Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

The Red Planet approaches.

1 view
Skip to first unread message

feklar

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 6:46:52 AM8/23/03
to
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 00:15:13 -0700, Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'
<alond...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> >> http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm
>> >
>> >The 'facts' in the above URL have gross errors, inconsistencies,
>> >omissions, and distortions of the truth.
>>
>> Like what, you lying sack of socks?
>
>Oh, for one, anyone who claims that a UHF station uses a million watts
>of power has their head where the sun don't shine. The ERP may be
>that high, but the transmitter itself may use well under 0.1 megawatt.
>That's a _big_ difference.

"You pay for the respectable electricity costs of television
broadcasting (the many hundreds of 5 and 10 million watt transmitters
operating 24 hours a day nationwide) in increased product prices. "

Is that what you meant? Where does it mention UHF? The 'word' "UHF"
is not present in that document. Search for it...

Your logic facilities are defective, you should exercise them more.

You deduct from the reference to 5 and 10 million watt transmitters
that that total includes UHF transmitters since it was used in the
same sentence, and there aren't "many hundreds" of TV stations in the
USA unless you include UHF stations.

Perhaps I might have worded it mre specifically. The statement is
entirely true if you consider all the FM radio stations in the USA.

The statement did not read
"the many hundreds of 5 and 10 million watt TV transmitters operating
24 hours a day nationwide".

It read
"the many hundreds of 5 and 10 million watt transmitters operating 24
hours a day nationwide".

There -are- a total of many hundreds of VHF and FM radio stations in
the USA that transmit within that power range.

For one, if you had read it all the way through you would have seen
that it was a rough draft, not a final document, as is stated in the
text.

For another, even though you would be right to say I that should have
been more specific, that fact that many total high powered
transmitters do exist and operate in the USA would be obvious upon the
slightest reflection or consideration or basic attampt at a logical
analysis.

>I could go on, but I'll let the others read it, and see that the so-
>called "facts" as used there have no references to back them up, and
>are merely opinions of the author, nothing more. A properly
>researched document would give a reference for each claim that is
>made.

What, did internet censorship end? Afraid someone might read it and
figure it how obvious it is?

Enough people have paid attention to the news over the last 30 years,
and the ones who haven't have mothers, fathers, aunts, and uncles who
did. Especially the news from 20 and 30 years ago, before the total
propaganda bullshit really started getting intense.

I never presented the document as a research paper. If I wanted to
submit a research paper, I'd send it to fucking MIT...

http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-you_idiot.mp3

I don't have to write one. The facts involved are widely known
enough, and the few that aren't can be easily verified by checking the
references. Or asking your momma.

>But on further examination, anyone who reads it would not bother to
>reply, fearing being accused of feeding a troll. I.e., another EER.

The possibility of the truth getting out farther than it already has
must have really frightened you.

The facts are the facts. (As) If you need verification, read "Energy
Future: Study by the Harvard Business School" (one of the most
respected references on the subject) or look up the Wall Street
Journal article "1,001 Years of Natural Gas".

Domestic natural gas reserve estimates for the USA range from 300
years to more than 1000, and none of your attempt at subterfuge,
bullshit, or owing spiritual servitude will alter the fact that the
USA never needed to import a single drop of foreign oil, and we don't
need to import oil today.

Or that President Carter's biomass research farms proved that the
concept of large scale biomass farming for synthetic natural gas
production was an entirely valid concept, for 300 or 1000 years from
now when it will be needed when the gas in the graound runs out.

Let me guess, you are from Saudi Arabia, you saw that page and your
reaction is perfectly understandable. Read the pyrex page, it might
make you feel better. I am nothing if not righteous you know... If
argued intelligently instead of trying to cloud the issue with
subterfuge, I could straighten you out, and you would be forced to
agree, but don't start trying to flame my ass, because while you might
be David and I might be Goliath, I made sure I stole your sling and
hid all the rocks a few weeks ago. I'll embarrass your ass so bad you
will have to be put under continual suicide watch for the rest of your
natural existence. Hello, and you will do nine-tenths of the work for
me.

I posted other articles in sci.electronics.repair where I stated in
the post I was no expert in electronics, and postualted a theory,
clearly defined as such. I was wrong both times. Like I said, I am
no expert in electronics.

But when it comes to energy reserves and production I am not out of my
field like I am with electronics. Go up against me on that field and
it will be like your pee-wee league carcass with your little minature
Loiusville Slugger you got on bat day going up against Hank Aaron.
Like Pee Wee Herman going up against Superman. Don't waste your time,
and save yourself the embarrassment.

I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
billions of dollars each.

A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.

A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)

And another which dwarfs the value of those other two combined.

A link is provided at the end of this post to descriptions of these
three which are complete enough to serve the purpose.
----------------------------------------------------
A retarded chimpanzee sitting in the White House could switch 90
percent of the automobiles in the USA to running domestic natural gas
within 5 months, by taking over the assembly lines that make the
natural gas engines for the Crown Victoria and Aerostar and (in the
span of a single month) tooling up five more duplicate assembly lines,
just like what was done in World War II to build B-17s.

And we have ten times as many military reservists as we need who have
the technical training and experience to put down 400 new natral gas
wells in that 5 month span. And 30 new nuke plants. And manufacture
all of the replacement electric ranges and electric heaters required
in the areas that have their natural gas pipeline turned off.

After six months, all oil imports from anywhere except Mexico and
South America would end - permanently. We could end importing from
this hemisphere too, but we don't fuck over our friends. On the other
hand, as far as the Middle East goes we don't give billions to our
enemies to fuck us over either, given the choice. For the last 30
years, the USA has imported an average of 50 to 100 billion dollars a
year worth of foreign oil. You think this somehow helps us?

We aren't an enemy of Canada, but they do need to be motivated so if I
were President I would end oil imports from Canada. Canada needs to
be supplying Austrailia and Great Britain and itself, not the USA.

That defeat.htm document has been around for almost five years now.

I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.

There isn't a hope in Hell of you finding error or flaw in defeat.htm,
other than maybe a few minor grammatical or spelling errors or
omissions like "the many hundreds of 5 and 10 million watt TV and
radio transmitters operating 24 hours a day nationwide". like it
should have said.

Your motives are transparent enough to anyone else who reads this,
since it is readily apparent and well known that the USA uses a vast
amount of electricity, more than any other country on the planet and
more than most of the rest of the planet combined.

I try to raise this point and you insinuate that the point is invalid
because I did not count the number of TV stations properly, therefore
what, the USA uses less electricity than any other country according
to you? So what, do you actually believe the total USA national power
consumption of TV and radio stations, the State and County
governments, street lighting and traffic signals nationwide, and
Federal government electricity use is provided by seven gerbils
running on a treadmill? You don't think that high oil prices impact
power rates or copper wire manufacturing? Or taxes?

I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
of USENET or internet trolling.

http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-what_the_hell_were_you_thinking.wav
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

You will remember me as the one who made solar power generation an
economic reality, cut the cost of housing in half, caused the greatest
economic expansion in the USA and the world ever witnessed, and ended
the greenhouse gas problem. If you graduated junior high school, read
that link and you will realize that I am right.

Not immediately. At first, you will only suspect that I am right.
The more you think about it, and the more time goes by, and eventually
within the next few years as you see it being implemented, you will
come to know that I am right.

Deal with this intelligently and learn something useful for a
change...

now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

Lord Valve

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 2:02:14 PM8/23/03
to

feklar wrote:

> I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
> world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
> invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
> this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
> years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
> billions of dollars each.

Um...why aren't you hanging out with Bill Gates, then?

I mean - alt.guitar.amps? You're posting from your
Learjet, yes?

> A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
> reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
> possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.

Ah...

> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)

Um...

> And another which dwarfs the value of those other two combined.

What does the DOE have to say about any of this?

You, um...you *do* hang out with 'em...right? In between
lunch with Warren Buffet and dinner with Tony Blair?

> And we have ten times as many military reservists as we need who have
> the technical training and experience to put down 400 new natral gas
> wells in that 5 month span. And 30 new nuke plants.

I don't care how many people you put on it...

you're simply *not* going to build thirty nuke plants in 5 months.
You are beginning to rave, dude. Easy, now...

> We aren't an enemy of Canada,

Tell that to the Canadians.

> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.

OK, now you're a certified nutcase. Step away from the crack-pipe.

BTW, what office did president Bush run for in 2002?

> I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
> of USENET or internet trolling.

You'll be first in line, eh?

Lord Valve
Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed

marc

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 2:45:23 PM8/23/03
to
Classic. When the red planet gets really close... eh, I can't say it.


"Lord Valve" <detr...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3F47AE06...@ix.netcom.com...

Opherian

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 5:36:35 PM8/23/03
to
LOS ANGELES (Aug. 23) - Republican Bill Simon dropped out of California's
gubernatorial recall race Saturday, boosting the position of GOP front-runner
Arnold Schwarzenegger amid calls from party leaders to consolidate behind fewer
candidates.

``I strongly believe that the desire of Californians must come before the
aspirations of any single candidate,'' Simon said in a statement released by
his campaign. ``There are too many Republicans in this race and the people of
this state simply cannot risk a continuation of the Gray Davis legacy.''

Recent statewide polls have shown Schwarzenegger leading the pack of
Republicans but still running neck-and-neck with the only high-profile Democrat
on the list of replacement candidates, Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante.
The Rabbi Stiffkugel (Ophe...@aol.com)

feklar

unread,
Aug 23, 2003, 10:49:15 PM8/23/03
to
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:02:14 GMT, Lord Valve <detr...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

Come on, Lord Valve, make some effort here, because its worth it. I
can see how you might have come to your mistaken conclusion without
actually reading the reference material, but if you take the time to
read it you will be surprised. I posted this to alt.guitar.amps
because you all know me well enough here, and the amp techs have the
basic technical knowledge to follow it if they make the effort.

Read the infoZ in the links first, then comment. You will be changing
your mind about it.

Lord Valve, you realize of course that the pyrex machine I invented
means you are right about teaching the possibility of space
colonization in your home school, I presume... Trust me on this long
enough to make an assessment, and you'll be taking my side of this
quick enough. I was hoping, in fact, that you would be one of the
ones to answer up, but I had hoped you would have read more before
coming to a mistaken conclusion. This one takes some effort to
follow.

As long as there is water and sand, the Moon and Mars can be
colonized. And the studies so far show that there is at least some
water on the moon, and a considerable amount on Mars. Send just one
pyrex machine up there and a few years later either one could support
a population of thousands of people.

All it takes is an initial power source to get it started, to run the
machine long enough to produce pyrex panels for solar greenhouses and
pyrex domiciles. There is only slightly less solar power available on
Mars than on Earth, and at the equator, even with the very thin
atmosphere, the temperature on Mars reaches over 50 degrees F. It
would get a lot hotter, within a few degrees of Earth's average
temperature, if the atmosphere were more similar to earth.

But first we need to deal with using it to cut the cost of housing
here on Earth in half, and use it for large scale solar power
terraforming. The concept is viable and proven by Solar Energy
Research Institute, but it took the pyrex machine to make it
economically viable.

SERI only made one mistake, in that they said reflectors would need to
be used. To prove that considerable power can be generated from
solar, and solar alone, reflectors were a required component, but in
practice it would be an inefficent setup in terms of power output and
land use.

Consider the shape of a prism. Now consider a 100,000 gallon prism
shaped water storage tank with a 2 foot thick base and sides, made of
black tinted pyrex panels laser welded together. The machine would
need to make 3 rectangular panels (1 bottom and 2 sides) and the 2
triangular end panels.

This would be situated inside a larger prism shaped greenhouse made of
clear pyrex, which wuld be situated inside yet another, so we have a
100,000 gallon water tank inside a quadrulple insulated greenhouse
(using clear chambered pyrex panels for the greenhouse, only a double
insulated greenhouse if solid clear greenhouse panels were used.
Chambered pyrex is hollow inside: read the description of it given
elsewhere by following the google link).

The greenhouse with the water tank inside of it is situated east to
west.

Now the sun will heat the water up to anywhere from 180 to 210 degrees
within an hour of sunrise, depending on the location being in Texas or
southern to mid latitude Kansas. There are laws against leaving your
child or your dog in a car with the windows rolled up in the
summertime, consider why.

Try this: http://rjnpages.tripod.com/rrcontrib.htm (Not as if this
is the first time one of my inventions worked and was worth more than
hundreds of millions of dollars...)

Anyway. We have the water heated up to 180 to 210 degrees. Now
SERI's approach was to go all solar with nothing exterior added, and
therefore they put up a reflector on the north side to concentrate
extra solar energy upon a small east - west running chamber in the
greenhouse. The water is forced nto this chamber, and the extra
concentration of solar energy brings it the rest of the way to 212
degrees, it boils, you have steam, and you can operate a steam turbine
to produce electricity.

But this approach, although useful to illustrate the basic concept and
to prove that a turbine can be driven directly from pure solar, has
serious efficiency flaws.

The proper approach is to kick start it in the morning with energy
from the power grid, and do away with the reflector. If refectors are
used, it wastes half the land area. The greenhouses in a large scale
terraforming effort are oriented east to west, and there are
alternating banks of greenhouses and east to west running reflectors
as one goes from south to north. Each reflector area must be as wise
north to south as the greenhouse north south width, because otherwise,
the reflectors will shade the greenhouses to the north of their
position.

So lets do away with the reflectors entirely, and isntead we have
nothing but row after row of greenhouses.

Modify the water tank slightly, to add a pipe running through it from
east to west. Lets say the greenhouses are 40 foot long as given in
the high speed rotary extrusion machine example given elsewhere.

So, we add a pyrex pipe inside each one before welding it together.
In practice, a rectangular pipe for ease of pipe construction and
instalation, but for this example, a round one with a 6 inch internal
diameter and a 24 inch external diameter. Very heavy duty in other
words, to be able to withstand high steam pressures.

Electric heating elements are installed in each pipe.

When the sun has been up for a half hour or so, the electric heating
elements are energized from the power grid, and serve the same purpose
as the reflectors, to add the extra 12 to 32 degrees of heat to bring
the 180 or 210 degree water to boiling to produce steam. Any extra
waste heat is given back to the water tank, in case someone is
whipping out a calculator to do efficiency calculations: there is no
heat loss.

So we have 180 to 210 degrees worth of BTUs from the sun, and an extra
12 to 32 degrees worth of BTUs from the grid. But when the steam is
used in the turbine, more than half of the total BTUs are converted to
electricity, again with no heat loss because the waste heat, even that
from the turbine friction, is recirculated back into the heat cycle of
the greenhouses. The temperature of the water that comes out of the
turbine has falen to 70 degrees.

Therefore, once the system is kick-started, its own output power grid
will be much more than required to keep it energized.

Once you go to 24 hour a day solar generation, you don't even need an
external power grid to kick start it, it will kick start itself.

So, before the greenhouses are even built, a basement is put as a
foundation under each one, with four huge storage tanks inside.

Two for water, and the other two for oxygen and hydrogen. In
practive, one would be used for water, and three for oxygen, and in
the next adjacent greenhouse, one for water, and three for hydrogen,
to keep the volitile mix sperate in case of a structural failure
somewhere.

When the sun comes up, 60 percent of the total power output goes to
seperating water into oxygen and hydrogen via electrolysis. Then, two
hours after the sun hgoes down, the temperature of the stored hot
water drops to 165 degrees and it is no longer efficient enough, so
the oxygen and hydrogen are routed into a mix chamber inside the steam
pipe, and stem continues to be produced all night long. Solar power,
24 hours a day.

Network the steam pipes from 100 of these 40 foot long greenhouses to
power a single large turbine, and you have nearly the output of a
midsized coal fired power plant.

See? None of these concepts are in doubt, SERI proved them as valid
more than 15 years ago. But, it was too expensive to implement before
I invented the pyrex machine. You know how much steel or aluminum or
even concrete storage tanks would have cost? Let alone manufacturing
large cast glass greenhouse panels and then shipping them. The pyrex
machine makes them on the site which is being terraformed.

I didn't invent the solar concepts: I just invented the pyrex machine.

Take one of those machines to Mars or the Moon, and enough power to
run it long enough to make a few solar power greenhouses and a few
domiciles, and take enough oxygen to get started and some seeds, and
enough food to last until the first crops.

The solar power concept works as well there as it will on Earth. Once
thats up and runing, you have enough for internal power as well as
continuing to run the machine to expand the size of the terraformed
territory. In fact, the best way to visualize large scale
terraforming on Earth for electricity or oxygen and hydrogen for fuel
cells is to consider what approach would be taken to colonizing Mars.
The only assumption one must make is the avaliability of water.

SERI said that to meet the entire electricity demands of the USA with
solar power would require covering a 6000 square mile area. That's
one 75 by 80 mile area. However, that estimate used a reflector based
steam setup, which wastes half the land area. This setup would only
require 4000 square miles (there are efficiency issues to getting rid
of the reflectors, so it isn't half or 3000 square miles).

That's one 40 by 50 mile area. To get solar power 24 hours a day, you
need two such areas. To have a week's reserve of oxygen and hydrogen
buildable in a two week span, you need four of these areas.

To meet the total USA demand for fuel cells for vehicles, you need to
double this total amount, or a total for power and fuel of eight 40 by
50 mile areas, all of which would fit inside the wastelands of Arizona
with room left over to spare, built on wasteland that can
realistically never serve any other useful purpose.

This is the future, and you will begin to see it within a few years,
probably in Mexico first, and then in the USA.

Let me address some of your mistaken points. Bine up on the details,
and you won't so ignorant about it next time. (Although I admit, it
sounds like tinfoil hat shit at first, if you make the effort to pay
attention to the details, it isn't and it isn't advanced to the point
of obfuscation of the facts: if you attended high school, you know
enough to be able to follow it. Of course, having some basic
capability to visualize doesn't hurt...)

OK, let's address the points:

>feklar wrote:
>
>> I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
>> world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
>> invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
>> this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
>> years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
>> billions of dollars each.
>
>Um...why aren't you hanging out with Bill Gates, then?

Because the world is broken. Don't worry though, I am fixing it.
Besides, why would I want to hang with Gates when I can go down to
Mexico and eat tequila worms with El Presidente Vincente Fox?

>I mean - alt.guitar.amps? You're posting from your
>Learjet, yes?

I said above why it was a good idea to post it here.


>> A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
>> reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
>> possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.
>
>Ah...

Read the link.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

>
>> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
>> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
>> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
>> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)
>
>Um...

Read the link.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1


>> And another which dwarfs the value of those other two combined.
>
>What does the DOE have to say about any of this?

Hard to say. I e-mailed them, as well as Sandia National Labs, but
never heard back from either. I gave up on those retards and gave
multiple copies to the Mexican government and PEMEX when I went down
there in June 2002. Hard to say whether the problem is government
retards obeying the Peter Principle, or criminal assholes trying to
cause trouble with internet censorship, but the trip to Mexico dealt
with both problems well enough.

>You, um...you *do* hang out with 'em...right? In between
>lunch with Warren Buffet and dinner with Tony Blair?

Remind me to tell you some shit about that general subject sometime.
After you follow the rest of this though...

>> And we have ten times as many military reservists as we need who have
>> the technical training and experience to put down 400 new natral gas
>> wells in that 5 month span. And 30 new nuke plants.
>
>I don't care how many people you put on it...

Come on, Lord Valve, American.

This is no different than what we did in WWII, converting the assebly
lines in Detroit to manufacture B-17s. People laughed back then, and
said we might be lucky to produe 100 a month, but within a year one
brand new Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress rolled off the assembly lines
every 30 seconds. I would have expected more from you.

>you're simply *not* going to build thirty nuke plants in 5 months.
>You are beginning to rave, dude. Easy, now...

I would have expected more from "Lord Valve, American".


>> We aren't an enemy of Canada,
>
>Tell that to the Canadians.

Fuck the Candians. Except Rush of course. Naw, I guess the
Candadians are OK. Just ignore that.


>> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
>> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
>> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
>> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.
>
>OK, now you're a certified nutcase. Step away from the crack-pipe.
>
>BTW, what office did president Bush run for in 2002?

2000 I mean. You'd have to ask around in SE Minnesota, SW Wsiconsin,
N and NE Iowa about my failed 2000 Presidential bid. Maybe in 2004.

Why have a retard running shit when you can have a genius, I say.

>> I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
>> of USENET or internet trolling.
>
>You'll be first in line, eh?

Not hardly. You think this is strange, to find this on USENET? Hell,
you seen George Bush on TV didn't you? This shit looks normal
compared to that shit.

>Lord Valve
>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed

Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed... you ain't seen nothing yet. Damn, now I
have to go play some BTO on the guitar. I'll be back later. Maybe
tomorrow.

Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed? Read this, then you will be Absolutely
Fuckin' Amazed.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

DGDevin

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 12:40:28 AM8/24/03
to
"feklar" <fek...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:3f473fba...@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net...

> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)

Ah, are you claiming that a marine drilling rig costs ****twenty --
billion -- dollars***? Dang, I need to get back into the oil/gas business,
it seems the profits in getting that stuff out of the ground have gone way
up in the past few years.

Baying at the moon, or a streetlight if that's all you can see....


feklar

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 4:21:08 AM8/24/03
to

You are ignorant. Go to Dallas, Texas. About 2 blocks south /
southeast of The Landmark Center is the place that builds and sells
most of the offshore oil rigs.

I can't remember the name of the place, but I went in and looked
around. I saw two things. Small herds of Arabs with towels on their
heads roaming around, and scale models of their offshore oil rigs.

They had about 8 different models on display ranging in price from 5
billion dollars to 40 billion dollars. This was 1987. No doubt the
prices are much more considerable in 2003 than they were in 1987.

What do you expect? One of those in the 20 billion dollar range is
similar to a skyscraper rising off the ocean floor 40 or 50 stories
tall. However, the structure must be considerably stronger than a
land skyscraper. At most, a land skyscraper might be expected to
withstand 200 MPH winds. An oil rig's "skyscraper" must withstand
many times that force, the equivalent of many hundreds of MPH of wind
force, to be able to withstand storm surge from Category 5 hurricanes
and minor tsunami, ocean currents, 80 foot tall waves, etc...

Remember also that there is a cumulative effect that will lead to work
hardening of the steel in that the waves push and release, push and
release, billions of times in a year or two. The waves push against
the sides of the structure, then pull back in the opposite direction.
Therefore the steel must be exceptionally strong to avoid trouble from
work hardening from this repetitive stress.

If you don't know metallurgy or what work hardening is, bend a coat
hanger back and forth a few times, and it will break. Or recall what
happened to that aircraft a few years back that was 20 minutes away
from coming in for a landing in Honolulu, when a huge piece of the
work hardened fuselage ripped off, taking about three rows of seat's
worth of passengers down to the doom with it when it went. Stressed
one too many times. It happens in ships sometimes. Some say it
played a part in the sinking of the Edmund Fitzgerald. A ship can
stand some considerable breaking stess a few times, but one time too
many, and its all over. Davy Jones' locker.

If the World Trade Center towers were built as strong as an offshore
oil rig, the planes would have bounced off and the people inside would
have been laughing their asses off (at least until they learned of the
innocent people inside).

So, what did the one of those WTC towers cost? They have been saying
20 billion to rebuild them. What would be more expensive, one of
those, or one that was eight times stronger, using six times as much
steel, using underwater welders that get paid $60 to $200 an hour...

There are good reasons why the oil rigs are so expensive, at least the
Neanderthal way they build them now.

So, which costs more, an undersea building four stories tall, or a 70
story tall skyscraper rising off the ocean floor, eight times as
strong as one of the World Trade Center towers (with labor and
materials transportation costs that are probably 30 to 50 times as
expensive once its all added up)?

If someone knows the name of that place in Dallas, kindly post it.

Lord Valve

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 4:49:56 AM8/24/03
to

feklar wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:02:14 GMT, Lord Valve <detr...@ix.netcom.com>
> wrote:
>
> Come on, Lord Valve, make some effort here, because its worth it. I
> can see how you might have come to your mistaken conclusion without
> actually reading the reference material, but if you take the time to
> read it you will be surprised.

I read a whole lot of it. You're a nutcase -

Nacy Luft would be scared to death of you. You are a megalomaniac
of *staggering* proportions. How in God's name do you manage to
stay outta the laughing academy?

> I posted this to alt.guitar.amps
> because you all know me well enough here, and the amp techs have the
> basic technical knowledge to follow it if they make the effort.
>
> Read the infoZ in the links first, then comment. You will be changing
> your mind about it.

Well, at first I thought you were just a crackpot...but I changed my mind.

Now I'm absolutely sure you are clinically insane. And, of course,
you will return with some rant about how small-minded and
unintelligent I am, for not being able to recognize your "genius."
And no, I don't work for the Evil Minnesota Government...


> Lord Valve, you realize of course that the pyrex machine I invented
> means you are right about teaching the possibility of space
> colonization in your home school, I presume...

I'm right, all right, but you haven't invented *anything* but a lot of hot air.

Of course, the evil (you pick the outfit) has conspired to keep you from
developing this concept. All you need is a million and a half dollars
and land title to half the states of Arizona and New Mexico. (Your words,
not mine.) Surely a reasonable request, considering the returns. I'll
get right on it. BTW, you have no idea what anything costs - check
the price on a semi - just one of the small things you may need to
make a start on your "project."

> Let me address some of your mistaken points. Bine up on the details,
> and you won't so ignorant about it next time. (Although I admit, it
> sounds like tinfoil hat shit at first, if you make the effort to pay
> attention to the details, it isn't and it isn't advanced to the point
> of obfuscation of the facts: if you attended high school, you know
> enough to be able to follow it. Of course, having some basic
> capability to visualize doesn't hurt...)

Jesus.

> OK, let's address the points:
>
> >feklar wrote:
> >
> >> I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
> >> world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
> >> invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
> >> this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
> >> years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
> >> billions of dollars each.
> >
> >Um...why aren't you hanging out with Bill Gates, then?
>
> Because the world is broken. Don't worry though, I am fixing it.

The only thing that worries me is that you're off your meds.

> Besides, why would I want to hang with Gates when I can go down to
> Mexico and eat tequila worms with El Presidente Vincente Fox?

<whew>

> >I mean - alt.guitar.amps? You're posting from your
> >Learjet, yes?
>
> I said above why it was a good idea to post it here.

Um...

>>> A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
>>> reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
>>> possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.
>>
>>Ah...

>Read the link.
Hot air.

>>
>>> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
>>> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
>>> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
>>> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)
>>
>>Um...

>Read the link.
(snip)
It's the same link. And where on earth did you get the idea that offshore
surface rigs cost 20 billion dollars? Tens of TRILLIONS of dollars?
Do you know how much a trillion dollars is? Do you think that if
for one microsecond the oil companies thought your crackpot
schemes would actually work they'd let you post 'em all over
the UseNet? Using the T-word (if accurate) gets you killed or
locked up so thoroughly you'll end up thinking daylight is a
fairy tale. The fact that you're still breathing is proof enough that
you're fulla shit.


>>> And another which dwarfs the value of those other two combined.
>
>>What does the DOE have to say about any of this?

>Hard to say. I e-mailed them, as well as Sandia National Labs, but
>never heard back from either. I gave up on those retards

Ah, that explains it. The guys at Sandia are retards. Ok, go on...

>and gave
>multiple copies to the Mexican government and PEMEX when I went down
>there in June 2002.

I bet I know where they posted 'em, too...in the break room.
Morale is important, yes?

>Hard to say whether the problem is government
>retards obeying the Peter Principle, or criminal assholes trying to
>cause trouble with internet censorship, but the trip to Mexico dealt
>with both problems well enough.

Ohhhhhh-Kaaaaayyyy.

>>You, um...you *do* hang out with 'em...right? In between
>>lunch with Warren Buffet and dinner with Tony Blair?

>Remind me to tell you some shit about that general subject sometime.
>After you follow the rest of this though...

That's all right, I'll take your word for it.

>>> And we have ten times as many military reservists as we need who have
>>> the technical training and experience to put down 400 new natral gas
>>> wells in that 5 month span. And 30 new nuke plants.
>>
>>I don't care how many people you put on it...

>Come on, Lord Valve, American.

>This is no different than what we did in WWII, converting the assebly
>lines in Detroit to manufacture B-17s. People laughed back then, and
>said we might be lucky to produe 100 a month, but within a year one
>brand new Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress rolled off the assembly lines
>every 30 seconds.

Now look, son - that's bullshit. The production rate for B-17s at the
Willow Run defense plant was one plane every 55 minutes. You
are incorrect by two orders of magnitude. I suspect that, in your
case, that's a smaller than usual error. But do continue...

>I would have expected more from you.

I'll try to do better.

>>you're simply *not* going to build thirty nuke plants in 5 months.
>>You are beginning to rave, dude. Easy, now...

>I would have expected more from "Lord Valve, American".

I don't give a rat's ass what you expected. Thirty nuke plants
can't be built in five months. And I have a sneaking suspicion
that, given the dearth of replies from sci.electronics.design,
there is a *large* contingent of EEs and whatnot over there who
are busting their guts laughing at my reaction to your (familiar
to them) grandiose violations of scientific principles and real-
world engineering concerns. For instance, you can't build
the stuff you're talking about outta fuckin' GLASS, son - it's
too damned heavy, it's impossible to machine, etc.


>>> We aren't an enemy of Canada,
>>
>>Tell that to the Canadians.

>Fuck the Candians.
What do they look like? I ain't into no moose pussy, junior...

>Except Rush of course.
Rush Limbaugh is a Canadian? Damn!

>Naw, I guess the
>Candadians are OK. Just ignore that.

If you say so.


>>> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
>>> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
>>> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
>>> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.
>>
>>OK, now you're a certified nutcase. Step away from the crack-pipe.
>>
>>BTW, what office did president Bush run for in 2002?

>2000 I mean. You'd have to ask around in SE Minnesota, SW Wsiconsin,
>N and NE Iowa about my failed 2000 Presidential bid. Maybe in 2004.

I guess running for President goes with the territory. How foolish of
me to have overlooked it...

>Why have a retard running shit when you can have a genius, I say.

Indeed.

>>> I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
>>> of USENET or internet trolling.
>>
>>You'll be first in line, eh?

>Not hardly. You think this is strange, to find this on USENET?

Well, I've read Nancy Luft, and I've been to the TimeCube
pages and even the Americans for Purity site, but they were
fairly normal compared to the stuff you posted. Of course,
I'm too stupid to understand all that hi-falutin' engine-ear type
talk. Say, there wasn't any math at all in your stuff. How'd
that happen? Calculator busted, perhaps?

>Hell, you seen George Bush on TV didn't you? This shit looks normal
>compared to that shit.

Your shit isn't normal compared to ANY TURD WHICH HAS EXISTED
SINCE THE DAWN OF EXCREMENT. In fact, it must have issued
from an orifice of epic proportion, a veritable Cosmic Sphincter.
You are the Grand Shit Almighty, and I am humbled by your presence.
I'm just an ordinary asshole, but you, sir, are the archetype.

>Lord Valve
>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed

>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed... you ain't seen nothing yet.

I can only imagine. And I thought Phil Allison was cracked...oh, my...sorry, Phil...

>Damn, now I
>have to go play some BTO on the guitar.

I know, I know...you're much better than the original.
It's the foamed Pyrex strings, I guess...

>I'll be back later. Maybe tomorrow.

I await your return in breathless anticipation.

>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed? Read this, then you will be Absolutely
>Fuckin' Amazed.

Oh, I read it, all right. Here are a few choice samples...
____________________________________________________

>While this may seem like a small accomplishment at first, a closer
>examination reveals this to be one of the largest advances in the
>history of the human race.

No comment. ;-)
____________________________________________________

>...Carbon Tetrachloride, a common, inexpensive, non-toxic,
>stable chemical...

Dude - carbon tetrachloride is fuckin' POISON. It's not even
*close* to being non-toxic. WTF do you come up with this shit?
____________________________________________________

>If Minnesota government criminals hadn’t got in the way, I would
>likely have at least a half a million of these houses constructed in
>hurricane territory by now. As it is, with the damage that was caused,
>I have only been able to reach a small fraction of my original
>potential as an inventor.
>
>Had it not been for that, I should have had half a million hurricane
>proof houses built by now, if not more. This cost you what I said it
>did above, as a bare minimum, but it is likely that the damage has
>cost you a lot more than that, and will cost even more if it doesn’t
>get repaired, because I won’t invent a tiny fraction of what I should
>have been able to invent.
>
>--->So far, Minnesota saved their taxpayers about 20 cents each by
>siding with criminal scum against me and the gods.<---
>
>It only cost everyone in the USA at least $568 dollars each.
>Typical government efficiency."

You and the gods, eh? Egad.
____________________________________________________

Well, I reckon that's about as big a dose as anyone on AGA can
stand this time around. It's kinda cool, having a clinical megalomaniac
on AGA - um, hey...you ain't a COMMIE or anything, are ya? I got
*standards*, see?

Lord Valve
Speechless

feklar

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 9:33:05 AM8/24/03
to
Obviously you are not Lord Valve. because Lord Valve previously
demonstrated enough intelligence to follow the content of the
referenced links, or, it is Lord Valve but he hasn't spent enough time
analyzing the material, it has to be one of the two.

I suspect the former, because he only argued one or two pertinent
points, and the rest of his reply did not address the subject
material.

The points were the cost of oil rigs, and land rights, and carbon
tetrachloride.

I will address these individually below, but I know you can do better
than that since the points you addressed were not of great
relevance. What I would want to know is if you find any flaws in any
of the the concepts. You brought up something about the
production rate of B-17s. I don't know, I remember reading that it
was one every 30 seconds. There were other plants besides
Willow Run making B-17s, so if other plants besides Willow run had
higher production rates that would explain the 2 every minute
figure. Ever see the "clock" in Detroit that shows how many
automobiles have produced in the current year? It numbers in the tens
of millions. For complete automobiles, not just for engines. And
that's without full production capability being even close to being
realized. I shouldn't have to explain that. That the USA easily has
the production capability should be obvious. Even if there was only
one B-17 produced every hour in W.W.II, that would demonstrate
sufficient capability considering the size and complexity of a B-17.

From http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1685.htm

"More than 8.7 million new automobiles were sold at retail last year,
according to the Transportation Department. "

These are complete automobiles, with most vehicle plants either
running at half capacity or idled. Been to St. Louis lately? There
are two or three closed down plants there that could be reopened.
Each automobile requires the output of many assembly lines. Frame,
body parts, engine, transmission, and even in the same model line
there are numerous engine and transmission types, each either
requiring its own production line or a retooling of an existing
assembly line. This is not the point. The point is, lines that
produce doors can be retooled to produce engines. Any line can be
retooled to produce just about anything.

I guess the real question is why you would be against the idea and
attempt to attack it, when the result would be the end of 50 to 100
billion dollars a year from being paid out to foreign countries for
oil we don't need, and a good share of that money going to countries
that breed terrorism against the USA. It does nothing but destroy our
economy and screw everyone in the USA over good.

For someone who talks about what serious shit we are all supposed to
be in the USA (especially yourself), you don't seem to have a lot
of faith in the abilities of its people to do the same thing their
recent ancestors did, which is simply taking over key industries and
stepping up production. It would take two weeks to plan a retooling
and set it in motion, and another two weeks for machine shops to
crank out the required tools to retool a respectable number of
assembly lines to engine, gas tank, and transmission production.

Of course, you need power to do this, like being President and
declaring a national energy emergency via an Executive Order. Not
some chimpanzee-ass lame half-ass effort, but stepping up to the
plate, and commanding. Telling underlings what is to be done, and
expecting that it will be done. 200 members of the Army Corps of
Engineers, 200 Automobile plant designers and supervisors, a few
10s of NASCAR people to design the conversion mounts, and another few
hundreds lesser production part personnel like the people
who make rubber O-rings for transmissions and aluminum valve bodies,
people who make piston rings, and the like. It would take
Detroit three days to produce a list of contacts for their parts
suppliers and arrange a massive video conference with every last one
of them, and then its just telling them look, this is the way it is
going to be. You need money, you will receive your authorization
papers for Federal Reserve Bank drafts at the end of this conference.
We expect that you will increase production by a factor of 10 within 3

weeks. The Federal Reserve bank drafts will pay for the cost,
although there will be an audit later, so don't go redecorating your
offices. Any help you need, we will provide you. We expect that
production will be a factor of 20 within five weeks. If there is any
doubt that you will be able to comply whatsoever, even the tiniest
shred of doubt, then immediately contact our planning committee
headed by these fine automobile engineers from Detroit. These people
know how to get things done.

And so on and so forth. As is stated on the page, the money would
have to come from inflation, since there is no other source
available. But inflation is a good thing when there is a certain and
guaranteed return on investment in a reasonably short period of time,
and this holds true in this case. The return on investment taking the
form of the elimination of 40 to 80 billion dollars a year worth of
foreign trade deficit. Every dime of decrease in the national trade
deficit results in a one dollar increase in the Gross National
Product. Increased GNP means increased government tax income without
extra load on the taxpayers.

So, your attempt to argue my solution to end most oil imports is a
lame "The people of the USA are not capable of such an effort".

Let's address your reply...

On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 08:49:56 GMT, Lord Valve <detr...@ix.netcom.com>
wrote:

>
>
>feklar wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 18:02:14 GMT, Lord Valve <detr...@ix.netcom.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Come on, Lord Valve, make some effort here, because its worth it. I
>> can see how you might have come to your mistaken conclusion without
>> actually reading the reference material, but if you take the time to
>> read it you will be surprised.
>
>I read a whole lot of it. You're a nutcase -

That isn't skip reading material. Some of it is off the topic at
hand, and you should stay away from it. There is too much material to

take in a a few minutes, let alone an hour or a week. Like about
Minnesota: that has nothing to do with the the google thread I
referred you to. That issue is very complex, and you have to read an
understand all of it before it fits together in any kind of logical
manner.

It might help to realize first the scale of what I invented. Now if I
had invented a better way of scooping dogshit off the sidewalk, a
better cross-your-heart bra, and an improved electric spaghetti fork,
the material there which is not relevant to this discussion might be
considered tinfoil hat shit, talking abut god or gods and all. If
having spiritual beliefs made people nutcases, a much greater segment
of the population would be inside nut wards than outside.

>Nacy Luft would be scared to death of you. You are a megalomaniac
>of *staggering* proportions. How in God's name do you manage to
>stay outta the laughing academy?

Somebody has to be, since that is the scale of the problems man has
created for himself.

>> I posted this to alt.guitar.amps
>> because you all know me well enough here, and the amp techs have the
>> basic technical knowledge to follow it if they make the effort.
>>
>> Read the infoZ in the links first, then comment. You will be changing
>> your mind about it.
>
>Well, at first I thought you were just a crackpot...but I changed my mind.
>
>Now I'm absolutely sure you are clinically insane. And, of course,
>you will return with some rant about how small-minded and
>unintelligent I am, for not being able to recognize your "genius."
>And no, I don't work for the Evil Minnesota Government...

No, I would plonk you if I thought that. Your problem is not taking
the time to give it a careful and detailed enough assessment, since
your posts elsewhere indicate that you are not a retard.

I really should get off my ass and move that material relevant to
Minnesota off somewhere less accessible, but I'm too busy trying to
regain my guitar playing abilities... I might need them to make some
money here sometime soon. If someone can't follow the
information there, there are others who can. There are others who
have. I have the respect of the Oklahoma government and the local
government here. And many in Texas, and many in Mexico.

I am trying to give you some good news, if you can't deal with it
until you see it with your own eyes, well, that's OK too I suppose.

As far as the Minnesota government goes, those retards are in for a
rude awakening spiritually later on. The pyrex machine can make
greenhouses like a donut factory makes donuts. Preventing the
starvation and malnutrition deaths of numerous millions of people a
year in Africa alone. Those retards in Minnesota caused at least a 10
year delay in the development and implementation of the pyrex
machine as a direct result of their criminal bullshit, causing the
deaths of something like 100 million people, and the needless
suffering of billions of other people whose standard of living could
have increased considerably. What's that, the suffering of 3 billion
people for 10 years... 30 billion years worth of suffering. I'm glad
it will be them and not me who gets to relive all that suffering after
they cross over.

>> Lord Valve, you realize of course that the pyrex machine I invented
>> means you are right about teaching the possibility of space
>> colonization in your home school, I presume...
>
>I'm right, all right, but you haven't invented *anything* but a lot of hot air.

Come on, be specific.

>Of course, the evil (you pick the outfit) has conspired to keep you from
>developing this concept. All you need is a million and a half dollars
>and land title to half the states of Arizona and New Mexico. (Your words,
>not mine.) Surely a reasonable request, considering the returns. I'll
>get right on it. BTW, you have no idea what anything costs - check
>the price on a semi - just one of the small things you may need to
>make a start on your "project."

I know what I need to know. As long as you have the resources to pay
for the land or be granted it by the government, and the
resources to pay for the machine, the electricity produced by what the
machine leaves behind it powers the machine, and then is sold.
The more terraforming the machine does, the more power gets sold, and
soon the machine is paid for from that sale, as is the operating
cost of the machine, and then additional land rights.

So what's a semi cost nowadays, about $50,000 to $125,000 depending on
how dooded up it is? Or $3000 for a used 20 year old
Kenworth and another $1000 for a used 25 year old Great Dane flatbed?

>> Let me address some of your mistaken points. Bine up on the details,
>> and you won't so ignorant about it next time. (Although I admit, it
>> sounds like tinfoil hat shit at first, if you make the effort to pay
>> attention to the details, it isn't and it isn't advanced to the point
>> of obfuscation of the facts: if you attended high school, you know
>> enough to be able to follow it. Of course, having some basic
>> capability to visualize doesn't hurt...)
>
>Jesus.

No, I only resemble Jesus in some ways. He walked the Earth. I walk
the Earth. He saved people's souls. I save people's asses.
Jesus was cool. I am cool. Jesus was serious shit. I am serious
shit. (I believe you address that matter further on down below)

But he was saintly, and I am not. He was forgiving, and I am not.

>> OK, let's address the points:
>>
>> >feklar wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
>> >> world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
>> >> invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
>> >> this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
>> >> years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
>> >> billions of dollars each.
>> >
>> >Um...why aren't you hanging out with Bill Gates, then?
>>
>> Because the world is broken. Don't worry though, I am fixing it.
>
>The only thing that worries me is that you're off your meds.

Your suspicion is unfounded. You haven't come close to voicing an
opinion that would indicate that. Deal with the technical facts of
the matter being proposed, and not the irrelevant material that was
conveniently available nearby. That material has as much relevance
to the matter at hand as the irritation I get from my johnson being so
long that it as the bad habit of falling down into the toilet water,
which is very annoying. In a public restroom, what do you do? Go to
the sinks and wash it off? People will think you are a pervert or
something.

>> Besides, why would I want to hang with Gates when I can go down to
>> Mexico and eat tequila worms with El Presidente Vincente Fox?
>
><whew>

Yeah when I get on down there to Mexico again, I plan on filling a
whole tequila bottle full of tequila worms and sending it up to my
brother in Minnesota. He was in the Marines, so he can deal with it.

>> >I mean - alt.guitar.amps? You're posting from your
>> >Learjet, yes?
>>
>> I said above why it was a good idea to post it here.
>
>Um...
>
>>>> A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
>>>> reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
>>>> possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.
>>>
>>>Ah...
>
>>Read the link.

>Hot air.

Incompetence of assessment.


>>>> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
>>>> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
>>>> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
>>>> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)
>>>
>>>Um...
>
>>Read the link.
>(snip)
>It's the same link. And where on earth did you get the idea that offshore
>surface rigs cost 20 billion dollars? Tens of TRILLIONS of dollars?

Read the post to the other guy. Its true, they cost that much. On
the average. In 1987.

>Do you know how much a trillion dollars is?

The Department of Energy's world oil reserves are based not just on
the amount of oil in the ground, but on the price of oil and on the
production cost. The lower the production cost or the higher the
price of oil, the greater the number of published reserves. Within
reason of course, but the figures take that into consideration. The
price of oil can only go so high and then the reserves start to
decline again, because people will buy alternatives. But the basic
idea is, the higher the price of oil, the more money the oil companies
have to spend on advanced exploration and advanced recovery
techniques, which are more expensive. If the price of oil is low,
then they don't have the money to use those techniques and the oil
stays in the ground, unrecoverable.

What I invented reduces the cost of offshore oil wells to a eightieth
of what it was. Or in other words, increases the world oil reserves
by about 50 years' worth. What is the monetary value of 50 years
worth of oil production anyway? What number best describes it?

This is a good thing, because only the oil companies are large enough
to attempt really large scale pyrex terraforming for electricity and
fuel cell production. This keeps them that way and improves their
economic health to where they have the extra resources that are
required.

> Do you think that if
>for one microsecond the oil companies thought your crackpot
>schemes would actually work they'd let you post 'em all over
>the UseNet?

I win either way. http://rjnpages.tripod.com/warning.htm The powers
that be win either way, and troublemaking assholes get to pay
for whatever it ends up costing. If fools want to follow theory and
ignore fact, far be it for me to stand in their way, as long as I meet

my responsibility to warn them of the dangers of such foolishness.
But don't spend too much time there, you have to understand the
integrity of what I invented first, and the scale of the impact it
possesses.

> Using the T-word (if accurate) gets you killed or
>locked up so thoroughly you'll end up thinking daylight is a
>fairy tale. The fact that you're still breathing is proof enough that
>you're fulla shit.

This is a good thing, because only the oil companies are large enough
to attempt really large scale pyrex terraforming for electricity and
fuel cell production. This keeps them that way and improves their
economic health to where they have the extra resources that are
required.

Yes, I repeated it. It was handy, it was nearby, and it answers your
ignorant theory of the way things work with the extra fact required
for you to follow it. It helps to have all the facts wen making an
assessment, you know. Besides, what retard would kill off a goose
that lays golden eggs? When they have been able to collect up the
eggs and greatly improve their position.

I suppose you think they would kill off the inventor of a 100 MPG
carburetor too? No, they would simply raise the price of gasoline to
three times the current price. They would be happy, because they
would make the same money they make now, only for a much
greater number of years. The oil runs out. There is only so much
left in the world. The USA used up almost all of its contiguous
continental oil reserves in the period 1900-1970. How long do you
think the Middle East or Mexico reserves will last, given that our
consumption now is much greater than the average rate of that 70 year
period? Remember now, we have already used 30 years' worth
of Mexican and Middle Eastern oil so far...

>>>> And another which dwarfs the value of those other two combined.
>>
>>>What does the DOE have to say about any of this?
>
>>Hard to say. I e-mailed them, as well as Sandia National Labs, but
>>never heard back from either. I gave up on those retards
>Ah, that explains it. The guys at Sandia are retards. Ok, go on...

Actually, I was leaning more toward the "troublemaking Russian
assholes having infiltrated U.S. government intelligence" theory...

>>and gave
>>multiple copies to the Mexican government and PEMEX when I went down
>>there in June 2002.
>I bet I know where they posted 'em, too...in the break room.
>Morale is important, yes?

Sometimes. I guess we will see.

>>Hard to say whether the problem is government
>>retards obeying the Peter Principle, or criminal assholes trying to
>>cause trouble with internet censorship, but the trip to Mexico dealt
>>with both problems well enough.
>Ohhhhhh-Kaaaaayyyy.
>
>>>You, um...you *do* hang out with 'em...right? In between
>>>lunch with Warren Buffet and dinner with Tony Blair?
>
>>Remind me to tell you some shit about that general subject sometime.
>>After you follow the rest of this though...
>That's all right, I'll take your word for it.

Get onto internet relay chat or Kazaa and download "Athena" by the Who
if you really want to know. Then ask nicely and I will tell you.

>>>> And we have ten times as many military reservists as we need who have

>>>> the technical training and experience to put down 400 new natural gas


>>>> wells in that 5 month span. And 30 new nuke plants.
>>>
>>>I don't care how many people you put on it...

>>Come on, Lord Valve, American.

Ye of little faith. Damn, from some of your posts I would have
thought that you alone, single-handedly, could have accomplished it.


>>This is no different than what we did in WWII, converting the assebly
>>lines in Detroit to manufacture B-17s. People laughed back then, and
>>said we might be lucky to produe 100 a month, but within a year one
>>brand new Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress rolled off the assembly lines
>>every 30 seconds.
>Now look, son - that's bullshit. The production rate for B-17s at the
>Willow Run defense plant was one plane every 55 minutes. You
>are incorrect by two orders of magnitude. I suspect that, in your
>case, that's a smaller than usual error. But do continue...
>
>>I would have expected more from you.
>I'll try to do better.

This is acceptable.

>>>you're simply *not* going to build thirty nuke plants in 5 months.
>>>You are beginning to rave, dude. Easy, now...

It depends solely on the number of resources and personnel you are
willing to apply. It can be done. It would be a monumental pain in
the ass 24 hour a day 7 day a week undertaking that would require
immense sums and a vast horde of workers and planners. I didn't
say it would be easy or cheap, only that it was possible.

>>I would have expected more from "Lord Valve, American".
>I don't give a rat's ass what you expected. Thirty nuke plants
>can't be built in five months.

Yes they can. It depends solely on the number of resources and
personnel you are willing to apply. It can be done. It would be a
monumental pain in the ass 24 hour a day 7 day a week undertaking that
would require immense sums and a vast horde of workers and
planners. I didn't say it would be easy or cheap, only that it was
possible.

> And I have a sneaking suspicion
>that, given the dearth of replies from sci.electronics.design,
>there is a *large* contingent of EEs and whatnot over there who
>are busting their guts laughing at my reaction to your (familiar
>to them) grandiose violations of scientific principles and real-
>world engineering concerns.

They are scientists for the most part. The sworn duty of any
scientist is to attack the ideas of other scientists. Scientists deal
with absolute facts, and are not concerned with any theory except to
try to destroy it. Part of it is ego, taken as a personal insult that

someone else could think of something useful where they had not. It
is an excellent mechanism for scientific issues, but scientists always

make poor inventors. It is good to have such a mechanism, but it is
also good to have supporters of an idea, which is why I expanded
the original thread past sci.electronics.design. While there may be
some there who are willing to take devil's advocate and have the
patience to assess the issue before issuing an opinion, I wanted to be
sure that there would be some who would.

A scientist is not always the best medium to propose a new idea to.
First it is best to show the facts to non scientists who have basic
technical and non technical background. Engineers are desirable in a
case such as this. Scientists are not. Although the title EE implies

engineer, more often they consider themselves scientists, and this is
more of a mechanical engineering issue than an electrical one in the
first place. Someone in that group started this thread by accident, I
merely moved it elsewhere.

>For instance, you can't build
>the stuff you're talking about outta fuckin' GLASS, son - it's
>too damned heavy, it's impossible to machine, etc.

http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-1999/pr-19-99.html
That one uses 4 8.4 meter diameter lenses. One of the very large
binocular telescopes currently under construction uses two 27 1/2
foot diameter pyrex lenses, each weighing in at over 200 tons. None
of them collapse under their own weight.

Chambered pyrex is mostly hollow inside, and has greatly improved
strength to weight ratio characteristics.

Large glass forms are easily machined with high power lasers, or
hydraulics. If you paid more attention to the world you would know
that 4 inches of solid steel can be be cut with highly pressured water
ejected from special nozzles. The Grand Canyon is nothing as a
demonstration of the power of water compared to this. The cut is a
mirror finish and is very precise.

And remember, pyrex isn't actually the best choice, its just one of
the more widely known possible choices. There are other forms of
hardened glass that make pyrex look stupid. In WWII, since we are on
the subject of B-17s, they were later updated to have
bulletproof glass. This was before plastic was invented. It wasn't
plastic between lamination of glass as in automotive safety glass,
this was solid structural glass, and could stop incoming 50mm cannon
shells fired at speeds greater than or equal to that of bullets.

>>>> We aren't an enemy of Canada,
>>>
>>>Tell that to the Canadians.
>
>>Fuck the Candians.
>What do they look like? I ain't into no moose pussy, junior...

I'll deal with it if it comes down here.

>>Except Rush of course.
>Rush Limbaugh is a Canadian? Damn!

The band, Rush.
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-you_idiot.mp3
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-what_the_hell_were_you_thinking.wav

>>Naw, I guess the
>>Candadians are OK. Just ignore that.
>If you say so.

yes

>>>> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
>>>> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
>>>> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
>>>> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.
>>>
>>>OK, now you're a certified nutcase. Step away from the crack-pipe.
>>>
>>>BTW, what office did president Bush run for in 2002?
>
>>2000 I mean. You'd have to ask around in SE Minnesota, SW Wsiconsin,
>>N and NE Iowa about my failed 2000 Presidential bid. Maybe in 2004.
>I guess running for President goes with the territory. How foolish of
>me to have overlooked it...

You would have been a lot better off, believe me.

>>Why have a retard running shit when you can have a genius, I say.
>Indeed.

Indeed.

>>>> I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
>>>> of USENET or internet trolling.
>>>
>>>You'll be first in line, eh?
>
>>Not hardly. You think this is strange, to find this on USENET?
>Well, I've read Nancy Luft, and I've been to the TimeCube
>pages and even the Americans for Purity site, but they were
>fairly normal compared to the stuff you posted. Of course,
>I'm too stupid to understand all that hi-falutin' engine-ear type
>talk. Say, there wasn't any math at all in your stuff. How'd
>that happen? Calculator busted, perhaps?

Who is Nancy Luft? Do I need a calculator to sum up the total number
of atoms in the sun before I can know that it will rise in the east
and set in the west? These issues require only common sense. I gave
a few in the turbine discussion posted elsewhere in this thread.
Total BTU usage and efficiency expressed as a percentage of the total
available BTUs. It doesn't need to be expressed any other way,
because doing so would have no effect on the outcome, unless you feel
some bizarre need to express the energy in ergs or calories.

>>Hell, you seen George Bush on TV didn't you? This shit looks normal
>>compared to that shit.
>Your shit isn't normal compared to ANY TURD WHICH HAS EXISTED
>SINCE THE DAWN OF EXCREMENT. In fact, it must have issued
>from an orifice of epic proportion, a veritable Cosmic Sphincter.
>You are the Grand Shit Almighty, and I am humbled by your presence.
>I'm just an ordinary asshole, but you, sir, are the archetype.

Now this actually halfway makes sense. You are improving.

>>Lord Valve
>>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed
>
>>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed... you ain't seen nothing yet.
>I can only imagine. And I thought Phil Allison was cracked...oh, my...sorry, Phil...

Hey, I don't use WD-40 anywhere.. well I guess it might have a few
uses keeping the pyrex machine running in top condition... maybe.

>>Damn, now I
>>have to go play some BTO on the guitar.
>I know, I know...you're much better than the original.
>It's the foamed Pyrex strings, I guess...

Thou shalt not blaspheme my guitar strings. My strings are Vinci
Heavy Metal 9 gauge. Do it again, and I shall conjure up vast
numbers of buffalo and Indian warrior spirits from the nearby Oklahoma
countryside, and send them up to Denver via Pueblo to suck
every last remnant of mojo out of your keyboards and amplifiers. And
half the mojo of your tube inventory.

>>I'll be back later. Maybe tomorrow.
>I await your return in breathless anticipation.

I knew you would.

>>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed? Read this, then you will be Absolutely
>>Fuckin' Amazed.
>Oh, I read it, all right. Here are a few choice samples...
>____________________________________________________
>
>>While this may seem like a small accomplishment at first, a closer
>>examination reveals this to be one of the largest advances in the
>>history of the human race.
>
>No comment. ;-)

Ah so you admit you haven't read it enough to know one way or the
other. This is as it should be.

>>...Carbon Tetrachloride, a common, inexpensive, non-toxic,
>>stable chemical...
>
>Dude - carbon tetrachloride is fuckin' POISON. It's not even
>*close* to being non-toxic. WTF do you come up with this shit?

Hmmm. I don't know, I read that in the Merck Chemical Manual way back
in 1986, and I swear I recall it was listed as non toxic. If
it's toxic, then it's toxic, I don't have the manual handy. Even if
it is, its use in a closed steam system would pose no danger so long
as appropriate protections were used like gas masks. Only an issue
during maintenance or repair, since the target application is in
remote terraformed areas. I will have to look into this. The people
of Quebec and Siberia and Nebraska and North and South Dakota will
not be pleased if CT cannot be used, since CT is the only way they can
get steam solar power at their northerly latitudes.

>>If Minnesota government criminals hadn’t got in the way, I would
>>likely have at least a half a million of these houses constructed in
>>hurricane territory by now. As it is, with the damage that was caused,
>>I have only been able to reach a small fraction of my original
>>potential as an inventor.
>>
>>Had it not been for that, I should have had half a million hurricane
>>proof houses built by now, if not more. This cost you what I said it
>>did above, as a bare minimum, but it is likely that the damage has
>>cost you a lot more than that, and will cost even more if it doesn’t
>>get repaired, because I won’t invent a tiny fraction of what I should
>>have been able to invent.
>>
>>--->So far, Minnesota saved their taxpayers about 20 cents each by
>>siding with criminal scum against me and the gods.<---
>>
>>It only cost everyone in the USA at least $568 dollars each.
>>Typical government efficiency."
>
>You and the gods, eh? Egad.

I claim a spiritual goal as an inventor. It is not relevant to the
discussion. Well, OK, maybe it is, but not until you recognize the
immense scale of what I invented. Gods, angels, shades, spirits,
what's the difference... It still has no real bearing except as a
curiosity.

>Well, I reckon that's about as big a dose as anyone on AGA can
>stand this time around. It's kinda cool, having a clinical megalomaniac
>on AGA - um, hey...you ain't a COMMIE or anything, are ya? I got
>*standards*, see?

You know better than to call an American that...

>Lord Valve
>Speechless

As far as trying to debate the technical accuracy of what I invented,
yes, pretty much speechless. You did make a few minor efforts,
but they have been defeated. If you wish to try harder, by all means.
You are undertaking an impossible goal though, be forewarned.
The technology works as advertised, and you will not be able to
disprove it. Feel free to choose any or all of the three to attack.

