small enough so that it could heat up hydrogen in this manner so that it could be used for thrust in a spacecraft? I looked up gyrotrons on the wikipedia. On portable application for these devices is in the Active Denial System for the military.
 |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Active_Denial_System_Humvee.jpg |
Mass is important because it imposes great penalties on a rocket. Another question is the loss in that penalty worth it in terms of performance? If a rocket could get a 900 Isp with a thing like this, you may be willing to pay for that performance especially since you won't have the mass penalty of having to carry oxygen on board.
Parkins device kept the gyrotrons on the ground, but that imposes its own limits. If you had a portable one onboard, you could generate your own thrust from solar power and by using hydrogen as a reaction mass. The advantage of hydrogen is that it can enable rocket engines of high Isp to be constructed. With the gyrotrons, you eliminate the nuclear power component, which has the advantage in that that you won't need radiation shielding.
Could a device such a this have enough thrust to get off the moon? I'm still thinking about the subject. Back to that later.
Update:
I'm not sure about the Apollo 20 reference. But the Nerva nuclear thermal rocket was deemed space worthy. It could have flown. It was canceled because it was feared that it would be a commitment to an expensive foray to Mars. Therefore, it was not due to a failure, but to its success. The government was afraid of it, in other words.
Morning Summary, 10/13/11
Good morning.
There's not too much more to say about Krivit. After that post, I can't take the dude seriously anymore.
But there's no guarantee that the E-cat will be successful in the long run. Mazda stopped making its rotary engines. A successful concept, but doesn't fit the current market demand. How the E-cat does in the market largely depends upon finding a market for it. I think we are getting to the point where the doubts about its viability are going to be resolved one way or another. Even if it's conceptually viable, it needs to find its market. Or like the rotary engine, it may not make it.
Changing the subject a bit, I've got another brainstorm that I thinking about. It is related to space and it is starting to consume a lot of my thinking. One problem about spaceflight is getting to space economically. Once you get to LEO, you've still got a problem to solve. How to get out of the Earth's gravitation is still a problem. You need a way to do that too. Basically, that is what I am thinking about right now. If I have anything else to post on it, I'll put it up here.
So I'll be keeping my noses in books and such. Posting may be light for awhile. I'll keep up with the usual stuff. Markets and politics and so forth. Just letting you know I'm still out here. So, stay tuned.
There's not too much more to say about Krivit. After that post, I can't take the dude seriously anymore.
But there's no guarantee that the E-cat will be successful in the long run. Mazda stopped making its rotary engines. A successful concept, but doesn't fit the current market demand. How the E-cat does in the market largely depends upon finding a market for it. I think we are getting to the point where the doubts about its viability are going to be resolved one way or another. Even if it's conceptually viable, it needs to find its market. Or like the rotary engine, it may not make it.
Changing the subject a bit, I've got another brainstorm that I thinking about. It is related to space and it is starting to consume a lot of my thinking. One problem about spaceflight is getting to space economically. Once you get to LEO, you've still got a problem to solve. How to get out of the Earth's gravitation is still a problem. You need a way to do that too. Basically, that is what I am thinking about right now. If I have anything else to post on it, I'll put it up here.
So I'll be keeping my noses in books and such. Posting may be light for awhile. I'll keep up with the usual stuff. Markets and politics and so forth. Just letting you know I'm still out here. So, stay tuned.
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Yahoo Breakout: Gold to $1,300 and 3 Other Commodity Shockers
A full 100% retrace of the recent rally in gold. He thinks the dollar leads. Wants to short Euro.
Titanium deposits on the moon discovered that are ten times the best concentration on Earth
Next Big Future
Comment: I looked up what John S. Lewis had to say about the moon in his book Mining the Sky. You can make your own oxygen and iron from materials close at hand. With any water available in lunar polar regions, you will then have water, oxygen, and a building material. It is possible to see how one can begin to put together permanent structures and live there.
Comment: I looked up what John S. Lewis had to say about the moon in his book Mining the Sky. You can make your own oxygen and iron from materials close at hand. With any water available in lunar polar regions, you will then have water, oxygen, and a building material. It is possible to see how one can begin to put together permanent structures and live there.
