Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Sun Jul 22, 2018 9:07 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Makalu wrote:
well if you're thinking that the outermost region of the photosphere is the surface in the model, that's not correct...quote from the pdf:

Quote:
Calcium ferrite and other metals make up the lowest "surface". On top of that rigid ferrite surface sits a layer of silicon, a layer of neon, a helium layer, finally followed by hydrogen.


i think the layer of calcium mentioned in the UB has something to do with the ions there having reached terminal velocity but not escape velocity...or their electrons haven't achieved escape velocity and built up the electric field that further accelerates the ions to the point where they are expelled in the solar wind

Makalu - I'm really not that impressed with the articles on the link which you provided, where the so called author of the site seems to have limited writing skills but I did look up this author, "Michael Mozina" - ("The Surface Of The Sun"), and found that this person is not that well received on the Physics forums (assuming they are the same person) which it seems that he has taken over many and been removed from some, but notwithstanding, it would seem that you are impressed with his work?

I have referenced the PDF document and re-examined the quote which you provided and you might wish to re-read the article where much has been written but little has been validated, however the writing style seems to spread speculation throughout the entire article.

So, if you can? It would be nice to know who this "Michael Mozina" is, and what credentials he might have to validate these claims?

As I said before, there are to many contradictions which I have found in these articles, which would take much to long to dispute.
However, can you provide any additional sources which can be followed and validated, which may associate with what the Urantia Book seems to be indicating on this subject?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 653
nope i'm not impressed with the model...you asked if there's any evidence for the calcium layer and i told you about the published model that comes closest to fitting it. i don't know what his credentials are except that he's written or co-written numerous cosmological research articles...but it doesn't matter to me what his or anyones elses credentials are...especially concerning acceptance on internet forums. It's a simple model he presents, centered on explaining one aspect of solar phenomena as i said (where a comprehensive and unifying model is needed)...it's easy to understand and the validation is based on observation of satellite images and the testing conducted long ago by Birkeland. Obviously more evidence is called for...the same can be said for the consensus models...we just know so little about the interior of the sun. But also most of the greatest scientists in history (a very short history lol) went against the consensus ideas of their time. If you aren't comfortable with that then maybe you should know in advance that some of the more intriguing science in the UB are simple models that go against the consensus of its time.

i once found some more technical papers on the internet concerning the nature of calcium and some other ions in the solar wind but i didnt bookmark them and have to run now but maybe can search for them for you later...g'luck


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Makalu wrote:
nope i'm not impressed with the model...you asked if there's any evidence for the calcium layer and i told you about the published model that comes closest to fitting it. i don't know what his credentials are except that he's written or co-written numerous cosmological research articles...but it doesn't matter to me what his or anyones elses credentials are...especially concerning acceptance on internet forums. It's a simple model he presents, centered on explaining one aspect of solar phenomena as i said (where a comprehensive and unifying model is needed)...it's easy to understand and the validation is based on observation of satellite images and the testing conducted long ago by Birkeland. Obviously more evidence is called for...the same can be said for the consensus models...we just know so little about the interior of the sun. But also most of the greatest scientists in history (a very short history lol) went against the consensus ideas of their time. If you aren't comfortable with that then maybe you should know in advance that some of the more intriguing science in the UB are simple models that go against the consensus of its time.

i once found some more technical papers on the internet concerning the nature of calcium and some other ions in the solar wind but i didnt bookmark them and have to run now but maybe can search for them for you later...g'luck

Makalu - a few things about your statement above, which gives me an insight into your thinking, especially regarding M.M.'s Web site and the information within, where you mention that he (M.M.) is using "testing" based on "Birkeland" yet in scanning both the PDF and Word Doc, I can find no mention of "Birkeland", notwithstanding that some of the material mentioned does parallel "Birkeland" subject matter, however the only place where I can find "Birkeland" is in the "Blog" and found on various pages on the Web site, so, it would seem that there is a difference between the documents and the Web site therefore, it would seem that the local Physics Forum entries would be true that M.M. has changed them based on Forum rebuttals, yet has not updated the documents.
Also, I've looked at some of Birkeland's work citations and most if not all are related to the Northern Lights and even though there are similarities to what M.M. attempts to compare from the "observation of satellite images" there is one main thing to keep in mind, and that is that Earth has an atmosphere which is a key part of how the Northern Lights visually appear, but the Sun does not have the same type of atmosphere, and the environments between the Earth and the Sun are definitely not the same, although certain aspects for the Sun could have a similar parallel to Earth. Even the elements, as we know them on Earth would have been effected via testing which is not the same environment as is found on or in the Sun, therefore these things need to be taken into account, and the visual "observations" that M.M. is basing his hypothesis on is therefore too simplified, but everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the evidence M.M. provides in some cases is just speculation.

Also, thank you for your insight into the Science in the Urantia Book, where you stated "that then maybe you should know in advance that some of the more intriguing science in the UB are simple models that go against the consensus of its time", where I believe that the "simple models" that you may be referring to are basic universal principles which repeat themselves in the universe and can be applied to many different sciences, but the problem is that these basic universal principles have slight differences and based on the UB's narration and specific words used have various implications depending on subject matter being defined or described. Where key words are used in different areas of the book that have multiple notations elsewhere and just a few word which have multiple definitions can change various paragraphs to be significant to other topics or subjects.
Nevertheless, with such insight that you have mentioned would you like to present some specific areas of the UB "that go against the consensus of its time"?

What I've found in the Urantia Book would amaze most but in order to even present them properly I would need to finish this section (6) to show how to use the premise behind the narrative technique used.
Why, even the UB gives instructions at the beginning of the Book as to look up those words being used, because their definition change, or have different meanings.
Which reminds me of my seventh grade home room teacher who gave us a simple test about reading and instructions.
He gave the whole class a sheet of paper with listed numbered instructions, where the first instruction indicated to read the list first and perform the instructions that each item indicates to do in a timely manor.
Well, as would be expected, and since I read very slowly, many of the other students in the class started to perform the tasks listed on the sheet of paper, primarily those persons who read rather quickly. As this comedic sight went on those individuals performing what was on the list, placed their heads on their desk, with one folded arm and raised there hand, after hearing several chuckles.
Well what just happened was that the last lined instruction, stated that this was a test and that the last instruction was to ignore doing all of the instruction listed after number one, which was to read all the instructions first and then follow the instructions, which followed to place your head on the desk and raise your hand.

