Tips & Notices – August 2018

About “Tips”:

While I’m mostly interested in things having to do with:

Computer stuff, especially small single board computers
Making money, usually via trading
Weather and climate (“Global Warming” & “Climate Change”)
Quakes, Volcanoes, and other Earth Sciences
Current economic and political events
(often as those last three have impact on money and climate things…)
And just about any ‘way cool’ interesting science or technology
Oh, and lately, cars ;-)

If something else is interesting to you, put a “tip” here as you like.

If there is a current Hot Topic for active discussion, try one of the Weekly Occasional Open Discussion pages here:

https://chiefio.wordpress.com/category/w-o-o-d/

You can also look at the list of “Categories” on the right hand side and get an idea of any other broad area of interest.

This ought not to be seen as a “limit” on what is “interesting”, more as a “focus list” with other things that are interesting being fair game as well.

The History:

Note that “pages” are the things reached from links on the top bar just under the pretty picture. “Postings” are reached from the listing along the right side of any given article (posting).

Since WordPress has decided that comments on Pages, like the Old Tips Pages, won’t show up in recent comments, it kind of breaks the value of it for me. In response, I shifted from a set of “pages” to a set of “postings”. As any given Tips Posting gets full, I’ll add a new one.

I have kept the same general format, with the T page (top bar) still pointing to both the archive of Tips Pages as well as the series of new Postings via a link to the TIPS category.

This is the next posting from prior Tips postings. Same idea, just a new set of space to put pointers to things of interest. The most immediately preceding Tips posting is: https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2018/07/10/tips-notices-july-2018/.

The generic “T” parent page remains up top, where older copies of the various “Tips” pages can be found archived. The Tips category (see list at right) marks Tips postings for easy location.

Subscribe to feed

Advertisements

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Tips and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

100 Responses to Tips & Notices – August 2018

  1. H.R. says:

    I said I’d post pics of our RV site when I found them. That was on the July Tips thread. I figured I’d just post them on the August Tips thread.

    Here are two views of our trailer on the site. The sites have a little pergola and a 6’x6′ storage shed. I don’t think it’s visible in either picture. Anyhow, I keep the gas grill in it and some of the stuff I hauled in the back of the truck; coolers, folding chairs, etc.

    They also have parking for your towed or towing vehicle and the sites are angled so it’s easier to back in.

    The nice sites like this book early. Thing is, the crappy RV parks with no room between trailers, no landscaping, and no parking book even earlier because they are cheaper.

    Here are the links to the pics of our site in Bickley RV Park. (Yup, that’s me.)

    https://imgur.com/a/7A3adIu

    https://imgur.com/a/1CvYYfr

  2. E.M.Smith says:

    @H.R.:

    Nice rig. We’ve been thinking about something about that size. Does it work well for long duration for two? Or is it better as a “couple of months and done” vacation thing?

    Like the foliage and the place generally looks neat.

  3. H.R. says:

    @E.M. It was very comfortable for two months and we are doing 3-plus months this coming winter. Don’t forget, we also had 2 dogs and two cats and their gear (two crates, a cat tree, and a console/maze kitty litter box) in the trailer.

    It’s a Shasta Revere 29RK and the living area is really comfortable and not cramped with us two and the critters. here’s a link to a good overview. We got ours new for $17,400 as they were clearing out for the 2018s. Check out the retail, which nobody pays, but we did way better than the typical sale price of $22,000 to $24,000 We got a couple of options, electric tongue jack(!) and 30# propane tanks(!) both I consider a necessity.

    http://www.rvguide.com/specs/shasta/travel-trailer/2017/revere/29rk.html

    We have been looking at adding a kit that makes an enclosed screen porch out of the area under the awning. It would give the critters a little more room to roam, makes sitting out in the evening a lot less buggy, and really expands the living space.

    The only thing we don’t like is that the bedroom has no slide-out, so it is hard to make the bed and there is less closet space. We would have no problem staying somewhere in the south November through April in our current rig, though.

    We would definitely have no problem living permanently in a 40′ fifth-wheel with 3-4 slide outs. They usually have a king bed, plenty of closet and storage space, a washer and dryer (and some have a dishwasher!), and a large bath and a half-bath.

    BUT!!!! Just as important as the trailer is the lot where you stay. It is easy to tolerate a small trailer in a nice RV ‘neighborhood’ vs not liking your stay in a super-deluxe rig because it is in a crap RV ‘neighborhood.’

    You mentioned buying a few acres in Florida and putting in a pad, a septic tank, and running water and electric. If you did that, you’d find that that you’d probably get by on less trailer as you could put up a storage shed and some outdoor cover/screening to expand your living space. You and the Mrs. would probably be quite content.

  4. Larry Ledwick says:

    How China is using a debt trap to force concessions from 3rd world countries, and gain foothold bases in key locations.

    https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/07/31/will-djibouti-become-latest-country-to-fall-into-chinas-debt-trap/

  5. E.M.Smith says:

    @Larry:

    Hey, what works for the IMF, EU, Globalists, etc etc. now being used by China. What a surprise…
    /sarc;

    Really, is anyone surprised that TPTB used debt to control countries (and their populations) and China has figure out how to do it too?

  6. ossqss says:

    Keep your eye out. Might see a rare phenomenon soon (currently modeled). Happened before though….

    https://mobile.twitter.com/RyanMaue/status/1025072161537568769

  7. E.M.Smith says:

    A $520 to $670 desktop mill for Aluminium or softer materials with 0.004″ precision…

    https://sienci.com/product/sienci-mill-one-kit/

    Not going to make a steel frame 1911-A1 but there are a lot of aluminum frame guns…

    Wonder what all other options there are.

    Saw a kickstarter for a 3D printed CNC mill…(not all of it, but things like gears and such)

    It looks like a revolution in small scale manufacturing is underway…

  8. Larry Ledwick says:

    Yes small precision machine centers within the reach of the average hobbyist are getting more and more available. I keep putting of buying a small desk top lathe or milling machine because they keep coming out with improved products, better features and accessories, almost hate to lock yourself into one right now knowing something better will show up in 6-18 months.

    Sound sort of like Moore’s law for light machine tools.

  9. E.M.Smith says:

    $800 mill w/ 0.001 precision NOT CNC. Tool kit $400+ so $1200 good to go.
    Write up by guy milling AR-15 recievers:
    http://www.majorpandemic.com/2014/07/little-machine-shop-hitorque-3960-mill-review.html

    More general purpose and less inexperienced hand-holdy… skill required. The tool site:

    http://www.majorpandemic.com/2014/07/little-machine-shop-hitorque-3960-mill-review.html

  10. Larry Ledwick says:

    I would love to have one of those but it is too big for my cramped apartment (and too heavy to wrestle up the stairs to the 3rd floor).

    The kind of projects I would be interested in doing would only require about 6″ – 8″ of table travel.
    If I had a workshop in a ground level garage that would be ideal along with a small 24″ center to center lathe with about a 5″ swing.

  11. Terry Jackson says:

    General comments on RVs. We have been 3+ months in various ones for the summer for 10+ years. Any of them can be made to work. In any RV, durability and longevity are a direct result of weight, and weight is a result of using substantial frames and structural components. So, travel trailers (bumper pulls) usually max out at about 12,000 lbs and have around 10% to 15% tongue weight. Fifth wheels can go to about 25,000 lbs and have about 25% pin weight. Motor homes can go upwards of 45,000 lbs with a tag axle.