Krivit's claims of failure of the E-cat
I haven't bothered to read Krivit until this very morning. I have to say that I am shocked.
He claims failure, but I really don't buy what he says. I'm sure Krivit has far more credentials than I do. What he says may be believed by those who would weigh what one says against the other. But I think that he is wrong- on the basis of what he says himself.
It appears to me that he is ignoring the energy that is going out continuously during the heat up phase. Does he not understand the basic set up? The set up, as I understand it, was to measure the heat exchanged from the E-cat via a heat exchanger away from the E-cat. It doesn't matter how the water got heated, the heat exchanger at that point would measure any heat source regardless of how it got there.
Krivit assumes a heat buildup which runs the E-cat in self sustain mode. Hah! This is either a deliberate distortion or he simply doesn't get the set up. Energy is always flowing out. Always.
So, during the buildup phase, energy is flowing out of the E-cat into the secondary heat exchanger. The evidence of this is provided by the data.
Therefore, you can measure energy production which was occurring during the buildup. It appeared to me that the E-cat was already producing more energy than it was consuming. Again, this is based upon the continuous flow of energy that was being measured throughout the test.
The electrical energy measured going into the heater was being measured by a device. You can calculate the energy there as input. The steam output was measured at the E-cat, and once again at the secondary heat exchanger. You can watch the heat buildup phase and, then as it got to 100 degree Centigrade, the boiling point of water, the secondary temperatures begin to rise. This indicates a heat exchange taking place at that location. This is how the output energy was calculated. The delta t's ( change in temperature) allowed you to calculate the output energy based upon the assumption that you were dealing with water. Given the fact that it began to record heat exchange at the boiling point of water, it would seem to confirm that it was indeed, water.
People seem to be throwing crap against the wall and hope that something sticks.
Get real.
He claims failure, but I really don't buy what he says. I'm sure Krivit has far more credentials than I do. What he says may be believed by those who would weigh what one says against the other. But I think that he is wrong- on the basis of what he says himself.
It appears to me that he is ignoring the energy that is going out continuously during the heat up phase. Does he not understand the basic set up? The set up, as I understand it, was to measure the heat exchanged from the E-cat via a heat exchanger away from the E-cat. It doesn't matter how the water got heated, the heat exchanger at that point would measure any heat source regardless of how it got there.
Krivit assumes a heat buildup which runs the E-cat in self sustain mode. Hah! This is either a deliberate distortion or he simply doesn't get the set up. Energy is always flowing out. Always.
So, during the buildup phase, energy is flowing out of the E-cat into the secondary heat exchanger. The evidence of this is provided by the data.
Therefore, you can measure energy production which was occurring during the buildup. It appeared to me that the E-cat was already producing more energy than it was consuming. Again, this is based upon the continuous flow of energy that was being measured throughout the test.
The electrical energy measured going into the heater was being measured by a device. You can calculate the energy there as input. The steam output was measured at the E-cat, and once again at the secondary heat exchanger. You can watch the heat buildup phase and, then as it got to 100 degree Centigrade, the boiling point of water, the secondary temperatures begin to rise. This indicates a heat exchange taking place at that location. This is how the output energy was calculated. The delta t's ( change in temperature) allowed you to calculate the output energy based upon the assumption that you were dealing with water. Given the fact that it began to record heat exchange at the boiling point of water, it would seem to confirm that it was indeed, water.
People seem to be throwing crap against the wall and hope that something sticks.
Get real.
About the 10/11/11 debate
I watched about an hour and a half of it. An hour and a half was plenty enough for me. Once they started with the "man in the street stuff", I turned it off. I expected a lot of those silly assed hypothetical questions again.
I am a bit surprised at how negative the conservative pundits are in reporting about the candidates.
Romney favored TARP, it is said. That won't help him with the Tea Party. Ok, I was against TARP also, but not against supporting people who had nothing to do with the melt down. The thing that I didn't like about TARP and the subsequent handling of the economy was because it appeared to bail out the people who were responsible. This may sound too much like these other leftist crazies, but I'll risk that. I'd like to think that the people who deserved to be protected would get protection. Let the others pay of their own mistakes. Romney talked like he'd go that way, so it wasn't all that bad for him.
