HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: aw3@ukc.ac.uk (A.Wilson)
Newsgroups: sci.physics
Subject: Re: New Group sci.physics.orthodox
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:17:58 GMT
Reply-To: aw3@ukc.ac.uk (Alan Wilson)
Organization: Chemical Laboratory, University of Kent at Canterbury, CT2 7NH, UK

In article <1992Nov9.135719.18651@cs.yale.edu> jhh@waldzell.physics.yale.edu (Jim Horne) writes:
>In article <1deevpINNl33@bigboote.WPI.EDU> phillies@bigwpi.WPI.EDU  
>(George D. Phillies) writes:
>> Is it just me, or is the crackpot and fringe material
>> drowning out the real physics?  Perhaps it is time for
>> sci.physics.orthodox (moderated?)
>> 
>I think a much better name would be sci.physics.research, and it
>would have to be moderated, though lightly. There is already a  
>successful moderated group sci.math.research which could serve
>as an example of how to encourage substantive discussions of current
>research.
>
>> My motivation for this is the suspicion that this group 
>> is not in contact with the physics community at all.  
>> George Phillies
>> phillies@wpi.wpi.edu
>
>Yes, very few real physicists read sci.physics. Most have been driven
>out by the crackpots.
>Jim Horne
>jhh@waldzell.physics.yale.edu
> 
I'm not sure about the real physicists being driven out, but having 
watched this group evolve for a year or so I definitely get the
impression that the coverage of physics is rather narrow and confined
to either fairly high level stuff on QM, GUT's and GR, or rather trivial
(but sometimes interesting) stuff at undergraduate level (mainly
mechanics, SR, FTL etc....). What is definitely missing is what the
vast majority of physicists do (myself included), which is use their
physics background in interdisciplinary research... I'm sure there are
lots of solid state experimentalists, materials scientists, theoreticians
etc, etc out there who are reading this newsgroup, but not contributing
because their expertise lies elsewhere (ie other than subjects listed
above).

Come on - lets hear about other aspects of physics !!!!!......

Alan


ps As usual, my opinions only, perhaps nobody is interested in Fermi
surfaces, conduction mechanisms in metal oxides, or. (insert your research
topic here.............)

--
Dr. Alan Wilson        (Approved by Morrissey, the consumer monkey)

" That was MY idea "
================================================================= 
Xref: sparky sci.physics:18143 sci.math:14409
From: pratt@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (Vaughan R. Pratt)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math
Subject: Re: What's a manifold?
Date: 5 Nov 92 06:04:00 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department,  Stanford University.

In article <1992Nov5.035214.25991@galois.mit.edu> tycchow@riesz.mit.edu (Timothy Y. Chow) writes:
>
>Well, this definition has the advantage of being easily motivated and
>concrete, but as people started studying manifolds more deeply they
>found that it was often a nuisance to have to be tied to a particular
>function f to define their manifolds.  There were certain geometric
>properties of manifolds that were "intrinsic" to the surface and didn't
>really depend on the function f in any essential way.  It seemed that
>what was needed was a way of defining manifolds without having to pick
>a space R^n for the manifold to live in and specify an explicit function.
>
>Hence the modern approach to manifolds is to define them as objects in
>their own right, without reference to a space that they're imbedded
>in.  This is what motivates the definition that John Baez gives.
>Notice that he doesn't require the manifold to live in some R^n.  The
>extra abstraction is a small price to pay for the simplification and
>logical clarity that it yields, as you will appreciate if you study the
>subject more deeply.  Similarly, smooth manifolds and algebraic
>varieties (and later schemes) are nowadays defined without making them
>live in R^n.

Ah, now this is starting to sound very interesting and helpful.  What I
don't understand here is how "living in R^n" is of itself creating
complexity and obscurity.  I can see that the arbitrariness of f might
get in the way.  But where does the complexity and obscurity creep in
if for example we define a manifold to be a smooth retract of an open
subset of R^n?  (This is essentially taking the existence of tubular
neighborhoods as definitive of manifolds, and is how Bill Lawvere likes
to think of them.)
-- 
Vaughan Pratt				There's no truth in logic, son.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: logajan@sleepy.network.com
Subject: Weighty subjects
Reply-To: logajan@sleepy.network.com
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 16:18:58 GMT

ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE writes:

>I cannot imagine how to weigh the cathode while it is under electrolysis.