    If the objective is a parked home, start with a 5th wheel. They can be 40+ feet long, have multiple slides, can have thermopane windows, and can have 50 amp power to allow use of the AC and the micro at the same time. Propane will run the hot water and the heat, but some AC units are heat pumps and can heat as well as cool. Refrigerator can be electric/propane or residential, but the residential may need to be aftermarket. Entry is via a folding 3 to 5 step stairway. Access to the bath and bed are another 3 or 4 steps up. Storage is usually quite good, and the basement under the bedroom is usually quite large. A 12 to 16 gallon dual fuel (propane/e,electric) water heater will make a hot shower possible if you use the momentary shutoff while you soap or shave. Taking propane tanks to be filled is a pain, so maybe a larger stationary tank is in order. Some can be had with a washer/dryer, loads are small so frequent use, and cycle times are a bit long, say 3+ hours to wash and dry one load. On site leveling can be hydraulic or manual screw jacks

    The motor part of the motorhome needs exercising every few months. It can have diesel fired hot water and hot water heat. Leveling can be jacks or air bags. We really like ours, but we put 10,000 miles a year on it. Parked, it would be a 5th wheel for us.

    The travel trailer is also good, but smaller, and usually with fewer options, 30 amp power, and smaller. Typical size is 25′ to about 30′.

    Look at upper tier older models such as Teton, Carriage, Mobile Suites, New Horizons and others. It usually needs a 1 ton dually for many of these, but delivery is usually available as well.

  12. p.g.sharrow says:

    Who built Stonehenge, mystery solved ?
    Strontium isotope analysis on cremated human remains from Stonehenge support links with west Wales; Scientific Reportsvolume 8, Article number: 10790 (2018) |
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-28969-8.
    It would appear that cremated remains from far afield were interned at Stonehenge Blue Stone ring.
    Stonehenge, also functioned as a cemetery from an early stage in its long history. Excavations in 1919–26 recovered the cremated remains of up to 58 individuals, making Stonehenge one of the largest Late Neolithic burial sites known in Britain (Fig. 1). Following their initial excavation, the cremated remains found in various ‘Aubrey Holes’ (a series of 56 pits placed around the inner circumference of the bank
    The large Sarsens of the second stage of Stonehenge, would appear to me to be female–male clan monuments….pg

  13. cdquarles says:

    Take a gander at this article: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/08/why_is_trump_fighting_the_trade_war.html.

    This article shows a capital spending chart and as goes capital goods creation, so goes the economy. The article doesn’t really get into the nitty-gritty details, and it doesn’t have to; but if you want to understand President Trump, this one helps. Our tax and regulatory policies combined with our trade policies plus the US dollar’s reserve currency status explains much, at least to me, for why we are where we are.

  14. ossqss says:

    @cd , I recalled this from Willis a few months ago on trade wars.

    https://rosebyanyothernameblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/26/trade-war-bring-it-on/

  15. cdquarles says:

    Ok, but I disagree with the notion that ‘services’ don’t create wealth. They do. What creates wealth is anything that makes life better, for the person who is doing the buying, because that’s why he’s buying (or selling). Having ‘stuff’ does not make me wealthy, per se.

  16. p.g.sharrow says:

    The creators of Real Wealth are Farming, Mining and Manufacturing. This has been known for thousands of years and are, by their nature, Capitalist endeavors. I told Willis this several years ago but he is hung up on fishing and hunting as wealth creators. They are not. They are Mining the wealth from the Earth. Everything else is “value added services” that may or may not add real wealth. Intelligent planners know this and plan publicworks ,government services,, with this in mind. Modern socialists think the can do away with these dirty messy things and concentrate on “clean services” as their new way to prosperity. If no real, new, wealth is being created everyone slowly starves as the wealth migrates to the top and is not being replaced. When you run out of, real wealth, other peoples money, Socialism fails. ALWAYS ..pg

  17. p.g.sharrow says:

    Every Ecoloon Socialist Knows that Stuff is real wealth, that is why they hoard control over stuff for themselves and exclude or limit the consumption of stuff by the mundane people. We must save the stuff for future populations. To them, people do not create wealth, People consume wealth. Socialist have a great fear of running out of stuff. Stuff that they can’t recreate, they can only hoard stuff that they get from the creators.
    Left to their own devices free people create more stuff then they consume. It takes Socialists with official power to destroy the wealth creators. Then everyone starves..
    We don’t need them….pg

  18. E.M.Smith says:

    “What is wealth?” – an interesting question. Does it extend to non-stuff, er, “stuff”?

    We have a “wealth of knowledge” and some other metaphors, but is that really wealth?

    It is often called “intellectual capital” after all.

    Hmmm…. I feel a ponder coming on…

    The phrase “value added services” does cover my usual insertion about “location matters” and “transport improves value”. (As does grading, quality control, upgrading / refining operations and many other things). Are they a part of the wealth making operation, or not? Can a jeweler make fine jewelry with just a mine to work from? Or is the refining the ore and casting gold ingots part of “manufacturing”? (I’d say yes…) What about the salesman for the refiner and the delivery driver delivering the gold ingot to the jeweler? Are they part of the ingot manufacturing process, or just a “value added service”? After all, the jeweler could drive to the refiner himself and buy the ingot… Harder to say for that one. ( I lean toward “yes, they are making wealth”; but it is arguable.)

    A very large part of our economy runs on moving things to where their value is highest. I’m hard pressed to show how that does not improve the wealth of the process / product. I have no use what so ever for a bbl of oil, but great use for things being delivered to my local store or even direct to me by Amazon. Clearly driving my car around is just a “value added service” to me and a consumption good at most… but what about when moving me to a workplace where I contribute to creating things? Had there been no computer support at Apple there would be no iPod or iPhone today. Surely I contributed in some way to making the product happen… Or am I just a “value added service” to the people in China who screw the boxes together and solder components in place? Where does one draw the line on a “manufacturer”? At the shop floor? At the Salesman? At the “support staff”? At getting the staff to and from work in their own cars? Not at all clear to me… (Then again, I’m an Economist by training and we thrive on things being unclear ;-)

  19. jim2 says:

    Simon D. I have an idea for a possible method to measure the rectenna output.

    Fashion one rectenna array with whatever is the usual number of elements. Fashion a second array with an equal number of element, only for this one create the junctions (diodes) but without the antenna. The junctions should be as similar as possible and an equal number of elements in each array.

    Then incorporate the two devices in a Wheatstone bridge.

    https://www.electronicshub.org/wheatstone-bridge/

    You would have to work out the details of the bridge, but I’m thinking you put the two arrays in a cooling apparatus, and the other two legs of the bridge outside the cooler.

    To conduct the experiment, chill the two arrays down as low as you can manage, perhaps using liquid nitrogen. The, using an external leg of the bridge, balance the bridge.

    Now allow the arrays to warm to room temperature. Any voltage difference seen should be from the antenna array.

  20. jim2 says:

    This is the sort of thing that could easily end life on Earth, and things like this along with other bad actors, may account for the lack of provable alien life.

    From the article:
    A bizarre rogue planet without a star is roaming the Milky Way just 20 light-years from the Sun.

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/04/bizarre-rogue-planet-discovered-wandering-in-our-galaxy/

  21. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – i think the rectenna isn’t practically useful, since it costs too much to make and wears out too quickly, and the amount of power available is pretty low. The only reason for using it as an example is that it’s easier to see what’s happening by analogy with radio antennae and diodes, and if you’ve made a crystal set then you can see it has to work. As such, it’s maybe the best way to demonstrate that 2LoT is not always applicable. Having said that, though, I’ve found that a lot of people still don’t accept that and insist that 2LoT applies in all situations.