Cain was said to be "naive" for his 9-9-9 plan. Actually, it is not a bad idea. The proposition changes the incentive structure towards production and away from consumption. It stops penalizing success, hard work, and thrift. That is just what the doctor ordered, in my opinion. As for giving the government another revenue stream, that won't matter if we get our spending house in order. If we don't control spending, we are cooked in any case. There would be a risk, but if the spending side gets addressed, the risk is much less.
Perry is getting slammed again. But his idea of going all out on energy production is another good idea. Unfortunately for Perry, another slow talking, drawling Texan may not be in the cards this time around.
In general, I thought Romney was the focus of the discussion. A lot of the questions by candidates of each other went towards Romney. That gave him more of the face time, and he seemed to make the most of it. I think for that reason, he probably comes out on top in this debate.
If Romney wins the nomination, it won't break my heart. But I would worry about the dude.
He seems like the safe candidate. Safe in the sense that he won't scare people, and safe because he seems to be a nice enough guy. Safe also in that he appears to bring competence to the table.
I am a bit surprised at how negative the conservative pundits are in reporting about the candidates.
Romney favored TARP, it is said. That won't help him with the Tea Party. Ok, I was against TARP also, but not against supporting people who had nothing to do with the melt down. The thing that I didn't like about TARP and the subsequent handling of the economy was because it appeared to bail out the people who were responsible. This may sound too much like these other leftist crazies, but I'll risk that. I'd like to think that the people who deserved to be protected would get protection. Let the others pay of their own mistakes. Romney talked like he'd go that way, so it wasn't all that bad for him.
Cain was said to be "naive" for his 9-9-9 plan. Actually, it is not a bad idea. The proposition changes the incentive structure towards production and away from consumption. It stops penalizing success, hard work, and thrift. That is just what the doctor ordered, in my opinion. As for giving the government another revenue stream, that won't matter if we get our spending house in order. If we don't control spending, we are cooked in any case. There would be a risk, but if the spending side gets addressed, the risk is much less.
Perry is getting slammed again. But his idea of going all out on energy production is another good idea. Unfortunately for Perry, another slow talking, drawling Texan may not be in the cards this time around.
In general, I thought Romney was the focus of the discussion. A lot of the questions by candidates of each other went towards Romney. That gave him more of the face time, and he seemed to make the most of it. I think for that reason, he probably comes out on top in this debate.
If Romney wins the nomination, it won't break my heart. But I would worry about the dude.
He seems like the safe candidate. Safe in the sense that he won't scare people, and safe because he seems to be a nice enough guy. Safe also in that he appears to bring competence to the table.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Solidarity with “Occupy Wall Street”
Teleconference Oct 11 » cpusa
Are Democrats really, really sure they want to be associated with this bunch?
Are Democrats really, really sure they want to be associated with this bunch?
Europe: EC, IMF, ECB says aid likely for Greece, S...
Calculated Risk: Statement by the European Commission, the ECB and IMF on the Fifth Review Mission to Greece Staff teams from the European Commission (EC), E...
Slovakia Rejects Euro Bailout
I don't know what this will mean for the markets tomorrow. If you pay attention to what the talking heads say, tomorrow could be a bad day.
Slovakia Rejects Euro Bailout
I don't know what this will mean for the markets tomorrow. If you pay attention to what the talking heads say, tomorrow could be a bad day.
Ukraine jails Tymoshenko for 7 years, irks EU, Russia
Reuters
Tymoshenko's supporters say the trial was part of Yanukovich's plans to eliminate her as his only real opposition. If she ends up serving a long prison term, she will be unable to contest a parliamentary election next year or run again for president in 2015.
For Tymoshenko, the style-conscious heroine of the 2004 popular "Orange Revolution" that doomed Yanukovich's first bid for the presidency, her jailing was the latest chapter in a rollercoaster political career of highs and lows.
Subscribed videos
These are subscribed most recent videos from my YouTube page.
The first one here isn't on my subsribed list, but I'll include it anyway
YouTube Space Lab - What Will You Do?
Columbus vs Captain Kirk. Epic Rap Battles of History #14
Chuck Berry style bluesy guitar lesson rhythms and leads with tabs part 1
The Job Reference
The first one here isn't on my subsribed list, but I'll include it anyway
YouTube Space Lab - What Will You Do?