So, if one would actually follow the UB instructions, the contents of the UB might present itself as most interesting, however, that would also require a little imagination, which many of todays scientists ether have to little or to much of.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 653
well there's a number of references to birkeland on the webpage that outlines the model and they are all tied to birkelands electrically charged solid surface model of the sun and related to his experiments on duplicating the suns corona and sunspots, not the terrestrial aurora experiments. Note that he also cites his theories as based largely upon the works of Dr. Charles Bruce and Dr. Oliver Manuel. Some intro material for you on their ideas here:

http://www.catastrophism.com/texts/bruce/

http://pospapendix.blogspot.com/2008/05/oliver-manuel-and-iron-sun-2_05.html

and i would add a link to an electric universe (EU) model which also plays a large part in mozina's thinking:

http://electric-cosmos.org/sun.htm

no, i wouldn't like to "present" any particular science from the papers that goes against the consensus of its time, when published or now. they are numerous and many of them well known by and discussed in the UB community...you'll just have to endure the joy of discovering those for yourself. not to mention this isn't the proper section of the forum for the discussion you've already started and it goes against my scientific grain to compound that.

regarding your approach to the science in the UB all i can say is first make sure you understand the difference between the art of science and the act of dissociated technobabble


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Prior to looking at what the next Urantia Book quote (41:6.4) may add to this topic, let us re-examine some of the words used in (41:6.3), presented again, below.

Quote:
(462.1) 41:6.3 As your physicists have suspected, these mutilated remnants of solar calcium literally ride the light beams for varied distances, and thus their widespread dissemination throughout space is tremendously facilitated. The sodium atom, under certain modifications, is also capable of light and energy locomotion. The calcium feat is all the more remarkable since this element has almost twice the mass of sodium. Local space-permeation by calcium is due to the fact that it escapes from the solar photosphere, in modified form, by literally riding the outgoing sunbeams. Of all the solar elements, calcium, notwithstanding its comparative bulk — containing as it does twenty revolving electrons — is the most successful in escaping from the solar interior to the realms of space. This explains why there is a calcium layer, a gaseous stone surface, on the sun six thousand miles thick; and this despite the fact that nineteen lighter elements, and numerous heavier ones, are underneath.

When we look at some other words used in the UB narration above, as related to the subject matter which it is describing, there are a few interesting word associations which should be noted; like “widespread dissemination”, why use these two words together where they a synonyms of each other, but sound fine? A definition for “dissemination” is “the act of disseminating, or spreading widely”, but, is not “spreading widely” the same as “widespread” however just an adjective and the other the action of doing? Although, it could be said that there is no issue here but then to end the sentence with “is tremendously facilitated“, where "facilitated" means: (1) “to make easier or less difficult; help forward (an action, a process, etc.)”, and/or: (2) “to assist the progress of (a person).” Now, the word “facilitated” would be associated to the word “dissemination”, which is associated to the action to “ride the light beams for varied distances”, where “varied” would associate back to “widespread”, which indicates that “the light beams” are “varied” also, probably based on various light frequency, or types of “light beams.” However, when we look “forward” in this narration the “process”, or “action”, which is being described, is that “calcium”, “escapes from the solar photosphere”, which prompts the question, how? But, in looking “forward” again, the other question is how, does “calcium” also, through this process, “escaping from the solar interior to the realms of space.”

The use of the word “realms” would seem somewhat obvious when associated to “space”, where “realms” could be a reference to “(2) the region, sphere, or domain within which anything occurs, prevails, or dominates”, but when looking at this word’s origin as follows:
Quote:
noun - late 13c., "kingdom," from Old French reaume, probably from roiaume "kingdom," altered (by influence of Latin regalis "regal") from Gallo-Romance *regiminem, accusative form of Latin regimen "system of government, rule" (see regimen ). Transferred sense "sphere of activity" is from late 14c.

Where “transferred sence” refers, in part, to a “metaphor” of “sphere of activity”.
Therefore, “realms of space” may be a metaphor which might be associated with other words in the paragraph, like: “space-permeation”, where “permeation” refers to: “(1) to pass into or through every part of”; “(2) to penetrate through the pores, interstices, etc., of”; or “(3) to be diffused through; pervade; saturate”, or as an associated word definition of permeation – “interstices” – “(2) a small or narrow space or interval between things or parts, especially when one of a series of alternating uniform spaces and parts”, in that “realms of space” may also refer to a physical “space” between molecules, where “calcium”, acting like a filter or is a porous shell.

However, based on the previous understanding of what “space-permeation” may relate too, it would also apply to the “solar photosphere”, where the sun’s “photosphere” reacts with “convective cells” known as “granules/granulation” and patterned supergranules/supergranulation”, as boiling plasma, at different temperatures, where there is a “space” between the “granules” and “supergranules”, allowing, through this space – “escapes from the solar photosphere”.
Quote:
Photosphere – “The Sun”
“The Sun's photosphere has a temperature between 4,500 and 6,000 K (4,230 and 5,730 °C) (with an effective temperature of 5,777 K (5,504 °C)) and a density of about 2×10−4 kg/m3; other stars may have hotter or cooler photospheres. The Sun's photosphere is composed of convection cells called granules—cells of plasma each approximately 1000 kilometers in diameter with hot rising plasma in the center and cooler plasma falling in the narrow spaces between them. Each granule has a lifespan of only about eight minutes, resulting in a continually shifting "boiling" pattern. Grouping the typical granules are super granules up to 30,000 kilometers in diameter with lifespans of up to 24 hours. These details are too fine to see on other stars.”

Where it may be otherwise indicated, it would seem apparent that the “photons” – “light” – would be escaping between these “spaces” of boiling “plasma” which would also carry with them the “mutilated remnants of solar calcium”, along with other various elements.

As indicated in the UB paragraph above there are various other elements which “are underneath” “a calcium layer, a gaseous stone surface, on the sun six thousand miles thick”, which would seem to act as a protective “layer” or shell, that retains the active, or reactive, components of the interior of the sun, which would or could be different from what current science as established, based on the visual spectral analysis of the surface atmosphere of the sun.