    A better practical design is by using the photoelectric effect, which needs a semiconductor with a very low bandgap and a way of getting the required strong-enough electric field across it to produce a depletion layer (getting that field strong-enough is practically difficult). This then works using the same principles as a solar panel, but at a longer wavelength. Making this, though, needs decent deposition equipment and ways of measuring the thickness of the thin films produced, and also needs somewhat purer materials than I can currently get, so part of the development process means I’ll need to also build zone-purification systems and kit that can measure thicknesses of a few nm to a few microns. That’s a long task and though I’ve tried to wing it with what I can get and build, those attempts haven’t produced more than a few microvolts/microamps so far. In theory it will work, but practically making it is a little difficult without the professional kit.

    The absolute proof is better done using temperature measurements. Since 2LoT says that there is no process where all that happens is that a system cools down whilst delivering power to something outside the system, then I need to have a device that produces enough electrical power out that, if I thermally insulate it, its temperature goes down by a significant amount when I connect a load. A few tenths of a degree will be significantly above experimental errors, and of course the temperature gradient seen should follow the connection/disconnection of the load so that a correlation can be established and eliminate problems from imperfect thermal insulation. Once I get to the point that that can be proved, then it should be easy to pass it on to others to develop further. The device thus needs to produce a few mW of power for a device 1-2cm², and that seems to be possible in theory.

    Once I can demonstrate that there is a valid workaround for 2LoT, then I’m sure that there will be other ideas produced that do a better job – the main problem is that it’s thought to be impossible, so no-one will attempt it (at least if they do they are careful to not mention 2LoT at all).

    Given that I’m going to need a lot more time to produce that 2LoT device, and the device that violates CoM is a whole lot easier to actually make, I decided to back-burner 2LoT for a while and make a space-drive instead, and come back to 2LoT once I’ve got a bit more kudos in respect of violation of axioms. After all, I’m trashing a lot of things people hold as inviolable. 2LoT, CoM, CoE, and now removal of inertia and gravity (and how to build a flying saucer). Gets a bit much when I’m stomping through these fundamental bits and saying that mainstream science has got it wrong. I have to actually prove some of it experimentally so I’m choosing the lowest-hanging fruit first. There is of course a slight possibility that some other experimenter will read what I’ve written and try it out and get there first. Not a problem for me – I’m generally happier to buy something that does the job rather than need to design and make it myself, and it takes a few iterations of design to reach an optimum result. Still, the ideas are heretical enough that few people will bother, so I expect that the proofs will need to be produced before they are accepted.

  22. E.M.Smith says:

    Make that:

    “I expect that the proofs will need to be produced and a generation of professors will need to retire before they are accepted.”…

    BTW, might want to check if any semiconductor companies in S.Valley are junking “obsolete” gear as they move to next gen stuff… at one time that showed uo in “surplus” shops down here… now you might need direct contact with the companies…

  23. jim2 says:

    CoM and CoE, strictly speaking, went out the window with e=mC^2. But as long as both sides of the equation balance, all is well in the Universe.

    You would have to violate that in order to make a stir.

  24. jim2 says:

    EM – I think if a reproducible experiment can be made, professors won’t have to retire.

  25. jim2 says:

    SD – since you are unconcerned if someone gets there before you, what design of space drive do you have in mind?

  26. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – I regard mass and energy as interchangeable because of E=mc², but logically it is possible to create and destroy mass/energy now, whereas my start-point was that mass/energy was always conserved. That surprised me, since I expected that would only be possible with something cataclysmic such as Big Bang conditions. Looks like I can do it using a few watts on the kitchen table.

    The space drive is simply an extension of the two loops being driven 1/4 wave out of phase and spaced 1/4 wave apart. Standard theory says that must produce a reactionless force, but calculations for 5.8GHz or so and 3cm diameter loops around 13mm apart gives a force of around 1e-7 N. Pretty minute and almost unmeasurable. However, by employing resonances that force can be multiplied, possibly by 4-6 orders of magnitude. At that level, the force becomes useful. That force is produced relative to the frame of the device, so if it is allowed to accelerate an object in a null-gravity situation then all the energy we put in actually ends up as heat, but the kinetic energy the object accumulates (relative to the lab frame) appears from *nowhere*. Turn it around and we can slow down a fast-moving object too, and then the kinetic energy disappears to *nowhere*. I won’t publish the final design until I’ve shown it works, simply because if I get it working it may finance the stuff I can’t yet afford. Someone else may come up with a better one, too, if I state the principles and leave people to think how best to apply them. My first design used a travelling wave in resonance, but I realised I could make it work with a standing wave which is simpler and easier to make. Possibly it won’t give enough magnification of the force and I’ll need to think of a better way. Not quite totally not worried if someone copies my design, therefore, but the principles are available to anyone to design their own, and if it’s better than mine I’d buy it.

    Though these assertions go against what we’ve been taught, if that 1e-7 N basic force is correct and really there (and that follows from simple calculations based on changes in the fields travelling at the speed of light), then the rest logically follows. It’s a small effect in normal situations, but normally a small effect can be engineered to be larger. The fact that the effect exists at all shows that CoM is not exact, and neither is CoE, but since in most situations we deal with constant fields then for those situations CoM and CoE are correct. We define electric, magnetic and gravity fields as conservative, but that only precisely applies to constant fields and not changing ones.

    EM – I’ve looked at the discards from Silicon Valley but they are somewhat more expensive than I can afford, and there is also a pretty steep transport charge and around a 30% import charge into the EU on top of that. There is however a good fab down in San Sebastian who could probably do the job well, just needs money. I’m thus looking at a bootstrap process of becoming a serial violator of axioms (there are probably laws against that…) and the 2LoT violation may be the last one because it’s more expensive to actually do, and needs the most specialist knowledge in fabrication/materials that it would be better to pay for. I might manage to make one here, but with a large failure-rate and not a high output, and maybe enough output to prove the point, but it really needs high-end kit and a lot of experience to do the job right.

  27. p.g.sharrow says:

    Long ago, when I was a young lad. About 1957 IIRC, I read a lot of Si-Fi stories. One of these was about a group of humans that were trying to join the Galactic Federation. As a test the humans were required to duplicate a “black box” that produced electricity. You had to start by making fire, taking ores and forging a hammer, followed by making tools to make tools, to make tools, to make tools, etc. to create the final invention. The human group created a stack of integrated multi-layered circuits that produced the required power. The Aliens that did not think the humans were advanced enough to join were astonished. Their “black box” was a chemical battery. The Human creation was an electronic device that fed off of the energies of the Universe!
    Think of that, 5years before Fairchild Camera created the first IC chip, someone dreamed of a giant IC creation that feed off of the energies of the Universe to create electrical power.

    Back in the early 1880s Nicola Tesla, as a High School student envisioned an Electrical powered flying machine. All of his studies and later inventions were designed around this idea to create a large L-C circuit system that would result in Electrical flight.

    Over 30 years ago I was set upon this quest of an Electrical Space drive by a vision of a “black box” that changed mass/inertia by a broadcast force field. I don’t know how Simon got his itch or how long he’s been at it, but from my studies I see no reason that it can’t work and many reasons that it might.
    We seem to have a wonderful group here to share our thoughts with and get advice from in our quest to advance human knowledge. …pg

  28. Simon Derricutt says:

    My reply seems to have evaporated. I’ll try to recreate it.

    Jim2 – CoE involves mass/energy being conserved, not just mass OR energy. I’d thought that breaking that would involve something cataclysmic like the Big Bang, but instead it seems we can create and destroy mass/energy without any fanfare with a few watts of power on the kitchen table. Logically, this will create a stir.