The astronauts "weigh" themselves by sitting in a bucket that oscillates
up and down.  That acceleration gives rise to a number of measurable
quantities.

Maybe you could fasten the cathode to a piezo element which itself is
fastened to the tube.  The frequency of resonant oscillation ought to have
some relationship to the mass of the cathode.


tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
>>Yamaguchi claims it absorbs 760 times its own weight of deuterium.
>
>I presume that's a typo of some kind. That would be 9 kg/cc, which could
>only be some variant of degenerate matter.

Yeah, but it'd probably account for the cold fusion effects. heh heh
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca (Bruce Dunn)
Subject: Re: Missing Oxygen
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 19:07:18 GMT

\ Tom writes:

This leaves us with no good way to measure the cathode loading.  I think
the resistance is not well known - or even meaningful at high loadings.
Expansion of the cathode is hard to do, and depends on the shape of the
cathode.  I cannot imagine how to weigh the cathode while it is under
electrolysis.  I have all along assumed that a cell can not be turned off
and the cathode removed and weighed.  It it is, then at least sometimes
a lot of gas is lost.  So what to do????


How about this:

1) While the cell is running, flush the head space of the cell with helium.
This removes oxygen and prevents the recombiner from eating evolved
deuterium/hydrogen.

2) Turn off the helium flush and the cell power at the same time.

3) Sit back and watch the gas volume expand as deuterium/hydrogen comes out
of the cathode.  When the volume has stopped increasing, it is probably safe
to remove the cathode.  For added protection, you might wish to gently heat
the cathode in situ.

4) Remove and weight the cathode to measure anything that is good and stuck
in the structure.

5) Loading is determined by the gas evolved by the cathode plus the mass gain
of the cathode.




--
Bruce Dunn    Vancouver, Canada   Bruce_Dunn@mindlink.bc.ca
From: seghers@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (David Seghers)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:32:23 GMT
Subject: Re: Real Science
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion

(I'll post this since my mail bounces...  Perhaps others will also want to
inform the new administration of what "real science" is about...  :-)}  )

>
>There is going to be a new crew in Washington.  I hope someone will tell them 
>that there is no such thing as directed research.  There is hardly even 
>directed development.  But there is directed Pork.  And that, my friends, is 
>directed research! 
>
>Tom Droege
>
>----------
>
Tom,  

Perhaps you can be the one to tell the Clinton crew "how it is."  I picked
up the Clinton email address from someone posting to the talk.politics.*
groups.  Here it is:


        Glad to help. The official address (managed by Jock Gill) is:

        75300.3115@compuserve.com

I really enjoy reading your postings, and I think you are performing a 
tremendous service to the net-at-large by showing what *real* science
is about!  Keep up the great work!

(An interested layman convinced that most of the truly interesting 
discoveries have yet to be made...)

David Seghers (seghers@hpcc01.HP.COM) 415-691-3730

************************************************************************
Solipsist Society, Founding Member  (I think, therefore you are.)

Charter member of the "I HATE vi!" Club.
************************************************************************
The statements and opinions above are my own, entirely my own, and no one
else's.
************************************************************************
Solipsist Society, Founding Member  (I think, therefore you are.)

Charter member of the "I HATE vi!" Club.
************************************************************************
The statements and opinions above are my own, entirely my own, and no one
else's.


Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: bbs.rgeorge@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Russ George)
Subject: Pons and Fleischmann in France
Organization: The TSoft BBS and Public Access Unix, +1 415 969 8238
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 00:33:58 GMT

some have asked about who is funding Pons and Fleischmann in France. 
They are supported by IMRA corp. a research subsidiary of Toyota corp.
They have jsut added 32 new scientists to staff there. The facility is 
called IMRA Europe to be distinguished for a similar effort being mounted 
in norhtern Japan called IMRA Japan. Other big Japanese companies with 
substantial cold fusion efforts include NTT, Toshiba, Hitachi, 
Mitsubishi, and a long list of others. The funds dedicated for cold 
fusion research from MITI are for equipment expenses in Japanese 
universities. Total is jsut over $3 million US for 1993 alone, other 
expenses such as lab overhead, salaries, etc. are being picked up by the 
ministry of education.  This works out to roughly a $6-$9million dollar 
budget for cold fusion research in Japanese universities alone for 1993. 
A drop in the bucket when compared to the reported work in Russia at 54 
different scientific institutes (as reported by Tsarev head of Russian 
cold fusion research). 
I wonder why the US academic bandwagon hasn't caught on to the prospect 
for research dollars in cold fusion here in the US.


--
Russ George (bbs.rgeorge@tsoft.sf-bay.org)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Subject: Yellow Crud Power
Reply-To: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:43:13 GMT

John Logajan has nicely worked out the energy of formation of Yellow Crud.

A gross guess is that one cc formed in 4 mega seconds.  Given that the yellow
crud density is between 1 and 10, I estimate that this contributed of order
100 micro-watts to the anomalous heat.  Perhaps John would like to use the
one cc per 4 mega-seconds number and compute a more accurate number.  

Tom Droege
From: tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: New Scientist: Lukewarm reception for Japanese cold fusion
Date: 6 Nov 92 19:51:27 GMT
Distribution: sci
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <BxB0ou.1uF.1@cs.cmu.edu>, webb+@CS.CMU.EDU (Jon Webb) writes:
> [...palladium plate...] Yamaguchi claims it absorbs 760 times its own 
> weight of deuterium.

I presume that's a typo of some kind. That would be 9 kg/cc, which could
only be some variant of degenerate matter.

-- 
         Tarl Neustaedter	tarl@sw.stratus.com
         Marlboro, Mass.	Stratus Computer
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Subject: Be direct
Reply-To: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:31:56 GMT

I also should have noted that the best way to determine power input into
the duplicate cell is to measure voltage and current.  Attempting to measure
the resistance is derivative and is subject to the error of the temperature
coefficient of the conductor's resistivity.
From: tarl@coyoacan.sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Nagoya conference in Nature, 29 oct
Date: 5 Nov 92 08:25:10 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

A word from the establishment about that Nagoya conference. Page 765 of the
29 Oct Nature:

	COLD FUSION PRODUCES HEAT BUT NO PAPERS

{Tokyo.} Advocates of cold fusion seem again to have fogotten the most
elementary rule of scientific communication -- publication. Last week,
Japanese researchers at Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (NTT)
generated tremendous heat among the country's media by announcing they
had found "undoubted direct evidence of cold fusion".
   The statement is not new in the three-and-a-half-year history of the
phenomenon. But, as has often been the case for supporters of a process
claimed to have been discovered by chemists Stanley Pons and Martin
Fleischmann, the NTT researchers have no paper, published or submitted,
to back up their claim. The company's public relations department could
not even provide an abstract for the announcement.
   NTT scientists say they have detected helium-4 from palladium electrodes
soaked in deuterium gas and then heated in a vacuum. David Williams of
University College, London, says that he is "underwhelmed" by their
evidence and that similar findings have been traced to contamination
from the atmosphere.
						David Swinbanks

In other words, still no published details. The most detailed experiment
descriptions I have seen of Cold Fusion attempts have been in this group,
-- 
         Tarl Neustaedter	tarl@sw.stratus.com
         Marlboro, Mass.	Stratus Computer
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: morrison@vxprix.cern.ch
Subject: Cold Fusion Update.
Organization: SF-Bay Public-Access Unix
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 05:05:51 GMT

Dear Colleagues,                                        8 November 1992.
                Am writing up a summary of the Third International Cold Fusion 
Conference at Nagoya, 22 to 25 October. As it is rather long and unfinished, am 
sending this extract which is a summary of my Invited Talk which was entitled;

          REVIEW OF COLD FUSION EXPERIMENTS

and have added the description of the events that followed - events that are
unusual at conferences that are supposed to be scientific. 
    Will send the full account of the Cold Fusion conference as soon as possible
(have added the beginning) while due to pressure of other work, the actual 
paper of my talk will probably not be ready before the end of the year.