However, this “calcium layer” analysis presented in the UB, would not be that farfetched in that I was privy to seeing a NEWS program in the middle, late 1980’s which presented a person who lived in England, who created a media presentation of a substance, which he created, solely from the material and apparatus found in his kitchen, where at that time was in response to the various issues encountered by the NASA Space Shuttle program, where they were using ceramic plates, glued onto the Shuttles, that would frequently fall off and were detrimental to the weight added to the Shuttle, but acted as the primary heat shield used on reentry. This man created a media presentation of a substance which he created, as mentioned before, from components found in his kitchen, which looked like a milky white, semi-flexible, shapeable, and cuttable (saw-able) material which was impervious to all known heat. This impervious-to-heat material was tested on the media presentation by applying the highest available heat, which was an acetylene-torch, that previously was shown to cut steel, and then applied to this block of material, where it was not phased at all and was shortly handled by his hands, without incident.

I have wondered about what the ingredients’ might have been, since it was noted that this man died leaving only the media presentation, and no other specifications as to the components or the process used to make this material. Where, if what the UB has indicated, above and that calcium, sodium, and possibly potassium, or the process in which calcium might be changed to appear like potassium, that what I might find in a kitchen which contains calcium, would be a milk product mixed some other ingredients and put under some form of heat or possibly a microwave process which would create this remarkable material? We know that milk, when boiled creates a skin or film, and if sodium was added would bring up the temperature by which it would boil, and we know that yogurt and cheese also, are formed through a use of milk, where milk also contains “calcium”. If we examine “milk” we may find various similar elements which could apply to the “calcium layer” mentioned above, as a component part of the sun.
Quote:
Milk” – “Salts, minerals, and vitamins”
“Minerals or milk salts, are traditional names for a variety of cations and anions within bovine milk. Calcium, phosphate, magnesium, sodium, potassium, citrate, and chlorine are all included as minerals and they typically occur at concentration of 5–40 mM. The milk salts strongly interact with casein, most notably calcium phosphate. It is present in excess and often, much greater excess of solubility of solid calcium phosphate. In addition to calcium, milk is a good source of many other vitamins. Vitamins A, B6, B12, C, D, K, E, thiamine, niacin, biotin, riboflavin, folates, and pantothenic acid are all present in milk.”

So, if this “calcium layer”, as indicated in the UB, could be considered a “shell” or structure of the sun, which could retain an inner core of the sun that might be greater than the surface temperature of the sun, it just might indicate that the interior of the sun might be different than what is thought. In that the core of the sun might actually be considered at a “negative temperature”, which would, thermodynamically be hotter than what would be theoretically possible and might indicate something below a “Zero-point energy” source or “singularity” which could be described as a “white-hole” or the dimensional opposite to a “black-hole”, where anti-matter could be the primary fuel source.

Before moving to the next UB quote (41:6.4) below, we should make note of a phrase used in the previous UB quote (41:6.3), “light and energy locomotion”, which would apply more to the next UB narration.

Where, “energy”, as we know from the following:
Quote:
Energy
“In physics, energy is a property of objects which can be transferred to other objects or converted into different forms, but cannot be created or destroyed. It is difficult to give a comprehensive definition of energy because of its many forms, but one common definition is that it is the ability of a system to perform work.”
[. . .]
“All of the many forms of energy are convertible to other kinds of energy, and obey the conservation of energy. Common energy forms include the kinetic energy of a moving object, the radiant energy carried by light, the potential energy stored by an object's position in a force field,(gravitational, electric or magnetic) elastic energy stored by stretching solid objects, chemical energy released when a fuel burns, and the thermal energy due to an object's temperature.”

Where “light” would reflect “radiant energy”, “and” “energy locomotion”, might best be inferred as “elastic energy”, which would combine several forms of energy, noted in these UB narratives. Also, the word “locomotion”, as applied to “locomotive”, might be an indication, “(5) of, relating to, or aiding in locomotion or movement from place to place”; “(6) moving or traveling by means of its own mechanism or powers”; and/or “(7) serving to produce such movement; adapted for or used in locomotion”.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Prior to looking at the next UB quote/narration (41:6.4), it should be noted that in the previous UB quote (41:6.3), where the following phrase, “and this despite the fact that nineteen lighter elements, and numerous heavier ones, are underneath”, seems to make sense when referencing “solar elements” or the elements as noted on the atomic table, where “calcium” is number 20, and that there are 19 “lighter” “elements”, if based on “atomic weight” or “relative atomic mass” which is not the same as “atomic mass” but, if one uses or assumes that “atomic weight” is the principle used in this comparison, then this same phrase can be associated to isotope/neutron mass, which uses the same “atomic weight” measurement and, it should be noted that this UB subject has established that we are talking about a “ionized” atom and not a (non-ionized) atom, where then, would not be “protons”. Also, the UB narration uses “solar elements” and “element(s)”, where an “element” would mean – “(1) a component or constituent of a whole or one of the parts into which a whole may be resolved by analysis”.

Then there is the sentence – “The calcium feat is all the more remarkable since this element has almost twice the mass of sodium.” – where “calcium” has a “atomic weight” value of “40.078”, and “sodium” the value of “22.98976928”, which is about “twice the mass”, but if one takes into consideration the “isotopic mass” for each of these elements the values noted above are very close to the “stable”, or “observationally stable” isotopes, which also are very close to the “proton”, “neutron” values most equal to the number of “electrons” associated to these “elements”.

Also, in this aforementioned sentence, where “calcium feat” is “remarkable” when associated it to “sodium” but, this would not be that remarkable if one were to attempt to reason why the authors would use this type of wording, if not to draw attention to “feat”, which should now be in question?
So, why would this be a “feat”? Well, if one examines the values of the lowest and highest “isotopic mass’” of “calcium” and “sodium”, one would see that they overlap.

“Calcium” has 24 isotopes from 34Ca (lowest mass – 34.01412) through 57Ca (highest mass – 56.99236), values. Then compared to “Sodium”, which has 20 isotopes from 18Na (lowest mass – 18.02597) through 37Na (highest mass – 37.05934), values.
These two elements, share four “isotopes” which have very close “isotopic mass”, (34Ca, 34Na), (35Ca, 35Na), (36Ca, 36Na) and (37Ca, 37Na), where when you add the proton and neutron values together, for each they are associated to numeric values for “Ca” and “Na”, where there sum values are the same but the proton and neutron values differ.