    The space drive is simply an extension of the basic idea of two loops driven with 1/4 phase difference and spaced 1/4 wave apart, so that by the time the wave reaches the other coil it will be 1/2 wave phase difference and the forces on each coil, instead of being equal and opposite, will both be in the same direction. Calculations say that for around 5.8GHz at 100mA, with loops 3cm diameter and around 13mm apart, the force is of the order of 1e-7N per loop. Very small, but not zero. My idea is to use resonances to increase the current and the magnetic field, and it should be possible to add another 4-6 orders of magnitude to that force. At that level, it becomes practically useful, but maybe not yet enough to lift a space-ship off the ground. Enough to shorten the trip to Mars dramatically, though. The first design I tried used a travelling wave and a looped waveguide, but I then realised that I could do it somewhat more sneakily using a standing wave. The first test proved to be somewhat too quick and dirty to achieve the accuracy needed, but tells me the wave type and length are correct, so I’m in process of building a more-accurate one that should achieve better resonances. First build is needed to find out what you need to do better next time, so I’m not that worried I can’t see any thrust yet – the thin Copper won’t stay where it’s put so several mm out.

    It’s not that I’m unconcerned if someone rips off my design, but that the principles are out there and everyone’s, and so if someone has a better design than I do I’d buy that instead. It’s possible that this design may pay for the research needed on the other projects, after all.

    EM – I’ve looked at the Silicon Valley discards, but they are well beyond my budget. Added to that, there’s a pretty large transport fee and around a 30% customs charge getting into the EU. I still need to build the skills and get the materials pure. As such, I’m envisioning a bootstrap process as a serial violator of axioms (there must be a law against that, too…) and the CoM violation is the easy one. 2LoT violation is maybe better taken to a fab where there’s the kit and the experience to do the job right, and so that may be the last one to be properly violated even though it was the first thought of. It’s the most expensive one to develop, and we may even produce one that takes usable energy from static air-pressure, which needs feature sizes at the limits of what is currently possible. Expensive to develop, therefore. By contrast, the gravity control should be much easier.

    Even professors have to take notice when the thing they say was impossible happens before their eyes. There will likely be a rash of people saying they always said it was possible and papers to prove that. It is after all in the textbooks already for CoM, but it’s a negligible force.

  29. Simon Derricutt says:

    pg – back when I was a student I had to learn doublethink, and accept both theories (QM and Relativity) were absolutely correct when they were mutually exclusive. There remain paradoxes in standard Relativity, and some odd paradoxes elsewhere. When I was effectively forced into an early retirement in 2002 I decided to try to resolve those paradoxes. One was the way that energy gets used up, yet is conserved, and that resulted in the 2LoT ideas. Really based on a semantic problem and that our language isn’t sufficiently accurate to distinguish what is actually happening. For CoM, it was the EMDrive that made me look at why momentum is actually conserved, since it was obviously impossible according to standard science and yet there have been too many replications (and I do trust NASA to measure things like that). It works, so why? LENR obviously works, though it isn’t in the standard theory. Coming across Alzofon was almost pure chance, since I’ve never accepted the UFO stories as being other than misidentification and/or fabrication (and a lot of them are that), but I’ll need to reconsider that assumption.

    I’ve seen theories change over my life, so I’m aware that current theory is only the best explanation we have so far. Any theory can be disproved by experiment, and in fact this is the definition of a good theory that it can so be disproven.

    For your project, I’m aware that whenever we go beyond conditions we’ve tested we might find something unexpected. I’m flexible on maybe needing to discard stuff I thought was true based on the experimental evidence. I’m also aware that even a theory that is wrong may make a correct prediction for some things, so apart from the effort put in and the beauty of the finished machine, there was also a chance that you’d find out something new and demonstrate something worth having. In the grand scientific tradition you’re putting the theory to the test. If I was there I’d be helping you rather than just cheering you on from 1/4 world away.

    As things are, though, I think Fred Alzofon is probably closer to the mark than your theory, and since it can be done pretty cheaply and quickly, I’ll be trying that. Getting the predicted experimental result does not of course mean that the theory is the truth, just that it’s closer to it. Still, amazing future if it does indeed work. I can’t quite believe I’m involved at all in something so possibly world-changing, but I suppose there’s always someone involved in such things. The other bits I’ve worked out also have the capability to make massive changes if I can prove they work and if people don’t simply disbelieve it because of attachment to absolutes (the Book is right, don’t question it).

    Nice thing about this group is that people ask the hard questions. If I can’t answer them I need to do more work or accept that the ideas are wrong. If I’m right, then the future should bring almost-free energy and travel to distant stars, with a trip to the Moon being about the same cost as a short-hop flight is now. Have space-suit, will travel…. May not solve the political problems, but astronauts do come back with a different view of the planet, so send the politicians to the Moon. Maybe even bring them back….

  30. E.M.Smith says:

    Simon:

    If close enough to regular semiconductor fab, there are LOTS of “Fabless Semiconductor’ companies that contract out the Fab to sites in Asia. If you just want a small lot of 1/2 dozen or so, you might enquire about their ability to make “engineering samples for evaluation”…

    BTW, first copy of the comment was in SPAM. No idea why. I fished it out.

  31. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh, and it occurs to me that some “standard” physics theories use concepts like 7 or 10 dimensional phase space… one might not need to violate CoM, just shift some of the Mo to a dimension we don’t perceive…

  32. jim2 says:

    Simon – real scientists think of experiments that can prove the current ones wrong. Of course, the experiment might simply produce a result in line with current theories. I would say you are a real scientist as you are trying to prove the current paradigms wrong. If you succeed, it will be YUUUGGGGEEEE!

  33. Simon Derricutt says:

    EM – I’ll discuss it with the fab when I’ve got enough money to pay them, but they do seem pretty competent and only around 2.5 hours drive away. Also speak English, which is lucky since my Spanish is non-existent apart from saying I can’t speak it. Some of the fab runs here have nevertheless given data that will be useful in the final (paid for) fab runs, though. I do know some of the pitfalls and gotchas.

    Maybe the comment hit some trigger-word. I obviously missed it second time.

    It’s possible to balance the books by positing that the momentum goes into another dimension, but in reality fields can create and destroy it. You can put momentum into a field (as in force times time) but if the field is varying then the momentum that is transferred to another object may not be the same and most likely won’t be – there’s always that spacetime gap between when the field gets the energy and when it comes out again at the receiving particle. Since angular momentum is also transferred by fields, that is also not necessarily conserved. Since the only way that momentum can be transferred is via field interactions, then this logically follows. Though we place a lot of store on momentum and its conservation, and of course that continues in quantum mechanics, then this is somewhat surprising that momentum isn’t fundamental. Of course most transactions use fields that are effectively constant and so in most situations momentum is conserved, but it’s the exceptions I tend to be interested in. In the same way, in almost all situations energy will be conserved too, but those odd situations where it isn’t could be useful. I know people will want to keep their conservation laws intact, but they are not actually inviolable. Personally, I can only experience 3 dimensions and time, so adding extra dimensions that we can’t see or measure just seems wrong. Once we can measure them, that’s OK.

    For an 8-dimensional geometry of space that may just work, try http://revolution-green.com/emergence-theory/ but don’t ask me to explain the theory. May be better to look at that when you’ve messed up your daily rhythm and are awake at the wrong time.