Once you try it and fail, the rest of it starts making a lot of sense.
You can attack the rest of it now, without the backing of credibility
of the inventions easily enough, but once the validity of the
inventions is established, it gets quite a bit harder to do that.

Stick with the inventions for now, some good might come of it.

I deal with this. Look at what others are dealing with. If I had
been elected president, I would have created 3 million new jobs, not
destroyed 3 million existing jobs... Pay attention in that google
thread about the effect on the economy that would be caused by cutting

the cost of housing in half.

Your enemies here in aga could use a lack of analytical assessment on
your part in this matter as serious ammunition against you in the
near and far future if they pay more attention than you do, and it
will take years for you to live it down... It might have been better
to have said nothing.

Bill Sloman

unread,
Aug 24, 2003, 6:40:40 PM8/24/03
to
fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote in message news:<3f48bdcf....@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>...

<huge snip>

> >>...Carbon Tetrachloride, a common, inexpensive, non-toxic,
> >>stable chemical...
> >
> >Dude - carbon tetrachloride is fuckin' POISON. It's not even
> >*close* to being non-toxic. WTF do you come up with this shit?
>
> Hmmm. I don't know, I read that in the Merck Chemical Manual way back
> in 1986, and I swear I recall it was listed as non toxic. If
> it's toxic, then it's toxic, I don't have the manual handy. Even if
> it is, its use in a closed steam system would pose no danger so long
> as appropriate protections were used like gas masks. Only an issue
> during maintenance or repair, since the target application is in
> remote terraformed areas. I will have to look into this. The people
> of Quebec and Siberia and Nebraska and North and South Dakota will
> not be pleased if CT cannot be used, since CT is the only way they can
> get steam solar power at their northerly latitudes.

Carbon tetrachloride is toxic

http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts30.html

People used to be blase about it - when I was a teaching undergraduate
chemistry in the 1960's (while getting my Ph.D.) the practical
chemistry we were supervising involved one experiment where the
students were pipetting carbon tetrachloride, and they were expected
to suck the liquid into their pipettes. It worried me at the time, but
they weren't going to get enough to make them sick in that one
experiment.

Chemists use even more toxic substances in sealed systems - nothing is
ever perfectly sealed, but it isn't difficult to keep the air
circulation fast enough to flush out the leakage fast enough to keep
the level below 10ppm.

-----
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

feklar

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 12:03:06 AM8/25/03
to
On 24 Aug 2003 15:40:40 -0700, bill....@ieee.org (Bill Sloman)
wrote:

Hmmm... yeah, the edition I read in 1986 was a late 60's edition, 1968
I think, that I bought at a thrift store for a dime.

Whatever happened to Sodium Pentathol? Was there some renaming
convention that was implemented between the 60's and 80's? I read the
description of Sodium Pentathol in the 1968 edition, and out of
curiousity, years later when I had an 80's edition in my hand, I tried
looking it up and it wasn't there? Was it renamed to Sodium
Pentobarbitol?

now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 12:49:08 AM8/25/03
to
In article <7c584d27.0308...@posting.google.com>,
bill....@ieee.org mentioned...

When I was a kid, my parents and others used "Carbon Tet" as a spot
cleaner on clothes, I think because it was good at cutting grease. It
could be bought in a tin can and was commonly stored in a cupboard in
the house. Probably some of it would evaporate and get into whatever
was in the cupboard. If food was in there, it was likely
contaminated, too. It's been banned for decades, so I guess it's some
pretty nasty stuff.


> -----
> Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
>

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@

Active8

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 6:04:29 AM8/25/03
to

damn, valve dude, your replies had me in tears with my sides and jaw
hurtin'. i'll have to finish reading that link quickly if i'm to join in
on the fum.

brs,
mike

Active8

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 11:23:54 AM8/25/03
to
In article <3f498955....@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

maybe pentovar. there's another name maybe. and some other
anathesia/truth serum i can't remember. then i recall something called
ketamine which might be the Thomas (thomson?) concoction, a tranq.

google it.

Active8

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 11:32:25 AM8/25/03
to
In article <MPG.19b3351be...@news.inreach.net>, alondra101
@hotmail.com says...

banned? from what? i saw it used to remove cable flooding (the black
nasty shit that gas and paint thinner doen't work very well on) compound
not 5 years ago. or maybe it was methylene chloride. that's also pretty
nasty. i know i heard of tet being used on flooding once for sure, but
that guys info was sometimes suspect. i don't even think he ever heard
of the black flooding. it's not common. isn't the C-tet carcinogenic?

your parents should have tried lemon juice first.

mike
>
>
> > -----
> > Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
> >
>
>

Active8

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 4:16:00 PM8/25/03
to
In article <3f48bdcf....@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

i like all this energy production and food growing stuff. reminds me of
some of buckminster r. fullers writings. i know an excellent gardner you
can get in one of those greenhouses on mars. he'd love that.

> Obviously you are not Lord Valve. because Lord Valve previously
> demonstrated enough intelligence to follow the content of the
> referenced links, or, it is Lord Valve but he hasn't spent enough time
> analyzing the material, it has to be one of the two.

a quick scan of the headers shows that LV is either LV or someone who
hacked his own header. if you don't understand that, don't ask. it's OT.


>
> I suspect the former, because he only argued one or two pertinent
> points, and the rest of his reply did not address the subject
> material.

maybe he still hadn't had time to read all those links to long-winded
articles you supplied. not the one referring to auto production. that
was at least reasonable.

[snip]


> I really should get off my ass and move that material relevant to
> Minnesota off somewhere less accessible, but I'm too busy trying to
> regain my guitar playing abilities... I might need them to make some
> money here sometime soon.

christ on a crutch! i'm too busy in general to have time to regain my
guitar playing abilities and here you are claiming to be able to save
the country but don't have the time to fix part of your campaign speech.

i can't even find your name anywhere.

first, who the fuck are you? second, who the fuck are you that you can
make fast money playing guitar? eddie fucking van halen? i'm talking
about the kind of money that compares to all the cash you should've made
from those fantastic inventions.

> If someone can't follow the
> information there, there are others who can. There are others who
> have. I have the respect of the Oklahoma government and the local
> government here. And many in Texas, and many in Mexico.

where is here, OK? MN? if the OK gov't is representative of some of the
okies i've spoken to, you're *all* fucked.


>
> I am trying to give you some good news, if you can't deal with it
> until you see it with your own eyes, well, that's OK too I suppose.

ah... a prophet is never received in his home town. i'd like to see
these inventions with my own eyes. i'd also like to see a system with no
heat loss.

>
> As far as the Minnesota government goes, those retards are in for a
> rude awakening spiritually later on.

[snip guts out of paragraph]


> not me who gets to relive all that suffering after
> they cross over.

i'm not an atheist... i just think the magical explanation doesn't cut
it even though it works for uneducated inbreds... but i always get
worried when god/religion/spirituality gets brought into a discussion
where common sense should be sufficient to receive the point.

>
> >> Lord Valve, you realize of course that the pyrex machine I invented
> >> means you are right about teaching the possibility of space
> >> colonization in your home school, I presume...
> >
> >I'm right, all right, but you haven't invented *anything* but a lot of hot air.
>
> Come on, be specific.

well, where's the info on this pyrex machine and those other great
inventions?
>
[snip]


> >Jesus.
>
> No, I only resemble Jesus in some ways. He walked the Earth. I walk
> the Earth. He saved people's souls. I save people's asses.
> Jesus was cool. I am cool. Jesus was serious shit. I am serious
> shit. (I believe you address that matter further on down below)

he did. that's what really brought tears.

>
> But he was saintly, and I am not. He was forgiving, and I am not.
>
> >> OK, let's address the points:
> >>
> >> >feklar wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have forgotten more than you will ever know about power production,
> >> >> world reserves, and standard and alternate energy sources. In 1984, I
> >> >> invented something which major USA corporations installed and use to
> >> >> this day, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and in the last five
> >> >> years I invented three technologies, worth an average of hundreds of
> >> >> billions of dollars each.

refs, please...

hey, i designed a deal that saves a hobby farmer maybe $50 a month
(what's his kWh rate? i just guessed.) on his electricity bill. how many
farmers are there? maybe i should market that basic circuit to other
markets. too bad individuals aren't as concerned with saving a few bucks
compared to companies that realize millions in savings from pennies per
unit.

> >> >
> >> >Um...why aren't you hanging out with Bill Gates, then?
> >>
> >> Because the world is broken. Don't worry though, I am fixing it.

in between riffs, right?

> >
> >The only thing that worries me is that you're off your meds.
>
> Your suspicion is unfounded. You haven't come close to voicing an
> opinion that would indicate that. Deal with the technical facts of
> the matter being proposed, and not the irrelevant material that was
> conveniently available nearby. That material has as much relevance
> to the matter at hand as the irritation I get from my johnson being so
> long that it as the bad habit of falling down into the toilet water,
> which is very annoying. In a public restroom, what do you do? Go to
> the sinks and wash it off? People will think you are a pervert or
> something.

or a bullshit artist. at least if you washed it in public someone might
believe it really is that long.

why not, anyway. when the lines were too long at the cap center, i
pissed in a sink. on the way out, i looked over my shoulder and they
were lined up at the sinks. glad i thought of it first 'cause i had to
piss bad.
>
[snip bs]


> >
> >>>> A method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil in half, and
> >>>> reopening closed down oil wells with steam injection made economically
> >>>> possible, worth tens of billions of dollars.
> >>>
> >>>Ah...

yeah, ah... i've heard of pumping h2o and maybe steam into wells. still
ain't sure who came up with those ideas.
> >
> >>Read the link.

it better supply the info linking you, your name, and those inventions.
otherwise i'm compelled to think you're looney tunes. i'm not arguing
the problem of oil imports and i'm not ready to comment on those SERI
studies, i'm just having a problem understanding why someone who ran for
president and has invented all this stuff can't put his name in his
posts or on his pages or even have a real domain name so i can find out
who the fuck he is with a simple whois.


>
> >Hot air.
>
> Incompetence of assessment.

more name calling. you're giving all the indications that your a
psuedoscientist. keep this shit up and no one will even bother to look
at the "relevant material".


>
>
> >>>> A new type of undersea oil well that costs one eightieth of a 20
> >>>> billion dollar offshore surface rig. Worth tens of trillions of
> >>>> dollars. (Would you rather build one offshore oil rig for 20 billion,
> >>>> or 80 offshore oil rigs for 20 billion?)
> >>>
> >>>Um...
> >
> >>Read the link.
> >(snip)
> >It's the same link. And where on earth did you get the idea that offshore
> >surface rigs cost 20 billion dollars? Tens of TRILLIONS of dollars?
>
> Read the post to the other guy. Its true, they cost that much. On
> the average. In 1987.

why not just answer the fucking question and save me the time of going
back to find something? seriously. what other guy? i didn't see that in
the past. should i see it in the future? yup. too bad i had to leave and
come back and download a 720 line post. i should have turned the
"archive message bodies" option on. more shit to clean up.


>
> >Do you know how much a trillion dollars is?

1/4 of the national expenditure according to one of my [psuedo?] refs.

as much as you should have in the bank after inventing all this shit
that saved the drilling companies all that money?

was it 4 Bil or 4 Tril that my stepdad said that the oil companies
raised by raising the prices two winters ago?

that would explain why they won't fund your greenhouses. how could they
raise the prices without having foreigners to blame?


>
> The Department of Energy's world oil reserves are based not just on
> the amount of oil in the ground, but on the price of oil and on the
> production cost. The lower the production cost or the higher the
> price of oil, the greater the number of published reserves. Within
> reason of course, but the figures take that into consideration. The
> price of oil can only go so high and then the reserves start to
> decline again, because people will buy alternatives. But the basic
> idea is, the higher the price of oil, the more money the oil companies
> have to spend on advanced exploration and advanced recovery
> techniques, which are more expensive.

but you saved them from that.

> If the price of oil is low,
> then they don't have the money to use those techniques and the oil
> stays in the ground, unrecoverable.

again... but you saved them from that. you again imply that below.


>
> What I invented reduces the cost of offshore oil wells to a eightieth
> of what it was. Or in other words, increases the world oil reserves
> by about 50 years' worth. What is the monetary value of 50 years
> worth of oil production anyway? What number best describes it?
>
> This is a good thing, because only the oil companies are large enough
> to attempt really large scale pyrex terraforming for electricity and
> fuel cell production. This keeps them that way and improves their
> economic health to where they have the extra resources that are
> required.

oh, i was going to ask why you're still talking about oil when there's
all that gas under lake erie and you're going to power us with solar as
soon as you're done playing guitar to finance this.

OTOH, if, as you said, the Federal Reserve could help the auto industry
crank up production, why can't they help build pyrex? they're as
criminal as the oil industry so we'd just have a shootout in the
streets. it's as simple a concept as getting rid of crack dealers. you
teach them to shoot accurately and lower the bail on a murder charge to
$50. A shoots B, C bails A out so he can shoot him...


>
> > Do you think that if
> >for one microsecond the oil companies thought your crackpot
> >schemes would actually work they'd let you post 'em all over
> >the UseNet?
>
> I win either way. http://rjnpages.tripod.com/warning.htm

just as i'm about to shout for joy over a short read, i find a link to a
whole slew of other pages. but hey guys, we may have a clue here. "Rob's
..." now we just have to look up all the robs an we'll have narrowed
down the possibilities of who the hell you are. maybe a google of the
last pres. election will solve that, but i think it's come back to me.

> The powers
> that be win either way, and troublemaking assholes get to pay
> for whatever it ends up costing.

er, i thought consumers paid for it. whatever "it" means.

> If fools want to follow theory and
> ignore fact, far be it for me to stand in their way, as long as I meet
>
> my responsibility to warn them of the dangers of such foolishness.
> But don't spend too much time there, you have to understand the
> integrity of what I invented first, and the scale of the impact it
> possesses.

i'll say it differently this time. after all that reading i'd better be
able to make sense of it. or what, you ask? or i'll definitely know
you're bullshit and would probably kick your ass for wasting my time if
we ever crossed paths save for the fact that it's not in my best
interest to do so.


>
> > Using the T-word (if accurate) gets you killed or
> >locked up so thoroughly you'll end up thinking daylight is a
> >fairy tale. The fact that you're still breathing is proof enough that
> >you're fulla shit.

IIRC, the tears started here.


>
> This is a good thing, because only the oil companies are large enough
> to attempt really large scale pyrex terraforming for electricity and
> fuel cell production. This keeps them that way and improves their
> economic health to where they have the extra resources that are
> required.

is there an echo in here?
>
> Yes, I repeated it.

no shit?

> It was handy, it was nearby, and it answers your
> ignorant theory of the way things work with the extra fact required
> for you to follow it. It helps to have all the facts wen making an
> assessment, you know. Besides, what retard would kill off a goose
> that lays golden eggs? When they have been able to collect up the
> eggs and greatly improve their position.

if you get elected and/or make all this happen i'll shit golden bricks
and not need a goose.


>
> I suppose you think they would kill off the inventor of a 100 MPG
> carburetor too? No, they would simply raise the price of gasoline to
> three times the current price. They would be happy, because they
> would make the same money they make now, only for a much
> greater number of years. The oil runs out. There is only so much
> left in the world. The USA used up almost all of its contiguous
> continental oil reserves in the period 1900-1970.

funny, i was told it happened in the gulf war alone. maybe that was
military fuel reserve. i also know people in LA (state) who say there
were tankers off the coast waiting to drop oil and weren't allowed to do
so during carter's (?) gas shortage.


> How long do you
> think the Middle East or Mexico reserves will last, given that our

[snip]


> >
> >>Remind me to tell you some shit about that general subject sometime.
> >>After you follow the rest of this though...
> >That's all right, I'll take your word for it.
>
> Get onto internet relay chat or Kazaa and download "Athena" by the Who
> if you really want to know. Then ask nicely and I will tell you.

i'll be able to actually hear the words, right? i kinda remember that
song as being clear.
>
[snip]


>
> >>>you're simply *not* going to build thirty nuke plants in 5 months.
> >>>You are beginning to rave, dude. Easy, now...
>
> It depends solely on the number of resources and personnel you are
> willing to apply. It can be done. It would be a monumental pain in
> the ass 24 hour a day 7 day a week undertaking that would require
> immense sums and a vast horde of workers and planners. I didn't
> say it would be easy or cheap, only that it was possible.

and don't forget the cost of lives lost when you bust ass like that.
hoover dam... johns hopkins respiratory center... baltimore subway...
the number would probably increase dramatically when you use "hordes of
workers" which translates into "bigger clusterfuck"


>
> >>I would have expected more from "Lord Valve, American".
> >I don't give a rat's ass what you expected. Thirty nuke plants
> >can't be built in five months.
>
> Yes they can. It depends solely on the number of resources and
> personnel you are willing to apply. It can be done. It would be a
> monumental pain in the ass 24 hour a day 7 day a week undertaking that
> would require immense sums and a vast horde of workers and
> planners. I didn't say it would be easy or cheap, only that it was
> possible.

another echo. i better sue that fucking ear doctor after all.


>
> > And I have a sneaking suspicion
> >that, given the dearth of replies from sci.electronics.design,
> >there is a *large* contingent of EEs and whatnot over there who
> >are busting their guts laughing at my reaction to your (familiar
> >to them) grandiose violations of scientific principles and real-
> >world engineering concerns.

were getting close to the part where i lost it, here.


>
> They are scientists for the most part. The sworn duty of any
> scientist is to attack the ideas of other scientists. Scientists deal
> with absolute facts, and are not concerned with any theory except to
> try to destroy it. Part of it is ego, taken as a personal insult that
>
> someone else could think of something useful where they had not. It
> is an excellent mechanism for scientific issues, but scientists always

i might kick myself in the ass for not thinking of something first, or
get pissed because i didn't have the resources to develope something i
thought of before someone else developed it, but i don't get jealous. i
tear my own ideas apart so i don't waste time on something that won't
work. i suspected you might not be refering to EEs and techs and i see
that distinction made below. i'll let the "scientists" defend
themselves.


>
> make poor inventors. It is good to have such a mechanism, but it is
> also good to have supporters of an idea, which is why I expanded
> the original thread past sci.electronics.design.

you mean expanded *to* S.E.D.?

if this is the original thread you refer to, it was about mars. you
threw in a link and this is where it got us.

> While there may be
> some there who are willing to take devil's advocate and have the
> patience to assess the issue before issuing an opinion, I wanted to be
> sure that there would be some who would.

that doesn't even parse. while there may be A, i wanted to be sure there
would be A. while there may be donkeys, i wanted to be sure there would
be donkeys. why not just say, "I wanted to see if anyone would check
this out."


>
> A scientist is not always the best medium to propose a new idea to.
> First it is best to show the facts to non scientists who have basic
> technical and non technical background.

that's like saying the EE should show his idea to an ME. or as fred the
history major did (with a little knowlege of how things have been done
in electronics and a few buzz words - but no apparent knowlege of the
principles of the physics behind it or of basic circuits for that
matter,) took his idea to an ME who got the funding from a business man
with the help of a black box which was totally fraudulent though it
can't be proven that fred's a fraud without using truth serum.
psuedoscientist for sure. he just had some circuits built and did bad
lab work. then he had a fix designed in by some crackpot who may have
been knowingly fraudulent and who lied about the test results. i may
have the story confused. the first circuit's first test had to be bad
labwork. if that was the same circuit of the second test, the results
were a flat out lie. OTOH, if the second test was with the "fixed
circuit", the results were erroneneous because i got the same results
until i proved that the circuit was designed by someone without a clue.
that's when i just shut up, designed some other circuits and wrote some
software for the demo, and watched another EE without a clue mess with
the 3rd circuit design hoping the business man would come up with my
last check which he never did get out of that account in Costa Rica.

> Engineers are desirable in a
> case such as this. Scientists are not. Although the title EE implies
>
> engineer, more often they consider themselves scientists, and this is
> more of a mechanical engineering issue than an electrical one in the
> first place. Someone in that group started this thread by accident, I
> merely moved it elsewhere.

which group? SED? lot's of us had to take physics, thermo, and
hopefully, engineering economics. there are some this group that are
just as qualified to fuck with you as the texas politics buffs, and the
guitar amp dudes.
>
[snip]

heh, heh, heh...
i really like rush.


>
> >>Naw, I guess the
> >>Candadians are OK. Just ignore that.
> >If you say so.
>
> yes
>
> >>>> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
> >>>> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
> >>>> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
> >>>> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.
> >>>

how did that affect your votes?

[snip]


>
> >>>> I ought to charge a new penalty of Spiritual Servitude for the offense
> >>>> of USENET or internet trolling.

now i need to ask... who the fuck are you to impose Spiritual penalties?
> >>>
[snip]

> Who is Nancy Luft?
yeah who? luft is air in german, so maybe luft kopft?


> Do I need a calculator to sum up the total number
> of atoms in the sun before I can know that it will rise in the east
> and set in the west? These issues require only common sense. I gave
> a few in the turbine discussion posted elsewhere in this thread.
> Total BTU usage and efficiency expressed as a percentage of the total
> available BTUs. It doesn't need to be expressed any other way,
> because doing so would have no effect on the outcome, unless you feel
> some bizarre need to express the energy in ergs or calories.
>

er, this thread? all i remember is a bunch of hypothetical numbers.
let's see.

> So we have 180 to 210 degrees worth of BTUs from the sun

degrees don't directly convert to BTUs, dude, and you didn't give any
calculations that are worth a rat's ass. hell, i can also do the same
thing without picking up a calculator.

uh, let's say we have about 20 hens that lay about 10 eggs each and shit
about a pound of chicken shit in a day. this chicken shit can be
converted to methane with a little wheat straw to add to the kitty and
if we burn the methane it will power the incubator. please.

> >>Hell, you seen George Bush on TV didn't you? This shit looks normal
> >>compared to that shit.
> >Your shit isn't normal compared to ANY TURD WHICH HAS EXISTED
> >SINCE THE DAWN OF EXCREMENT. In fact, it must have issued
> >from an orifice of epic proportion, a veritable Cosmic Sphincter.
> >You are the Grand Shit Almighty, and I am humbled by your presence.
> >I'm just an ordinary asshole, but you, sir, are the archetype.

that's where i lost it.


>
> Now this actually halfway makes sense. You are improving.
>
> >>Lord Valve
> >>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed
> >
> >>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed... you ain't seen nothing yet.
> >I can only imagine. And I thought Phil Allison was cracked...oh, my...sorry, Phil...
>
> Hey, I don't use WD-40 anywhere.. well I guess it might have a few
> uses keeping the pyrex machine running in top condition... maybe.

works on stiff joints, too. possibly arthritis.


>
> >>Damn, now I
> >>have to go play some BTO on the guitar.
> >I know, I know...you're much better than the original.
> >It's the foamed Pyrex strings, I guess...
>
> Thou shalt not blaspheme my guitar strings. My strings are Vinci
> Heavy Metal 9 gauge.

Ernie Ball for me.

> Do it again, and I shall conjure up vast
> numbers of buffalo and Indian warrior spirits from the nearby Oklahoma
> countryside, and send them up to Denver via Pueblo to suck
> every last remnant of mojo out of your keyboards and amplifiers. And
> half the mojo of your tube inventory.

mmm... do i want a president who talks this line of shit? stick to
saving the country's energy needs and colonizing mars. make sure you
find a worthless rock on which to put all the assholes i don't like.


>
> >>I'll be back later. Maybe tomorrow.
> >I await your return in breathless anticipation.
>
> I knew you would.
>
> >>Absolutely Fuckin' Amazed? Read this, then you will be Absolutely
> >>Fuckin' Amazed.
> >Oh, I read it, all right. Here are a few choice samples...
> >____________________________________________________
> >
> >>While this may seem like a small accomplishment at first, a closer
> >>examination reveals this to be one of the largest advances in the
> >>history of the human race.
> >
> >No comment. ;-)
>
> Ah so you admit you haven't read it enough to know one way or the
> other. This is as it should be.
>
> >>...Carbon Tetrachloride, a common, inexpensive, non-toxic,
> >>stable chemical...
> >
> >Dude - carbon tetrachloride is fuckin' POISON. It's not even
> >*close* to being non-toxic. WTF do you come up with this shit?
>
> Hmmm. I don't know, I read that in the Merck Chemical Manual way back
> in 1986, and I swear I recall it was listed as non toxic.

you inhaled and forgot.

and while i'm on the subject, here's something that must have been
snipped:

***************


> SERI said that to meet the entire electricity demands of the USA with
> solar power would require covering a 6000 square mile area. That's
> one 75 by 80 mile area. However, that estimate used a reflector based
> steam setup, which wastes half the land area. This setup would only
> require 4000 square miles (there are efficiency issues to getting rid
> of the reflectors, so it isn't half or 3000 square miles).

> That's one 40 by 50 mile area. To get solar power 24 hours a day, you
> need two such areas. To have a week's reserve of oxygen and hydrogen
> buildable in a two week span, you need four of these areas.

*****************

did that carbon tet smell good? 40x50 is 2000. i leave the proof to you
as an excersize.

> If
> it's toxic, then it's toxic, I don't have the manual handy.

i thought everyone ;-) knew that.

> Even if
> it is, its use in a closed steam system would pose no danger so long
> as appropriate protections were used like gas masks. Only an issue
> during maintenance or repair, since the target application is in
> remote terraformed areas. I will have to look into this. The people
> of Quebec and Siberia and Nebraska and North and South Dakota will
> not be pleased if CT cannot be used, since CT is the only way they can
> get steam solar power at their northerly latitudes.

don't tell them yet. wait 'til you're in. then propose an array of uWave
antennas that will receive power from outerspace and fry them when it's
off target.
>
[snip].


> >
> >You and the gods, eh? Egad.
>
> I claim a spiritual goal as an inventor. It is not relevant to the
> discussion. Well, OK, maybe it is, but not until you recognize the
> immense scale of what I invented. Gods, angels, shades, spirits,
> what's the difference... It still has no real bearing except as a
> curiosity.
>
> >Well, I reckon that's about as big a dose as anyone on AGA can
> >stand this time around. It's kinda cool, having a clinical megalomaniac
> >on AGA - um, hey...you ain't a COMMIE or anything, are ya? I got
> >*standards*, see?
>
> You know better than to call an American that...

uh, i know some americans on welfare that i call commies.


>
> >Lord Valve
> >Speechless
>
> As far as trying to debate the technical accuracy of what I invented,
> yes, pretty much speechless. You did make a few minor efforts,
> but they have been defeated. If you wish to try harder, by all means.
> You are undertaking an impossible goal though, be forewarned.
> The technology works as advertised, and you will not be able to
> disprove it. Feel free to choose any or all of the three to attack.

i've heard this line before. i hope your shit does work and if it does,
i hope the shit happens. i'll get around to reading all that stuff and
be sure to ream you if you've wasted my time.

>
> Once you try it and fail, the rest of it starts making a lot of sense.
> You can attack the rest of it now, without the backing of credibility
> of the inventions easily enough, but once the validity of the
> inventions is established, it gets quite a bit harder to do that.
>
> Stick with the inventions for now, some good might come of it.
>
> I deal with this. Look at what others are dealing with. If I had
> been elected president, I would have created 3 million new jobs, not
> destroyed 3 million existing jobs... Pay attention in that google
> thread about the effect on the economy that would be caused by cutting
>
> the cost of housing in half.

if all this conspiracy theory shit is true, and if half of what i
suspect can be proven, what's the answer? i hear so many people bitching
and no one voting or passing out info.

>
> Your enemies here in aga could use a lack of analytical assessment on
> your part in this matter as serious ammunition against you in the
> near and far future if they pay more attention than you do, and it
> will take years for you to live it down... It might have been better
> to have said nothing.

one does have to watch what one says. if you're lucky someone will
correct you and you'll have a chance to recant or apologize.

mike
see, first name here and last name in the e-mail address. what's you're
excuse?

BTW, IIRC, fred wanted Buchanann (sp?) to win. knowing none of you guys
had a snowball's chance in hell of winning and not wanting the inventor
of the internet to win, i had to go for a candidate who has provided me
with a fair amount of entertainment and killed a few bad guys in the
process. IIRC, someone said you were a crackpot. maybe it was fred. i
take in as much as i can evaluate it as best i can. we'll see.

feklar

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 10:51:18 PM8/25/03
to
On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 20:16:00 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>first, who the fuck are you? second, who the fuck are you that you can
>make fast money playing guitar? eddie fucking van halen? i'm talking
>about the kind of money that compares to all the cash you should've made
>from those fantastic inventions.

I have some Indian freinds. I can likely land a gig at a Casino or
some Indian owned bars, and get a working income, most likely full
time wages for part time work. But it sort of helps to get back my
playing skills before I gig, maybe. I'm close enough now to be going
out gigging within a month or three. And making those Indians good
money, since I don't suck when it comes to playing the guitar. If you
post an mp3 of yoiur playing "Franenstein" by Edgar Winter, I'll post
one too and we can put it to the vote here and let the people decide.

It's hard to accomplish anything if you don't have enough income and
enough free time.

>where is here, OK? MN? if the OK gov't is representative of some of the
>okies i've spoken to, you're *all* fucked.