Can this commonality within elements be coo berated in the UB, possibly, when one looks at the following phrase, “(41:6.2)[. . .] all of the more common forms of matter.”

Therefore the “feat” as mentioned in the UB, must have something to do with this similarity, but at this time, it would seem, that it should only be a notation where there may be something in the UB narrations, which might possibly explain the “feat” being presented, which may not be that “remarkable”?

Quote:
(462.2) 41:6.4 Calcium is an active and versatile element at solar temperatures. The stone atom has two agile and loosely attached electrons in the two outer electronic circuits, which are very close together. Early in the atomic struggle it loses its outer electron; whereupon it engages in a masterful act of juggling the nineteenth electron back and forth between the nineteenth and twentieth circuits of electronic revolution. By tossing this nineteenth electron back and forth between its own orbit and that of its lost companion more than twenty-five thousand times a second, a mutilated stone atom is able partially to defy gravity and thus successfully to ride the emerging streams of light and energy, the sunbeams, to liberty and adventure. This calcium atom moves outward by alternate jerks of forward propulsion, grasping and letting go the sunbeam about twenty-five thousand times each second. And this is why stone is the chief component of the worlds of space. Calcium is the most expert solar-prison escaper.

The previous UB quote, the narrative seems to flow well in its construction and reading however, “electronic circuits” and “electronic revolution” can easily be interpreted as “electron circuits” and “electron revolution”, so why was “electronic” used in these instances? Where in its word origin, “electronic” was used to represent “electron” or things pertaining to “electrons”. It was not until 1930, that it was used in reference with a suffix of “-ic” – “’having some characteristics of’ (opposed to the simple attributive use of the base noun)”, – “electron”.

Then there is the use of the words “circuits” and “revolution” where they seem straight forward but, would require additional re-associations, linking various word groups together, which may imply additional referencing to that, being described?
Where “circuit” has multiple meanings which could reflect simultaneously, since the plural is used above.
Also, “revolution” has several meanings but for the purpose of this narrative, we will use “(6) Mechanics.” – “(a) a turning round or rotating, as on an axis.”, “(b) a moving in a circular or curving course, as about a central point.”, “(c) a single cycle in such a course.” Or, a synonym, as “spin” but there may be an implication that this “spin” may be tethered, where, as this object “orbits”, it “orbits” a “circuit” on an axial “spins”, but when crossing a specific threshold, possibly "ionization threshold", the direction of the “spin” may change, or reverse itself.

The words “stone atom” is used again here, and based on its usage would indicate the “atomic nucleus”, in that the “stone” or seed(s), being contained within multiple “electron shells”, and that this “stone” – “nucleus is the very dense region consisting of protons and neutrons at the center of an atom.”

Now, the narration which follows, sets a contradiction between what is being described in the UB and, what or how atomic physics seems to portray the electron configuration or path(s), in that it seems, when describing “electron shell(s)” and, that each “shell” can contain “subshell(s)”, holding several electrons, the number of, depending on the location of the “shell” to the “nucleus”, and that these “subshells”, which contain more than one electron, follow along the same shell-path/circuit, being distinguishable by the “atomic orbital”. However, the UB narration above indicates – “in the two outer electronic circuits” – then states, – “which are very close together” – “back and forth between the nineteenth and twentieth circuits” – whereby, if the UB, is correct, the (20) electrons of “calcium” have concentric “circuits” or “shells” and that based on “circuits” proximity to each other, may constitute what today’s science, refers to as “subshells”.

In that, according to the “electron shell” paths as depicted on the “atomic table” for “calcium”, they are configured as “2, 8, 8, 2”, having 4 shells, where the last or outer shell contains 2 electrons. Where, according to the UB, this “2, 8, 8, 2”, are “subshells” grouped as “shells”, where from left to right, or innermost to outermost “electron shells” are described as “K, L, M, N,. . .”, whereby would be better labeled as “K2, L8, M8, N2”, or “CaK1,2, CaL1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, CaM1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8, CaN1,2” for “calcium”, and that the reference to the “nineteenth” and “twentieth” electrons in the outer circuit, could be referred to as “CaN1” and “CaN2”.

Now, the interesting factor which focuses on the removal or loose of electron “CaN2” from “its own orbit”, results in the electron “CaN1”, being tossed “back and forth between” the “orbit”, or “orbital” path of electrons “CaN1-2”, where prior to the removal of electron “CaN2”, we can assume that each electron followed a centered path along the “orbit”, but now the UB narration uses the word “between”, which would or could presume that the “orbit”, itself, is a contributing factor. This factor would have something to do with the fact of the remaining or absent electron, where the “electron charge” would affect the neutron, or that the electron orbit, could actually be the “ground state” of the electron, its lowest-energy level, thereby causing the “excited state” of the remaining electron, CaN1, bouncing “back and forth between” the “ground states” of the “orbit’s”, where each time the electron hits or touches the “orbital-ground path”, may have its “revolution” or “spin” changed in an opposite or opposing direction creating a wobbling effect or vibration, which can be related to “more than twenty-five thousand times a second”.

Would this electron excited state, also cause some reaction with the neutron(s), possibly some form of “flux”, like “neutron flux”, which could affect the “calcium atom”?

The other factor which we have not focused on is the loose of the outer electron, where it is obvious that the two outer electrons were “paired”, assuming that the following phrase, could make that implication, “its lost companion”. It also does not indicate how the electron was “lost”? But, only infers by stating, “Early in the atomic struggle it loses its outer electron”, where we would possibly, need to look at other UB narrations to see if there is some definition which might apply to “atomic struggle”, like in “(176.1) 15:8.6”? But, in relation to this remaining, unpaired electron, where if we examine the “chemistry” aspect of this subject, if might shed some light on what has occurred:
Quote:
"In chemistry, an unpaired electron is an electron that occupies an orbital of an atom singly, rather than as part of an electron pair. As the formation of electron pairs is often energetically favourable, either in the form of a chemical bond or as a lone pair, unpaired electrons are relatively uncommon in chemistry, because an entity that carries an unpaired electron is usually rather reactive. In organic chemistry they typically only occur briefly during a reaction on an entity called a radical; however, they play an important role in explaining reaction pathways.”