Columbus vs Captain Kirk. Epic Rap Battles of History #14
Chuck Berry style bluesy guitar lesson rhythms and leads with tabs part 1
The Job Reference
Cain: The Godfather's years
Omaha.com
Excerpts:
Excerpts:
- Some of those who worked with Cain during his 13 years in Omaha say he was a hands-on leader of a team of managers and shares credit for stabilizing the company, particularly for his inspiration and his focus on marketing strategies that worked.
- But Tim McMahon, who was Godfather's marketing director under founder Willy Theisen, told The World-Herald that Cain, though charismatic, "simply doesn't register as a significant force" in Godfather's success.
- that it was longtime executive Ronald Gartlan, now CEO, "who provided the operational stability and focus on customer satisfaction over the long haul."
- In the recent interview, Cain called Gartlan "my key guy."
- He fired some managers, hired some new ones and promoted others, including Gartlan.
- Gartlan came to Godfather's as an accountant brought in from the firm then known as Coopers & Lybrand to prepare for a public sale of stock in 1982. By the time Cain arrived in 1986, Gartlan already had solid franchise experience,
Second Anniversary
Not really. The reason I brought it up though, was because I've been thinking about this blog, and I noticed that the anniversary passed without my noticing.
For the record, it was the 15th of September. Almost a month late. That's not unusual for me to forget these kinds of things.
While I was thinking about the blog, I set up several new categories as the blog has gotten bigger. They are a best of series for each major category of posts. Now you can bring up the best of one category at a click and read through it at your leisure. "Best of" is defined as the most popular in that category.
So "Best of" means most popular, but I don't necessarily agree that it is my best stuff. But that is the way things go in the real world. Doesn't matter what I think, it is what everybody else is interested in. Unfortunately, that doesn't always square with what I'm interested in. Somehow, you have to find common ground, and that is easier said than done.
The blog has been doing well lately, relatively speaking. It is still quite obscure in the blog universe.
I've gotten a few ideas by going over the most popular stuff. It may give me ideas on how to improve the performance metrics of the blog. I've gotten a few clues.
What I would really like to do is make things happen. This may not be the best way to do that. Perhaps no one looks at bloggers as rainmakers.
For the record, it was the 15th of September. Almost a month late. That's not unusual for me to forget these kinds of things.
While I was thinking about the blog, I set up several new categories as the blog has gotten bigger. They are a best of series for each major category of posts. Now you can bring up the best of one category at a click and read through it at your leisure. "Best of" is defined as the most popular in that category.
So "Best of" means most popular, but I don't necessarily agree that it is my best stuff. But that is the way things go in the real world. Doesn't matter what I think, it is what everybody else is interested in. Unfortunately, that doesn't always square with what I'm interested in. Somehow, you have to find common ground, and that is easier said than done.
The blog has been doing well lately, relatively speaking. It is still quite obscure in the blog universe.
I've gotten a few ideas by going over the most popular stuff. It may give me ideas on how to improve the performance metrics of the blog. I've gotten a few clues.
What I would really like to do is make things happen. This may not be the best way to do that. Perhaps no one looks at bloggers as rainmakers.
Dems aggressively counter Republican attacks on anti-Wall Street protests
TheHill.com
The protesters don't speak for me. I've always been a working class American. They are a small fringe. They have no broad support.
It looks like an Astroturf operation to me.
Update:
Matthew Knee posts at Legal Insurrection: Mars Ain’t The Kind of Place To Raise Your Kids…
More here...
Update:
Jonah Goldberg - The Corner - National Review Online: Democratic Party Going All-In on Occupy Wall Street
Comment: If the Democrats think they can win with this, I think they are badly mistaken.
Video:
Michael Moore and his pals are behind this. Michael Moore is a joke.
The protesters don't speak for me. I've always been a working class American. They are a small fringe. They have no broad support.
It looks like an Astroturf operation to me.
Update:
Matthew Knee posts at Legal Insurrection: Mars Ain’t The Kind of Place To Raise Your Kids…
More here...
Update:
Jonah Goldberg - The Corner - National Review Online: Democratic Party Going All-In on Occupy Wall Street
Comment: If the Democrats think they can win with this, I think they are badly mistaken.