Yeah come down to the capitol here and speak that shit. March through
the streets of Tulsa shouting about how Oklahomans are lame.

>well, where's the info on this pyrex machine and those other great
>inventions?

Follow the google sig at the end of this post.

>in between riffs, right?

Great how that works, isn't it?

>why not, anyway. when the lines were too long at the cap center, i
>pissed in a sink. on the way out, i looked over my shoulder and they
>were lined up at the sinks. glad i thought of it first 'cause i had to
>piss bad.

Yeah, you can get away with it at a rock concert, hell, the wenches
invade the men's rooms all the time and commandeer the toilets. But
not at a shopping mall.


>yeah, ah... i've heard of pumping h2o and maybe steam into wells. still
>ain't sure who came up with those ideas.

Yeah, I didn't invent those techniques, but I did figure out how to
make them economically viable. Follow the google link.

>> Incompetence of assessment.
>
>more name calling. you're giving all the indications that your a
>psuedoscientist. keep this shit up and no one will even bother to look
>at the "relevant material".

Telling someone they are unaware of one or more facts is not insulting
htem. I don't know why everyone always takes being accused of being
ignorant as an insult. Fuck, I don't know but a thousandth of the
total amount of shit there is no know, but at least I admit to it.


>> >It's the same link. And where on earth did you get the idea that offshore
>> >surface rigs cost 20 billion dollars? Tens of TRILLIONS of dollars?
>>
>> Read the post to the other guy. Its true, they cost that much. On
>> the average. In 1987.
>
>why not just answer the fucking question and save me the time of going
>back to find something? seriously. what other guy? i didn't see that in
>the past. should i see it in the future? yup. too bad i had to leave and
>come back and download a 720 line post. i should have turned the
>"archive message bodies" option on. more shit to clean up.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=MPG.19b4388da889ff25989806%40news.west.earthlink.net&rnum=1&prev=/&frame=on

Its post number 21 in the thread.

I went to google.com, clicked on groups, and typed in
feklar the red planet approaches.

>> >Do you know how much a trillion dollars is?
>
>1/4 of the national expenditure according to one of my [psuedo?] refs.
>
>as much as you should have in the bank after inventing all this shit
>that saved the drilling companies all that money?

Now we are hearing the truth.

>oh, i was going to ask why you're still talking about oil when there's
>all that gas under lake erie and you're going to power us with solar as
>soon as you're done playing guitar to finance this.

Read "Energy: The Created Crisis" You mean the Canadiens haven't yet
sucked all the gas out of there yet? The oil companies wanting to
screw the gas companies had enough influence so that no Lake Erie
drilling leases were granted to US companies, while the Canadians
drilled hundreds of wells, then sold the gas to the USA for three
times what we would have paid if USA gas companies had been granted
drilling leases.

>just as i'm about to shout for joy over a short read, i find a link to a
>whole slew of other pages. but hey guys, we may have a clue here. "Rob's
>..." now we just have to look up all the robs an we'll have narrowed
>down the possibilities of who the hell you are. maybe a google of the
>last pres. election will solve that, but i think it's come back to me.

If you really want my name and address, its in one of the posts in the
google thread at the end of this post.

>> The powers
>> that be win either way, and troublemaking assholes get to pay
>> for whatever it ends up costing.
>
>er, i thought consumers paid for it. whatever "it" means.

I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

>> It depends solely on the number of resources and personnel you are
>> willing to apply. It can be done. It would be a monumental pain in
>> the ass 24 hour a day 7 day a week undertaking that would require
>> immense sums and a vast horde of workers and planners. I didn't
>> say it would be easy or cheap, only that it was possible.
>
>and don't forget the cost of lives lost when you bust ass like that.
>hoover dam... johns hopkins respiratory center... baltimore subway...
>the number would probably increase dramatically when you use "hordes of
>workers" which translates into "bigger clusterfuck"

Yeah well I figure it all evens out. A pyrex house will cost about
half what a standard house costs. It will never need a new roof.
Therefore it will put almost all roofers out of work. But with all
that extra money around from people having their housing costs cut in
half, they will be able to actually finally be able to take a well
deserved vacation. At the fishing resort owned by an ex-roofer. You
ever been up there, roasting your ass off in 160 to 180 degree heat?
So I prevent more suffering than I cause in this case, all totaled.
Besides, most people anymore would be glad to get the work that would
be provided by the massive conversion project. Some types of work are
always going to be a pain in the ass, but if it has to be done then it
has to be done. The economy being destroyed by oil imports has caused
considerably more suffering and death than the project could hope to
begin to cause.

>if this is the original thread you refer to, it was about mars. you
>threw in a link and this is where it got us.

>> While there may be
>> some there who are willing to take devil's advocate and have the
>> patience to assess the issue before issuing an opinion, I wanted to be
>> sure that there would be some who would.

Its obvious what I meant after realized its obvious there was a
composing error.

>heh, heh, heh...
>i really like rush.

yes

>> >>>> I bet I kicked George Bush's ass so bad as a write in candidate in the
>> >>>> 2002 election he would have had to commit suicide out of sheer
>> >>>> embarrassment, if the smirking lamer hadn't had his Party friends
>> >>>> alter the vote to make it look like he was first and Gore was second.
>> >>>
>
>how did that affect your votes?

I don't know, I just said to a few people here and there around Iowa,
Minnesota, and Wisconsin that they ought to vote for me as a write-in
candidate, and I would implement the cure described in
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

It wasn't a bad idea then, and it isn't a bad idea this next time.
Personally, I wouldn't want the job, I have better things to do with
my time.

>now i need to ask... who the fuck are you to impose Spiritual penalties?

I cannot impose Spiritual Penalties. Only the gods, God, Providence,
whatever you want to call it, can impose that. I only offer idiots
the chance to risk it. Technically, they can only impose it upon
themselves. Assholes can cause considerable damage and suffering by
screwing me over. Assholes have caused considerable damage and
suffering by screwing me over. This simply makes sure that everyone
they screw over is more than compensated, and increases whatever
penalty they would normally suffer considerably. Someone is given a
choice of possibly screwing up something the gods want done, and they
choose to take the risk, then it falls somewhere under the category
loosely termed "blapshemy" and gets treated accordingly. That offense
carries considerably more weight than any other.

I could say that even the gods have their own rules and must obey
them, and this just takes advantage of a loophole to bypass the normal
limits of things, but then I'd have to explain it and I ain't in the
mood.

>> So we have 180 to 210 degrees worth of BTUs from the sun
>
>degrees don't directly convert to BTUs, dude, and you didn't give any
>calculations that are worth a rat's ass. hell, i can also do the same
>thing without picking up a calculator.

But degrees and mass do, and I gave the mass as being 50000 to 100000
gallons of water.

>> Thou shalt not blaspheme my guitar strings. My strings are Vinci
>> Heavy Metal 9 gauge.
>
>Ernie Ball for me.

Good choice

>> Do it again, and I shall conjure up vast
>> numbers of buffalo and Indian warrior spirits from the nearby Oklahoma
>> countryside, and send them up to Denver via Pueblo to suck
>> every last remnant of mojo out of your keyboards and amplifiers. And
>> half the mojo of your tube inventory.
>
>mmm... do i want a president who talks this line of shit? stick to
>saving the country's energy needs and colonizing mars. make sure you
>find a worthless rock on which to put all the assholes i don't like.

Show some respect

>did that carbon tet smell good? 40x50 is 2000. i leave the proof to you
>as an excersize.

Now why do you want to attack the point like that? Its obvious I
meant that the required area is smaller than 6000 square miles.

Obviously, I should have followed my instinct and checked that with
the calculator.

The point is still valid, and is a considerable improvement over using
reflectors, and all the required aeas would still fit very nicely into
Arizona with room left over to spare.

>uh, i know some americans on welfare that i call commies.

That's socialism, not communism, to be politically correct.

>> Your enemies here in aga could use a lack of analytical assessment on
>> your part in this matter as serious ammunition against you in the
>> near and far future if they pay more attention than you do, and it
>> will take years for you to live it down... It might have been better
>> to have said nothing.
>
>one does have to watch what one says. if you're lucky someone will
>correct you and you'll have a chance to recant or apologize.

When its obvious that I am right, Lord Valve will become the
laughingstock of aga, and this title will likely never change in his
lifetime. He's supposed to be be so technically competent, you know.

>see, first name here and last name in the e-mail address. what's you're
>excuse?

search google.com for feklar and Sheridan


now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

feklar

unread,
Aug 25, 2003, 10:59:04 PM8/25/03
to
So NASA realizes that the Moon and Mars can be colonized now.

Sadly, in 2002, they learn that of all the nearby ice asteroids and
comets that were available to send a manned crew up to for diversion
for impact with Mars or the Moon to add an extra water supply that had
near passes to either, 8 had close passes since 1970, but there are
expected to be no more close passes until the year 2197.

now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

feklar

unread,
Aug 26, 2003, 5:38:47 AM8/26/03
to
Someone wanted my address. Its down at the bottom.

Here, just in case you don't have a copy, take the whole thing, what
the fuck.

Unfortuantely, in this text format it loses all the pretty italics,
underlining, boldface and formatting, but you will have to suffer it
this way.

<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
[ Criminal Complaint Investigation Request for Wire Fraud and Covert
Foreign Attack / Sabotage, and Possibly Mail Fraud, Conspiracy, and
Treason, ], and [ Notice of Conditional Waiver to Right to Privacy
for the Purposes of Conducting such Investigation and for the
Prevention of Further Criminal Activities. ]

The undersigned, Robert John Nelson, (THE GRANTOR) offers this notice
as proof of his legal permission and authorization for the following
authorities: { Oklahoma State and local Government agencies in
general, including the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation or any
other Oklahoma government agency including Police, or any other
organization, agency, or people the Oklahoma governments authorize
(except U.S. Federal government agencies). (and) Texas State and
local Government agencies in general, including the Texas Rangers or
any other Texas government or Republic of Texas agency including
Police, or any other organization, agency, or people the Texas
governments authorize (except U.S. Federal government agencies).
(and) The Mexican government in general, or any Mexican government
agency, or any other organization, agency, or people the Mexican
government authorizes (except U.S. Federal government agencies).
(and) Any member or council of any Native American Indian Nation.
(and) ConocoPhillips Petroleum Company, (and) U.S. military
intelligence (and) The Minnesota Government (and) The Russian
Government (and) DirecTV (and) Any musician or band having a valid
recording contract with a U.S.A. or U.K. record company or
corporation, either currently, or within the last 20 years (and) any
U.S.A. or U.K. record company or corporation (and) Any member or
organization of any or all of the following: [ Clear Channel
Communications, Inc. or any of its subsidiaries, Cable News Network
LP, LLLP or any of its subsidiaries, FOX News Network, LLC or any of
its subsidiaries, American Broadcasting Company or any of its
subsidiaries, National Football League or any of its subsidiaries,
KSWO-TV in Lawton, OK, WBAY-TV in Green Bay, WI, WKBT-TV in LaCrosse,
WI, KTTC-TV in Rochester, MN, WCCO-TV and KSTP-TV in Minneapolis / St.
Paul, MN, KWWL-TV in Waterloo / Cedar Rapids, IA, WDIV-TV in Detroit,
MI, and any Texas or Oklahoma petroleum producer, or producers
association or organization. ] } (THE AGENCIES)

to install, use and operate, subject to the conditions of this notice,
any form of electronic audio, video, and telephone surveillance,
including direct physical means or indirect means of monitoring /
recording / testing wired and wireless telephone equipment and
telephone lines owned or possessed or used by THE GRANTOR or
monitoring / recording any other electronic or computer or internet
equipment owned or possessed by THE GRANTOR at, inside, and near THE
GRANTOR's current address and/or location, only between the hours of
4:00 PM to 12:00 PM inclusive, Tuesday through Saturday, [ for the
purposes of understanding and investigating THE GRANTOR's complaints
of a criminal problem and a malevolent foreign problem within U.S.
government intelligence agencies and / or private intelligence
agencies, a malevolent foreign problem in general, criminal / foreign
tampering with telephone or internet equipment possessed or used by
THE GRANTOR and possibly criminal tampering with the United States
Postal Service, and for the purpose of preventing these criminal and
foreign entities from causing further damage to the United States of
America, to THE GRANTOR, and to THE AGENCIES ] (THE PURPOSE).

THE GRANTOR accepts that Mexico and the U.K. are benevolent foreign
agencies, and that most Russian government agencies are benevolent
foreign agencies. Video or audio surveillance shall not be used in
any bathroom or lavatory. THE GRANTOR gives the following
permissions: Permission is given to use video surveillance to monitor
/ record the exterior outdoor areas at or near THE GRANTOR's residence
at any time of any day. Permission is given to monitor / record /
test wired and wireless telephone equipment and telephone lines owned
or possessed or used by THE GRANTOR at any time of any day. Permission
is given to monitor / record THE GRANTOR's internet access and THE
GRANTOR's computer monitor displays from 8:00 AM to 12:00 midnight on
any day, but this permission is limited to the screen resoultion of
1024 x 768. No permsission is given to view any other screen
resolution.

Further, THE GRANTOR extends permission to THE AGENCIES to record and
to disseminate the live or recorded information discovered via this
surveillance to whatever people or agencies (including U.S. Federal
government agencies) they deem appropriate, by whatever means they
deem appropriate, including via mass broadcast, in order to implement
THE PURPOSE. However, THE AGENCIES must use their own surveillance
equipment or that of their assigns. In no case shall any equipment or
surveillance data or service which is provided, owned, or operated by
any U.S. Federal agency be used (however, military intelligence may
use their own equipment). Content realized by the surveillance may be
edited by any of THE AGENCIES for brevity, profanity or legitimate
security concerns, but not for taking the content out of its original
obvious context. THE GRANTOR gives his permission to verify any
information and contact any individual or agency discovered via the
surveillance. THE GRANTOR requests that two-way communications
equipment (either encoded / scrambled or open channel) be provided to
bypass problematic telephone equipment and associated criminal and
foreign activity, in order to clarify information and debate relevant
matters or issues related to THE PURPOSE.

THE GRANTOR states that he does not trust the FBI or Federal
Government intelligence in general, for repeated past failures on
their part to act upon THE GRANTOR's legitimate criminal complaints
even when proof was provided, and for reasons that will become obvious
during the course of surveillance, contact, and / or investigation.
THE GRANTOR states that he can prove beyond any reasonable doubt the
existence of a criminal problem and a malevolent foreign problem
within U.S. government intelligence agencies and elsewhere, but makes
no claim of being able to precisely identify the identities of the
perpetrators, or that an investigation will identify them. However,
if this surveillance is conducted, THE GRANTOR will prove that THE
PURPOSE will be guaranteed to be implemented via the surveillance and
the two-way communication. THE GRANTOR can prove a history of
encountering criminal activities related to the telephone and
internet, to surveillance, and possibly to the U.S. Mail, and that
these activities show an undeniable and obvious trend towards the
perpetrators damaging and attempting to damage the United States and
benefiting foreign entities, and attempting to create situations which
cause this effect.

THE GRANTOR states that knowledge is power, and that his attempts
since 1998 to communicate knowledge of a highly beneficial nature to
the United States Government and to various entities within the USA
(including some of THE AGENCIES) have not reached the intended
recipients as a result of these activities. Also, THE GRANTOR can
prove beyond any reasonable doubt that because of the duration of the
delay in communicating this knowledge, vast financial damage has been
caused to the United States, to THE GRANTOR, and to THE AGENCIES. THE
GRANTOR can show that the delay in implementing this new knowledge,
namely a method of cutting housing and building construction costs by
50 percent, a method of cutting the cost of pumping crude oil by 50
percent, and a method of reducing offshore oil rig construction costs
to 1/80th the current costs or less, has been intentional, and that
the delay has caused a respectable amount of damage to the U.S.
economy, and that the requested surveillance and the resulting spread
of the knowledge is necessary to prevent continued delays or the
outright canceling of the existence of this knowledge in the USA. THE
GRANTOR states that other activities of the perpetrators which are
intended to cause other damage to the United States can also be
nullified via these means. THE GRANTOR states that he can prove
beyond any reasonable doubt that these activities are not merely
criminal in nature, but are being conducted at least in part by a
malevolent foreign entity. THE GRANTOR can prove beyond any possible
doubt that censorship of his attempts to communicate this knowledge
via the internet has occurred. THE GRANTOR states that he can show a
clear pattern of the perpetrators attempting to cause and attempting
to create situations that cause economic and other damage not only to
THE GRANTOR, but to the AGENCIES and to the United States in general.

One possible example of this censorship danger is KSWO-TV. THE
GRANTOR provided KSWO with a copy of the HTML internet page containing
the complete description of the method of reducing the cost of pumping
crude oil, which is capable of reopening thousands of oil wells in
Texas and Oklahoma, and creating a vast economic benefit to Texas and
Oklahoma's general and governmental economic health. KSWO was asked
to relay the information to the TV stations in Wichita Falls, TX, and
also to post a copy of the page on the kswo.com internet web site and
refer their viewers there on the TV news. There are two separate
versions of the oil pump improvement page, one for internet criminals,
and one for people THE GRANTOR wished to give the information to
freely, at no cost. KSWO received a printed version of the one
intending to give the knowledge away, and this was the version
requested to be posted. Since THE GRANTOR was never contacted by
KSWO, he assumes that his request was not honored. It may be that the
information was posted as requested. This is a possible example, but
there are other examples that can be proven.

Regarding the CD ROM circulated by THE GRANTOR in 2001 and 2002, THE
GRANTOR states that after distributing more than 100 CD-ROMs to
various petroleum, news, government, and other agencies, he has never
received any correspondence via either U.S. Mail or via telephone or
internet from anyone regarding the contents, and that he has never
ignored or denied anyone's effort or attempt to inquire or to
communicate via these or any other means. THE GRANTOR suspects that
efforts were made to contact him, but were subverted, and requests an
investigation into this matter.

THE GRANTOR states that if the references provided via the
surveillance are contacted, some of them will be able to verify that
the criminal activities described above did in fact occur.

In order to determine or bypass criminal activities, THE GRANTOR gives
his permission, evidenced by his signature below, to the Texas Rangers
and/or other Texas law enforcement agencies, and to the Oklahoma State
Bureau of Investigation and/or other Oklahoma law enforcement, to
monitor the contents of his United States Postal Service mailbox, and
to open and examine the contents of any mail placed in the mailbox by
the U.S. Postal Service which is addressed to THE GRANTOR. The key to
the THE GRANTOR's mailbox will be made available by THE GRANTOR.
Also, THE GRANTOR agrees that possession and display of this legal
notice by any of the entities described in this paragraph at a U.S.
Post Office is a legal authorization by and legal permission from THE
GRANTOR for these entities to obtain keys to THE GRANTOR'S current
mail box from that Post Office for the purposes described in this
notice.

THE GRANTOR takes this opportunity to remind the Oklahoma and Texas
governments that Federal regulation and then deregulation of natural
gas severely damaged their economies and the United States economy in
general, and that the (to date, 4 year) delay in upgrading existing
oil and gas wells with the new technology to reduce pumping costs has
also caused significant loss and damage totalling at least many
billions of dollars. Also, that it is a proven fact that the USA
never needed to import foreign oil: that 30 years ago it was obvious
that our own natural gas resources could meet the USA demands for
automobile fuel for 1000 years, and that it was obvious 20 years ago
that the claimed practice of "nation building" in the Middle East only
created enemies against the United States and supplied them with vast
financial resources, and also that biomass production of natural gas
was a proven, viable and reliable means of replacing wellhead natural
gas 990 years from now when wellhead gas finally runs out, and that
oil imports from the Middle East have severely damaged the USA
economy.

THE GRANTOR states that there are legal methods that exist to prevent
such occurrences of Federal Government malfeasance, and that the
permission given in this document, if utilized by THE AGENCIES, is one
of these means. THE GRANTOR states that Texas and Oklahoma government
and law enforcement, seperately or together, can constitute a
legitimate government intelligence agency, and serve THE PURPOSE very
well, and regardless of anyone's moronic, slanderous, malevolent, or
criminally fraudulent claims to the contrary, are as perfectly well
qualified and easily patriotic enough to make intelligent assessments
and determinations as to what benefits U.S. national security and the
security of THE AGENCIES and what does not, what issues are actually
relevant to the subject of security and which are not, and to what is
fact and what is fraud, as are any other State or Federal group or
agency, and that any claim to the contrary could only be made by
malevolent foreigners (or (remotely) possibly Satan worshippers
attempting to cause damage in general), or someone gullible enough to
be made a chump of by some malevolent agency who had attained power
within the United States by some means, and could only be a further
attempt to subvert both the PURPOSE and THE GRANTOR's and THE
AGENCIES' Constitutionally guaranteed rights of freedom of speech and
assembly.

THE GRANTOR states that he can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that
the criminal activities described above have already cost Texas and
Oklahoma an immense amount of financial loss, and that if allowed to
continue unimpeded, will cause even greater loss, and that the means
provided by this notice and THE AGENCIES acting upon these means are
the only likely means of preventing these further losses.

Unless extended in writing, THE GRANTOR revokes all legal permissions
and authorizations contained within this notice effective January 1st,
2008.

THE GRANTOR reserves the right at any time to cause temporary
canceling of any audio and video surveillance by the following means:
1) If THE GRANTOR tunes his TV or stereo to an unused radio frequency
so that the static or noise can be clearly heard, and leaves the TV or
stereo in this condition for more than 120 seconds, then the
surveillance must be ended for a one hour period from the time the
stereo was tuned to the unused frequency or the time that this
condition was discovered. After the one hour period has elapsed, 5
second audio checks may be conducted to check whether the static is
still present. If the static is not present, the audio and / or video
surveillance may resume, unless the time lies outside of the allowed
hours. 2) If THE GRANTOR verbally requests that the surveillance be
suspended for any given period of time, the surveillance must be
suspended for that period of time. Any requested suspension lasting
more than 24 hours will be affirmed by posting an image of a circle
with a slash through it at THE GRANTOR's residence in the same
location as the copy of this notice. When this image is removed, any
or all of THE AGENCIES may return.

THE GRANTOR affirms that any copy, FAX, ASCII or computer data
representation, or other facsimile of this notice that contains the
exact wording is a valid instrument, but only for THE AGENCIES or for
any individual member of THE AGENCIES. Any of THE AGENCIES may
contact any of the others and provide them a copy of this notice.
This notice also reaffirms that THE GRANTOR gave his verbal permission
to THE AGENCIES to continue to use the surveillance described above
and in an earlier version of this notice, and on or about October,
2000, and affirms this permission from the present retroactive to
October, 2000. The Russian Government and Minnesota Government and
all TV stations that are members of THE AGENCIES except KSWO-TV, were
given verbal permission to use the surveillance described above and in
previous notices in or about June, 1997, and for them, THE GRANTOR
reaffirms this permission retroactive to June, 1997. THE GRANTOR
affirms that the permissions given in the original 2002 version of
this notice were verbally extended indefinitely. All of these
affirmations are confirmed, and now superseded, by this notice, as
evidenced by THE GRANTOR's signature below.

This notice is valid for any residence owned or rented by THE GRANTOR.
However, if THE GRANTOR takes up residence on any Native American
(Indian) reservation, land, or property, this notice shall only be
valid if it is clearly posted on the premises and the permsission of
the Native American Nation having jurisdiction is given. If THE
GRANTOR takes up residence in Mexico or anywhere else outside the
United States, the permissions given in this notice is revoked
effective the date of taking up the new residence.

The rights granted via this notice to THE AGENCIES by THE GRANTOR do
not extend to any production for profit, although if mass broadcasting
occurs, THE GRANTOR agrees that unrelated commercials or other
sponsorship or advertising do not constitute a production for profit.
If it is felt wise to distribute recordings, THE GRANTOR recommends
MP3 format via CD-ROM or internet, but in no case shall the sampling
rate be lower than 64 kilobits per second / 22 kilohertz monophonic or
equivalent format. If this format is used, then the use of filtering,
equalization, and a noise gate is permissible and is recommended to
reduce the MP3 file sizes, as long as the intended content is not
lost.

A copy of this notice will be kept posted at THE GRANTOR's residence
in a visible location. Current residence:
Robert John Nelson, 2301 SW Sheridan Rd. #24, Lawton, OK 73501 (580)
248-5801


(signed)
______________________________________________________________

Subscribed and sworn before me
this _________ day of ________, __________


(witness)
______________________________________________________________
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

feklar

unread,
Aug 26, 2003, 5:41:58 AM8/26/03
to
Only the stupid, ignorant, or uninvolved fail to be impressed by
that.

It does open up some really excellent probabilities, and cancels out
opportunities and avenues for retarded bullshit quite nicely.

feklar

unread,
Aug 26, 2003, 5:52:46 AM8/26/03
to
We had to tear down the new U.S. Embassy in Moscow, and rebuild it,
because the Russian had sneaked so many radar reflectors into the
structure. Can't have them listening in with radar surveillance from
10 miles away you know.

In other matters, I'll answer your ignorant question before you ask
it. They are included in the list of "THE AGENCIES" because I have
friends there, regardless of who it is you are asking about

feklar

unread,
Aug 26, 2003, 6:19:00 AM8/26/03
to
Life's been good to me so far.
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/wah.mp3

That's a half megabyte file for you abacus users.

feklar

unread,
Aug 26, 2003, 10:19:18 PM8/26/03
to

Active8

unread,
Aug 28, 2003, 11:59:16 AM8/28/03
to
In article <3f4ac1e7...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 20:16:00 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >first, who the fuck are you? second, who the fuck are you that you can
> >make fast money playing guitar? eddie fucking van halen? i'm talking
> >about the kind of money that compares to all the cash you should've made
> >from those fantastic inventions.

ok. i see your a pretty righteous dude and all. and you obviously want
to do something to really benefit mankind. i think alot of people really
do.

but man. these inventions you're ranting about... your gone. heh, heh,
heh... one of the first links i looked at where i found that reference
to a Wall Street Journal or times article... never mind, let's go right
to the pyrex machine.

how can you say that spraying nitrogen cold glass at molten glass will
SLOW the cooling time of the molten glass?

you said the expansion of the cold glass will slow the cooling and
you're not sure what the hot/cold mix is. it needs to be determined
through experiment, which means this hasn't been done.

i don't think it will work. where is there one article of evidence that
this "shock tempering" has been done and proven to work?

[snip]


> Yeah, you can get away with it at a rock concert, hell, the wenches
> invade the men's rooms all the time and commandeer the toilets. But
> not at a shopping mall.

i manage to avoid having to use public restrooms for the most part.
>
>
[snip]


> >> The powers
> >> that be win either way, and troublemaking assholes get to pay
> >> for whatever it ends up costing.
> >
> >er, i thought consumers paid for it. whatever "it" means.
>
> I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

yeah yeah
>
[snip]


>
> >did that carbon tet smell good? 40x50 is 2000. i leave the proof to you
> >as an excersize.
>
> Now why do you want to attack the point like that? Its obvious I
> meant that the required area is smaller than 6000 square miles.

just havin' fun :-)


>
> Obviously, I should have followed my instinct and checked that with
> the calculator.
>
> The point is still valid, and is a considerable improvement over using
> reflectors, and all the required aeas would still fit very nicely into
> Arizona with room left over to spare.
>
> >uh, i know some americans on welfare that i call commies.
>
> That's socialism, not communism, to be politically correct.

i know. i still say commies in this case.

mike

feklar

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 7:02:14 PM8/29/03
to
Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
of the concepts of the pyrex machine.


On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:49:15 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

feklar

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 7:13:45 PM8/29/03
to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:49:15 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>Consider the shape of a prism. Now consider a 100,000 gallon prism
>shaped water storage tank with a 2 foot thick base and sides, made of
>black tinted pyrex panels laser welded together. The machine would
>need to make 3 rectangular panels (1 bottom and 2 sides) and the 2
>triangular end panels.
>
>This would be situated inside a larger prism shaped greenhouse made of
>clear pyrex, which wuld be situated inside yet another, so we have a
>100,000 gallon water tank inside a quadrulple insulated greenhouse
>(using clear chambered pyrex panels for the greenhouse, only a double
>insulated greenhouse if solid clear greenhouse panels were used.
>Chambered pyrex is hollow inside: read the description of it given
>elsewhere by following the google link).

I used the prism shape because it's easier to visualize. In practice,
rectangular tanks and greenhouses would be used, otherwise its a waste
of heat storage capacity. Rectangular tanks have a much higher
storage capacity than a prism shaped tank.

The tanks are black tinted. For those of you that don't understand
why, the black has to be present, either as tint or an applied coating
on or in the tanks. There are two types of heat energy, radiant heat
and convective heat. Radiant heat is expressed in terms of
electromagnetic energy, infrared for example. Convective heat relates
to the vibration of molecules. The greater the vibration, the higher
the total energy or heat content. Water cannot be heated directly
with radiant energy because it is transparent to radiant energy (light
goes through water). The black tint or coating is required to convert
the radiant solar energy into convective energy.