  34. E.M.Smith says:

    I was thinking of the multidimensional space description as being a way to describe it to folks reluctant to accept non-CoE or non-CoM that might let them get past their hangup… If they think it is still conserved but just went “somewhere else” then your details might be more readily accepted (or at least they might listen to the idea…)

    Not so much that it is actually what happens ;-)

    Just think of it as the used car salesman in me showing through ;-)

  35. p.g.sharrow says:

    “Just think of it as the used car salesman in me showing through ;-)”
    Sometimes people would rather believe bs then hear the truth.
    @ simon; An L-C circuit depends on the inertia of the Universe to the expanding EMF field developed in the winding’s of the coil. An Inertia that is a perfect EMF elastic. Your concept that a quarter wave should result in a standing wave field sounds like the object of Tesla’s massive designs in harmonics. He felt that pumping this standing wave would become additive rather then dissipative of the energy input ed. At a point, if the frequency is high enough the capacitive plates () become L&C to the outside universe (-) turn that on it’s side and what you get a flying disk, UFO, form follows function. Current costs energy that is wasted as heat. Voltage kicks hard at induction / Inertia before current flows, Voltage and frequency are key to this standing force field. It appears to me this will also lead to artificial gravity.

    Building things is what I prefer to do but the last 2 years has consumed my time doing other things. I look forward to your efforts to follow up on research in applied science in this field…pg

  36. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – really, the points I’m making are pretty simple, so I’ve been wondering why others haven’t seen them, or if I’ve simply missed something in the logic. The purpose of making the ideas public is that if there’s a logic error then having more people putting in their thoughts on them then any such error would be noticed. You initially rejected the ideas as wrong, but got over the belief that the old theories had to be totally right and instead looked at the evidence and logic. If there are no holes in the logic, then these exceptions to the laws are real and we have ways of using them to produce very cheap power. If there were any holes in the logic, though, I’m pretty sure someone would have found them and raked me over the coals. That’s the benefit of having true sceptics looking at them.

    EM – it may help in getting the ideas into the mainstream if there’s a way of keeping the appearance that the traditional laws are still kept, but I prefer to avoid those sweet lies and get down towhat’s actually happening. I’m getting far more useful feedback here than on R-G, where it seems that the sceptics can’t have found an error but still believe it’s wrong, so don’t say anything. Getting the experimental evidence is obviously not an easy task and will take some time, so if there’s really some error in the logic it’s better to find it before I’ve put in the time and money.

    pg – there may be some non-linearities of the response of the universe to very high amplitudes of oscillation, but I suspect we won’t get excess energy at the amplitudes I can reasonably reach given the results of linear accelerators and cyclotrons. The force produced by the two loops at 1/4 wave phase difference and 1/4 wavelength apart is not related to gravity but is simply a force produced by the action of a current on a magnetic field. In effect, it’s pushing on the Rest of the Universe (RoU). Not antigravity, therefore, but just the same as an electric motor except that instead of having a rotor and stator we are generating the magnetic field by the antenna we are using the current in. In effect, I’m using a mirror to produce an image of the antenna, and the image works as well as a real current flowing as regards the magnetic field. Once we get onto Alzofon’s theory then the idea is to produce a surface with a small volume behind it where there is no energy. Such a surface must produce a node in the waves, in the same way as stopping a guitar string. Where there’s nothing, there’s nothing to vibrate. That surface thus defines an edge of the universe, and if that surface encloses a volume then we’ve split the single universe we know into a new volume (the spacecraft) and the RoU, and neither can have any gravitational or inertial influence on the other. Evidence for this being likely to be true is in the astronomical measurements of the rotation-speed of galaxies in the distant past, as explained by Mike McCulloch’s theory. The new theories together give us a totally different picture of the way the universe works that seems to have at least some experimental evidence to back it in the anomalies we know about. We’ll just have to see if the predictions of gravity and inertia control are correct. So far, there seem to have been no replications of Alzofon’s experiment, which is surprising. Maybe people tried it and it failed, so they didn’t say anything (file-drawer effect), or maybe it did work and got an above-top-secret rating and got buried.

  37. p.g.sharrow says:

    @Simon; your inside the null or node of osculation sounds about right. I have paid attention for many years and don’t recall anyone doing experimental work on an inside out LC circuit. Lots of work on the induction part but not the capacitive part. Tesla considered the capacitance against the RoU to be the most important part of his work, Any thing that flies is anti-gravity but linear acceleration caused by Dielectric warpage could serve as a counter to gravity or even as a cause…pg

  38. philjourdan says:

    Another reason to NOT use Wikipedia as a reliable source. The lie of omission (but we knew that with William Connolley) – http://dailycaller.com/2018/08/05/wikipedia-sarah-jeong-new-york-times/

  39. E.M.Smith says:

    @Phil:

    Well this is a hell of a quote from that link:

    “ThePostOnline is an explicitly right-wing news site, according to wikipedia’s own article on it, and therefore not a reliable source.”

    The implication being only Left-Wing is valid and reliable?
    Sheesh… the stupid is strong in this one…

    How can anyone be so Dim as to not see the value in “compare and contrast” between two points of view. The foundation of ALL Science, lots of forensics, much art appreciation and literature, and more.

  40. E.M.Smith says:

    @Simon:

    There are persistent rumors, some asserting inside information, that the USA has various “otherworldly” flight capabilities. I’d vote for “classified and buried” absent evidence otherwise.

  41. jim2 says:

    The Linux Vendor Firmware Service is a secure portal which allows hardware vendors to upload firmware updates. This site is used by all major Linux distributions to provide metadata for clients such as fwupdmgr and GNOME Software. There is no charge to vendors for the hosting or distribution of content.

    https://fwupd.org/

  42. jim2 says:

    Simon says … of Jim2:
    You initially rejected the ideas as wrong, but got over the belief that the old theories had to be totally right and instead looked at the evidence and logic.

    That’s not exactly correct. I have a Chem degree and have been a big fan of science since I could read. I’m familiar with the history of science and knew long before this that all theories in science are provisional. Newton was wrong since he wasn’t completely right. Einstein certainly may well be wrong also.

    So, no, I didn’t say you couldn’t be right because Science is Right. What I did say is I need to see an experiment that demonstrates some established (and provisionally accepted) theory is wrong. Then that experiment has to be replicated.

    That’s the way real science works. I would be tickled pink if you proved WITH AN EXPERIMENT that thermo is wrong in some way. Or the conservation of mass-energy is wrong WITH AN EXPERIMENT. And I don’t mean a thought experiment. A physical experiment, thank you.

  43. Simon Derricutt says:

    Jim2 – I’m working on the experimental confirmations. There are of course some low-level confirmations of 2LoT being broken/bypassed, of which the nantenna array is the clearest. The CoM violations are contested at the moment, and are largely assigned to “unknown experimental error” in the journals. I think the experiments have been done well-enough that the loopholes are real and the axioms are not always true, so the task is to make the experimental results so large that experimental error can’t be assigned as the reason. In the various essays I’ve done on these subjects, I have pointed to the experimental evidence of anomalies, as well as the thought-experiments that provide some justification for the effects that are seen (and generally ignored as being too small to prove that the axioms are wrong).

    Of course, what I’m trying to do is not just the experimental confirmation (or to disprove the idea though that may happen), but to produce a useful technology. The space-drive will be useful and keep satellites in the right places without needing reaction-mass, as well as reduce the time taken to go to Mars. Logic says it will work based on what we know already that works (the force between two current-loops), so the question is whether I’ve done the design well-enough. The text-books say that the force will be there, and so it’s whether I can make that force big-enough to be useful. The mere existence of that force says that CoM is not always valid, and that in turn says that CoE is not always valid. These are logical conclusions from experimental results of the force between two current loops and the measured speed of light. As such, asking for experimental results to confirm that shouldn’t be needed. What I’m really doing here is pointing out the logical conclusions from what we already know to happen. Making it big enough to be actually useful, though, does need an experimental test of the kit and to measure just how large a force I can achieve.