Video:
Michael Moore and his pals are behind this. Michael Moore is a joke.
Are you a betting man?
As for me, not so much. But I've played the markets, and that is a risk taking venture. Perhaps there are those who think that the markets are just a big casino, so, in that case, I've done some betting in my time.
With respect to the controversy of the E-cat, I would be willing to bet someone that it works, provided that the terms of the bet could be worked out. The terms would have to ones I could take, because I really can't afford to lose the bet. I would be willing to put some money into it, though.
In order to prove or disprove the E-cat, I can envision a lot of people on both sides of the issue getting together and putting their money into a winner's purse. The terms of the bet would be negotiated. The purse would have to be at least the cost of another demonstration. Of course, Rossi would have to agree to make one. Provided that enough funds could be made available, and the terms of a definite outcome could be agreed upon, a bet may be possible to arrange.
Anybody interested?
With respect to the controversy of the E-cat, I would be willing to bet someone that it works, provided that the terms of the bet could be worked out. The terms would have to ones I could take, because I really can't afford to lose the bet. I would be willing to put some money into it, though.
In order to prove or disprove the E-cat, I can envision a lot of people on both sides of the issue getting together and putting their money into a winner's purse. The terms of the bet would be negotiated. The purse would have to be at least the cost of another demonstration. Of course, Rossi would have to agree to make one. Provided that enough funds could be made available, and the terms of a definite outcome could be agreed upon, a bet may be possible to arrange.
Anybody interested?
Monday, October 10, 2011
Free Hank Williams song- better hurry to get it
Hank Williams made a song in response to the flap about what he said recently. He made a song that is available for free, but only for a very limited time. Click on the link below for your free download.
Apologies? Nope. Looking for one?
Apologies? Nope. Looking for one?
Rash judgment?
A little about what I've been doing today.
After writing about Moonrush, I listened to the Space Show when the guest was Dr. Robert (Bob) Richards, who has an entry in the Lunar X prize competition.
After that, I went back and looked at the E-cat news on Peswiki. I downloaded a copy of the spreadsheet data file and was going to make a graph of the results, but it was too difficult to work with. I gave up on that.
There was a pretty negative quote on Peswiki which claimed that the thermocouples were in the wrong place and so forth.
It begins to appear that there are questions which weren't apparent to me before. If the data is in any way questionable, there's a problem. Those who were there say that the machine was producing energy, though. Then I looked at the list of people who were there. I didn't recognize many of the names.
I'm stepping back a bit from this as it appears that I may have made a rash judgment.
Update:
One more thing: the energy output after the E-cat was put on self sustain- that was too impressive to be ignored or discounted. There should be another test. But Rossi had better silence all the doubters, or they'll win. Belief alone can't win- you need incontrovertible evidence.
After writing about Moonrush, I listened to the Space Show when the guest was Dr. Robert (Bob) Richards, who has an entry in the Lunar X prize competition.
After that, I went back and looked at the E-cat news on Peswiki. I downloaded a copy of the spreadsheet data file and was going to make a graph of the results, but it was too difficult to work with. I gave up on that.
There was a pretty negative quote on Peswiki which claimed that the thermocouples were in the wrong place and so forth.
It begins to appear that there are questions which weren't apparent to me before. If the data is in any way questionable, there's a problem. Those who were there say that the machine was producing energy, though. Then I looked at the list of people who were there. I didn't recognize many of the names.
I'm stepping back a bit from this as it appears that I may have made a rash judgment.
Update:
One more thing: the energy output after the E-cat was put on self sustain- that was too impressive to be ignored or discounted. There should be another test. But Rossi had better silence all the doubters, or they'll win. Belief alone can't win- you need incontrovertible evidence.
ELECTRIC LIGHT DISCO BABY // SINGLE RELEASE // FRIDAY 7TH OCTOBER
glitterpunchofficial
Looks like CarylCake has her new band (Glitterpunch is the name, I think) up and running.
Looks like CarylCake has her new band (Glitterpunch is the name, I think) up and running.
Moon 2.0: Join the Revolution - HD High Definition
Good morning.
I am perusing the Lunar X Prize site to see who's out there and what they intend to do on the moon. This is in connection to the Moonrush post, which may be a useful proposition to colonize the moon without costing the taxpayers a dime.