Where a “radical” process, may have been described above?
Quote:
"In chemistry, a radical (more precisely, a free radical) is an atom, molecule, or ion that has unpaired valence electrons.

With some exceptions, these unpaired electrons make free radicals highly chemically reactive towards other substances, or even towards themselves: their molecules will often spontaneously dimerize or polymerize if they come in contact with each other. Most radicals are reasonably stable only at very low concentrations in inert media or in a vacuum."


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
In conjunction with the previous quotes, the following narration presents more detail of the action previously noted when the outer electron is lost and the following electron tends to replace its orbital path. However, again there are unique words or combinations of words use which draw attention and, would require additional review as to why they are being used. Possibly because, at the time of this presentation there were no words or terms already in science to associate to, so a descriptive association would have been presented which closely would match the initial intention being presented.
Quote:
(462.3) 41:6.5 The agility of this acrobatic calcium electron is indicated by the fact that, when tossed by the temperature-X-ray solar forces to the circle of the higher orbit, it only remains in that orbit for about one one-millionth of a second; but before the electric-gravity power of the atomic nucleus pulls it back into its old orbit, it is able to complete one million revolutions about the atomic center.

The word or group in question is “temperature-X-ray” where it is used as an action cause of being “tossed by”, where when searched, results would appear for “temperature X-ray” however these are associated with “low temperature X-ray” where when we apply “solar forces” would imply “high temperature” not low. Therefore by searching “high temperature X-ray” we might find a collation with a subject on “Aluminium_magnesium_boride – (thermal expansion)” which presents that “The thermal expansion coefficient (TEC) for AlMgB14 was measured as 9×10−6 K−1 by dilatometry and by high temperature X-ray diffraction using synchrotron radiation.” Where “Xray diffraction” is redirected to “X-ray crystallography” indicating that – “X-ray crystallography is a tool used for identifying the atomic and molecular structure of a crystal, in which the crystalline atoms cause a beam of incident X-rays to diffract into many specific directions. By measuring the angles and intensities of these diffracted beams, a crystallographer can produce a three-dimensional picture of the density of electrons within the crystal.” But, more to the point is that “synchrotron radiation” is used, which when its local source is presented, it may assimilate or can be associated to the “solar forces to the circle of the higher orbit” of the remaining Calcium electron’s action. Thereby, presenting the action as noted in (41:6.4) –
Quote:
[. . .] By tossing this nineteenth electron back and forth between its own orbit and that of its lost companion more than twenty-five thousand times a second, a mutilated stone atom is able partially to defy gravity and thus successfully to ride the emerging streams of light and energy, the sunbeams, to liberty and adventure.[. . .]
– as might be assimilated in a “Synchrotron” – where “A synchrotron is a particular type of cyclic particle accelerator, descended from the cyclotron, in which the guiding magnetic field (bending the particles into a closed path) is time-dependent, being synchronized to a particle beam of increasing kinetic energy (see image). The synchrotron is one of the first accelerator concepts to enable the construction of large-scale facilities, since bending, beam focusing and acceleration can be separated into different components. The most powerful modern particle accelerators use versions of the synchrotron design.”

Image
Schematic of a synchrotron

This same type of action in a “synchrotron” may also be associated to the action of the remaining Calcium electron.

Also, the alternate pulling “force” which is applied on the electron is “the electric-gravity power of the atomic nucleus” which may be associated to a known “fundamental force” described as:
Quote:
Fundamental interactions, also known as fundamental forces or interactive forces, are the interactions in physical systems that appear not to be reducible to more basic interactions. There are four conventionally accepted fundamental interactions—gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear—each understood as the dynamics of a field. The gravitational force is modeled as a continuous classical field. Each of the other three is modeled as a discrete quantum field, and exhibits a measurable unit or elementary particle.

Gravitation and electromagnetism act over potentially infinite distance—across the universe—and mediate everyday macroscopic phenomena. The other two fields act over minuscule, subatomic distances. The strong interaction is responsible for the binding of atomic nuclei. The weak interaction also acts on the nucleus, mediating radioactive decay.”

Looking back a bit to the previous use of “light beams” and “sunbeams” there is also an association with “synchrotron light source”, where it has an association with “electron beam”, as follows:

Quote:
A synchrotron light source is a source of electromagnetic radiation (EM) usually produced by a storage ring, for scientific and technical purposes. First observed in synchrotrons, synchrotron light is now produced by storage rings and other specialized particle accelerators, typically accelerating electrons. Once the high-energy electron beam has been generated, it is directed into auxiliary components such as bending magnets and insertion devices (undulators or wigglers) in storage rings and free electron lasers. These supply the strong magnetic fields perpendicular to the beam which are needed to convert the high-energy electron energy into photons.

Having mentioned various definitions for “revolution” in previous posts, there may be an association with the type of electron behavior as might be associated with the mechanical principle as described in “wigglers” in the definition above, where the spin or revolution as per the bouncing or flopping back and forth, “between” the two electron orbits, may have a similar electronic/electric/electron charge association.

Quote:
A wiggler is an insertion device in a synchrotron. It is a series of magnets designed to periodically laterally deflect ('wiggle') a beam of charged particles (invariably electrons or positrons) inside a storage ring of a synchrotron. These deflections create a change in acceleration which in turn produces emission of broad synchrotron radiation tangent to the curve, much like that of a bending magnet, but the intensity is higher due to the contribution of many magnetic dipoles in the wiggler. Furthermore, as the wavelength (λ) is decreased this means the frequency (ƒ) has increased. This increase of frequency is directly proportional to energy, hence, the wiggler creates a wavelength of light with a larger energy.

A wiggler has a broader spectrum of radiation than an undulator.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
In the following Urantia Book quote/narration it reaffirms that there is a layer of “calcium” which forms “the outer crust of the sun”, but when the word “crust” is used it assumes a material like substance which might be associated to stone like layer rather than a gaseous or plasma state material of “calcium” where in a previous narration it indicates that “there is a calcium layer, a gaseous stone surface” on, or in the sun, whereby the assumption is that this “layer” would be in some composite form, and that, possibly as a result of the “convulsive eruptions in connection with the formation of the solar system”, that this layer may have formed or built up to the depth mentioned. Also, that much of this “solar calcium” has been used to encrust the sun, whereby a possible byproduct of “the formation of the solar system” and, that “much” was used whereby quite a bite of the “solar calcium” should still remain, which would also indicate that there is “calcium” or the components of “calcium” still past this point towards the sun’s core or center.

Temperature of this part of the sun, has been paramount to the subject where thermodynamics would play a principle part of the processes being described, but there is one area which we have not really examined, and that is the method by which the various particles escape from the sun, in that this “outer crust” seems to currently be playing the part of a heat shield or force field containing the massive reactions in the sun which would seem to fuel its life giving properties.

Quote:
(462.4) 41:6.6 Your sun has parted with an enormous quantity of its calcium, having lost tremendous amounts during the times of its convulsive eruptions in connection with the formation of the solar system. Much of the solar calcium is now in the outer crust of the sun.

Having presented the various theories and/or translations based on the UB text aforementioned I noticed that the process by which this “calcium” “outer crust” may play a primary function, from my own experience with working with medical “oxygen concentrator”, where they use a “Pressure swing adsorption (PSA)” process and, in the same industrial form of the “oxygen concentrator” process, where larger amounts are produced, they use a “Vacuum swing adsorption (VSA)”, or a combination of both systems, to separate various elements or components from there gaseous states. Both process use “adsorbents (e.g., zeolites)” to “form a molecular sieve and preferentially adsorb the target gas species”, where is same type of process may have been or is occurring in the sun and is using the “calcium” “outer crust” as the “molecular sieve”, however one must keep in mind that this “gaseous” “calcium” “crust” would be as dense as to perform as a “crust” like sieve, where the internal temperature would create significant “pressure” to cause various reactions to push through the “crust”, and the “vacuum” of space, would apply the pull through the “crust”, where the escaping “photons” created from the loss of the “electrons” would also be assisted by the “vacuum”, “pressure” process. Where the pressure or thermal process could be fed by a “Zero-point energy” process, and that the plasma at the surface of the sun, could also be part of the “calcium” “crust” process, where the temperature of space, is a factor.
Quote:
Zero-point energy, also called quantum vacuum zero-point energy, is the lowest possible energy that a quantum mechanical physical system may have; it is the energy of its ground state. All quantum mechanical systems undergo fluctuations even in their ground state and have an associated zero-point energy, a consequence of their wave-like nature. The uncertainty principle requires every physical system to have a zero-point energy greater than the minimum of its classical potential well. This results in motion even at absolute zero. For example, liquid helium does not freeze under atmospheric pressure at any temperature because of its zero-point energy.

The concept of zero-point energy was developed in Germany by Albert Einstein and Otto Stern in 1913, as a corrective term added to a zero-grounded formula developed by Max Planck in 1900. The term zero-point energy originates from the German Nullpunktsenergie. An alternative form of the German term is Nullpunktenergie (without the s).

Vacuum energy is the zero-point energy of all the fields in space, which in the Standard Model includes the electromagnetic field, other gauge fields, fermionic fields, and the Higgs field. It is the energy of the vacuum, which in quantum field theory is defined not as empty space but as the ground state of the fields. In cosmology, the vacuum energy is one possible explanation for the cosmological constant. A related term is zero-point field, which is the lowest energy state of a particular field.”

Supplemental associations:
Quote:
An ion (/ˈaɪən, -ɒn/) is an atom or molecule in which the total number of electrons is not equal to the total number of protons, giving the atom or molecule a net positive or negative electrical charge.

Ions can be created, by either chemical or physical means, via ionization. In chemical terms, if a neutral atom loses one or more electrons, it has a net positive charge and is known as a cation. If an atom gains electrons, it has a net negative charge and is known as an anion. An ion consisting of a single atom is an atomic or monatomic ion; if it consists of two or more atoms, it is a molecular or polyatomic ion. Because of their electric charges, cations and anions attract each other and readily form ionic compounds, such as salts.

In the case of physical ionization of a medium, such as a gas, what are known as "ion pairs" are created by ion impact, and each pair consists of a free electron and a positive ion.

Quote:
In biology, an ion transporter, also called an ion pump, is a transmembrane protein that moves ions across a plasma membrane against their concentration gradient, in contrast to ion channels, where ions go through passive transport. These primary transporters are enzymes that convert energy from various sources, including ATP, sunlight, and other redox reactions, to potential energy stored in an electrochemical gradient. This energy is then used by secondary transporters, including ion carriers and ion channels, to drive vital cellular processes, such as ATP synthesis.

Energy source
Such ion pumps can use energy from a variety of sources, including ATP or the concentration gradient of another ion (sometimes called an "ion exchanger"). Symporters transport anions down their concentration gradient to fuel the transport of another type of ion in the same direction, while antiporters also use the concentration gradient in this same manner but transport in the opposite direction. In contrast, uniporters transport a single ion down its concentration gradient. In all of these cases, there is at least one driving ion that travels down its concentration gradient, thereby providing the energy of the system. Ions that are moved up their concentration gradients are called the driven ion.

Quote:
Concentration gradient
"Molecular diffusion", often simply called diffusion, is the thermal motion of all (liquid or gas) particles at temperatures above absolute zero. The rate of this movement is a function of temperature, viscosity of the fluid and the size (mass) of the particles. Diffusion explains the net flux of molecules from a region of higher concentration to one of lower concentration. Once the concentrations are equal the molecules continue to move, but since there is no concentration gradient the process of molecular diffusion has ceased and is instead governed by the process of self-diffusion, originating from the random motion of the molecules. The result of diffusion is a gradual mixing of material such that the distribution of molecules is uniform. Since the molecules are still in motion, but an equilibrium has been established, the end result of molecular diffusion is called a "dynamic equilibrium". In a phase with uniform temperature, absent external net forces acting on the particles, the diffusion process will eventually result in complete mixing.