    It took me a long time to get over my underlying belief in CoM and CoE, since I was taught that when I was young and they had always been right in my experience up to that point. The 2LoT work was in fact based on them being true (and in that situation they are true because the fields are effectively constant). I thus expect other people to have the same difficulties in seeing that those Laws have loopholes, and situations where they don’t apply. Thought-experiments are useful in exposing the limits of the assumptions, and from them we can then design real experiments. Without the initial thought-experiments, though, the normal experiments would not show anomalies out of the noise because the un-amplified forces are way too small to be easily measured. Unless you first realise that an anomaly should be there, and have worked out a way to make it big-enough to measure, you won’t see it.

    The stuff I’m doing is definitely experimentally-based, but also induction from what we already know to work. Though I think I’m right, I could have made a logical cock-up somewhere and missed something I shouldn’t have. Hopefully if I tell people the ideas then any such errors will be found. EM’s group has been far better than others in actually discussing it, and so far no logical errors have turned up. As such, I’ll keep working on making it real, because it ought to work.

  44. cdquarles says:

    Keep at it, Simon. My prime training is chemistry also, spiced with some mathematics and biology. One thing drilled into chemists/chemical engineers, is that conditions matter and may matter a lot. I have less physics training as such, so tend to not comment on physics as such, unless chemistry is involved, or I can follow the math/logic.
    [That’s one of my biggest peeves with ‘global warming’. They talk ‘physics’ when chemistry matters more.]

  45. E.M.Smith says:

    My 2 ¢ worth per “conditions matter” is just that silver chemical reactions are known to change with lunar conditions. (IIRC it is different with a full moon overhead vs no moon). Similarly, we now know that the rate of atomic decay varies with {something – GCRs? Solar flux?} and that was thought to be a constant at one time…

    So yes, “conditions matter” and it shows up around the edges in small bits…

  46. ossqss says:

    What could possibly go wrong here? Future Darwin Award Winner maybe?

    https://www.kansas.com/news/nation-world/national/article216159170.html

  47. E.M.Smith says:

    @Ossqss:

    The student soon to be known as “Lefty”?

  48. E.M.Smith says:

    @Another Ian:

    Might be more effective to include a note like “Links to an article where DOJ was ordered by the court to preserve and present Comey private emails under FOIA”… That there’s some news…

  49. H.R. says:

    This one is a keeper. It’s stone age technology fer cryin’ out loud. Stone tools and fire!

    The video doesn’t skip anything other than walking, so if you want to cut down the 47:55 length, you can do a little skipping and not miss any technique, but it was so fascinating, I just watched the whole thing.
    Primitive technology: searching for groundwater and water filter (water well and tank) full

    Here’s a follow-up with a seawater system. I haven’t watched it yet.

  50. Larry Ledwick says:

    Very interesting I have looked at similar designs in various books and articles but very interesting to see them actually assemble it and especially to watch the clarification process as the gravel filter gradually tightens up and washes out the very fine sediment. I also found it interesting that they put that layer of charcoal in the filter and the “splash rocks” in the top to keep the well water from disturbing the sand layers.

  51. E.M.Smith says:

    Anyone who’s had a fish tank with an under gravel filter knows the basics. Any kind of container, then layer your materials and be patient…

    Saw that distilling sea water one before, but then lost the link. Nice to have it where I can find it again ;-) Yeah, clay, fire, bamboo… Just think what you could do with a piece of pipe and a pot…

  52. H.R. says:

    @Larry: I was blown away by the stone tools and how they made their bucket with fire. The bucket went surprisingly quickly.

    I never did get the story on the blocks that were lying around from the start. There’s a whole series of these Primitive Technology videos. Most likely the blocks are covered in another video.

  53. Larry Ledwick says:

    It would be nice if they included complete elapsed time information (maybe they did in the comments and I missed it) but as you mentioned if you are patient and just solve one problem at a time you can get a lot done with systematic applied effort.

    I would guess it took maybe 3 days for the whole thing perhaps 4 or 5 if they had to wait for weather and such.

    I was also wondering if they used any “special” ingredients other than just local clay like volcanic pumice to make low tech cement.

    People under estimate the ability of primitive technologies to get things done, they just don’t have the patience and persistence to do things like that.

    Of course the hidden skill here is the concept for doing it and someone a thousand years ago figured out how to do all that, and they got the benefit of all that trial and error when they were shown as kids how to accomplish those tasks.

    The sand filters used by the ancients are structurally identical to that setup, only the details are different. Another ancient filter technology is the use of wick siphons, which can achieve very good filtration although they are quite slow. (wick siphons can be used to filter used motor oil to clear oil but it takes weeks to filter the oil due to the very slow flow).

  54. Steven Fraser says:

    One Summer between college years, I worked as a groundsman for a water company. One of the production basins has this configuration:

    The input was a feed from a major US river. The purification system is an in-line basin, 1/4 mile long and 150 yards across. At the tail end of it was a humongous engineered filter of stunningy elegant and workable design.

    Each section of the filter had this stack of materials, from the bottom up:

    1) Concrete container, shaped like the negative space of an inverted pyramid with the pointy-end cut off, and the big end up. The exit pipe in the center of the bottom (the truncated point)
    2) A ceramic ball that would wedge between the walls, but not block the pipe.
    3) 4 ceramic balls that fit in the spaces formed between the corners of the pyramid and the first ball, and of sufficient size to be level with the top of the first ball.
    4-5 or 6) Layers of successively smaller ceramic balls
    7 Clean pea gravel large enough that would not fall through the filter
    8 A 12″ layer of beach sand
    9 An 8″ layer of charcoal
    10 an 8″ layer of beach sand

    The unit was not gravity-fed, but by the vacuum of the water pumps doing pull/push (pull from the filter, push to the line)

    In the basin, the following steps.

    Mix river water with lime, to soften it
    Mix Ferric Sulffate to flock it (accrete solids that will settle)
    Mix Chlorine to kill bacteria.

    They put 40 Million gallons a day through that facility.

    I cut the grass :-)

  55. E.M.Smith says:

    The mention of blocks reminded me that not everyone grew up with the California / Mexico background and Adobe structures heritage. Get a fine thick heavy with clay mud, mix in some straw, pack it into frames (or hand shape) to form bricks. Let it set in the sun until dry. You now have construction bricks. Mortar can be the same stuff. Once laid up, cover with some kind of plaster to prevent rain washing it away and it can stand for hundreds of years. (Lime & similar in primitive conditions)

    Also look up the English “Wattle and Daub” construction:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wattle_and_daub

    Wattle and daub is a composite building material used for making walls, in which a woven lattice of wooden strips called wattle is daubed with a sticky material usually made of some combination of wet soil, clay, sand, animal dung and straw. Wattle and daub has been used for at least 6,000 years and is still an important construction material in many parts of the world. Many historic buildings include wattle and daub construction, and the technique is becoming popular again in more developed areas as a low-impact sustainable building technique.

    As long as you have sticks and mud you can build a house… or barn… or shed…

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2010/08/08/everything-from-mud/

    Part of what makes me do a pronounced eye roll when folks start moaning about “Running Out!!!!” of resources. We can NEVER EVER run out of resources… the whole planet (solar system!) is a giant ball of resource.