Update:
LCROSS mission may have struck silver on the moon - space - 21 October 2010 - New Scientist
I had forgotten about this. You could make coins out of the silver deposits where you also find water. Cool!
Update:
You could make 1/10 oz. silver coins and have a face value of 1000 dollars. That would mean that you could mine 100 metric tons for 35 billion. The coins' face value would be about 300 times its constituent metal's value. This would be a premium of about 10 to 1. Too expensive? That would be a lot of coins too- 352000 per ton. You could mine less of the stuff and mine other things later. Silver could be the lowest hanging fruit, though.
I am perusing the Lunar X Prize site to see who's out there and what they intend to do on the moon. This is in connection to the Moonrush post, which may be a useful proposition to colonize the moon without costing the taxpayers a dime.
Update:
LCROSS mission may have struck silver on the moon - space - 21 October 2010 - New Scientist
I had forgotten about this. You could make coins out of the silver deposits where you also find water. Cool!
Update:
You could make 1/10 oz. silver coins and have a face value of 1000 dollars. That would mean that you could mine 100 metric tons for 35 billion. The coins' face value would be about 300 times its constituent metal's value. This would be a premium of about 10 to 1. Too expensive? That would be a lot of coins too- 352000 per ton. You could mine less of the stuff and mine other things later. Silver could be the lowest hanging fruit, though.
Sunday, October 9, 2011
Moonrush
In case you are not familiar, this is Dennis Wingo's book about In Situ Resourcing on the moon. It was an inspiration for the book, Platinum Moon, discussed previously on this blog with respect to LENR.
It isn't new material, so there's not a lot to say. Something occurred to me in connection with the recent debt negotiations. There was an idea to use a coin to retire debt, then to raise new debt so as to fund the government. Why not fund Wingo's idea to fund a concept to mine pgms and then use those pgms to finance the enterprise?
It would work like this: the mission would finance it with bonds purchased by the Fed. That's like Quantitative Easing, but the twist is to retire the debt when the platinum comes back from the moon. That is, to make coins from the platinum mined from the moon. How many coins? That would depend upon the denomination that you need to choose.
For example, if you were to bring back 1 metric ton, it would raise 39 billion dollars if the coins were denominated at a million apiece. If 10 tons were to be brought back, it would be reduced to 100k, and so forth.
Wingo's ideas wouldn't require that much money, according to his book. So, $39 billion would give plenty of wiggle room. He believes there could be a lot of pgms on the moon due to asteroidal impacts. He says that rich deposits of pgms on Earth are of the same type. In fact, if this theory is correct, and it appears to be good reason to believe that it is, we are already using asteroidal metals. That explains the logic of his proposal. So, if the pgms came to Earth by way of asteroidal impacts, it should be true for the moon as well.
There is some iffy parts to this, of which the presence of pgms is one. Another is the financing scheme just outlined. There are those who would find fault with this idea, I'm sure. But it would be legal, as far as I know.
Technically, it appears quite doable, as Wingo lays it out in detail. On the Space Show recently, he said he doubted that the government would do his type of proposal. ( By conventional financing, not like this financing proposal I just mentioned, which is shall we say, "creative".)
That means that private industry would have to undertake the project, but are the amounts of money he discusses "a bridge too far"? He doesn't think so, but the speculative part about the pgms would possibly make it so. In that case, somebody would have to do a prospecting mission to look for pgms, and that may not be too far outside of the realm of possibilities.
Yet, if the government did it, that part wouldn't be too ambitious. But is the government interested? He seems to be doubtful on this point.
If the government is not, it may take the private sector to do it all, just like in the book Platinum Moon. But there ought to be a way to do these things, because money should not be an issue, provided that the proposition is sound.
Update:
I did some checking on the internet with respect to the metal value of a coin. A Sacajawea coin is worth about 3 cents for its metal. That's a 30 to 1 ratio. For collectible coins, the market value can be a multiple of its face value. Let's say another 30 to 1 ratio. In other words, a coin that costs the government 3 cents to make can be sold for nearly 1000 times what it cost to obtain the metal to make it.