Image
Diffusion from a microscopic and macroscopic point of view.
Initially, there are solute molecules on the left side of a
barrier (purple line) and none on the right. The barrier is
removed, and the solute diffuses to fill the whole container.
Top: A single molecule moves around randomly. Middle:
With more molecules, there is a clear trend where the solute
fills the container more and more uniformly. Bottom: With an
enormous number of solute molecules, all randomness is gone:
The solute appears to move smoothly and systematically from
high-concentration areas to low-concentration areas,
following Fick's laws.



Quote:
(462.5) 41:6.7 It should be remembered that spectral analyses show only sun-surface compositions. For example: Solar spectra exhibit many iron lines, but iron is not the chief element in the sun. This phenomenon is almost wholly due to the present temperature of the sun’s surface, a little less than 6,000 degrees, this temperature being very favorable to the registry of the iron spectrum.

Based on the previous UB quote, the narration points to a possible error of current science which assumed that the surface of the sun is composed of primarily “iron” where the narrative indicates that “iron is not the chief element of the sun’s surface,” and that the “emission spectrum” is being distorted because of temperature, therefore the method of determining these elements should be modified, but if there are additional elements which are present, then how would the science of today take or remove this predominant assuming in order to evaluate any other elements?

From the following article: “Emission Spectrum
Quote:
[. . .] The frequencies of light that an atom can emit are dependent on states the electrons can be in. When excited, an electron moves to a higher energy level or orbital. When the electron falls back to its ground level the light is emitted.

Image
Emission spectrum of Hydrogen.

The above picture shows the visible light emission spectrum for hydrogen. If only a single atom of hydrogen were present, then only a single wavelength would be observed at a given instant. Several of the possible emissions are observed because the sample contains many hydrogen atoms that are in different initial energy states and reach different final energy states. These different combinations lead to simultaneous emissions at different wavelengths.

Image

Emission spectrum of Iron


Based on the various possible interpretations which could be assessed or assumed from the context of the Urantia Book, we should note the following UB quotes/narrations, which in part reference other topics but contain specific translations which should be noted.
Quote:
(164.3) 15:0.3 Of the vast body of knowledge concerning the superuniverses, I can hope to tell you little, but there is operative throughout these realms a technique of intelligent control for both physical and spiritual forces, and the universal gravity presences there function in majestic power and perfect harmony. It is important first to gain an adequate idea of the physical constitution and material organization of the superuniverse domains, for then you will be the better prepared to grasp the significance of the marvelous organization provided for their spiritual government and for the intellectual advancement of the will creatures who dwell on the myriads of inhabited planets scattered hither and yon throughout these seven superuniverses.

Where it could be assumed that the authors “can hope to tell you little” although “operative throughout” the text which they could only hope to reveal is “a technique of intelligent control” of information herein. “It is important first” to acquire the basic “organization” within the narrations in the Book, before one can hope for “intellectual advancement” from within the narrative.

Quote:
(320.4) 29:1.4 These mighty beings are the physical ancestors of the vast host of the power centers and, through them, of the physical controllers scattered throughout the seven superuniverses. Such subordinate physical-control organisms are basically uniform, identical except for the differential toning of each superuniverse corps. In order to change in superuniverse service, they would merely have to return to Paradise for retoning. The physical creation is fundamentally uniform in administration.

Basically, the creation properties of the universe, or physical laws or rules, are few and repeat themselves, with minor variations based on environment, and need to be augmented or changed based on the basic principle of paradise system.
However, it may be necessary to understand what is closets to our location in order to be able to associate their principles to the basic principle of paradise.
You don’t have to recreate the wheel every time, in order to know that it’s still and only a wheel.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
kowalskil wrote:
A New Kind of a Russian Nuclear Reactor

Link to my article: http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/cf/reactor419.html

Feel free to share it with all who might be interested, especially with students.

Ludwik Kowalski, Ph.D.

“L. Kowalski” – I have looked over your presentation, listed above and have found some areas which were not, either extrapolated with detail, or were left out for various reasons, possibly being, a lack of information available. Either way I found the title used in this post to be relative to the content of the article and the use of “cold fusion” would be debatable based on the temperature involved.

Quote:
[. . .] The diagram does not show that the porcelain tube (red in the diagram) was closely wrapped by a heating wire. The electric energy delivered to the heater, in each experiment, was measured using several instruments; one of them was a standard kWh meter, similar to those used by electric companies. Heating of the fuel was necessary to keep the fuel temperature very high; the required temperature had to be between 1000 C and 1400 C.
[. . .] (diagram) [. . .]
The reactor container (a covered box) was immersed in an aquarium-like vessel, filled with boiling and steaming water. To keep the water level constant during the experiment, a small amount of hot water (probably 90 grams) was added through a funnel, every three minutes or so. [. . .]

The porcelain tube with the powdered fuel was electrically heated at the rate of 500W. Then the state of thermal equilibrium was reached. The water in the aquarium remained in that state for nearly one hour. The constant fuel temperature, measured with a thermocouple (also not shown in the diagram) was 1290 C.[. . .]

Although the information which I cut from your presentation above, presents questions which are not present in your article.

(1) The “porcelain tube” “was closely wrapped by a heating wire.” Where an electric current was “delivered”, however only the wattage was presented as “500W.” There was no mention of either voltage or amperage in the analysis to determine any available heat delivered to the “porcelain tube” because if the tube was “closely wrapped” it would present an electromagnetic field to the compound in the tube, also if there was no insulator between the water in the tank and the electrical current there would be a direct short presented unless DC current was used, which would require higher amperage to achieve “500W”. I could see this being the case if the wire used was inside of the “porcelain tube” and was placed in a vacuum.

(2) The other question I have, which was not presented, is the quality of the “porcelain” or “ceramic” used, was it glazed, which would be synonymous to “porcelain” but if an unglazed ceramic tube was used it would act as a filter where it is porous and would allow the water outside the tube to bleed through and come in contact with the “(LiAlH4 + Ni) powder” which would cause an additional reaction, specifically to “LiAlH4”, however, the “Ni” would act as "Arene" which would help in “polarization” but the overall effect achieved is heat and not electricity.

(3) The “vessel, filled with boiling and steaming water” would indicate that the water was preheated rather than being brought to a boiling point through the reaction process, where I’m curious if the energy used to preheat the water was taken into account in the energy used to determine the values presented. Because if the recaptured water measured after the experiment did not account for the water density at various temperatures, the results may be different. All this is relevant only if the water in the “vessel” was pre-heated.