If you boil a pan of water, the convection from the moving molecules
at the bottom of the pan is transferred to the water molecules, and
soon they are moving fast enough to have the pan boiling. You could
use a laser beam to heat water to boiling in a clear chamber, but it
would take years because most of the light goes right through the
water without being absorbed by it. If the chamber was coated with a
black coating, the coating would absorb the energy from the laser,
convert it to molecular heat motion, and transfer that motion to the
water, and the water would boil within a short time.


now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

Neal Atkins

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 7:16:06 PM8/29/03
to
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:02:14 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
>alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
>in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
>of the concepts of the pyrex machine.

Wow. A first. A top posting moron replies to his OWN POST! How
kewl. Can you get your computer to jerk you off or are you waiting on
a spontaneous emission?

And L. Ron Hubbard already has the patent on self serving "religious"
organizations that use science fiction. Look for "scientology" to sue
you for damages any day.

feklar

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 7:27:57 PM8/29/03
to
On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:49:15 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>Read the infoZ in the links first, then comment. You will be changing
>your mind about it.

I have an improvement for the high speed rotary example given in the
google thread below.

It would be better to eliminate the flow of molten pyrex through the
axle and rotating arms, and replace it with granulaed pyrex.

So basically, the entire hot side would be removed, and the capacity
of the 'cold' side would be doubled.

The mechanics of the cold side remain the same, but half the
granulated pyrex goes into a heater chamber at the end of each arm and
is melted there instead.

Hydrogen is introduced through the cold side in the same channels as
the granulated pyrex, and oxygen is introduced through the other half
of the axle and is routed to the ends of each arm, where it is mixed
with the hydrogen to generate the heat to melt the pyrex granules.

This approach eleiminates the many potential problems associated with
trying to route molten pyrex through the axle and arms. For example,
if that approach were taken it would take 2 hours to bring the machine
up to operating temperature, to remelt the pyrex that had cooled
inside the hot side of the arms.

Using oxygen and hydrogen to heat a small asbestos melting chamber at
the end of each arm should also result in a much greater total energy
efficiency for the machine, and generate far less waste heat.

This requires that the machine must have a water source and an
electrolysis unit. The electrolysis process would be inefficient
energy wise, but since the machine will leave power generation
capacity behind it as it travels the length of a given area, the
efficiency loss will be so small as to be insignificant and can
mathematically be expressed as zero, accurately enough. And a water
source will have to be available in the area being terraformed anyway,
whether the end product is agriculture greenhouses, solar generation
greenhouses, or housing.

Besides, the waste heat associated with using electric heating
elements that can only apply heat to a considerable mass or area may
well compensate for the inefficiency, since waste heat is much less
from precise application of oxygen and hydrogen to areas of much
smaller mass.

now you are really screwed
http://rjnpages.tripod.com/defeat.htm

http://www.infernalpress.com/Columns/election.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00065.htm

And don't forget to vist
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=3e7b0647.306061257%40news.kc.sbcglobal.net&rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fq%3Dpyrex%2BAnd%2Bnow%2Bfor%2Bsomething%2Bcompletely%2Bdifferent%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26selm%3D3e7b0647.306061257%2540news.kc.sbcglobal.net%26rnum%3D1

feklar

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 7:42:51 PM8/29/03
to
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:16:06 GMT, nat...@austin.rr.com (Neal Atkins)
wrote:

>On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 23:02:14 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:
>
>>Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
>>alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
>>in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
>>of the concepts of the pyrex machine.
>
>Wow. A first. A top posting moron replies to his OWN POST! How
>kewl. Can you get your computer to jerk you off or are you waiting on
>a spontaneous emission?

No, I am one of the damned. Virtual reality computers and Heather
Locklear cartridges are still at least 30 or 40 years beyond the
current computer technology. At least there is some hope for future
generations.

Active8

unread,
Aug 29, 2003, 9:56:55 PM8/29/03
to
In article <3f4fdabd...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
> alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
> in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
> of the concepts of the pyrex machine.

i did. can't you read?

mike

feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 1:09:03 AM8/30/03
to

You did not. Repost your foolish attempt though so we can all be
certain.

Active8

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 3:11:22 AM8/30/03
to
In article <3f4fddee...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sun, 24 Aug 2003 02:49:15 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:
>
> >Read the infoZ in the links first, then comment. You will be changing
> >your mind about it.

not.


>
> Hydrogen is introduced through the cold side in the same channels as
> the granulated pyrex, and oxygen is introduced through the other half
> of the axle and is routed to the ends of each arm, where it is mixed
> with the hydrogen to generate the heat to melt the pyrex granules.

hi fecal:

hydrogen burns with low heat. where are your calorimetry/thermo numbers
to show that hydrogen flame will even melt sand?

i see others have picked you apart. why did you accuse a poster of
evading an issue when all he did was point out that glass is amorphous?

http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-
you_idiot.mp3
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/sounds/Arnold_Schwarzenegger-
what_the_hell_were_you_thinking.wav

that's not an evasion, jackass! you'd been babbling on about the crystal
matrix of glass.

what drug would make one dream that applying a cold material can slow a
cooling process?

i googled "shock tempering". there is no such thing. the info regarding
the metalurgical process of cryogenic tempering is quite clear that this
cooling is done veeerrrryyyy slowly. the info mentions the crystalline
nature of steel and carbon particles contained therein.

you can hardly use frozen bodies of water and the "one molecule at a
time" analogy since frozen water is crystaline and again, glass is
amorphous.

you say marble is a crude form of glass. i, also, say bs. go back to
high school and stay awake this time. we paid for it the first time, you
pay this time.

too bad this probably won't work. the potential applications could be
great. i even like the cube molding concept (though i suspect it's not
an original one), as well as those little bottles of K. but the basic
premise of your idea is so bad, it's not even wrong.

mike

feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 4:05:23 AM8/30/03
to
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 07:11:22 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>> Hydrogen is introduced through the cold side in the same channels as
>> the granulated pyrex, and oxygen is introduced through the other half
>> of the axle and is routed to the ends of each arm, where it is mixed
>> with the hydrogen to generate the heat to melt the pyrex granules.
>
>hi fecal:
>
>hydrogen burns with low heat. where are your calorimetry/thermo numbers
>to show that hydrogen flame will even melt sand?

I see you described your idiocy properly at least as "high fecal".

Ask NASA if a straight oxygen and hydrogen mix will melt high
temperature steel.

Why is it do you think that a rocket nozzle is cooled with liquid
hydrogen? Any liquid fueled rocket uses a cone inside a cone inside a
cone, usually made of high temperature high strength steel.

A tightly coiled loop of steel or copper pipe goes down between the
outer and middle cone and then back up between the middle an inner
cone, with the liquid hydrogen being mixed with the liquid oxygen as
it comes out of the pipe at the top of the inner cone.

The liquid hydrogen flowing through the coil carries away the heat
buildup that would otherwise melt the steel nozzle.

Let me guess, you are going to tell us next that high carbon steel
melts at a lower temperature than glass.

feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 4:19:11 AM8/30/03
to
CHAPTER 11
OXYGEN FUEL GAS WELDING PROCEDURES

http://www.machinist.org/army_welding/Ch11.htm

Siol

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 6:43:45 AM8/30/03
to
"feklar" <fek...@rock.com> wrote in message news:3f4fdabd...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net...

> Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
> alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
> in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
> of the concepts of the pyrex machine.

It so too ridiculous to waste time arguing. We're leaving you alone in hope that
you'll finally go away.

Siol


feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 10:41:07 AM8/30/03
to
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 12:43:45 +0200, "Siol" <nos...@spamsucks.com>
wrote:

Yeah well, it is better that it should be this way. The rest of us
staying don't need assessments done by idiots, or by some fool who is
afraid that I might be right, considering what it would mean.

feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 11:27:26 AM8/30/03
to
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 07:11:22 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>hydrogen burns with low heat. where are your calorimetry/thermo numbers
>to show that hydrogen flame will even melt sand?

See the other post for the ARMY gas welding / gas cutting page
numbers.

But why would actually need numbers in the first place? Never seen a
glassblower melt glass with a gas torch before I take it?

Straight MAPP gas burning in atmosphere will generate enough heat to
melt glass. (although it can cause glass to flare up in a manner
resembling a small explosion if anyone is thinking if trying it... if
you ever experiement with it wear long heavy sleeves and safety
glasses...)

So given that, is it actually necessary to puke numbers up when it is
blatantly obvious that hydrogen reacting with nearly pure oxygen will
produce considerably more heat (to say the least) than MAPP gas
burning in atmosphere?

Some things are pretty much self-evident, and this is one of them.
This is doubly true for anyone who would be familiar with the BTU
contents of the various fuel gases, as you tend to insinuate by using
the word "calorimetry". It wouldn't surprise me if O2 and CO produced
enough heat to get the job done, since the BTU content of CO isn't
that much less than natural gas, and natural gas burning in nearly
pure oxygen will obviously be hotter than MAPP gas burning in standard
atmosphere.

I'm just going by logical application of empirical data. When the
difference in scale is obvious, why would one would need the actual
numbers?

And as if it wouldn't be obvious that electric heating elements would
get the job done if by some freak chance O2 and H2 failed, since they
are being used now in high temperature applications?

It speaks to your intent that the statement "You would be better off
sticking to electric heating elements" would be missing from your
reply. Really amazing, how fast some people would rob themselves of
something that would only be of either vast or considerable personal
economic benefit to themselves, just so they can be an asshole, given
the slightest opportunity.

Let me guess, you have some plan, and the pyrex machine, from your
point of view, would tend to interfere with it? I hope this isn't
worshippers of the non existant "evil entity" left over from the
religious scams that went on in the 80s trying to cause trouble, or
foreigners trying to continue to fuck over the USA, I'll be really
disappointed if I find that out later, and I'll have to reincarnate
some serious lamer ass. Not your average lamer ass, serious lamer
ass.

But anyway, why would you say that MAPP gas combusting in standard
atmosphere will melt glass, but a high flow of hydrogen reacting in a
high flow of oxygen wouldn't? Or why O2 and H2 will melt steel, but
according to you wouldn't melt glass, even though glass normally melts
at a lower temperature than steel? Some new and as yet undiscovered
law of physics?

feklar

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 11:36:48 AM8/30/03
to
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:27:26 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

Maybe the point for you to be considering here is BTUs/second and flow
rates, and not the inherent total BTU content of a given quantity of a
given gas...

Active8

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 9:53:41 PM8/30/03
to
In article <3f5030ed...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 01:56:55 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In article <3f4fdabd...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
> >fek...@rock.com says...
> >> Interesting isn't it? No one in this thread, the other ones in
> >> alt.guitar.amps, or the original one in sci.eng.metallurgy referenced
> >> in the google link in my sig, has been able to successfully attack any
> >> of the concepts of the pyrex machine.
> >
> >i did. can't you read?
> >
> >mike
>
> You did not. Repost your foolish attempt though so we can all be
> certain.

just look for it.
>

Active8

unread,
Aug 30, 2003, 9:59:15 PM8/30/03
to
In article <3f50595b...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 07:11:22 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> Hydrogen is introduced through the cold side in the same channels as
> >> the granulated pyrex, and oxygen is introduced through the other half
> >> of the axle and is routed to the ends of each arm, where it is mixed
> >> with the hydrogen to generate the heat to melt the pyrex granules.
> >
> >hi fecal:
> >
> >hydrogen burns with low heat. where are your calorimetry/thermo numbers
> >to show that hydrogen flame will even melt sand?
>
> I see you described your idiocy properly at least as "high fecal".
>
> Ask NASA if a straight oxygen and hydrogen mix will melt high
> temperature steel.
>
> Why is it do you think that a rocket nozzle is cooled with liquid
> hydrogen? Any liquid fueled rocket uses a cone inside a cone inside a
> cone, usually made of high temperature high strength steel.
>
> A tightly coiled loop of steel or copper pipe goes down between the
> outer and middle cone and then back up between the middle an inner
> cone, with the liquid hydrogen being mixed with the liquid oxygen as
> it comes out of the pipe at the top of the inner cone.
>
> The liquid hydrogen flowing through the coil carries away the heat
> buildup that would otherwise melt the steel nozzle.

but how much fuel is burned to reach those temps? any fool can look at a
rocket engine cutaway and make assumptions. bet you can't explain how to
calculate the acceleration of a rocket due to fuel burn in the near
vacuum of space where there's no matter to resist the force of thrust.
if you don't supply the breif answer soon, i'll assume you had to
research it.

btw. i see nothing at the SERI site to support your solar greenhouse
claims.

feklar

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 12:30:29 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:59:15 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>but how much fuel is burned to reach those temps? any fool can look at a
>rocket engine cutaway and make assumptions. bet you can't explain how to
>calculate the acceleration of a rocket due to fuel burn in the near
>vacuum of space where there's no matter to resist the force of thrust.
>if you don't supply the breif answer soon, i'll assume you had to
>research it.

I presume it has something to do wth the mass of the gases multiplied
by some partial component of the energy of the reaction modified by a
3 dimensional equation that describes the geometery of the nozzle.

I'm an inventor, not a rocket scientist. What relevance does rocket
thrust have to the original subject matter?

>btw. i see nothing at the SERI site to support your solar greenhouse
>claims.

Go the othe Dpeartment of Energy web site. You won't see anything
there either regarding Jimmy Carter's tax break program from the 80s
where you could write solar power or insulation adittions to your
house off of your taxes. You won't find anything regarding the
biomass sea farm research project either, there, at SERI, or at
Sandia. It take it that because of this, we can all now safely assume
there never was a biomass research project, or tax write offs for
energy improvements. There's nothing at www.whitehouse.gov about the
Bay of Pigs invasion either, even though the President at the time did
order it.

Search the web for "power tower" sometime, a Sandia/SERI project that
uses solar reflectors to attain a temperature high enough to melt
steel. Or, alternatively, go to Dallas, Texas, and sit inside your
car on a hot summer day for a few minutes with all the windows rolled
up. When you finally figure out why you can't sit in it without the
car running and the air conditioner going full blast, you will have
gained a personal appreciation for the heat involved in a solar
greenhouse.

Did you actually go to SERI up there in Golden and go through their
library like I did? If you try it sometime, tell Steve Ruben and Bim
Gupta I said "long time no see" when you get up there.

I still have my stage 2 assessment from the Department of Energy for
my own submission to the NBS Energy Related Inventions program
entitled "Solar Power Plant Abstract, Large Scale Production" from
1988. This was handled through Representative Pat Schroeder's office
in Denver, Colorado and directly through SERI. MOst submission to
this program never make it past stage 1 assessment. Stage 3
assessment is the funding and prototyping.

The invention was declined for third stage assessment. The reasons
given were twofold. One, there was a fatal flaw in that no heat
storage conversoin medium or mass was being used, because at the time
I had been taking the fool approach to thinking water cold be heated
directly by sunlight. This was easily remedied by using some type of
black colored conversion medium to convert the radiant energy into
convective energy.

The assessment acknowledged this, and said that while the minor flaws
in the design could be fixed, the concept in general would basically
be an economic impossibility.

If you want to credit me with being the sole inventor of the solar
greenhouse concept, well far be it for me to argue with you.

The pyrex machine removes the economic drawbacks from the concept.
NBS was right, it would have been hideously expensive to implement the
solar concept on any appreciable scale using any available
construction method of the time. Its too bad I didn't invent the
pyrex machine first, and then the solar greenhouse...

I still have all the paperwork here but I'm not going through the
hassle of digging through a mountain of shite to locate it for some
unknown internet troll. If you are actually somebody having something
relevant to do with something, get a copy of the abstract and the
assessment from the Department of Energy / National Bureau of
Standards Energy Related Inventions Program in D.C. using my name,
Robert Nelson, for the records search. Its a public record, I would
think that anyone could access it.

But you won't find it on their web site, just so you know...

Might be easier just to ask PEMEX...

feklar

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 12:34:01 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 04:30:29 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>Go the othe Dpeartment of Energy web site. You won't see anything
>there either regarding Jimmy Carter's tax break program from the 80s
>where you could write solar power or insulation adittions to your
>house off of your taxes. You won't find anything regarding the
>biomass sea farm research project either, there, at SERI, or at
>Sandia. It take it that because of this, we can all now safely assume
>there never was a biomass research project, or tax write offs for
>energy improvements. There's nothing at www.whitehouse.gov about the
>Bay of Pigs invasion either, even though the President at the time did
>order it.

Hey there's nothing at whitehouse.gov about World War II. Damn, and
until now I had thought the Holocaust really did happen, and people
saying it didn't were just bullshitting.

Neal Atkins

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 12:40:15 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 04:30:29 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>I'm an inventor, not a rocket scientist.

No. You are no "inventor". You are a jerk off. Otherwise post some
of your "trillions of dollars" worth of "inventions".

Active8

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 1:29:23 AM8/31/03
to
In article <3f517a2c...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 04:30:29 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:
>
> >Go the othe Dpeartment of Energy web site. You won't see anything
> >there either regarding Jimmy Carter's tax break program from the 80s
> >where you could write solar power or insulation adittions to your
> >house off of your taxes. You won't find anything regarding the
> >biomass sea farm research project either, there, at SERI, or at
> >Sandia. It take it that because of this, we can all now safely assume
> >there never was a biomass research project, or tax write offs for
> >energy improvements. There's nothing at www.whitehouse.gov about the
> >Bay of Pigs invasion either, even though the President at the time did
> >order it.
>
> Hey there's nothing at whitehouse.gov about World War II. Damn, and
> until now I had thought the Holocaust really did happen, and people
> saying it didn't were just bullshitting.

there's a clue as to whom i'm referring to when i bring up fred, the
psuedoscientist i worked for.

Active8

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 1:33:37 AM8/31/03
to
In article <3f517bf7...@news-server.austin.rr.com>,
nat...@austin.rr.com says...
that's what i'm talking about. no drawings, no numbers. abstract
descriptions only. there's a link on his site to a Wall Street Journal
article. i thought it would take me to an actual article. nope. it was a
link to another one of his pages. within the first couple of paras the
word "Illuminati" came up. he says my rocket question isn't relevant.
how is the illuminatti relevant to a WSJ article that was supposed to
support whatever he was claiming when he supplied the link.

brs,
mike

feklar

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 4:17:30 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 05:33:37 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>that's what i'm talking about. no drawings, no numbers. abstract
>descriptions only. there's a link on his site to a Wall Street Journal
>article. i thought it would take me to an actual article. nope. it was a
>link to another one of his pages. within the first couple of paras the
>word "Illuminati" came up. he says my rocket question isn't relevant.
>how is the illuminatti relevant to a WSJ article that was supposed to
>support whatever he was claiming when he supplied the link.

Except for typing it this very second, I have never written or typed
the word Illuminati.

feklar

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 4:21:50 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 04:40:15 GMT, nat...@austin.rr.com (Neal Atkins)
wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 04:30:29 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

OK try this one. This one reopens thousands of closed down oil wells
in Texas and Oklahoma and elsewhere.
---------------------------------

How to Reduce Oil Pumping costs by 40 to 80 percent, and make
cost-effective application of the advanced oil recovery technique of
steam injection possible
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modified 9/11/2001: Extensive additions: added pump construction
details, computer control system details, and modified the storage
construction details.
Modified 11/7/2001: Added basic non-metal boiler construction
description and a note regarding use in submersible pumps.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Currently, oil wells use one of three methods of pumping crude oil.
These are electric, natural gas, and oil fueled pumps which are fueled
directly from the well. (This ignores advanced recovery techniques
such as brine pumping, but the improvement works for those techniques
as well). The latter method is not in widespread use because of
government pollution regulations, fuel inefficiency, and high
maintenance costs and requirements.
The modification is an upgrade to use a low cost computer controlled
steam powered pump, powered by electricity or natural gas or other
means, augmented with passive solar power.

The concept of passive solar power is a proven technology, gone into
in vast detail in the book "Passive Solar Design". This invention is
not patentable, because it is based on a steam pump, the patent on
which expired more than a century ago, and passive solar research done
by the U.S. Department of Energy and Solar Energy Research Institute,
which falls into the public domain is is therefore not patentable.
That this is so is a benefit, not a detriment.

Let's say that all current oil well pumps were converted to steam
pumps, where natural gas or electricity heated water to steam to drive
the pump. This would actually be a slight to moderate improvement over
existing methods, in and of itself, in terms of efficiency, because
the Stirling cycle engine (steam engine / steam pump) is the most
efficient means known to convert heat into mechanical energy.

But this small efficiency improvement is not the heart of the proposed
modification.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The basic concept of the improvement is to use fuel or electricity to
raise solar heated water temperature at 160 to 200 degrees up to 212
degrees (the temperature of steam) or more, instead of using it to
heat water from 70 to 100 degrees to 212 degrees.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After the steam drives the pump, the heat of the steam is converted
into mechanical energy, and the temperature of the steam falls from
212 degrees to 80 to 100 degrees in the process.

Normally, to just use fuel to bring the water temperature back to
boiling is to raise the water temperature from 90 degrees back to 212
degrees, a temperature increase requirement of 122 degrees.

This improvement uses a passive solar heat generation and storage
layout to use solar heat to raise the water temperature from the 90
degree condenser temperature up to 180 degrees. Then, fuel or
electricity only needs to be used to raise the temperature from 180 to
212 degrees, a temperature increase requirement of only 32 degrees.

Do the math: use fuel to increase water temperature 32 degrees, or use
fuel to increase the water temperature 122 degrees. This works out to
a savings of about 1/4 as much energy as it would take to raise the
water temperature 122 degrees. At the lower latitudes of Texas,
Oklahoma, and California, it works out closer to 1/5 as much energy.

I've been around in Texas and Oklahoma, and I never witnessed any
passive solar installations in operation. I rode a bicycle through the
Oklahoma countryside over 50 miles, saw hundreds of oil pumps, but no
solar.

The solar and steam technologies are proven, but have never been
applied to this type of application. It gives US domestic oil
producers a competitive advantage, because it makes transportation
costs more of an issue in the total price of fuel. Arabs have to ship
crude oil thousands of miles, domestic producers only hundreds of
miles.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boiler construction:
Without going into too many details, a boiler can be constructed that
contains no exposed metal for about $300 for a simple efficiency
improvement setup, or $1500 for a high capacity boiler for both pump
and steam injection steam supplies.

The boiler would be made of fairly thick rebar reinforced concrete.
Two hanging rack supports would be cast into the concrete by placing
them into the rebar array before the concrete is poured. After the
concrete cures, the interior of the concrete tank is sprayed with
fiberglass.

The rack would be made of two high strength steel bars. The bars would
be placed inside high temperature plastic pipe, and the empty space
filled with sand to allow for heat expansion and contraction. The
plastic pipe simply insulates the steel from contact with the water.

This rack, consisting of these two support bars and possibly linked
with plastic encased crossmembers, would hold an array of electric
heating elements.

The construction of the heating elements is similar to the support
racks. Electric heating filament, similar to those found in certain
electric heaters and toasters, are run inside of high temperature
black pigmented plastic pipes, and black tar sand is used to fill the
empty space inside the pipes. The resistance and thickness of the
filaments are designed to produce a working temperature range of 250
to 300 degrees Fahrenheit.

The heating elements are secured at the ends with springs which are
connected to heat resistant anchors at the ends of the pipe.
Components of these types that can withstand the operating temperature
are readily available. These pipes are sealed at the ends, and the
insulted wire for the power supply are attached with fused multiply
flanged seals.

The heating element pipes are then hung from the support racks. At the
bottom level of the tank, the heating pipes are arranged in triads.
This way, the inlet water from the solar preheat tanks can be routed
into the tank through an inlet pipe, and this inlet pipe can be
threaded between the triads, so that there is maximum heat
concentration directly incident upon the inlet water before it exits
the inlet pipe and enters the tank. After the pipe passes between a
triad of heating pipe, the pipe is routed back 180 degrees to flow
back through the next triad in the tank bottom.

The water inlet and the steam outlets pass through a triple flanged
seal in the tank wall. The seals are chosen for a greater heat
expansion coefficient than the pipe or the concrete, coated with high
temperature grease, and then placed onto the rebar array before the
concrete is poured. The inlet and outlet pipes and the support pipes
should be grooved, and the seals should be directly cast onto the
pipes.

During operation the pressure will flatten the flanges away from the
pressure, forcing the grease to seal any small deficiencies in the
contact between the concrete and the seal. This pressure against the
other side of the flange (closer to the exterior of the tank) will
keep the grease from being forced out of the seal. Three flanges
means that there will be no possibility of loss of steam pressure
through these seals.

The top of the tank is formed out of very thick rebar reinforced
concrete coated with fiberglass. A series of male / female concentric
mating grooves between the tank lid and the top of the side of the
tank are grooved into the lid and the top of the sides of the tank. A
flexible rubber seal coated with high temperature grease between the
mating surfaces will prevent any loss of pressure through the seal,
and the weight of the lid should be enough to contain the pressure if
the lid is made thick and heavy enough.

This type of design provides additional failsafe against valve or
computer control failure, because if the pressure ever rises very far
above design specifications, the excess pressure will raise the let
and the excess pressure will safely escape. The lid would be lifted
slightly, not blown off, and the excess pressure would equalize
itself.

Details beyond this need not be given regarding the boiler
construction past this basic concept. It is widely known that
appropriate sealing materials exist, and that this type of
construction can easily withstand the steam pressure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pump construction:
I should be able to build a computer controlled steam pump for a
medium sized capacity oil well for less than $1000. For the largest
wells, this cost should not rise to more than $1500. This would
include the steam pump, the computer controls, and all the valves,
sensors, and wiring.

The pump body would be sand casted from high temperature resin or
plastic, as would the pistons, valves, and rods. Steel corrodes, and
requires the use of anti-corrosion agents and a complicated water
quality and chemical composition monitoring system, where this
approach needs no such additives.

My approach would be to find the total horsepower requirement for the
pump, calculate the required piston diameter and stroke, then go to
the catalog and look up teflon piston rings for the next largest size
piston, and design the piston to use this ring. The same procedure
would be followed for the teflon valve seals, using steam flow
requirements for determining the valve sizes.

The rest of the pump design is rather obvious, except that the body
would be designed around the piston diameter, and cast in two halves,
one having a male boss extruded around the perimeter of the mating
surface, and the other half would have a female channel, so a sealing
gasket can be placed into the mating channel and the two halves can be
mated together and then clamped down to form an airtight seal.

High capacity submersible oil pumps can be upgraded with the
efficiency improvement by raising the pump, removing the power drive
and replacing it with a cable drive, and then driving the pump from
the surface via the drive cable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If by some bizarre chance the Texas or Oklahoma governments would be
moronic enough to want to screw themselves economically and require a
boiler license to operate the steam pump, there are two solutions. One
would be to give the computer program the capability to pass the steam
boiler license test. The other would be to simply bulldoze out a
trench, line it with cinder block, and bury the steam pump, so even if
it did blow up, it would be impossible for anyone to be injured or
killed in the blast.
If I, or someone else who was actually competent, wrote the control
program and designed the sensor and control systems, the device could
be made entirely fail-safe. My accomplishment with the railroad safety
invention, another computer controlled fail-safe system, proves that
this can be achieved. There has not been a single instance of a head
on train collision in the United States since 1987, when the railroads
installed the system. I did not write that control program, or it
would have also prevented rear end collisions. However, I have the
assembly, C, and C++ programming experience and background to be
capable of writing either it, or the control program for the steam
pump.

A number of different companies offer sensors and fluid / steam
control valves that are certified for use in nuclear power plants at a
very reasonable price.

I would install a system comparable to that of the space shuttle
control computer bank, except that my control system would only use
three computers rather than five, since human life would never be put
at risk. A simple safety interlock on the entryway into the
underground pump that prevents entry if the steam pressure exceeds a
given value, and redundant pressure sensors and indicators that can be
examined before entry, combined with posted warnings and instructions,
can easily avoid any possibility of this danger.

The three computer boards (currently as of this writing) would be off
the shelf Pentium motherboards, with a minimum amount of RAM, running
a control program in either freeDOS or pure assembly language. These
three boards can currently be obtained in the proper configuration for
less than $150, or less than $100 when bought in quantities of 50 or
more. This price usually holds true for off the shelf low end or
borderline obsolete motherboard / CPU combo boards.

The actual control program is not complicated, and could be written in
30 days. All the program has to do is read the serial ports for the
sensor values and make adjustments to the control valves and servos in
response. The valves and sensors would take the form of three
independent systems, each capable of overriding the others in order to
lower boiler temperature or control steam pressure or distribution
pathways. Each would monitor the democratic votes cast by the other
two, and if an error condition arises in one of the boards, the other
two will reinitialize and reboot the malfunctioning unit. Error logs
would be kept, and upon recognition of the existence of a failure
pattern, the computer would call via telephone or wireless for human
assistance, to repair the faulty unit. If the computers failed to
check in once (or more) a day with the reporting station, it would
automatically be recognized as an error condition and a maintenance
check would be made, fist via remote means, then physically if
required.

The computer control systems will have the capacity to completely
disable the steam system. Each board sends out control signals to
control valves and servos that automatically shut down the boiler and
release the pressure if the correct encoding of signals is not
received on a regular basis.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: the pyrex extrusion machine supersedes the heat storage method
described below, although the one described below would work, and be
cost effective. Pyrex water storage tanks would be even more cost
effective.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Let's say we are in Texas. The sun heats stored water to an annual
average (including after dark heat storage) of 180 degrees at the
latitude of Texas. Of course, one needs to have a sufficient number of
black plastic 55 gallon drums or suitable substitute heat storage
medium materials to adequately meet the supply and storage
requirements, so that at night in winter, the heat will not fall below
150 to 160 degrees by the time the sun rises again.
That this can be done is more than obvious. Read the book "Passive
Solar Design". There is no theory there, only known and proven fact.
Don't be frightened off by the sheer size of this book. The entire
second half is comprised of solar tables for each latitude and
longitude, and of the first half, the book is printed in large type,
and contains vast numbers of diagrams and photographs, many of which
are full page or two page. The concepts presented in this book are
neither complicated or technical: it was written for the layman.

One uses the solar constant tables form that book, and with their
calculated water flow requirements for the pump's capacity in CFM,
calculates the number of hot water storage 55 gallon drums required.

Then one bulldozes out an appropriately sized area, creating a 5 foot
high hill that runs east and west. The south half of the hill is then
bulldozed out, and styrofoam panels installed on the back (south
facing, east-west running) wall and floor. Then one installs the 55
gallon plastic drums and plastic pipe to connect them.

Then one builds a sparse frame out of wood or steel or aluminum, and
covers the entire area with a clear sheet plastic greenhouse. One
installs one more sheet plastic greenhouse around the first one,
leaving a little air space between the two, and then installs a hard
plastic or glass greenhouse around that, to create a triple insulated
greenhouse.

A cheaper method would be to use two layers of clear plastic sheeting
two form the inner two levels of greenhouse, and use a wall
constructed of standard glass privacy brick as the outer layer.
Because this type of glass has lesser optical qualities, slightly more
total surface area would be required, say perhaps an additional 5 to
10 storage drums, but this would be more than offset by the cost
savings of using the privacy block, and the privacy clock is much more
resistant to passing storms and hail.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For a steam pump that has a 1000 gallon per hour pumping capacity, the
pump itself would cost about $2000. The greenhouse and 55 gallon drums
would cost about $6000 (less than half of this if the well owner does
the construction).
A fail-safe computer monitoring system for the steam pump, that has
the capacity to regulate the system and call for human assistance when
required, about $200 to $5000, depending on where one acquires it. A
high school senior can build that for $200. IBM would likely want
$5000.

Say the well owner does their own construction. This amounts to a
total of about $5000 for the entire installation, assuming that the
Oklahoma or Texas petroleum organizations have published construction
plans and written the computer control program.

This would easily pay for itself in a single year. Notice, that's 1000
gallons per hour, not 1000 gallons per day.

So, unless the Arabs have taken over all the banks, there is
absolutely no problem obtaining the financing to reopen a closed down
oil well. The vast majority of US oil wells that have closed (by the
thousands) have closed simply because it costs more to pump the oil
than the oil can be sold for. Costing $40 to pump $31.50 worth of oil
is a recent example that caused operating oil wells to be shut down.
(from NBC News).

Do the math above. Instead of $40, it would cost $8 to $10 to pump
that 31.50 worth of oil, after this improvement is installed.

In a worst case scenario, where Texas saw cloud cover for 365 out of
365 days in a given year, with it raining 30 percent of the time, the
average water temperature would never fall below 140 degrees, which
means that no profit was being made at all the first year, because all
the profit had gone to pay the financing on the modification.

After another six months to a year of this total cloud cover, the
financing would have been paid, and the well would begin turning a
profit.

There is no doubt of this. The technology involved is proven, but no
one seems to have noticed its potential in the field of pumping oil
until now.

Neal Atkins

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 9:25:20 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 08:21:50 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>>>I'm an inventor, not a rocket scientist.
>>
>>No. You are no "inventor". You are a jerk off. Otherwise post some
>>of your "trillions of dollars" worth of "inventions".
>
>OK try this one. This one reopens thousands of closed down oil wells
>in Texas and Oklahoma and elsewhere.

Yah, jerk-off. A "real" proposal. Uh-huh. Don't you have a design
for a perpetual motion machine also?

Where is your steam powered guitar amp?

feklar

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 11:31:34 AM8/31/03
to
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 13:25:20 GMT, nat...@austin.rr.com (Neal Atkins)
wrote:

>>OK try this one. This one reopens thousands of closed down oil wells


>>in Texas and Oklahoma and elsewhere.
>
>Yah, jerk-off. A "real" proposal. Uh-huh. Don't you have a design
>for a perpetual motion machine also?
>
>Where is your steam powered guitar amp?

What a retard. You wouldn't be able to understand how a coffepot
works.

RonSonic

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 5:09:19 PM8/31/03
to
On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 08:05:23 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 07:11:22 GMT, Active8
><mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>>> Hydrogen is introduced through the cold side in the same channels as
>>> the granulated pyrex, and oxygen is introduced through the other half
>>> of the axle and is routed to the ends of each arm, where it is mixed
>>> with the hydrogen to generate the heat to melt the pyrex granules.
>>
>>hi fecal:
>>
>>hydrogen burns with low heat. where are your calorimetry/thermo numbers
>>to show that hydrogen flame will even melt sand?
>
>I see you described your idiocy properly at least as "high fecal".
>
>Ask NASA if a straight oxygen and hydrogen mix will melt high
>temperature steel.
>
>Why is it do you think that a rocket nozzle is cooled with liquid
>hydrogen? Any liquid fueled rocket uses a cone inside a cone inside a
>cone, usually made of high temperature high strength steel.
>
>A tightly coiled loop of steel or copper pipe goes down between the
>outer and middle cone and then back up between the middle an inner
>cone, with the liquid hydrogen being mixed with the liquid oxygen as
>it comes out of the pipe at the top of the inner cone.
>
>The liquid hydrogen flowing through the coil carries away the heat
>buildup that would otherwise melt the steel nozzle.
>
>Let me guess, you are going to tell us next that high carbon steel
>melts at a lower temperature than glass.

It does.....

Ron

Active8

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 10:50:58 PM8/31/03
to
In article <3f517796...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 01:59:15 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >but how much fuel is burned to reach those temps? any fool can look at a
> >rocket engine cutaway and make assumptions. bet you can't explain how to
> >calculate the acceleration of a rocket due to fuel burn in the near
> >vacuum of space where there's no matter to resist the force of thrust.
> >if you don't supply the breif answer soon, i'll assume you had to
> >research it.
>
> I presume it has something to do wth the mass of the gases multiplied
> by some partial component of the energy of the reaction modified by a
> 3 dimensional equation that describes the geometery of the nozzle.


>
> I'm an inventor, not a rocket scientist. What relevance does rocket
> thrust have to the original subject matter?

checking to see if you have any knowlege of basic physics. i think you
don't. like fred, you talk high falutin' words and can't work out a
simple problem. the answer is a simple conservation of momentum problem.
your abstract terminology just gave you away.

the one on your site where they told you to get stuffed?


>
> The invention was declined for third stage assessment. The reasons
> given were twofold. One, there was a fatal flaw in that no heat
> storage conversoin medium or mass was being used, because at the time
> I had been taking the fool approach to thinking water cold be heated
> directly by sunlight. This was easily remedied by using some type of
> black colored conversion medium to convert the radiant energy into
> convective energy.

don't recall *those* reasons. the letter i read mentioned that they had
already conducted research on the idea prior to your submission and
stated the reason the idea was scrapped.


>
> The assessment acknowledged this, and said that while the minor flaws
> in the design could be fixed, the concept in general would basically
> be an economic impossibility.
>
> If you want to credit me with being the sole inventor of the solar
> greenhouse concept, well far be it for me to argue with you.

i wasn't about to . you claimed that your idea was in part based on
research conducted at SERI. i figured it would be on the web rather than
buried in their library. i figured they'd have some hard data, something
you refuse to provide.

i'm well aware of the sun's potential. it's the whole system on which
you would do the calculations if you wanted to convince anyone you have
a valid idea.

melt some pyrex and throw some really cold pyrex on it and see what
happens. just because you can make ice by spraying cold water and snow
on a cold wall, you can't make an enormous leap of illogic and claim
that it's stronger or more fracture resistant than ice made the usual
way.


>
> The pyrex machine removes the economic drawbacks from the concept.

that's what i would hope could be done. fast pyrex. i think you *could*
find a way to extrude it and leave it behind the machine to cool slowly,
but spraying cold pyrex on molten ain't the way.

> NBS was right, it would have been hideously expensive to implement the
> solar concept on any appreciable scale using any available
> construction method of the time. Its too bad I didn't invent the
> pyrex machine first, and then the solar greenhouse...
>
> I still have all the paperwork here but I'm not going through the
> hassle of digging through a mountain of shite to locate it for some
> unknown internet troll.

fuck off. you're trying to convince people you have a valid idea and
don't have the time to dig up the info. you obviously can't comprende
simple english judging by the way you infer that i am a troll, dickhead.
if you could read, you'd have seen that i hope you shit does work. you
just can't convince me that throwing "frozen" (dumbass - ALL solids are
frozen) or very cold pyrex at hot pyrex will slow the cooling process.

> If you are actually somebody having something
> relevant to do with something, get a copy of the abstract and the
> assessment from the Department of Energy / National Bureau of
> Standards Energy Related Inventions Program in D.C. using my name,
> Robert Nelson, for the records search. Its a public record, I would
> think that anyone could access it.

last assessment i read from DOE concerning you basically said, "fuck
off, rob". it's on your site.

if the only people you want to talk to are "relevant" ones, why are you
blathering on about your idea on USENET?

Active8

unread,
Aug 31, 2003, 11:43:11 PM8/31/03
to
In article <3f51ae84...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 05:33:37 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >that's what i'm talking about. no drawings, no numbers. abstract
> >descriptions only. there's a link on his site to a Wall Street Journal
> >article. i thought it would take me to an actual article. nope. it was a
> >link to another one of his pages. within the first couple of paras the
> >word "Illuminati" came up. he says my rocket question isn't relevant.
> >how is the illuminatti relevant to a WSJ article that was supposed to
> >support whatever he was claiming when he supplied the link.
>
> Except for typing it this very second, I have never written or typed
> the word Illuminati.

maybe not. but when i used the links you supplied, i found a link to a
Wall Street Journal article. that is, those words were the link. it was
not a a Wall Street Journal article and it did contain the "I" word.
when i go looking for legitamate references, i don't expect to find or
care to find conspiracy theory bs, true or otherwise. can't find the
link now. IIRC it was on a page with a grey bg, like those spiritual
servitude pages, maybe.

feklar

unread,
Sep 1, 2003, 12:13:13 AM9/1/03
to
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 03:43:11 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>In article <3f51ae84...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
>fek...@rock.com says...
>> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 05:33:37 GMT, Active8
>> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>>
>maybe not. but when i used the links you supplied, i found a link to a
>Wall Street Journal article. that is, those words were the link. it was
>not a a Wall Street Journal article and it did contain the "I" word.
>when i go looking for legitamate references, i don't expect to find or
>care to find conspiracy theory bs, true or otherwise. can't find the
>link now. IIRC it was on a page with a grey bg, like those spiritual
>servitude pages, maybe.

Well, give the name of the page so I can fix the bad link.

feklar

unread,
Sep 1, 2003, 1:01:58 AM9/1/03
to
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 02:50:58 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>> I still have my stage 2 assessment from the Department of Energy for
>> my own submission to the NBS Energy Related Inventions program
>> entitled "Solar Power Plant Abstract, Large Scale Production" from
>> 1988. This was handled through Representative Pat Schroeder's office
>> in Denver, Colorado and directly through SERI. MOst submission to
>> this program never make it past stage 1 assessment. Stage 3
>> assessment is the funding and prototyping.
>
>the one on your site where they told you to get stuffed?

rjnpages.tripod.com/geo.htm you mean. That is obviously the
geothermal power plant idea submitted to the DOE / NBS under the
Energy Related Inventions program in 1986, and has nothing to do with
the solar plant I submitted to the program in 1988. People can read
it and form their own opinion as to what might be up with that.

The geothermal plant idea was also submitted to Unocal and Phillips
petroleum in 1986. I moved and never submitted my new address to
Unocal, so I can't say what their opinion of it was, but W. Delmar
Johnson, one of the research heads at Phillips 66, was impressed
enough to write me a personal letter of recommendation.

If I find the lost wall wart for my scanner maybe I'll scan and post
it.

>> The invention was declined for third stage assessment. The reasons
>> given were twofold. One, there was a fatal flaw in that no heat
>> storage conversoin medium or mass was being used, because at the time
>> I had been taking the fool approach to thinking water cold be heated
>> directly by sunlight. This was easily remedied by using some type of
>> black colored conversion medium to convert the radiant energy into
>> convective energy.
>
>don't recall *those* reasons. the letter i read mentioned that they had
>already conducted research on the idea prior to your submission and
>stated the reason the idea was scrapped.

On the geothermal power plant idea from 1986, yes.

By your subterfuge I guess we can take it to mean you know you can't
successfully attack the pyrex machine or the solar power concepts.

>> The assessment acknowledged this, and said that while the minor flaws
>> in the design could be fixed, the concept in general would basically
>> be an economic impossibility.
>>
>> If you want to credit me with being the sole inventor of the solar
>> greenhouse concept, well far be it for me to argue with you.
>
>i wasn't about to . you claimed that your idea was in part based on
>research conducted at SERI. i figured it would be on the web rather than
>buried in their library. i figured they'd have some hard data, something
>you refuse to provide.

(He's starting to realize he has made a mistake here, you can tell by
his use of the subservient 'i' instead of 'I'...)

At the time it was assessed, it was deemed unworkable because of the
economics. Why would SERI post a glowing review of their
non-accomplishment with a technology deemed to be failed? The point
being made was that they assessed it, and said the concept itself was
valid enough once the minor flaws were repaired, that the minor flaws
could be repaired, but that the concept would still be too expensive
to implement.

In other words, you tried to assail the basic solar power generation
concept, but SERI itself says the basic concept is valid. Just too
expensive to build. Not punking out at the first sign of difficulty,
I decided to find a way to improve the economics, and the pyrex
machine is the result.

When I find the wall wart, I'll dig up the letter and scan it for you.


That, and the recommendation letter from Phillips, really need to be
on the next version of the CD-ROM containing the website that I
distribute anyway, so I may as well get off my ass and get it done.

And rewriting and removing irrelevant material, what a pain in the
ass.

I appreciate your inadvertantly pointing out to me that I already
possess a positive assessment of the solar concept from SERI, I had
forgotten I had it, and it will save a lot of having to be explaining
the solar concept and further complicating the issues, when I promote
the improved version of the pyrex machine concept to people whose
opinion matters and whose logic isn't so limited.

>i'm well aware of the sun's potential. it's the whole system on which
>you would do the calculations if you wanted to convince anyone you have
>a valid idea.

In 1988, SERI said it will work, what the fuck more could you want or
need than that? I say we place a wager. Obviously you will want to
give decent odds since you claim to be so certain that you are right
and I am wrong. I'll put my V-Amp 2 and my Quantum Terminator 20 SS
practice amp worth a total of $140, and you put up a 1972 HIWATT 50
watt stack once owned by Pete Townshend worth $4500. And the wager
will be, can I produce the letter from SERI and does it say what I
said it says? I say I can and it does. You can disagree. What do
you say?

>melt some pyrex and throw some really cold pyrex on it and see what
>happens. just because you can make ice by spraying cold water and snow
>on a cold wall, you can't make an enormous leap of illogic and claim
>that it's stronger or more fracture resistant than ice made the usual
>way.
>>
>> The pyrex machine removes the economic drawbacks from the concept.
>
>that's what i would hope could be done. fast pyrex. i think you *could*
>find a way to extrude it and leave it behind the machine to cool slowly,
>but spraying cold pyrex on molten ain't the way.

Actually, I need to change that. It could work with frozen pyrex
granules, with the right system to cope with condensation on the cold
granules.

But room or atmospheric temperature granules should get the job done
just fine. I have serious doubts that going to frozen granules would
provide any significant advantage over using room temperature
granules. I need to remove references to "frozen". That document is
years old, and has been hacked a few times. I need to rewrite it from
scratch. I have a bad habit of being lazy when it comes to writing,
and trying to recycle old material. It doesn't always get the job
done right. I don't might writing so much, but I really hate
re-writing shite I already wrote.

Look up "sputtering" sometime. The concept of the pyrex machine isn't
all that much different. Hell, it *would* be sputtering if only hot
were being sprayed.

I never claimed a panel wouldn't still be hot after it was extruded /
sprayed. It would still take a while to cool down, I'm not talking
about instant room temperature here. What I said was to have cooler
material expanding to counteract the molten pyrex contracting as it
cools, in order to make large panels without the danger of cracking
due to contraction. That is the only real intended purpose of using
non-molten granules, other than for altering the structure of how a
panel forms its matrix when it cools, and for being able to rapidly
produce panels.

Go back and read the post on glassblowers using marble molds if you
have doubt as to the integrity of the bonds between the molten and
non-molten pyrex.

>> NBS was right, it would have been hideously expensive to implement the
>> solar concept on any appreciable scale using any available
>> construction method of the time. Its too bad I didn't invent the
>> pyrex machine first, and then the solar greenhouse...
>>
>> I still have all the paperwork here but I'm not going through the
>> hassle of digging through a mountain of shite to locate it for some
>> unknown internet troll.
>
>fuck off. you're trying to convince people you have a valid idea and
>don't have the time to dig up the info. you obviously can't comprende
>simple english judging by the way you infer that i am a troll, dickhead.
>if you could read, you'd have seen that i hope you shit does work. you
>just can't convince me that throwing "frozen" (dumbass - ALL solids are
>frozen) or very cold pyrex at hot pyrex will slow the cooling process.

All I can tell you is that if you want empirical data, take two pans
of water. From one of the pans, pour half the water out into ice cube
trays and freeze it. When frozen, take the ice cubes out and dump
them back into the pan they came out of, and then put both pans into
the freezer. When frozen, compare the two.

You cry for empirical data, but that isn't the first time I told you
how to get it. If you had read the material in the links you have
have already seen the ice cube comparison. And you wonder why I would
assume you are trolling.

Since you want to bring up rocket science, if you see an oxygen and
hydrogen rocket being launched and flying off, what the fuck would be
the point of needing mathematical proof that a liquid fueled rocket
would be possible? If you can see it with your own eyes taking off
and flying away, then it obviously fucking works.

Same thing for the ice cube demonstration.

>> If you are actually somebody having something
>> relevant to do with something, get a copy of the abstract and the
>> assessment from the Department of Energy / National Bureau of
>> Standards Energy Related Inventions Program in D.C. using my name,
>> Robert Nelson, for the records search. Its a public record, I would
>> think that anyone could access it.
>
>last assessment i read from DOE concerning you basically said, "fuck
>off, rob". it's on your site.

Yes, something similar to that, for the geothermal power plant. On
the other hand, I got a personal letter of recommendation out of it
from Phillips.

>if the only people you want to talk to are "relevant" ones, why are you
>blathering on about your idea on USENET?

I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

Active8

unread,
Sep 1, 2003, 4:19:28 PM9/1/03
to
In article <3f52c6fc...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 03:43:11 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >In article <3f51ae84...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
> >fek...@rock.com says...
> >> On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 05:33:37 GMT, Active8
> >> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >maybe not. but when i used the links you supplied, i found a link to a
> >Wall Street Journal article. that is, those words were the link. it was
> >not a a Wall Street Journal article and it did contain the "I" word.
> >when i go looking for legitamate references, i don't expect to find or
> >care to find conspiracy theory bs, true or otherwise. can't find the
> >link now. IIRC it was on a page with a grey bg, like those spiritual
> >servitude pages, maybe.
>
> Well, give the name of the page so I can fix the bad link.

if you have a link to a news article on one of your pages, you should
know it. learn to read. i said i can't find it now. i can't even find
your spiritual servitude pages which is an indication of how bad your
site sucks. so find it yourself. i have little time to waste on your
pipe dreams.

feklar

unread,
Sep 1, 2003, 5:33:37 PM9/1/03
to
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 20:19:28 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

> i have little time to waste on your pipe dreams.

That will depend on whether you owe me or not.

Interesting, I was just telling someone the details of the version of
the machine that makes pyrex pipe last night. Sounds like a regular
omen, to me.

Replacing New York City's sewer system will cost 20 billion dollars.

Before 9-11, this was New York City's greatest financial crisis, most
of being left over from the days of the construction of the Empire
State Building, all of it needing to be replaced.

Replacing New York City's sewer system with pyrex pipe instead of cast
iron or steel pipe: also 20 billion dollars. Of course, it will only
need to be replaced once every 5000 years instead of once every 50
years.

For the dense and the slow, obviously, the outer pipe diameter will
have to be larger with pyrex pipe for the same internal diameter pipe
size as cast iron or steel. In an application like that, in terms of
structural strength, pyrex is weaker than steel or cast iron, but not
that much weaker. The pipe thickness needs to be a little larger to
compensate for the difference.

A steel or cast iron pipe with a 6 foot internal diameter might have a
6 foot 8 inch external diameter. A pyrex pipe with a 6 foot internal
diameter would need to be slightly thicker than a concrete pipe with a
6 foot internal diameter, probably about an 8 to 9 foot external
diameter.

I'll give you a clue as to the mechanics of the pipe making model or
version of the pyrex machine. The mechanics and the geometry are
based on something halfway similar to a brake cylinder hone. How much
the rest of you want to bet he can't figure it out unless I describe
it for him in considerable detail?

Yea go ahead and brag to your freinds about how mistaken I am, so it
can come back to haunt your ass later.

I wouldn't trade one of my pipe dreams for 80 billion of his.

Active8

unread,
Sep 1, 2003, 7:11:24 PM9/1/03
to

uh, excuse the language below, but you're proving to be such a moron, i
know of no other way to convey my opinion of you.

> >don't recall *those* reasons. the letter i read mentioned that they had
> >already conducted research on the idea prior to your submission and
> >stated the reason the idea was scrapped.
>
> On the geothermal power plant idea from 1986, yes.
>
> By your subterfuge I guess we can take it to mean you know you can't
> successfully attack the pyrex machine or the solar power concepts.

we? *no one* believes you.

that wasn't subterfuge. i'll tell you again. i've attacked your machine
on the grounds that you can't slow a cooling process by adding something
cold. you come back with bs about reposting my attack so everyone can
see it. fuck you. read the posts. it's there for everyone to see, but
you're too stoned to fucking comprende. you're a typical asshole who
would post a reply like that so those who didn't read the whole thread
in context would think you're right.


point #1:
yeah, you finally got around to talking about expanding pyrex
compensating for the contracting pyrex below. you weren't crystal clear
on this matter up to this point, though i suspected that's what you may
have been on about. i didn't want to put words in you mouth, so i
waited. it's taken a long time for your fucked up mind to finally make
the distinction.

>
> >> The assessment acknowledged this, and said that while the minor flaws
> >> in the design could be fixed, the concept in general would basically
> >> be an economic impossibility.
> >>
> >> If you want to credit me with being the sole inventor of the solar
> >> greenhouse concept, well far be it for me to argue with you.
> >
> >i wasn't about to . you claimed that your idea was in part based on
> >research conducted at SERI. i figured it would be on the web rather than
> >buried in their library. i figured they'd have some hard data, something
> >you refuse to provide.
>
> (He's starting to realize he has made a mistake here, you can tell by
> his use of the subservient 'i' instead of 'I'...)

you dipshit. i rarely capitalize. before teletubbies like you started
using inet, simple messages were sent back and forth with no regard to
capitalization. now that computers are cheap enough that every lamer and
his family can have one, lots of people are pretending that they stayed
awake in school and others are sending messages as if they were formal
business commos. for others, it's just natural for them to hit the shift
key when it's needed. I can do it either way. It doesn't matter to me.

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII... there. just so you know
you've done a good enough job convincing me that you're an idiot.



>
> At the time it was assessed, it was deemed unworkable because of the
> economics. Why would SERI post a glowing review of their
> non-accomplishment with a technology deemed to be failed? The point
> being made was that they assessed it, and said the concept itself was
> valid enough once the minor flaws were repaired, that the minor flaws
> could be repaired, but that the concept would still be too expensive
> to implement.
>
> In other words, you tried to assail the basic solar power generation
> concept, but SERI itself says the basic concept is valid. Just too
> expensive to build. Not punking out at the first sign of difficulty,
> I decided to find a way to improve the economics, and the pyrex
> machine is the result.

there was no SERI info to attack, shithead. it was the DOE letter i
referred to and you even commented on it. how can you forget so easily?
if you would just realize what the drugs are doing to your mind and stop
using them, there might be hope for you. or maybe you're just stupid.

BTW, did you say Amtrak used your radioactive paint / geiger counter
system? or just BN?


>
> When I find the wall wart, I'll dig up the letter and scan it for you.

wall warts are readily available. when i can't find one, i just dig up
another or go out and buy one.


>
>
> That, and the recommendation letter from Phillips, really need to be
> on the next version of the CD-ROM containing the website that I
> distribute anyway, so I may as well get off my ass and get it done.
>
> And rewriting and removing irrelevant material, what a pain in the
> ass.

>
> I appreciate your inadvertantly pointing out to me that I already
> possess a positive assessment of the solar concept from SERI, I had
> forgotten I had it, and it will save a lot of having to be explaining
> the solar concept and further complicating the issues, when I promote
> the improved version of the pyrex machine concept to people whose
> opinion matters and whose logic isn't so limited.

ah... we're back to another trait of the psuedoscientist. claiming
others aren't smart enough to understand.

i'm supposed to think that i'm stupid because i don't understand how
cold pyrex will slow the cooling process of molten pyrex. see point #1

>
> >i'm well aware of the sun's potential. it's the whole system on which
> >you would do the calculations if you wanted to convince anyone you have
> >a valid idea.
>
> In 1988, SERI said it will work, what the fuck more could you want or
> need than that? I say we place a wager. Obviously you will want to
> give decent odds since you claim to be so certain that you are right
> and I am wrong. I'll put my V-Amp 2 and my Quantum Terminator 20 SS
> practice amp worth a total of $140, and you put up a 1972 HIWATT 50
> watt stack once owned by Pete Townshend worth $4500. And the wager
> will be, can I produce the letter from SERI and does it say what I
> said it says? I say I can and it does. You can disagree. What do
> you say?

i say that i never said you *couldn't* produce a letter from SERI.

i NEVER said your solar power wouldn't work, either, cockbreath. i said
the only way to make a case is with facts and figures.


>
> >melt some pyrex and throw some really cold pyrex on it and see what
> >happens. just because you can make ice by spraying cold water and snow
> >on a cold wall, you can't make an enormous leap of illogic and claim
> >that it's stronger or more fracture resistant than ice made the usual
> >way.
> >>
> >> The pyrex machine removes the economic drawbacks from the concept.
> >
> >that's what i would hope could be done. fast pyrex. i think you *could*
> >find a way to extrude it and leave it behind the machine to cool slowly,
> >but spraying cold pyrex on molten ain't the way.
>
> Actually, I need to change that. It could work with frozen pyrex
> granules, with the right system to cope with condensation on the cold
> granules.

condensation of water vapor?


>
> But room or atmospheric temperature granules should get the job done
> just fine. I have serious doubts that going to frozen granules would
> provide any significant advantage over using room temperature
> granules. I need to remove references to "frozen". That document is
> years old, and has been hacked a few times. I need to rewrite it from
> scratch. I have a bad habit of being lazy when it comes to writing,
> and trying to recycle old material. It doesn't always get the job
> done right. I don't might writing so much, but I really hate
> re-writing shite I already wrote.

solution: don't write shit in the first place.


>
> Look up "sputtering" sometime. The concept of the pyrex machine isn't
> all that much different. Hell, it *would* be sputtering if only hot
> were being sprayed.

you might be talking about a metal deposition process, but so what?


>
> I never claimed a panel wouldn't still be hot after it was extruded /
> sprayed. It would still take a while to cool down, I'm not talking
> about instant room temperature here. What I said was to have cooler
> material expanding to counteract the molten pyrex contracting as it
> cools, in order to make large panels without the danger of cracking
> due to contraction. That is the only real intended purpose of using
> non-molten granules, other than for altering the structure of how a
> panel forms its matrix when it cools, and for being able to rapidly
> produce panels.

what matrix?

the molten pyrex will still contract regardless of the expansion of the
solid pyrex. you'll have the energy of each molecule of the molten being
reduced and the energy each molecule of the solid increasing.

and you're too stoned to realize that expansion (of the cold pyrex) is a
cooling process (you have to remove heat from hot stuff to raise the
energy of cooler stuff) which will remove heat from the molten pyrex
(causing it to contract) and cause it to cool faster than it would if
you used an insulator to keep the heat in.

are you trying to say that the cold, better yet, *solid* pyrex will act
as an insulator and slow the cooling process?

see point #1

if so, you'd have done better to just say that in the first place. but
then you're back to the original problem. cooling time. but then you
could leave the pyrex behind the machine to cool while it's spitting out
more panels.

uh, seems to me that pyrex beakers (what? no borax?) break quite easily
and yet those corningware plates don't. maybe clear corningware is the
ticket.


>
> Go back and read the post on glassblowers using marble molds if you
> have doubt as to the integrity of the bonds between the molten and
> non-molten pyrex.

i never attacked the bond integrity issue.

and where might i find that in all this bs? googling "marble" and
"glassblower" with "feklar" didn't return anything. perhaps if you take
notes from your site and organize your thoughts into an outline, you can
present a clear, concise treatment of your ideas. then you can stick in
refs to facts and figures. last thing an investor wants to do is have to
read through a disorganized jumble of words interspersed with foreign
conspiracy theory. concept, scope, theory, technical details, supporting
data, economic impact, ...

>
> >> NBS was right, it would have been hideously expensive to implement the
> >> solar concept on any appreciable scale using any available
> >> construction method of the time. Its too bad I didn't invent the
> >> pyrex machine first, and then the solar greenhouse...
> >>
> >> I still have all the paperwork here but I'm not going through the
> >> hassle of digging through a mountain of shite to locate it for some
> >> unknown internet troll.
> >
> >fuck off. you're trying to convince people you have a valid idea and
> >don't have the time to dig up the info. you obviously can't comprende
> >simple english judging by the way you infer that i am a troll, dickhead.
> >if you could read, you'd have seen that i hope you shit does work. you
> >just can't convince me that throwing "frozen" (dumbass - ALL solids are
> >frozen) or very cold pyrex at hot pyrex will slow the cooling process.
>
> All I can tell you is that if you want empirical data, take two pans
> of water. From one of the pans, pour half the water out into ice cube
> trays and freeze it. When frozen, take the ice cubes out and dump
> them back into the pan they came out of, and then put both pans into
> the freezer. When frozen, compare the two.

and that will prove what? should i then take the two blocks of ice to
the scrap yard and ask them to compare the crushing strength? just
because they come out the same, you're comparing apples to oranges,
perhaps. if i put the ice cubes in the water and one of them fractures
clean through, MAYBE the water will fill in the crack before it freezes.
and MAYBE the viscocity of the molten pyrex WILL NOT fill in the
fractures caused by the uneven expansion of the solid pyrex. don't
forget, the solid pyrex will absorb heat from the molten and cause it to
cool faster.

point #1 again.

see, i'm having trouble with this "compensation" thing. you said that if
pyrex is allowed to cool too rapidly, it will have weak spots prone to
fracture. how exactly will expanding solid pyrex "compensate" for a
[more rapidly than normal] cooling molten pyrex. now think this through
and try to explain it to someone who [like you] has never made pyrex.
start from the beginning and try to keep your thoughts flowing slower
than you type.

>
> You cry for empirical data, but that isn't the first time I told you
> how to get it.

you NEVER told me directly how to get it. i haven't seen you tell anyone
else, either.

> If you had read the material in the links you have
> have already seen the ice cube comparison.

a needle in a haystack.

> And you wonder why I would
> assume you are trolling.
>
> Since you want to bring up rocket science, if you see an oxygen and
> hydrogen rocket being launched and flying off, what the fuck would be
> the point of needing mathematical proof that a liquid fueled rocket
> would be possible? If you can see it with your own eyes taking off
> and flying away, then it obviously fucking works.
>
> Same thing for the ice cube demonstration.
>
> >> If you are actually somebody having something
> >> relevant to do with something, get a copy of the abstract and the
> >> assessment from the Department of Energy / National Bureau of
> >> Standards Energy Related Inventions Program in D.C. using my name,
> >> Robert Nelson, for the records search. Its a public record, I would
> >> think that anyone could access it.
> >
> >last assessment i read from DOE concerning you basically said, "fuck
> >off, rob". it's on your site.
>
> Yes, something similar to that, for the geothermal power plant. On
> the other hand, I got a personal letter of recommendation out of it
> from Phillips.

what did they recommend? that you kill yourself?


>
> >if the only people you want to talk to are "relevant" ones, why are you
> >blathering on about your idea on USENET?
>
> I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

here we go again. more bullshit. if you think i'm impressed with that
line, you're wrong. you're not dick marcinko or any of those other
writers who may have used that phrase.

in other words, why would i believe the answer to my question is top
secret? eh, wannabe?

feklar

unread,
Sep 2, 2003, 3:11:02 AM9/2/03
to
On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:11:24 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>we? *no one*

>yeah, you finally got around to talking about expanding pyrex
>compensating for the contracting pyrex below. you weren't crystal clear
>on this matter up to this point, though i suspected that's what you may
>have been on about. i didn't want to put words in you mouth, so i
>waited. it's taken a long time for your fucked up mind to finally make
>the distinction.

That is blatantly clear from the original description. What do yo
mean, finally?

>BTW, did you say Amtrak used your radioactive paint / geiger counter
>system? or just BN?

AMTRAK doesn't own or maintain any track other than the short lengths
at some of their terminals. They lease track use from the other
railroads. So the call isn't theirs to make. Whatever BN decided
upon, AMTRAK is using.

>> When I find the wall wart, I'll dig up the letter and scan it for you.
>
>wall warts are readily available. when i can't find one, i just dig up
>another or go out and buy one.

Yeah well I don't pay for something I don't need, when I already have
it lying around somewhere, unless it constitutes an emergency, which
this don't. You are a fool if you would go to Radio Shack and buy a
replacment wall wart for a scanner, since they charge about $15, and a
new scanner with better resolution than your old one can be bought on
eBay for $19.

You've seen some of my scanned images, so its obvious I have a
scanner. I'll get around to it. If you're too impatient then call or
write the DOE / NBS.

>i say that i never said you *couldn't* produce a letter from SERI.
>
>i NEVER said your solar power wouldn't work, either, cockbreath. i said
>the only way to make a case is with facts and figures.

>condensation of water vapor?

yes

>if so, you'd have done better to just say that in the first place. but

>then you're back to the original problem. cooling time. but then you
>could leave the pyrex behind the machine to cool while it's spitting out
>more panels.

If what you said about expansion and contraction that I deleted were
true, then the ice cube example would fail to produce a solid block of
ice.

And it isn't obvious from the housing panel construction example in
the original document that the panels needed at least a day to cool
down?

>i never attacked the bond integrity issue.

Attacking some suposed expansion / contraction incompatibility between
solid and molten pyrex is the same thing as attacking the bond
integrity issue.


>and where might i find that in all this bs? googling "marble" and
>"glassblower" with "feklar" didn't return anything.

I guess google isn't what it used to be. It was a recent post, so
maybe google didn't catch up with it yet.

> perhaps if you take
>notes from your site and organize your thoughts into an outline, you can
>present a clear, concise treatment of your ideas. then you can stick in
>refs to facts and figures. last thing an investor wants to do is have to
>read through a disorganized jumble of words interspersed with foreign
>conspiracy theory. concept, scope, theory, technical details, supporting
>data, economic impact, ...

I'll give it that

>> >fuck off

Where have you beeen lately? Fucking off is out, and fucking on is
in.

>. you're trying to convince people you have a valid idea and
>> >don't have the time to dig up the info.

I said I'd get around to it, don't have a cow, man.

>> >you
>> >just can't convince me that throwing "frozen" (dumbass - ALL solids are
>> >frozen)

Good point

>> > or very cold pyrex at hot pyrex will slow the cooling process.

I told you before, I don't know where you get this idea that I'm
trying to slow the cooling process. This will speed the cooling
process, not slow it. You lack the comprehension skills to figure
this obvious reality out from reading the original description? I'm
just curious as to how you could come to the conclusion that this
could somehow slow the cooling process, let alone how you could come
to the conclusion that I was somehow trying to communicate that this
would somehow slow the cooling process.

>and that will prove what? should i then take the two blocks of ice to
>the scrap yard and ask them to compare the crushing strength? just
>because they come out the same, you're comparing apples to oranges,

If I could invent a gentic engineering technique that allowed me to
produce two identical items that were both apples and oranges, I'd
apply for a patent.

> just
> because they come out the same, you're comparing apples to oranges,

This has to qualify for the USENET "best foolishness of the week"
award.

>perhaps. if i put the ice cubes in the water and one of them fractures
>clean through, MAYBE the water will fill in the crack before it freezes.
>and MAYBE the viscocity of the molten pyrex WILL NOT fill in the
>fractures caused by the uneven expansion of the solid pyrex. don't
>forget, the solid pyrex will absorb heat from the molten and cause it to
>cool faster.

"perhaps" you say. I take it the ice cube demonstration is too
difficult for your limited skills, maybe I can send a technician over
there to assist you, and then you can know rather than wonder. If the
cost of the water is too expensive for you, I can send a dollar or
something. What a deal, you get 35 free trays of ice that way. And
they charge a buck for five tray's worth at the convenience store...

>point #1 again.
>
>see, i'm having trouble with this "compensation" thing. you said that if
>pyrex is allowed to cool too rapidly, it will have weak spots prone to
>fracture. how exactly will expanding solid pyrex "compensate" for a
>[more rapidly than normal] cooling molten pyrex. now think this through
>and try to explain it to someone who [like you] has never made pyrex.

I could go into the details of microminiature fractures forming in the
molten pyrex as it cools an an accelerated rate, and how they are
prevented from expanding for anything more than a tiny distance
because of the random nature of the alignment of the internal matrix
planes, but why, when the ice cube demonstration shows that this does
not significantly affect the overall strength of the panel? Now if
the panel cooled normally, and these type of microminiature fractures
developed, they would eventually travel down the entire legth of the
cyrstal plane, and it would be a serious issue. But as it is, the
internal structure is too randomized and the planes can only expand
tiny distances. The strength of the bond between the (originally) hot
and cold pyrex is only reduced by the number of molecules involved in
the fractures. Compared with the total surface area of the positive
bonds, you are talking about a microscopic percentage of the total
number of molecules.

In fact, the presence of these microminiature fractures is likely to
actually make the panel more resitant to impact, because they will
make the panel less resonant.

>> You cry for empirical data, but that isn't the first time I told you
>> how to get it.
>
>you NEVER told me directly how to get it. i haven't seen you tell anyone
>else, either.

Yeah, well, once the technician gets there and shows you the ice cube
demonstration, you will have it.

>> If you had read the material in the links you have
>> have already seen the ice cube comparison.
>
>a needle in a haystack.

OK, that I will admit

Dude, you need to try some stress-relieving exercises or something...

feklar

unread,
Sep 2, 2003, 3:27:47 AM9/2/03
to
>> just
>> because they come out the same, you're comparing apples to oranges,
>
>This has to qualify for the USENET "best foolishness of the week"
>award.
>
>>perhaps. if i put the ice cubes in the water and one of them fractures
>>clean through, MAYBE the water will fill in the crack before it freezes.
>>and MAYBE the viscocity of the molten pyrex WILL NOT fill in the
>>fractures caused by the uneven expansion of the solid pyrex. don't
>>forget, the solid pyrex will absorb heat from the molten and cause it to
>>cool faster.
>
>"perhaps" you say. I take it the ice cube demonstration is too
>difficult for your limited skills, maybe I can send a technician over
>there to assist you, and then you can know rather than wonder. If the
>cost of the water is too expensive for you, I can send a dollar or
>something. What a deal, you get 35 free trays of ice that way. And
>they charge a buck for five tray's worth at the convenience store...

Ice and pyrex are just different temperature ranges. Thier solid form
properties otherwise are very similar. But if you want authenticity,
go to a glassblower and have him use molten glass and glass cubes.
But you can pay for that, I ain't going to.

Like I said.

Since you want to bring up rocket science, if you see an oxygen and
hydrogen rocket being launched and flying off, what the fuck would be
the point of needing mathematical proof that a liquid fueled rocket
would be possible? If you can see it with your own eyes taking off
and flying away, then it obviously fucking works.

Active8

unread,
Sep 2, 2003, 1:12:44 PM9/2/03
to
In article <3f53b72c...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

hey fecal:

you're such an asshole. i doubt anyone else is even still reading your
drivel. i only ask you to spell out the stuff that makes no sense at
all. naturally your rotating arms will spray pyrex on the inside of a
cylinder.

BTW extrusion of say a flat plastic sheet is done by forging the molten
mat'l through a nozzle. how you manage to figure that spraying layers is
"extrusion" is beyond me.


>
> Yea go ahead and brag to your freinds about how mistaken I am, so it
> can come back to haunt your ass later.

you really are that vain that you think i waste time talking about you.

Active8

unread,
Sep 2, 2003, 3:00:47 PM9/2/03
to
In article <3f543fa4...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:11:24 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >we? *no one*
>
> >yeah, you finally got around to talking about expanding pyrex
> >compensating for the contracting pyrex below. you weren't crystal clear
> >on this matter up to this point, though i suspected that's what you may
> >have been on about. i didn't want to put words in you mouth, so i
> >waited. it's taken a long time for your fucked up mind to finally make
> >the distinction.
>
> That is blatantly clear from the original description. What do yo
> mean, finally?

see below


>
> >BTW, did you say Amtrak used your radioactive paint / geiger counter
> >system? or just BN?
>
> AMTRAK doesn't own or maintain any track other than the short lengths
> at some of their terminals. They lease track use from the other
> railroads. So the call isn't theirs to make. Whatever BN decided
> upon, AMTRAK is using.

great! my cousin is a RR engineer who now does safety and accident
investigation. we'll see. i can also contact my uncle's father who works
for Amtrak. in good time, of course.


> Dude, you need to try some stress-relieving exercises or something...

this is "below"

no stress here. see, when i read your pyrex paper, IIRC, you started off
talking about how cracks would form if the cooling were accelerated.
then you started on about spraying cold pyrex at molten pyrex. that's
when the bs alarms went off. you said the expansion would "compensate"
for the contraction. so you went from the problem of having to let the
pyrex cool slowly to spraying nitrogen cold pyrex on it. then you stated
that the mix still needs to be determined meaning it hasn't been tried.
more bs alarms went off. so after i stated that cold pyrex won't slow
the cooling process numerous times, you *finally* cleared up what you
were talking about. as i said, i suspected this but didn't want to put
words in your mouth.

> If what you said about expansion and contraction that I deleted were
> true, then the ice cube example would fail to produce a solid block of
> ice.

i see that but i'm thinking that when you throw ice in water and freeze
it again, the part of the ice that fractured melts away before
refreezing and any deep cracks get filled in with water or they remain.
throw them in hot water and they may completely melt before refreezing.

ok, little grains of pyrex would completly melt and bigger ones would
possibly fracture clean through and not be filled in. maybe this is more
like making concrete or adding sand to epoxy. they spray concrete to
make domes. i hope you've read some of buckies stuff. you could spray
domes, pyramids, whatever.

now, if it takes a pyrex panel a day to cool, forgive me for having to
ask, how long does it take to cool the crap they currently make? i
thought your idea was supposed to hasten the manufacturing process. if
that's not true or not very significant, my mistake. if you're not
trying to rapidly cool the pyrex this makes more sense. recall, i never
bitched about the idea of a machine moving along the desert cranking out
pyrex. that would be great, assuming the thing really ends up being
powered by what it leaves behind.

stated differently, your machine will be a pyrex sprayer, not really an
extruder, or maybe i missed something in the word description and after
it's sprayed, it goes through an extrusion orifice which would fine tune
the dimensions.

> Attacking some suposed expansion / contraction incompatibility between
> solid and molten pyrex is the same thing as attacking the bond
> integrity issue.

no, the expansion/contraction issue i addressed... i was considering the
cracking.

> >> > or very cold pyrex at hot pyrex will slow the cooling process.
>
> I told you before, I don't know where you get this idea that I'm
> trying to slow the cooling process.

simple, you said that rapid cooling causes cracks. so naturally you'd
try to slow the cooling and not have to let it cool in some temperature
controlled place.

> This will speed the cooling
> process, not slow it.

which won't cause cracks? yeah, i get what you're saying *further*
below.

> You lack the comprehension skills to figure
> this obvious reality out from reading the original description? I'm
> just curious as to how you could come to the conclusion that this
> could somehow slow the cooling process,

i didn't come to that conclusion. i was fucking with you because i
thought you had arrived at that conclusion which led me to believe you
were using some serious hallucinogenics.

> let alone how you could come
> to the conclusion that I was somehow trying to communicate that this
> would somehow slow the cooling process.

you said "compensate". you're pages aren't available now for some reason
so i can't go there right now, but you did go from saying that fast
cooling is a problem to using "frozen" pyrex to compensate for this as
if it would slow the cooling. i happen to know a moron who would
probably think this. it doesn't take much of a stretch to imagine some
idiot on psychotropics imagining that expanding material could somehow
"compensate" for contracting material as if it would *slow* the cooling
when it's obvious that a cold material would *speed* the cooling. yes, i
did picture a burnout with a crack pipe and a guitar sitting around
slack jawed with a bunch of idiots hanging on his every word.

maybe your commo skills go to hell at times. i do it sometimes when i
post a question. i think my thoughts run faster than my typing and if
i'm not careful, i end up looking back at my post and wondering WTF.
that's why i suggested you slow down, explain things to those who don't
work in the pyrex biz, show some numbers, drawings, etc.

> "perhaps" you say. I take it the ice cube demonstration is too
> difficult for your limited skills,

no, the freezer's too full for even 2 small pans. also, i think i know
the outcome. when i say you're comparing apples to oranges, it's because
ice is crystaline, IIRC, and glass is amorphous. look it up if you have
to. glass *and* amorphous. maybe that doesn't matter. so all this
babbling about the internal matrix and crystal structure is another
issue that has bs alarms going off.

> I could go into the details of microminiature fractures forming in the
> molten pyrex as it cools an an accelerated rate, and how they are
> prevented from expanding for anything more than a tiny distance
> because of the random nature of the alignment of the internal matrix
> planes, but why, when the ice cube demonstration shows that this does
> not significantly affect the overall strength of the panel?

did you really test the strength of the ice?

> Now if
> the panel cooled normally, and these type of microminiature fractures
> developed, they would eventually travel down the entire legth of the
> cyrstal plane,

again, glass is amorphous. stop talking crystals.

> and it would be a serious issue. But as it is, the
> internal structure is too randomized and the planes can only expand
> tiny distances.

again we have a commo prob. your descriptions never mentioned how often
a layer is sprayed, though i recall a rapidly (?) rotating sprayer. but
you didn't mention anything to the effect that the first layer will
achieve some kind of equilibrium that causes the second layer to form
independantly. now taking plywood as an example where the grains run
perpendicular, i can see how a crack travelling down one thin layer
won't amount to squat unless subsequent layers develope cracks that
coincide with each other. so if we're getting close to being on the same
wavelength now, this is making more sense. sorry, i just had to give you
a chance to either make sense or talk shit.

> The strength of the bond between the (originally) hot
> and cold pyrex is only reduced by the number of molecules involved in
> the fractures.

great! now i know you realize there will be fractures. read your page. i
got the impression your process would eliminate cracks.

> Compared with the total surface area of the positive
> bonds, you are talking about a microscopic percentage of the total
> number of molecules.

all this should have been in the pyrex page. in an organized flow of
thoughts, not a brief description followed by "rob's fantastic house
building adventure", followed by more random thoughts.


>
> In fact, the presence of these microminiature fractures is likely to
> actually make the panel more resitant to impact, because they will
> make the panel less resonant.

like a stiffener would. eh, dunno. "likely" is another scary word - and
you attacked me for saying "perhaps". see, we're back to the problem
that this hasn't been tried. it's a lot to take in. i hope this works.
some may be afraid of this. it could conjure up sci-fi images of giant
machines achieving consciousness and taking over :-0

anyway, consider this. in this thread alone, myself excluded, everyone
has completely blown you off. now if you insist on inferring that i'm
stupid because your writings are disorganized and i can't take it all in
properly... if you call me a troll because i'm willing to debate, rather
than just blow you off... know this. i manage to travel quite often in
my business and a short hop to your house to shove a buffalo up your ass
is well within my limitations :-)

the commo prob... i'm currently working for a client as a consultant.
the client likes to ask questions without providing any organized
background info. i can't give examples because it would violate my non-
disclosure greement, but suffice it to say that you won't get shit
accomplished if you can't communicate efficiently. USENET's a bitch in
that respect. you can't say, "wait, back up. WTF?", without waiting.

mike

Active8

unread,
Sep 2, 2003, 3:23:28 PM9/2/03
to
In article <3f544560...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> >> just
> >> because they come out the same, you're comparing apples to oranges,
> >
> >This has to qualify for the USENET "best foolishness of the week"
> >award.
> >
> >>perhaps. if i put the ice cubes in the water and one of them fractures
> >>clean through, MAYBE the water will fill in the crack before it freezes.
> >>and MAYBE the viscocity of the molten pyrex WILL NOT fill in the
> >>fractures caused by the uneven expansion of the solid pyrex. don't
> >>forget, the solid pyrex will absorb heat from the molten and cause it to
> >>cool faster.
> >
> >"perhaps" you say. I take it the ice cube demonstration is too
> >difficult for your limited skills, maybe I can send a technician over
> >there to assist you, and then you can know rather than wonder. If the
> >cost of the water is too expensive for you, I can send a dollar or
> >something. What a deal, you get 35 free trays of ice that way. And
> >they charge a buck for five tray's worth at the convenience store...
>
> Ice and pyrex are just different temperature ranges. Thier solid form
> properties otherwise are very similar. But if you want authenticity,
> go to a glassblower and have him use molten glass and glass cubes.
> But you can pay for that, I ain't going to.

sorry, meant to deal with this in my last follow up. i think a glass
blower would probably be willing to talk about all this for free. a six
pack, maybe.

>
> Like I said.
>
> Since you want to bring up rocket science, if you see an oxygen and
> hydrogen rocket being launched and flying off, what the fuck would be
> the point of needing mathematical proof that a liquid fueled rocket
> would be possible? If you can see it with your own eyes taking off
> and flying away, then it obviously fucking works.

they did some calculations first. when i talk about numbers, an engineer
would first at least roughly determine how much energy it takes to build
and maintain the generator. then he'd figure out how many generators it
takes to supply enough energy to build that many generators. he wouldn't
go to his boss or investor and say, "it takes 'about' 20 generators to
power the generator maker 'assuming' each generator can supply 'about'
20kWH based on 'approximately' 50% efficiency extracted from 'some where
around' 100ft head of water."

i ain't gonna do your numbers for free, either. ain't gonna do 'em for
myself, either, since i'm not building a terraformer, you are. what the
fucks taking so long? :-) move yer/their ass/asses! :-) you ain't done
yet? :-) hire some meskins.

see, i might be able to see a rocket go up, but i haven't seen a pyrex
machine and ice water isn't pyrex. maybe the analogy is valid. dunno.
probably ain't far off. i try not to jump to conclusions like they did
when flies supposedly "mutated" into DDT resistant strains. that was bs.
before you start, again... all i did was point out that cold cools hot
to see if you'd clarify what you were on about.

mike

feklar

unread,
Sep 3, 2003, 2:32:27 AM9/3/03
to
On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:00:47 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

You know what I need to invent next , or at least have someone else
write, is a program that checks posting syntax. Why just have a
spelling and grammar checker?

It is really easy to take something the wrong way, get irritated, and
start up a flame war, and the nature of the medium seems to amplify or
reduce the scale of the given intelligent post or insult or flame as
the case might be. Sarcasm gets taken as hatred, humor as attack.

It would be nice for someone to wade through some of the internet
flame wars to see what makes them start up, and look for key words and
phrases and commonly mistaken intent involved, then wrote a program to
scan a post to check for that before it gtes sent.. Obviously, if you
typed 'retard' or 'retarded' in a post somewhere, the program would
see it and have a cow about it before it let you post it...

Such is the nature of the medium.

In reading this latest post from you, I detect a knowing rather than a
derisive smile sneaking across you face, now that you have had a
little time to turn it over a few times and examine the concept.
Interesting, isn't it?

MOre follows...

>In article <3f543fa4...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
>fek...@rock.com says...
>> On Mon, 01 Sep 2003 23:11:24 GMT, Active8
>> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>>
>great! my cousin is a RR engineer who now does safety and accident
>investigation. we'll see. i can also contact my uncle's father who works
>for Amtrak. in good time, of course.

It sucks to have had that ripped off, but I guess there ins't much I
can do about it (at least in this lifetime...).

>> Dude, you need to try some stress-relieving exercises or something...

OK, I admit I could use some too. Maybe with one of those interesting
Mexican mamacita wenches from "Hoy" on Galavision...

>this is "below"
>
>no stress here. see, when i read your pyrex paper, IIRC, you started off
>talking about how cracks would form if the cooling were accelerated.
>then you started on about spraying cold pyrex at molten pyrex. that's
>when the bs alarms went off. you said the expansion would "compensate"
>for the contraction. so you went from the problem of having to let the
>pyrex cool slowly to spraying nitrogen cold pyrex on it. then you stated
>that the mix still needs to be determined meaning it hasn't been tried.
>more bs alarms went off. so after i stated that cold pyrex won't slow
>the cooling process numerous times, you *finally* cleared up what you
>were talking about. as i said, i suspected this but didn't want to put
>words in your mouth.

Misunderstanding is a pain in the ass, and writing isn't my greatest
skill, and the internet compounds errors in syntax and intent.

>> If what you said about expansion and contraction that I deleted were
>> true, then the ice cube example would fail to produce a solid block of
>> ice.
>
>i see that but i'm thinking that when you throw ice in water and freeze
>it again, the part of the ice that fractured melts away before
>refreezing and any deep cracks get filled in with water or they remain.
>throw them in hot water and they may completely melt before refreezing.
>
>ok, little grains of pyrex would completly melt and bigger ones would
>possibly fracture clean through and not be filled in. maybe this is more
>like making concrete or adding sand to epoxy. they spray concrete to
>make domes. i hope you've read some of buckies stuff. you could spray
>domes, pyramids, whatever.

I told you the idea kicks serious ass. Not your average ass, this is
a large scale concept with a hideously immense potential. Even makes
Lord Valve's dreams of space conquest possible. Maybe we can make him
a pyrex Conquistador helmet shaped space helmet.

Of course, this idea isn't one you can assimilate in a few minutes or
a day, so I have give him at least that. I should have posted a
better, rewritten description, rather than bits and pieces from
different posts and pages, and then waited two weeks before I even
replied to anyone.

>now, if it takes a pyrex panel a day to cool, forgive me for having to
>ask, how long does it take to cool the crap they currently make? i
>thought your idea was supposed to hasten the manufacturing process. if
>that's not true or not very significant, my mistake. if you're not
>trying to rapidly cool the pyrex this makes more sense. recall, i never
>bitched about the idea of a machine moving along the desert cranking out
>pyrex. that would be great, assuming the thing really ends up being
>powered by what it leaves behind.

The total cooling time probably doesn't matter. The shorter, the
better, but it isn't life or death for any of the applications for the
concept. It should cool faster because the initial average
temperature of the total mass is cooler.

>stated differently, your machine will be a pyrex sprayer, not really an
>extruder, or maybe i missed something in the word description and after
>it's sprayed, it goes through an extrusion orifice which would fine tune
>the dimensions.

You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.

What an anus. I say we put it to the public vote. I say we change
our galaxy's name to "Andromeda" and call M51 "The Milky Way" from now
on... or better yet, just M51. That's so lame I have a hard time
believing they can sell candy bars with that moniker. Yet they
discontinue the best candy bar ever made, the Marathon bar.
("Marathon John, lasts a good long time", the slogan from the TV
commercial. The Marathon existed from about 1970 to 1975.)

>> Attacking some suposed expansion / contraction incompatibility between
>> solid and molten pyrex is the same thing as attacking the bond
>> integrity issue.
>
>no, the expansion/contraction issue i addressed... i was considering the
>cracking.

>when it's obvious that a cold material would *speed* the cooling. yes, i

>did picture a burnout with a crack pipe and a guitar sitting around
>slack jawed with a bunch of idiots hanging on his every word.
>
>maybe your commo skills go to hell at times. i do it sometimes when i
>post a question. i think my thoughts run faster than my typing and if
>i'm not careful, i end up looking back at my post and wondering WTF.
>that's why i suggested you slow down, explain things to those who don't
>work in the pyrex biz, show some numbers, drawings, etc.

Yes, definately. Its a wonder I passed English I guess.. I can speak
but I can't write for shit.

>> "perhaps" you say. I take it the ice cube demonstration is too
>> difficult for your limited skills,
>
>no, the freezer's too full for even 2 small pans. also, i think i know
>the outcome. when i say you're comparing apples to oranges, it's because
>ice is crystaline, IIRC, and glass is amorphous. look it up if you have
>to. glass *and* amorphous. maybe that doesn't matter. so all this
>babbling about the internal matrix and crystal structure is another
>issue that has bs alarms going off.

LIke I said, I'm an inventor, not a specialist.

>> I could go into the details of microminiature fractures forming in the
>> molten pyrex as it cools an an accelerated rate, and how they are
>> prevented from expanding for anything more than a tiny distance
>> because of the random nature of the alignment of the internal matrix
>> planes, but why, when the ice cube demonstration shows that this does
>> not significantly affect the overall strength of the panel?
>
>did you really test the strength of the ice?

Not the way you think. I've never done the ice experiement, but I
don't need to. Its obvious what the outcome will be based on my
muskrat experience.

Up in northern Minnesota, going around walking on the lake at about 3
in the morning with a 12 or .410 gauge shotgun looking for
troublemaking muskrats. You notice after a while that solid ice will
crack and endanger your own position. the hole is bigger and cracks
extend in all directions including past underneath your own feet. But
towards the spring, when the ice turns to a 50 / 50 ice / water slurry
by day and then refreezes at night, when you go out there and shoot,
the hole in the ice is much smaller, and much more well defined, and
there are no cracks speading away from it. The hole from a 12 gauge
in refrozen ice will be smaller than that from a .410 in solid ice.

>> Now if
>> the panel cooled normally, and these type of microminiature fractures
>> developed, they would eventually travel down the entire legth of the
>> cyrstal plane,
>
>again, glass is amorphous. stop talking crystals.

Maybe I need to look up the definitions again, its been a long time
since I took metallurgy in high school.

>> and it would be a serious issue. But as it is, the
>> internal structure is too randomized and the planes can only expand
>> tiny distances.
>
>again we have a commo prob. your descriptions never mentioned how often
>a layer is sprayed, though i recall a rapidly (?) rotating sprayer. but
>you didn't mention anything to the effect that the first layer will
>achieve some kind of equilibrium that causes the second layer to form
>independantly. now taking plywood as an example where the grains run
>perpendicular, i can see how a crack travelling down one thin layer
>won't amount to squat unless subsequent layers develope cracks that
>coincide with each other. so if we're getting close to being on the same
>wavelength now, this is making more sense. sorry, i just had to give you
>a chance to either make sense or talk shit.

Right.

>> The strength of the bond between the (originally) hot
>> and cold pyrex is only reduced by the number of molecules involved in
>> the fractures.
>
>great! now i know you realize there will be fractures. read your page. i
>got the impression your process would eliminate cracks.

Again, I can't write for shit. What I meant was more in the vein of
saying something about the limited distances the cracks will be able
to travel, rather than their "being eliminated". Only their long
distance "chaining" distance effect is "being eliminated".

>> Compared with the total surface area of the positive
>> bonds, you are talking about a microscopic percentage of the total
>> number of molecules.
>
>all this should have been in the pyrex page. in an organized flow of
>thoughts, not a brief description followed by "rob's fantastic house
>building adventure", followed by more random thoughts.

Yes. I will accept being bitch-slapped for this error, but only from
a female TV newscaster or weathercaster.

>> In fact, the presence of these microminiature fractures is likely to
>> actually make the panel more resitant to impact, because they will
>> make the panel less resonant.
>
>like a stiffener would. eh, dunno. "likely" is another scary word - and
>you attacked me for saying "perhaps". see, we're back to the problem
>that this hasn't been tried. it's a lot to take in. i hope this works.
>some may be afraid of this. it could conjure up sci-fi images of giant
>machines achieving consciousness and taking over :-0

Yes, that is so. I need to avoid that and stick with what is obvious
or more easily defined.

I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/

>anyway, consider this. in this thread alone, myself excluded, everyone
>has completely blown you off. now if you insist on inferring that i'm
>stupid because your writings are disorganized and i can't take it all in
>properly... if you call me a troll because i'm willing to debate, rather
>than just blow you off... know this. i manage to travel quite often in
>my business and a short hop to your house to shove a buffalo up your ass
>is well within my limitations :-)

Read the above

>the commo prob... i'm currently working for a client as a consultant.
>the client likes to ask questions without providing any organized
>background info. i can't give examples because it would violate my non-
>disclosure greement, but suffice it to say that you won't get shit
>accomplished if you can't communicate efficiently. USENET's a bitch in
>that respect. you can't say, "wait, back up. WTF?", without waiting.

Wish me luck, or at the very least, wish it to the progress of the
development and implementation of the pyrex machine.

I'm starting a new thread in alt.energy to try to better define the
reaquirements for solar greenhouses. That it (solar power generation
with solar greenhouses) can be done is proven, but the best way to
implement it still remains to be decided.

Whatever the method chosen, pyrex will allow it to be built.

Remind me to describe the pipe making version of the pyrex machine for
you. First let me know that you know what a brake wheel cylinder hone
looks like or an engine cylinder hone. Of course, there are two
different looking different types of engine cylinder hones. I don't
mean the one with all the abrasive balls hanging all over it, I mean
the one that has three spring loaded stones.

Look up "wheel cylinder hone" on the net and you can see an image of
one.

Basically use something that looks like that, rotating in a cylinder,
but on roller bearings instead of abrasive pads, and spray out the
ends. You need a flat steel ring for a starter plate, and a rotating
cylinder the same diameter as the ring's inner diameter as an
extension of the hone type thing's axle that the ring fits over.
Probably a two piece ring that can be slipped over the cylinder and
latched together.

Probably need to use a set of planetary gears to have the cylinder's
rotation different than the rotational speed of the hone thingy's
axle, to keep the pyrex from sticking to the outer or inner cylinder,
and also to inhibit the roational force from being transerred to the
stell ring and causing it to spin, or causing a greater force to ahve
to be applied to keep it and the pipe being sprayed onto it from
spinning.

There are a couple other details, but first let me know you were able
to visualize this OK.

So, from right to left, we have the axle, the hone arms containing the
roller bearings rolling on the outer cylinder that encloses the whole
thing, then the axle extension (past the hones and past the total
length of a picture of a wheel cylinder hone), the planeary gear box,
and then the inner cylinder, the same diameter as the inner diameter
of the pipe you want to create.

And a little door into the big cylinder housing so you can put the
starter plate rings in. The (nearly) finished pipe comes out at the
left.

The far left end of the smaller cylinder has to be supported, but
there are numerous way fo doing that. For example, another removable
ring, roller bearings, etc...

But in any case the support must be retracable so that the finished
length of pipe can slide past it and off the cylinder.

feklar

unread,
Sep 3, 2003, 4:51:00 AM9/3/03
to
On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 06:32:27 GMT, fek...@rock.com (feklar) wrote:

>There are a couple other details, but first let me know you were able
>to visualize this OK.

Like alternating pin plates, as described elsewhere in pyrex2.htm.
Only using curved pin plates rather than the planar plates described
there.

One set in the first few inches of the entire circumference of the
inner surface of the outer cylinder, and another set, in the first few
inches of the entire circumference of the outer surface of the inner
cylinder, to keep the pyrex from sticking to the cylinders. This will
probably eliminate any need to rotate the inner cylinder.

Then when the pipe sections are completed and ready to be installed,
clamping is an issue. For strength and impact / vibration resistance,
and other issues, the pipe should be made of fairly short sections of
pyrex cylinder, tongue and groove jointed together, and then clamped.

Say for example, underground gas pipeline. Make each ring section two
to six feet long with the required inner and outer diameter for the
intended purpose. The greater the pipe diameter, the shorter each
section should be.

Instead of using a flat steel ring to start a new pipe section, use a
machined one with a tongue sticking out of it. When the pipe is done,
internally heat the steel plate to remove it from the end of the
section. Then use a high pressure water cutting nozzle on the other
end of the pipe to cut off the ragged unfinished end, and cut a tongue
out of it. I don't know how easy this is to visualize, but a tongue
could easily be cut into a pipe end. Cutting a groove, on the other
hand, that could prove to be an immense pain in the ass to try to pull
off. No need, since the steel tongue of the ring left one behind it
in the other end of the section, and that just needs to be trued up
slightly.

Then the sections can be combined using silicon caulk. I suppose this
means that every 200 years, the sections will have to be seperated and
recaulked, but I don't think it can be avoided. Its still a much
better maintenence schedule than what exists for gas pipeline today.

(Remember, if you want to visualize pyrex pipe, visualize it at around
the wall thckness of concrete pipe, or even a tad larger. A lot
thicker than steel pipe.)

I can buy a tube of clear or tinted 100 year silicone caulk with a
rated lifespan of 100 years, exposed, for $2. (In a more sheltered
environment, under compression and not exposed to air, it should last
twice as long if not longer.)

Therefore a 55 gallon drum should cost about $12, bought in quantities
of 5000 drums at a time or bought under years long production
contract. (If these economics are foreign to anyone, get your local
mechanic to reveal the true price he pays for a 55 gallon drum of
antifreeze or motor oil sometime.)

So the ends are test fitted for proper clearance, and then caulked
good with silicone and pressure forced together.

Every third section, for an underground gas pipeline, have a pyrex
support plate, maybe a few inches thick, with three large equidistant
protrusions or bosses around the circumference. Then run pyrex or
plastic rod through the holes in the protrusions and heat swage the
ends, after being sure there is enough free play in the pipe joints to
allow for expansion and contraction. Underground, you wouldn't want
to use steel for the obvious reason of rust. Probably high strength
plastic rod, perhaps reinforced nylon cable.

A non pressure application like a sewer probably doesn't need so much
in the way of clamping, although there will probably be some light
duty system that gets used.

The same type of thing would apply to use in a pyrex greenhouse for
making O2 and H2 pressure storage tanks.

Actually, using smaller sections is the best approach in any
application that would require high structural strength and resistance
to vibration and impact and force. A pyrex sea wall or levee, for
example, should be made out of short sections butted together with
tongue and groove joints. Possibly in both horizontal dimensions (x
and y) for a really thick wall, and possibly in all three.

Also for housing, it would be better to use shorter sections of panel
tongue and groove jointed and sealed together, for the same reason: it
will give more strength and greater resistance to impact and vibration
and force. And in any application, if damage did occur, it would
usually be limited to a single small panel which can then be easily
replaced.

Better to use shorter joined panels for greenhouses, but likely not
for thick walled water storage tanks.

The stuff might also come in handy for reducing the required roof
thickness required for a greenhouse to resist hail. A 1/4 inch thick
coat of clear silicone on the roof would reduce the required roof
thickness considerably. Of course, on the other hand, the clear
silicone caulk I used once turned white a year after it was applied.
It was clear for a year, but that won't cut it.

Active8

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 2:27:16 PM9/4/03
to
In article <3f55862d....@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Tue, 02 Sep 2003 19:00:47 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> You know what I need to invent next , or at least have someone else
> write, is a program that checks posting syntax. Why just have a
> spelling and grammar checker?

ActiveX control that asks if you really want to call that guy
sheisskopf.


>
> It is really easy to take something the wrong way, get irritated, and
> start up a flame war, and the nature of the medium seems to amplify or
> reduce the scale of the given intelligent post or insult or flame as
> the case might be. Sarcasm gets taken as hatred, humor as attack.
>
> It would be nice for someone to wade through some of the internet
> flame wars to see what makes them start up, and look for key words and
> phrases and commonly mistaken intent involved, then wrote a program to
> scan a post to check for that before it gtes sent.. Obviously, if you
> typed 'retard' or 'retarded' in a post somewhere, the program would
> see it and have a cow about it before it let you post it...
>
> Such is the nature of the medium.
>
> In reading this latest post from you, I detect a knowing rather than a
> derisive smile sneaking across you face, now that you have had a
> little time to turn it over a few times and examine the concept.
> Interesting, isn't it?

yeah. be fun to do the electronics on. let me know when someone kicks
out some high $. we'll just spray a quick few panels and build a
greehouse. take some data. smash out the panels for a stress test.
refine the thing and try a new set of panels.
>
> MOre follows...
>
yeah


> >i see that but i'm thinking that when you throw ice in water and freeze
> >it again, the part of the ice that fractured melts away before
> >refreezing and any deep cracks get filled in with water or they remain.
> >throw them in hot water and they may completely melt before refreezing.
> >
> >ok, little grains of pyrex would completly melt and bigger ones would
> >possibly fracture clean through and not be filled in. maybe this is more
> >like making concrete or adding sand to epoxy. they spray concrete to
> >make domes. i hope you've read some of buckies stuff. you could spray
> >domes, pyramids, whatever.
>
> I told you the idea kicks serious ass. Not your average ass, this is
> a large scale concept with a hideously immense potential. Even makes
> Lord Valve's dreams of space conquest possible. Maybe we can make him
> a pyrex Conquistador helmet shaped space helmet.

marvin the martion kicked ass.
>

> >stated differently, your machine will be a pyrex sprayer, not really an
> >extruder, or maybe i missed something in the word description and after
> >it's sprayed, it goes through an extrusion orifice which would fine tune
> >the dimensions.
>
> You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
> course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
> lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
> one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.

like those fags at nasa that wanted names like yogi bear for Mars rocks.
too gay.

>
> What an anus. I say we put it to the public vote. I say we change
> our galaxy's name to "Andromeda" and call M51 "The Milky Way" from now
> on... or better yet, just M51. That's so lame I have a hard time
> believing they can sell candy bars with that moniker. Yet they
> discontinue the best candy bar ever made, the Marathon bar.
> ("Marathon John, lasts a good long time", the slogan from the TV
> commercial. The Marathon existed from about 1970 to 1975.)
>

> >did you really test the strength of the ice?


>
> Not the way you think. I've never done the ice experiement, but I
> don't need to. Its obvious what the outcome will be based on my
> muskrat experience.
>
> Up in northern Minnesota, going around walking on the lake at about 3
> in the morning with a 12 or .410 gauge shotgun looking for
> troublemaking muskrats. You notice after a while that solid ice will
> crack and endanger your own position. the hole is bigger and cracks
> extend in all directions including past underneath your own feet. But
> towards the spring, when the ice turns to a 50 / 50 ice / water slurry
> by day and then refreezes at night, when you go out there and shoot,
> the hole in the ice is much smaller, and much more well defined, and
> there are no cracks speading away from it. The hole from a 12 gauge
> in refrozen ice will be smaller than that from a .410 in solid ice.

interesting. like that crust on snow after it refreezes. how about
frost. you can use slabs of that for walls. plenty of sand and sun in
the desert.
>

>
> Yes. I will accept being bitch-slapped for this error, but only from
> a female TV newscaster or weathercaster.
>

i'd like to have a few of the fox news babes around.

>
> I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
> http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/

needs a control to shut that noise off.


>
>
> Wish me luck, or at the very least, wish it to the progress of the
> development and implementation of the pyrex machine.

ok. gfl & glf


>
> I'm starting a new thread in alt.energy to try to better define the
> reaquirements for solar greenhouses. That it (solar power generation
> with solar greenhouses) can be done is proven, but the best way to
> implement it still remains to be decided.
>
> Whatever the method chosen, pyrex will allow it to be built.
>
> Remind me to describe the pipe making version of the pyrex machine for
> you. First let me know that you know what a brake wheel cylinder hone
> looks like or an engine cylinder hone. Of course, there are two
> different looking different types of engine cylinder hones. I don't
> mean the one with all the abrasive balls hanging all over it, I mean
> the one that has three spring loaded stones.
>

i know the hones.

i don't know about the sticking, but a clamshell should pop off and the
inner cylinder could be taken apart. i don't see what the inner
cylider's doing, though. reaming the center after the pipe's sprayed?

mike
>
>

Sir Charles W. Shults III

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 3:40:45 PM9/4/03
to
> > You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
> > course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
> > lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
> > one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.

You really don't know your history. The word "galaxy" comes from the Greek
"gala" and Latin "lac" both meaning milk. Also, the ancient Sumerian word
"gal" meant "great" so there's no surprise there if you interpret it to mean
"great milk". If you ever get out of the city and look at the night sky where
it is dark, it really does resemble milk spilled across the sky, like a road-
therefore the name "great milky way". In Middle English "galaxie" means the
Milky Way.

Cheers!

Chip Shults
My robotics, space and CGI web page - http://home.cfl.rr.com/aichip


feklar

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 3:49:28 PM9/4/03
to
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:27:16 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>> You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
>> course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
>> lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
>> one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.
>
>like those fags at nasa that wanted names like yogi bear for Mars rocks.
>too gay.

No shit, someone ought to skulldrag lamers that come up with bogus
tasteless bullshit like that :-)

>> Yes. I will accept being bitch-slapped for this error, but only from
>> a female TV newscaster or weathercaster.
>>
>i'd like to have a few of the fox news babes around.

Me too. Don't get me started....

>> I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
>> http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/
>
>needs a control to shut that noise off.

You never saw Terminator 2?

>i don't know about the sticking, but a clamshell should pop off and the
>inner cylinder could be taken apart. i don't see what the inner
>cylider's doing, though. reaming the center after the pipe's sprayed?

See, you start the rotating nozzles spraying on the ring, and slowly
retract the ring away from the nozzles, in effect "extruding" the pipe
as you go. The inner cylinder needs to be there to form the inner
wall of the pipe. The alterning pin racks keep the pyrex from
sticking on the cylinder. Most of the pyrex will get sprayed on the
surface ebing built up. Some stray pyrex spray will either bounce off
the cylinder / pin racks onto the surface being extruded, or fall down
through a hole at the front of the ring or pipe surface. Or it will
stick to the pin racks for a fraction of a second, then be ejected off
the pin surface by the oscillating motion of the pins, and fall down
the hole to be sent back and regranulated.

feklar

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 4:59:57 PM9/4/03
to
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 19:40:45 GMT, "Sir Charles W. Shults III"
<aich...@OVEcfl.THISrr.com> wrote:

>> > You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
>> > course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
>> > lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
>> > one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.
>
> You really don't know your history. The word "galaxy" comes from the Greek
>"gala" and Latin "lac" both meaning milk. Also, the ancient Sumerian word
>"gal" meant "great" so there's no surprise there if you interpret it to mean
>"great milk". If you ever get out of the city and look at the night sky where
>it is dark, it really does resemble milk spilled across the sky, like a road-
>therefore the name "great milky way". In Middle English "galaxie" means the
>Milky Way.

Interesting insight.

Of course, it might have worked back then, but you can't say its
anything to be proud of. People used to want to be gay. Most people
don't want to be today.

Who knows, people thought the moon was made of cheese once. One
wonders at the peculiar fascination with attributing dairy product
aspects with astrological phenomenon. Animals, I could see, like
Sirius or the Great Bear, or personailities like Archimedes, but milk
and cheese? Even "The Bull Dick" galaxy would be an improvement on
that bogus bullshit.

But damn, since we all know better nowadays... I still say we put it
to the vote.

Not even a Green Bay Packer fan wearing a cheesehead would vote to
retain "The Milky Way".

Sir Charles W. Shults III

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 6:20:47 PM9/4/03
to

"feklar" <fek...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:3f57a5e0...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net...

> Who knows, people thought the moon was made of cheese once. One
> wonders at the peculiar fascination with attributing dairy product
> aspects with astrological phenomenon. Animals, I could see, like
> Sirius or the Great Bear, or personailities like Archimedes, but milk
> and cheese?

Think about it- they didn't have Nintendo or clutches, plastics or ROMs,
they had stone and sky and wind. There were animals, plants, the skies, and
whatever you could make by hand. Not a lot of latitude for things to be named
after.

feklar

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 8:00:28 PM9/4/03
to
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 22:20:47 GMT, "Sir Charles W. Shults III"
<aich...@OVEcfl.THISrr.com> wrote:

> Think about it- they didn't have Nintendo or clutches, plastics or ROMs,
>they had stone and sky and wind. There were animals, plants, the skies, and
>whatever you could make by hand. Not a lot of latitude for things to be named
>after.
>
>Cheers!
>
>Chip Shults
>My robotics, space and CGI web page - http://home.cfl.rr.com/aichip

This is true.

Active8

unread,
Sep 4, 2003, 10:10:39 PM9/4/03
to
In article <3f579533...@news.houston.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 18:27:16 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> You're right, maybe I should it a pyrex sputtering machine... of
> >> course, on the other hand, that does sound pretty lame. The same
> >> lamer who invented the word "sputtering" was probably also the same
> >> one responsible for naming our galaxy "The Milky Way". Pretty gay.
> >
> >like those fags at nasa that wanted names like yogi bear for Mars rocks.
> >too gay.
>
> No shit, someone ought to skulldrag lamers that come up with bogus
> tasteless bullshit like that :-)
>
> >> Yes. I will accept being bitch-slapped for this error, but only from
> >> a female TV newscaster or weathercaster.
> >>
> >i'd like to have a few of the fox news babes around.
>
> Me too. Don't get me started....
>
> >> I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
> >> http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/
> >
> >needs a control to shut that noise off.
>
> You never saw Terminator 2?

yeah, but that doesn't mean i need a short sound bite blastin' out of my
speakers over and over on top of green manalishi or whatever. you can
display the embedded control down below arnie so the sound can be
gaffed.

>
> >i don't know about the sticking, but a clamshell should pop off and the
> >inner cylinder could be taken apart. i don't see what the inner
> >cylider's doing, though. reaming the center after the pipe's sprayed?
>
> See, you start the rotating nozzles spraying on the ring, and slowly
> retract the ring away from the nozzles, in effect "extruding" the pipe
> as you go. The inner cylinder needs to be there to form the inner
> wall of the pipe. The alterning pin racks keep the pyrex from
> sticking on the cylinder. Most of the pyrex will get sprayed on the
> surface ebing built up. Some stray pyrex spray will either bounce off
> the cylinder / pin racks onto the surface being extruded, or fall down
> through a hole at the front of the ring or pipe surface. Or it will
> stick to the pin racks for a fraction of a second, then be ejected off
> the pin surface by the oscillating motion of the pins, and fall down
> the hole to be sent back and regranulated.

oh yeah, the pins. you post a sketch of that and maybe i'll whip out a
quick 3D rough plan of it in ACAD so you can explain all that more
efficiently. time permitting.

cu at alt.energy where this outta be. i haven't checked that out in a
while. like to see who's flappin' about what these days.

mike
>
>

feklar

unread,
Sep 5, 2003, 7:08:36 AM9/5/03
to
The pins on the second plate have to be a little smaller in "diameter"
than the pins on the first plate for this to work properly, otherwise
the first plate would have no bonding material available for welding
it together.

Actually, the first plate would probably be made by drilling the holes
into a thick block of plate, maybe quarter inch steel plate, then
using precision CAM to machine each hole into the hexagon or octagon
shape. Possibly EDM, but that's a lot of EDM carbon dies to have to
machine. Maybe laser.

At any rate, once the holes were cut, what would be left of the plate
would pins and holes.

The machining of curved plate would be no more difficult for CAM
machining, although the CAD and CNC programming would be
mathematically a little more difficult.

The functoinality of curved plate would be more difficult to implement
though. In that case, the second plate would have to be segmented
with each section being able to float independant of the adjacent
section, and each of the pins in the second plate would have to float
a little at their base, which could be achieved by machining oval
holes in the base plate to hold the pins, and using pins that look
reminiscent of pop rivets, inserted into each hole, then swaged in
place on the other side of the plate.

While this would work, there would be wear issues. Where parts
wearing down would not really be much of an issue for flat pin plates,
for curved plates it would be, especially at the bases of the pins in
the second plate. I might have to find a way to improve upon this
approach and do away with curved pin plates.

Of course, if one is willing to settle for tank or pipe that is not
perfectly round, this wouldn't be an issue. We would just use
multi-sided arrays of flat pin plates. Like making octagon sided
pipe, only with a greater number of sides, maybe 10 or 20 or 30 sides.

Nothing anywhere says that pipe or storage tank must be round. So I
guess that while using curved pin plates could be done, it wouldn't be
very practical, so what would be the point, when using smaller arrrays
of flat plates will work.

So in the pipe making version of the machine, instead of cylinders
just use 40 or 60 sided channel or whatever that looks like a cylinder
from afar but on closer inspection shows its true nature. This would
still be "round" enough to allow for the circular motion of the
rotating nozzles to be effective, especially considering that there
will be unavoidable overspray. Should work just fine.

feklar

unread,
Sep 5, 2003, 8:09:42 AM9/5/03
to
Make sure that you have it visualized correctly: The rotating nozzles
will be rotating past the front of the psuedo-cylinder opening, not
inside of it. Where the nozzle bearings are located, the cylinder and
bearing surface the assembly rotates upon will be round, but past that
point, the outer (and inner) cylinder will be a "psuedo-cylinder" made
of 60 or 80 flat planes. Like an octagonal chamber on steroids...

This works because the nozzle spray is fan shaped, and because the
nozzles are not rotating inside the psuedo-cylinder but just past it.


Although technically, the nozzles could extend into the chamber formed
by the inner and outer psuedo-cylinders a little, as long as there was
sufficient clearance between the nozzles and the inner and outer
psuedo-cylinders.

The nozzles don't ever touch any cylindrical wall. The roller
bearings that the nozzles are mounted on do.

Also, going by the basic shape of a brake cylinder hone that has
roller bearings instead of hones and is a lot bigger, the actual
surface area around the ejector nozzles will need to have compressed
air nozzles that closely follow the ejector nozzles around, to cool
the surface enough for some basic surface solidification of the thin
layer of pyrex the ejector nozzles had just deposited, and to prevent
any molten pyrex from rolling down the surface that is being built up.

feklar

unread,
Sep 5, 2003, 5:24:32 AM9/5/03
to
On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 02:10:39 GMT, Active8
<mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:

>> >i'd like to have a few of the fox news babes around.
>>
>> Me too. Don't get me started....
>>
>> >> I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
>> >> http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/
>> >
>> >needs a control to shut that noise off.
>>
>> You never saw Terminator 2?
>
>yeah, but that doesn't mean i need a short sound bite blastin' out of my
>speakers over and over on top of green manalishi or whatever. you can
>display the embedded control down below arnie so the sound can be
>gaffed.

Is there a free java applet around for that somewhere I can download?

>oh yeah, the pins. you post a sketch of that and maybe i'll whip out a
>quick 3D rough plan of it in ACAD so you can explain all that more
>efficiently. time permitting.

Ever see one of those things carpenters use, a parallell row of pins
all sticking through a wood holder about the size a candy bar used to
be before they started shrinking 'em.

You can press the pins on a sufrace and they form around it. so if
you put it up against the edge of a table at a 45 degree angle and
press it down, when you take it off some of the pins will be pused
back to form around it, and on one side of the holder there will be a
traingle shape made of rows of pins sticking up, and on the other side
of the holder, a triangular indentation.

A pin plate would just be a plate made of aternating rows of pins and
holes. Pin, hole, pin, hole, and so on in a row, and the next row
offset by the width of one pin or one hole, and the next row with the
original offset, alternating rows.

Then another plate that just has pins, no holes, but with the same
spacing so that its pins will fit through the holes of the other
plate. The pins a little longer than those of the first plate, so
that when the two plates are mated, and the pins from the second plate
are all sticking through all the holes on the first plate, the tips of
all the pins from both plates will constitute an almost solid 2D
plane.

You can make the plate magnetically attractive to one another, and
send water pressure between then in pulses to slightly separate them,
and they come back together the instant the water pressure is
released, and the water will cool the metal so it never reaches its
Curie temperature (and temporarily loses its magetic properties as a
result). The pyrex otherwise would be hot enough to cause the plate
to lose magnetism.

So maybe send four water pressure pulses per second or so, and the
plates will start to seperate and then come back together 4 times a
second, alternating the heights of the interlocking pin grid. The
pyrex could not stick to that for more than a fraction of a second
before the oscillation motion of the pin tips moving up and down
sloughed it back off.

The plates would probably use square or hexagon shaped pins rather
than round pins. Round pins cannot be used because the pyrex would
works its way down between the rows of pins in the empty spaces.
Hexagon pins would have no empty space between rows and will have
considerable advantages over square pins when it comes to machining
the first plate. Octagonal pin stock may be even better to use. To
assimilate this, consider that the first plate needs no base plate and
is manufactured using only pins, but the second plate does need one
and has its pins attached to it. In the first plate, holes are simply
areas where there are no pins. The plate is held together by welding
the bases of pins. When the plate is finished the bottom surface
containing the welds is ground true, and then the hexagonal or
octagonal holes are trued up.

Not the cheapest thing to manufacture, considering all the truing
operations (six or eight precision CAM operations per hole, hundreds
of thousands of holes), but if you have the money to build or buy a
pyrex machine that costs a million dollars, then the fact the pin
plates will cost 5 or 10 thousand isn't worthy of mention.

Pin plates are but one possible approach or solution to keep pyrex
from sticking to the front part of the extrusion chamber. There may
be a cheaper alternative, but until someone figures out what that
might be, pin plates can get the job done in an acceptable manner.

Active8

unread,
Sep 5, 2003, 10:08:35 PM9/5/03
to
In article <3f585036...@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

> On Fri, 05 Sep 2003 02:10:39 GMT, Active8
> <mcol...@earthlink.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> >> >i'd like to have a few of the fox news babes around.
> >>
> >> Me too. Don't get me started....
> >>
> >> >> I see you went to my base page at Angelfire...
> >> >> http://www.angelfire.com/empire2/ptaak/
> >> >
> >> >needs a control to shut that noise off.
> >>
> >> You never saw Terminator 2?
> >
> >yeah, but that doesn't mean i need a short sound bite blastin' out of my
> >speakers over and over on top of green manalishi or whatever. you can
> >display the embedded control down below arnie so the sound can be
> >gaffed.
>
> Is there a free java applet around for that somewhere I can download?

not that i know of. i write my own stuff when i need it if there's no
acceptable alt.
>
mike

Active8

unread,
Sep 5, 2003, 10:11:46 PM9/5/03
to
In article <3f5869a3...@news.dallas.sbcglobal.net>,
fek...@rock.com says...

yeah. approximately round sounds better.

mike

0 new messages