Now, let's look at platinum. It can be bought on the open market now for about the price of gold - 1600 an ounce. If you multiply 1600 times 1000 you get 1.6 million dollars for each coin. So, asking putting a face value of 1 million on each coin is not out of the question. Most likely, people will not want to collect it though.
If you were to coin 35,200 of them at 1 million apiece, you would obtain the 35 billion dollars. This would take 1 metric ton of the metal to do it. Would there be 35,200 "purchases" of a coin struck of lunar platinum? Making it legal tender would obviate the need to sell it. If you coined 35,000 of them at 100k, you would only raise $3.5 billion. But at 100k, you get closer to the same ratio that you have with the ordinary currency.
Lunar platinum coins would be worth more than an ordinary coin because of its novelty. Plus if it was a limited edition coin such as this, it would have even greater value. You could probably give it a 100k denomination and then sell it on the market for whatever it could bring. Hopefully, it could fetch a premium on the face value, comparable to the Susan B Anthony dollar, thus recovering all of the debt and retiring it without costing the government a dime.
All of this from mining and refining on the lunar surface 1 metric ton of platinum. The 2002 output of platinum in the USA was about 4 times that number, according to Wingo's book. If they got really lucky, they may find a motherload worth a lot more than that.
It's worth looking into, don't you think?
Update:
The Sacajawea coin costs about 6 cents. That is a bit different, but it could still work.
Update:
I tweeted and Facebooked this post. I welcome any criticism of the idea. Tell me where this is wrong.
It isn't new material, so there's not a lot to say. Something occurred to me in connection with the recent debt negotiations. There was an idea to use a coin to retire debt, then to raise new debt so as to fund the government. Why not fund Wingo's idea to fund a concept to mine pgms and then use those pgms to finance the enterprise?
It would work like this: the mission would finance it with bonds purchased by the Fed. That's like Quantitative Easing, but the twist is to retire the debt when the platinum comes back from the moon. That is, to make coins from the platinum mined from the moon. How many coins? That would depend upon the denomination that you need to choose.
For example, if you were to bring back 1 metric ton, it would raise 39 billion dollars if the coins were denominated at a million apiece. If 10 tons were to be brought back, it would be reduced to 100k, and so forth.
Wingo's ideas wouldn't require that much money, according to his book. So, $39 billion would give plenty of wiggle room. He believes there could be a lot of pgms on the moon due to asteroidal impacts. He says that rich deposits of pgms on Earth are of the same type. In fact, if this theory is correct, and it appears to be good reason to believe that it is, we are already using asteroidal metals. That explains the logic of his proposal. So, if the pgms came to Earth by way of asteroidal impacts, it should be true for the moon as well.
There is some iffy parts to this, of which the presence of pgms is one. Another is the financing scheme just outlined. There are those who would find fault with this idea, I'm sure. But it would be legal, as far as I know.
Technically, it appears quite doable, as Wingo lays it out in detail. On the Space Show recently, he said he doubted that the government would do his type of proposal. ( By conventional financing, not like this financing proposal I just mentioned, which is shall we say, "creative".)
That means that private industry would have to undertake the project, but are the amounts of money he discusses "a bridge too far"? He doesn't think so, but the speculative part about the pgms would possibly make it so. In that case, somebody would have to do a prospecting mission to look for pgms, and that may not be too far outside of the realm of possibilities.
Yet, if the government did it, that part wouldn't be too ambitious. But is the government interested? He seems to be doubtful on this point.
If the government is not, it may take the private sector to do it all, just like in the book Platinum Moon. But there ought to be a way to do these things, because money should not be an issue, provided that the proposition is sound.
Update:
I did some checking on the internet with respect to the metal value of a coin. A Sacajawea coin is worth about 3 cents for its metal. That's a 30 to 1 ratio. For collectible coins, the market value can be a multiple of its face value. Let's say another 30 to 1 ratio. In other words, a coin that costs the government 3 cents to make can be sold for nearly 1000 times what it cost to obtain the metal to make it.
Now, let's look at platinum. It can be bought on the open market now for about the price of gold - 1600 an ounce. If you multiply 1600 times 1000 you get 1.6 million dollars for each coin. So, asking putting a face value of 1 million on each coin is not out of the question. Most likely, people will not want to collect it though.