Therefore, any additional information would be helpful, to asses any further evaluation of this type of “reactor”.

Thank you in advance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 653
it doesn't matter what voltage and amperage was used to generate the measured wattage and it doesn't matter if the source was AC or DC...using the local mains AC would be easiest/cheapest to implement. it goes without saying that the heating wire was insulated from the water, otherwise the current would follow the path of least resistance thru the water and not heat up the wire at all. the energy used to preheat the water was nullified by bringing the contraption to a state of thermal equilibrium before conducting the measurements.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Makalu wrote:
it doesn't matter what voltage and amperage was used to generate the measured wattage and it doesn't matter if the source was AC or DC...using the local mains AC would be easiest/cheapest to implement. it goes without saying that the heating wire was insulated from the water, otherwise the current would follow the path of least resistance thru the water and not heat up the wire at all. the energy used to preheat the water was nullified by bringing the contraption to a state of thermal equilibrium before conducting the measurements.

Assuming that the local electric current was used based on the Russian system the voltage would have been 220/240, however, in order to achieve the heat as described, regardless of the amount of electricity used, would be dependent on the mechanisms designed to produce heat, where the lack of specific design is in question. I'm sure that if the wire, as described, where insulated, in order to avoid water conductivity, would not generate enough heat, to effect the ceramic core material, because the water surrounding the wire would act as an insulator and would restrict any heat to water.

However, it is more likely that the coiled wire around the ceramic core filled with the metallic powder would have been designed to produce an "electromagnetic coil" whereby the powdered fuel would react as follows, as a "magnetic core",

Quote:
Many electromagnetic coils have a magnetic core, a piece of ferromagnetic material like iron in the center to increase the magnetic field. The current through the coil magnetizes the iron, and the field of the magnetized material adds to the field produced by the wire. This is called a ferromagnetic-core or iron-core coil. A ferromagnetic core can increase the magnetic field of a coil by hundreds or thousands of times over what it would be without the core. A ferrite core coil is a variety of coil with a core made of ferrite, a ferrimagnetic ceramic compound. Ferrite coils have lower losses at high frequencies.

A coil without a ferromagnetic core is called an air-core coil. This includes coils wound on plastic or other nonmagnetic forms, as well as coils which actually have empty air space inside their windings.

From article "Ferrimagnetism" note the following:
Quote:
Some ferrimagnetic materials are YIG (yttrium iron garnet), cubic ferrites composed of iron oxides and other elements such as aluminum, cobalt, nickel, manganese and zinc, hexagonal ferrites such as PbFe12O19 and BaFe12O19, and pyrrhotite, Fe1-xS.

Where the powdered fuel in the ceramic tube, had an "aluminum" type compound with "nickel", in that the reaction produced would most likely have been a result of "A ferromagnetic core can increase the magnetic field of a coil by hundreds or thousands of times over what it would be without the core."

Then there is the possible reaction of coming in contact with "water", where the temperature of the water would be needed to infuse through the ceramic tube. Otherwise, without the reaction with the "water" the "fuel" would not consume unless there is a known reaction of the powdered compound by themselves.

There is a viable possibility for this reactor to work, but it is in the details which would need to be defined to better recreate this experiment.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 653
yes the description provided is vague (and the equipment used is hobbyist level)...but there's no reason to believe there was a magnetic core in the ceramic tube and no reason why that would produce the results even if it was so...and no reason to believe there was insulation inhibiting the heat transfer between the heating wire and the ceramic tube (a layer of waterproof insulation covering the entire tube and external wire apparatus would suffice).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2015 3:15 pm +0000
Posts: 232
Makalu wrote:
yes the description provided is vague (and the equipment used is hobbyist level)...but there's no reason to believe there was a magnetic core in the ceramic tube and no reason why that would produce the results even if it was so...and no reason to believe there was insulation inhibiting the heat transfer between the heating wire and the ceramic tube (a layer of waterproof insulation covering the entire tube and external wire apparatus would suffice).

Yes the diagram was simple, but the additional narration did provide a visual alteration of the diagram, assuming that one can visualize the narration. However, in addition to your implication of insulation would need to be of a material which could withstand the temperatures indicated. Then there is that oxygen factor which would be required to produce any heat at all, should you have an occasion to look at a simple electric heater or the vacuum factor of a simple light bulb. The use of a thermocouple is by far not at a "hobbyist level" where if you are not familiar with this look at a gas appliance with a pilot light, where a thermocouple is used to generate an electric field which produces enough to create an electromagnetic field to hold open the pilot light valve, using the flame of the pilot light. Therefore just the use of a thermocouple would indicate temperatures of over 1000 deg.

If you would actually read some of the linked material presented in my presentations, you might see where this reactor is feasible. However, based on "Curie temperature" or "Curie point", once the nickel gets to hot, it would loose its magnetic affect at "627K", and is soluble in water, where by I would replace it with "Cobalt" which has a much higher "Curie temperature", "1400K" and it reacts violently with water, as does the "LiAlH4" and might produce a longer and hotter reaction. Even at those temperatures there should be no reason to not be able to contain the heat, depending on the material used.

As far as indicating that "there's no reason to believe there was a magnetic core in the ceramic tube", I suggest some additional reading or study, because to wrap a wire around any object, especially a cylindrical object which contains any substance which is of a metal compound, will create a magnetic effect, simple "hobbyist level" science here, however in order to avoid a reduction of compound reaction, it would be more likely that a direct current (DC) be used other that the Russian 220/240 volt system which would not produce the desired effect, the DC, or single phase AC can change the polarity of the current therefore changing the magnetic fields polarity direction to agitate the reactors effect.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 653
well i have probably a dozen or so thermocouples here at my home attached to various electrical devices that i've built as a hobby (not including some that came with multimeters that i've never used due to their inaccuracy) and i probably have all of the equipment needed to duplicate the experiment except for a calorimeter....so i consider it hobbyist level.

yes i'm aware of the magnetic field produced by an electric current...i just don't think it has anything to do with the chemical reaction here. the polarity of the circuit shown is irrelevant to its function.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: SEla_Kelly


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group