                                                        Douglas.

4. SATURDAY 24 OCTOBER, Jones, Yamaguchi, Miles, Iida, Kasagi, Cecil,
Tsarev, Gozzi, Morrison.

Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: Dieter Britz <BRITZ@kemi.aau.dk>
Subject: The Notoya Demo
Reply-To: Dieter Britz <BRITZ@kemi.aau.dk>
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:23:11 GMT


We have seen two conflicting accounts of the demonstration of a cold fusion
cell at the Nagoya conference. Both Jed Rothwell and Douglas Morrison agree
that the dummy cell had a thin lead making the contact. They disagree about
how much this lead mattered.
 I don't know what currents and voltages were being applied (how about telling
us?), but I have in my time fiddled with a lot of electronics and soldered a
lot of leads. I have never had a lead just lying around that was so thin that
it would dissipate significant heat with a few amps going through it. I take
it that the idea of using a silver wire would have been that Ag conducts
better than Cu, the usual material. To then use an extremely thin Ag wire
would seem to negate this advantage. This thing makes me suspicious.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk
Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Subject: D/Pd ratios
Reply-To: ames!FNALD.FNAL.GOV!DROEGE
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:11:06 GMT

I have measured 1190 relative volumes.  Because oxygen is slowly lost due to
the formation of the Platinum compound (yellow crud) the excess oxygen method
tends to undermeasure.  There is a simultaneous energy measurement that tends
to confirm that something is going on, but if anything it indicates that the
loadins is also under measured.  Moore (Trans Electrochemical Soc., 75 [1939])
measured 2800 relative volumes.  I cannot find anything wrong with his 
method.  But Moore thought that more than half of the gas existed not in the
crystal lattice but in "rifts in the slip planes".  Moore used very fine 
wires.  He would then pass a current through the wire and heat it up to drive
off the hydrogen.  Hard to go wrong with such a simple method.

Tom Droege

P.S.  Latest run is again drifting in the "anomalous heat" direction.  Heat 
also comes in pulses that are hard to explain.  This run was not intended as
a serious measurement but was designed to shake down the calorimeter after a 
number of changes.  So the calibration was only done to 10 mw or so.  Now the
"anomalous heat" is again up to 50 mw peaks.  Why does the calorimeter drift
with a cell in place, and not with a dummy load.  Why is the drift always in
the "anomalous heat" direction?  I really think that I have now eliminated the
TED as a possible source of drift.  
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: Dieter Britz <BRITZ@kemi.aau.dk>
Subject: Oops!
Reply-To: Dieter Britz <BRITZ@kemi.aau.dk>
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:27:04 GMT


In reporting the Arata and Zhang paper, I referred to their "spark discharge
fame". It is of course Wada and Nishizawa who have this fame. Sorry to
mystify you. Arata et al's fame lies in their on-off effect.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dieter Britz alias britz@kemi.aau.dk
Kemisk Institut, Aarhus Universitet, 8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Subject: Resistance of wires
Reply-To: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:29:48 GMT

Dieter Britz <BRITZ@kemi.aau.dk> writes:
>I have never had a lead just lying around that was so thin that
>it would dissipate significant heat with a few amps going through it. I take
>it that the idea of using a silver wire would have been that Ag conducts
>better than Cu, the usual material. To then use an extremely thin Ag wire
>would seem to negate this advantage.

I can't imagine the need for silver wire either.  The difference in
resistivity between copper and silver is only about 6%, with silver being
a slightly better conductor.  The difference in temperature coefficient
is only 10% better for silver.  It would be far easier and cheaper for me
to come up with a many 100's percent greater cross-sectional area copper
wire than a silver wire of any size.

A 30 guage wire has a resistance of about 0.1 ohm per foot.  For a ballpark
guess, lets assume the Mills cell is dropping 2 volts at 100 ma, or about
200 mw.  So, assuming a foot of 30 guage wire and by P=I^2*R, I=sqrt(P/R),
therefore I=1.4 amps.