If you were to coin 35,200 of them at 1 million apiece, you would obtain the 35 billion dollars. This would take 1 metric ton of the metal to do it. Would there be 35,200 "purchases" of a coin struck of lunar platinum? Making it legal tender would obviate the need to sell it. If you coined 35,000 of them at 100k, you would only raise $3.5 billion. But at 100k, you get closer to the same ratio that you have with the ordinary currency.
Lunar platinum coins would be worth more than an ordinary coin because of its novelty. Plus if it was a limited edition coin such as this, it would have even greater value. You could probably give it a 100k denomination and then sell it on the market for whatever it could bring. Hopefully, it could fetch a premium on the face value, comparable to the Susan B Anthony dollar, thus recovering all of the debt and retiring it without costing the government a dime.
All of this from mining and refining on the lunar surface 1 metric ton of platinum. The 2002 output of platinum in the USA was about 4 times that number, according to Wingo's book. If they got really lucky, they may find a motherload worth a lot more than that.
It's worth looking into, don't you think?
Update:
The Sacajawea coin costs about 6 cents. That is a bit different, but it could still work.
Update:
I tweeted and Facebooked this post. I welcome any criticism of the idea. Tell me where this is wrong.
Occam's Razor and the E-cat Test of Oct 6th
Occam's Razor is, as I understand it, a simplicity principle. With respect to explaining something, the principle asserts that the simplest explanation is most likely correct. After writing that, my understanding turns out to be incorrect. Here's what Wikipedia says:
In the case of the Oct 6th test, what are the competing hypotheses? I think that there can be only two: it works or it doesn't.
We have to assume that the conditions are what they are represented as being. In short, there is no secret energy source that can escape the notice of the observers. To postulate that there is one makes the assumption that this secret energy source can escape detection. Therefore, the energy produced must come from the E-cat apparatus itself.
Secondly, the measurement apparatus is reasonably accurate for the purposes of this test. This reason is self evident: if it was too inaccurate, this too would have been detected by the observers. To assume otherwise violates Occam's Razor because it introduces a new assumption once again.
Finally, it has to be the case that nothing is up the sleeves of some tricksters. This would require the assumption of some conspiracy amongst the observers to deceive everybody. Such a conspiracy would entail a large group of people present to be able to keep the tricks a secret. It seems unlikely to me. The larger the number of observers, the harder it is to keep a conspiracy secret. The more observers there are, the more likely that everything is as it appears to be. To say otherwise would violate the principle of Occam's Razor, as it would add a new assumption of a conspiracy.
Unless the naysayers can come up with an explanation that doesn't require these new assumptions, or does not require some form of another assumption not mentioned here, then the test is as represented.
From where I stand, the test looks like a success. The E-cat produces more energy than it consumes. That makes it a successful test. By the way, that is the simplest explanation too. In other words, it is as it appears to be.
is a principle that generally recommends, when faced with competing hypotheses that are equal in other respects, selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions.
In the case of the Oct 6th test, what are the competing hypotheses? I think that there can be only two: it works or it doesn't.
We have to assume that the conditions are what they are represented as being. In short, there is no secret energy source that can escape the notice of the observers. To postulate that there is one makes the assumption that this secret energy source can escape detection. Therefore, the energy produced must come from the E-cat apparatus itself.
Secondly, the measurement apparatus is reasonably accurate for the purposes of this test. This reason is self evident: if it was too inaccurate, this too would have been detected by the observers. To assume otherwise violates Occam's Razor because it introduces a new assumption once again.
Finally, it has to be the case that nothing is up the sleeves of some tricksters. This would require the assumption of some conspiracy amongst the observers to deceive everybody. Such a conspiracy would entail a large group of people present to be able to keep the tricks a secret. It seems unlikely to me. The larger the number of observers, the harder it is to keep a conspiracy secret. The more observers there are, the more likely that everything is as it appears to be. To say otherwise would violate the principle of Occam's Razor, as it would add a new assumption of a conspiracy.
Unless the naysayers can come up with an explanation that doesn't require these new assumptions, or does not require some form of another assumption not mentioned here, then the test is as represented.
From where I stand, the test looks like a success. The E-cat produces more energy than it consumes. That makes it a successful test. By the way, that is the simplest explanation too. In other words, it is as it appears to be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)