  56. Larry Ledwick says:

    CERT just put out a notice on a North Korean malware Includes some IP addresses it uses that if not already blocked by other rules should probably be locked out.

    https://www.us-cert.gov/HIDDEN-COBRA-North-Korean-Malicious-Cyber-Activity

  57. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh yeah… I was going to add a block rule for all N.K. IPs “real soon now” ;-)

  58. u.k.(us) says:

    XKCD hits one out of the park.
    (make sure to “mouse over” the cartoon for more).
    https://xkcd.com/2030/

  59. E.M.Smith says:

    @u.k.(us):

    Absolutely! That sure is MY response to the idea of electronic voting! (And I do computer security stuff for a living and have for 30 years…)

  60. Larry Ledwick says:

    He He He – – –

    blah blah blah blockchain (run away screaming)

    Bury it in the desert wear gloves (yep pretty much my view too)

    I really don’t understand why folks are so “trusting” of computers, it really makes not sense at all. You have a black box – you put something in one hole and some other stuff comes out another hole and you have absolutely no clue how the output thingy relates to the input thingy – you just take it on its face that if the advertising blurb says no puppies were injured in producing this product that all is well.

  61. Larry Ledwick says:

    File this one under future military tech

    https://breakingdefense.com/2018/08/detect-nukes-in-flight-with-electron-beam-technology/

    Has some minor typos (occasionally refers to electrons where it is probably intended to refer to neutrons but other than that, interesting tech and a doorway to true high power, long range particle beam applications)

    It implies that the spin of the source nucleus determines the spin “and the direction of emission” of the emitted neutron. I was not aware this was true (is it?)

    I think we have a couple of people deep enough into the nuclear physics world to comment on that implication.

    Right now simple neutron sources direct the neutrons with the rather crude method of thermalizing/absorbing all the neutrons except the ones you want to use (basically letting a beam leak out of a hole in the shielding as I understand it)

    An example of these simple passive generators are the ones used in soil density gauges and such which I understand just place a strong alpha emitter very close to a beryllium target to generate free neutrons as the alpha particles strike the beryllium, typically something like combination of beryllium-9 and polonium-210.

    There are also particle accelerator style neutron generators, but it is not clear to me how this design differs from those designs.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutron_generator

  62. E.M.Smith says:

    Conserved spin I get. Control of direction? There’s a bit missing…

    I’m also bothered by the way they keep saying high explosives are very dense like Plutonium… not even close… More like the density of play dough or plastic…

    IF it can be done, it has lots of potential, but that’s a big if…

    Didn’t see where electron & neutron were swapped, but was reading fast…

  63. ossqss says:

    So,,,, I have been seeing advertising on 20,000 mile oil changes and thought, what? I have only had a 4Runner that the factory says can go up to 10,000 with sythetic. 20,000 is double that…. I did a bit of research, and it is basically not really true. I did however find an entertaining explaination of it from and energetic (err something) person named Scotty! ;-)

  64. Larry Ledwick says:

    When full synthetic mobil 1 first came out they said you could go 30,000 miles. The oil itself never really wears out, (aside from a bit of shear breakdown which causes it to lose a little viscosity over time). What wears out is the additives in the oil. But if you do long oil change intervals and periodically change just the oil filter and top off with fresh oil you can actually run the oil much longer that most people suspect.

    Interestingly engine oil analysis shows that wear of internal surfaces is actually higher on fresh oil than it is on used oil. Trace metal build up much quicker on the new oil than they do in older oils which have already achieved equilibrium.

    There is a lot of debate on this subject and some oil hobbyists have actually done very long mileage tests with Mobil 1 (like 100 K miles) and showed that replacing the additives by periodic topping off after regular oil filter changes is actually the lowest cost way to do oil changes.

    I have used long interval oil changes since the 1980’s when Mobil 1 first came out with all synthetic oils and they work just fine.

    The trick is to use a high quality oil filter rather than some el-cheapo paper pulp filter like a FRAM.
    The top line oil filters like the Mobil1 which use synthetic filter elements filter far better.

    The very best oil filter is to use an industrial quality oil filter like the Canton. They will filter your oil so clean it retains its normal oil color rather than turning black due to small suspended carbon particles.

    https://www.cantonracingproducts.com/categories/performance-oil-fuel-filters/fuel-filter-elements-and-seals.html

    These are industrial hydraulic quality filters, the best setup is to run parallel filters one high capacity 8 micron and one 1 micron filter which will take the very small stuff out but the larger high capacity filter maintains oil flow under high rpm.

    This is a 500,000 mile test with 10k mile oil changes (simulated highway driving on a speedway)
    https://mobiloil.com/en/article/why-the-mobil-advantage/mobil-1-high-mileage-guide/high-mileage-challenge

    I can’t find the test done buy those car guys right now but they took a car and only replaced the oil it burned and lost during oil filter changes and did routine oil tests on it and found that the modern quality synthetics the basic oil stock itself essentially lasts for ever with almost no change other than the accumulation of trace metals (which stabilizes after a few thousand miles on the oil) and gradual loss of additives which get replenished as you do the oil filter changes.

    One brand Royal Purple tended to lose more viscosity than other synthetics due to shear but other than that no issues.

    I usually change oil once a year just before winter time in late Sept and then top off what ever is lost to drips and engine oil consumption and in the turbo wrx I also changed oil in early summer to a heavier weight oil, but all my other cars basically one oil change a year with top off.

  65. Simon Derricutt says:

    Larry – on the neutron-beam idea, the nuclei can be aligned using EPR (electron paramagnetic resonance) which I’ve recently found out about from the Alzofon drive work. Although I haven’t found the details of the emission direction of the neutron relative to the spin of the parent nucleus, it seems likely that these would be aligned and that the neutron beam from a set of aligned nuclei would be in a single direction and not two beams 180° opposed.

    It seems likely that the precise details of the weapon would have been mis-described, to stop people (maybe Russians, Chinese etc.) from replicating the research. Still, the basics look not too difficult, with the main problem in finding the right frequencies to use and the corresponding correct magnetic field. As you state, high explosives won’t stop the neutrons any better than plastics would, so that’s definitely misdirection. The beam may however do other things to any electronics and thus disable a smart bomb no matter what explosive it was using.

  66. Larry Ledwick says:

    Just so it does not evaporate a direct like to Sharyl Attkisson’s article

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/401116-what-would-the-intelligence-communitys-insurance-policy-against-trump

    A couple other links to interesting items – It seems someone in the DOJ flew a sterilized 747 down to Little Rock, Arkansas (Clinton’s hometown ) and picked up lots of boxes of evidence very quietly.

    https://truepundit.com/mystery-as-doj-load-it-with-boxes-documents/

    A little summary in the Canada Free Press of Antifa Antics

    https://canadafreepress.com/article/antifa-the-real-fascists

  67. Larry Ledwick says:

    The Turkish Lira value is cratering against the US Dollar.

  68. Larry Ledwick says:

    Facebook makes another concerning move toward total access to personal information.

    http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=58854

  69. Steve C says:

    @Larry – “Allowing these Big Tech companies to amass so much power was a giant mistake”. Amen to that.

  70. Larry Ledwick says:

    Followup on the quiet plane load of documents, mystery deepens and Feds make second trip to load documents – Hmm interesting – I wonder what Hillary and Bill are doing today?

    https://truepundit.com/mystery-deepens-as-doj-two-round-trips-in-48-hours-loaded-with-boxes-docs/

  71. ossqss says:

    This should be interesting. No way I make it up that late to watch the launch here from SRQ.

    https://www.space.com/41440-watch-parker-solar-probe-launch-webcast.html

  72. Larry Ledwick says:

    Seems the Chinese are getting cranky since President Trump has made it clear we will not be economic patsies any longer.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/10/politics/south-china-sea-flyover-intl/index.html

    From twitter:

    U.S. Indo-Pacific Command @PacificCommand
    Following @PacificCommand
    More U.S. Indo-Pacific Command Retweeted U.S. Navy
    The United States will not be “warned off” from lawful operations in international waters and airspace.

    U.S. Navy @USNavy
    Following @USNavy
    More
    We will sail, fly and operate wherever international law allows.

  73. Larry Ledwick says:

    Possibly related to above from twitter:
    dwnews @dwnews
    2 hours ago
    More
    Despite the Beijing continuous efforts to reduce Taiwan’s international space, the self-governing island’s has shown no sign of surrendering.

    https://www.dw.com/en/can-taiwan-counter-chinas-mounting-pressure/a-45036932

  74. E.M.Smith says:

    China is driven by a sense that personal influence matters most and “face” is most important.

    They miss the idea that folks will be driven by a fundamental sense of morality.

    I had an Ethnic Chinese “partner” not “get it” on that point and had to walk away from many $Thousands of income as he wanted an immoral behaviour and thought I’d go there for money.

  75. Another Ian says:

    “JC in Houston

    The former lawyer, former newspaperman, now well esteemed scifi writer John C. Wright has a post up: http://www.scifiwright.com/2018/08/alex-jones-and-the-communications-decency-act/ which covers most of the matter. I would commend it to your reading.”

    A comment at

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/08/10/a-decidedly-sarcastic-open-letter-to-youtube/

    The letter is worth reading too IMO

  76. Simon Derricutt says:

    A BBC article about 11-year-olds testing their hacking skilz against voting websites in the States. It seems the fastest got in and changed data in 10minutes. Of course, that means that the votes counted now depends on which side has the most-efficient hackers.
    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45154903

  77. H.R. says:

    @Simon: “Of course, that means that the votes counted now depends on which side has the most-efficient hackers.”

    Be nice to me, y’all. You may be looking at the next President of the U.S.A.

  78. jim2 says:

    I don’t know if anyone has mentioned One America News Network, but it seems to be just reporting news, and not anti-Trump. I get it on DirectTV Now. There may be other outlets for it.

    http://www.oann.com/

  79. Larry Ledwick says:

    oann is one of the feeds I follow on twitter.

    One America News Verified account
    @OANN ‏

  80. beththeserf says:

    Interesting article by Wright, Ian, Youtube or Facebook, publisher or platform?

    Here’s another interesting discussion, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7T7ulzNG7o
    pervasive spread of UN Agenda 21, right down to local councils non-disclosure of
    contact process. Delphi technique, and around 30,00 Precautionary Principle used
    as shaming technique to curtail individual activity, guilty unless proven innocent.

  81. Larry Ledwick says:

    This is interesting – Rachel Tobac @RachelTobac (CEO @SocialProofSec 🤖 training+pentesting companies on social engineering)
    11 hours ago
    At @defcon hacking conference they showed how easy it was to get full admin access to one of the common electronic voting machines – (under 2 minutes)

  82. Larry Ledwick says:

    Might be an interesting study to chase down for further examination.

  83. Another Ian says:

    “12 Aug: American Thinker: Exposed: the Deep State’s Authorship and Publication of the Dossier
    By Clarice Feldman

    The Internet is full of information, some of it not well researched or considered, but every now and then a star appears on the horizon. To my mind the new star is Yaacov Apelbaum, who, using his considerable technical skills, has produced a masterpiece of well-documented analysis (LINK) underscoring the nonsensical and partisan nature of the Mueller operation. He compares this effort by the anti-Trumpers to the plot line of the Dreyfus affair, where falsified evidence and suppressed evidence led to Captain Alfred Dreyfus’s conviction for treason…”

    A comment at

    http://joannenova.com.au/2018/08/weekend-unthreaded-226/#comment-2032267

  84. Terry Jackson says:

    The link to the analysis Another Ian mentions. Long, meticulous, detailed.
    https://apelbaum.wordpress.com/
    Also, much further down is a post on Capture the Flag, about digital security.

  85. Ralph B says:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/09/dinosaur-extinction-debate/565769/
    Substitute climate change for asteroid and this would never have been published

  86. E.M.Smith says:

    @Ralph B:

    Yes, true. But do note that the whole “impact vs Deccan Traps” argument is over the question of “Did the patient die from the gun shot or the bleeding out?”…

    Look up Anpipoal focusing.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipodes

    India was just about opposite the impact site. Rock hits:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicxulub_crater
    “The date of the impact coincides precisely with the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary (K–Pg boundary), slightly less than 66 million years ago”
    and on the antipodes what happens?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deccan_Traps
    “The Deccan Traps began forming 66.25 million years ago, at the end of the Cretaceous period. The bulk of the volcanic eruption occurred at the Western Ghats some 66 million years ago.”

    It is the SAME disaster. To “solve” it they need to agree they are both right…

    @Jon K:

    One wonders just who needs to be whacked with that “Clue Stick” ;-)

  87. E.M.Smith says:

    @Ossqss:

    My rule of thumb is that when FacePlant Twitster and Goerble “ban” something or try to block it, or defund it or… Then THAT is the place to be and the thing to do.

    Pretty simple, really. Streisand on Steroids ;-)

  88. LG says:

    Diving robots find Antarctic winter seas exhale surprising amounts of carbon dioxide
    https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1029/2018GL078013

    https://www.washington.edu/news/2018/08/14/diving-robots-find-antarctic-winter-seas-exhale-surprising-amounts-of-carbon-dioxide/

    Abstract

    Although the Southern Ocean is thought to account for a significant portion of the contemporary oceanic uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2), flux estimates in this region are based on sparse observations that are strongly biased towards summer. Here we present new estimates of Southern Ocean air‐sea CO2 fluxes calculated with measurements from biogeochemical profiling floats deployed by the Southern Ocean Carbon and Climate Observations and Modeling (SOCCOM) project during 2014‐2017. Compared to ship‐based CO2 flux estimates, the float‐based fluxes find significantly stronger outgassing in the zone around Antarctica where carbon‐rich deep waters upwell to the surface ocean. Although interannual variability contributes, this difference principally stems from the lack of autumn and winter ship‐based observations in this high‐latitude region. These results suggest that our current understanding of the distribution of oceanic CO2 sources and sinks may need revision and underscore the need for sustained year‐round biogeochemical observations in the Southern Ocean.

  89. cdquarles says:

    I ran across this one today: http://media.mcclatchydc.com/static/graphics/20150723-PDF/2014-10-24-ICIGappeal.pdf, on the Conservative Tree House blog, if I am remembering correctly. NB the dates involved. (This is the kind of thing that President Trump is having to deal with, as well as his cabinet.)

  90. E.M.Smith says:

    @cdquarles:

    I’m a bit distracted by “other things” lately… so what’s that document, who’s it from, and what does it mean?

    I scanned it but it’s mostly redactions, so I’m missing a lot of context….

  91. cdquarles says:

    It is an appeal from a whistleblower within the “intelligence community” that involved the roll-up of human intelligence assets in China after, apparently, they penetrated SoS Hillary Clinton’s very insecure “private” server that had government related business on it; from what I could gather. It was made to the Inspector General’s officer for the Intelligence Community. I think this individual lost his appeal and his clearance. I might be wrong about that, though.

  92. Pingback: Tips & Notices – September 2018 | Musings from the Chiefio

Comments are closed.