By intuitive inspection, if half the wire is out of the cell, half the power
is being dissipated outside of the cell.  If you slide the connection
(presumably to a much thicker "feed" wire) to effectively cut the wire length
in half, you also cut the resistance in half, and have to recompute the
applied current -- which is now I=2 amps -- to duplicate the 200mw Mills cell.

A 20 guage wire has about 10 times the cross-sectional area of 30 guage wire,
and therefore has 1/10 the resistance per foot, about 0.01 ohms.  We'd have
to pass about 4.5 amps to get it to dissipate 200 mw over a one foot section
and 6.3 amps if it were six inches long.

I doubt, however, that a mere 200 mw would heat a cup sized object to feel
"warm to the touch" so scale up these numbers appropriately.


- John Logajan MS010, Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428
- logajan@network.com, 612-424-4888, Fax 612-424-2853
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: bbs.rgeorge@tsoft.sf-bay.org (Russ George)
Subject: Re: Who is Funding Pons?
Organization: The TSoft BBS and Public Access Unix, +1 415 969 8238
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 00:23:07 GMT

Bob.Clarke%bbs@actcnews.res.utc.com (Bob Clarke) writes:

> I understand Pons is working in France with a staff of 32 scientists and
> other staff.  Who is funding this effort?
> --
> Bob Clarke, user of the UnixBBS System @ actcnews.res.utc.com
> E-Mail: Bob.Clarke%bbs@actcnews.res.utc.com
> ========================================================================
>    United Technologies Corporation
>    Opinions expressed do not necessarily represent UTC.


--
Russ George (bbs.rgeorge@tsoft.sf-bay.org)
From: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: I am your density
Date: 9 Nov 92 15:29:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: anubis.9211090701.AA05245
Reply-To: logajan@anubis.network.com (John Logajan)
Organization: Sci.physics.fusion/Mail Gateway

webb+@CS.CMU.EDU (Jon Webb) writes:
> [...palladium plate...] Yamaguchi claims it absorbs 760 times its own 
> weight of deuterium.

tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
>I presume that's a typo of some kind. That would be 9 kg/cc, which could
>only be some variant of degenerate matter.

webb+@CS.CMU.EDU (Jon Webb) writes:
>Not on my part.  That is a direct quote from New Scientist.  It does
>sound unlikely, though.  But your calculation of the density is
>probably wrong; it's well known that palladium expands as it absorbs
>deuterium (in electrolisys, at least.)

I'm sure they must have meant to say 760 times its own volume.  The CRC
HCP claims palladium can absorb 900 times its own volume at room temperture.

As for density, the highest density element is Osmium at 22.6 g/cc, with
gold at 19.3 g/cc and uranium at 19.07 g/cc.

Palladium is 12 g/cc.  760 times 12 is 9120, or about 9 kg/cc, just like
Tarl calculated.  That is about 400 times more dense than Osmium.  I doubt
palladium expands 400 times its volume!

By the way, for the curious, diamonds are only 3.5 g/cc.


- John Logajan MS010, Network Systems; 7600 Boone Ave; Brooklyn Park, MN 55428
- logajan@network.com, 612-424-4888, Fax 612-424-2853
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
From: evan@gauss.math.brown.edu (Evan M. Simpson)
Subject: Re: Re:Setting up home system for internet
Organization: Brown University Math Department
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:44:31 GMT

In article <uR6wTB3w165w@spectrx.saigon.com>, edgar@spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank) writes:
[...]
|> Tom:
|>  
|> Saw your request for advice about setting up a home system for
|> access to Internet and the usenet newsgroups.
[...]
|> Modem:
|>  
[...]
|> 2400 baud should be more than adequate for 100 msgs/month in and out.
|> a 9600 baud modem will cost at least $200 & in my opinion can only be
|> justified of you're doing a lot of work over long distance.
[Much excellent advice deleted]

   Note that these days you can buy a full-featured 14.4K fax/modem for as
little as $200 (Infotel, for example, or the Gateway offer). These can pay
for themselves quickly if you use a pay dialup service.

-- 
Evan Simpson               My .sig got stale, so I had to throw it out.  
Brown U. Math Dept.
evan@gauss.math.brown.edu  
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion