Slashdot Mirror

This was covered last year, and the Los Alamos website had a few interviews with some people involved on what the uses of Roadrunner are. They had a time-line of what phases are to be done, and as far as memory serves me, they were going with Opterons for the first phase, then performance assessment, then add the Cell processors in the third phase.

From these pictures, it clearly shows they're using IBM Blades (4 chassis in each rack), and IBM already offers BladeQ servers which use Cell processors for HPC applications. The IBM BladeQ servers pack double the CPUs of a PS3.

This was covered last year, and the Los Alamos website had a few interviews with some people involved on what the uses of Roadrunner are. They had a time-line of what phases are to be done, and as far as memory serves me, they were going with Opterons for the first phase, then performance assessment, then add the Cell processors in the third phase.

From these pictures, it clearly shows they're using IBM Blades (4 chassis in each rack), and IBM already offers BladeQ servers which use Cell processors for HPC applications. The IBM BladeQ servers pack double the CPUs of a PS3.

I missed all of the general-audience talks which have been given at LANL so far about Roadrunner, but this makes me want to try a bit harder at making it to some of them:

http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php/fuseaction/1663.article/d/200805/id/13277

Physics would truly be weird if this was true that anti-matter might fall up. First of all, there is no evidense that anti-matter is anywhere near that weird. It is just a form of energy, just as matter is a form of energy. Though some people do not understand that basic notion. When you combine matter with anti-matter you get energy. In terms of energy, adding matter and anti-matter is similar to adding 1 + 1 and getting 2. Not adding 1 and minus 1 and getting 0. That is a very important difference, and that is part of the reason that the notion that anti-matter might 'fall up' is just not credible. But that is not the reason for my post... The following comments were posted this week on a related blog that helps put some of the conversation surrounding the Large Hadron Collider Safety controversy in perspective I think. From a June 2008 blog by Martin Meenagh Quote: âoeBy what means can an Hawaii Court, even if it is a federal one, assert any authority over a facility outside the USA?â I am not a lawyer, but the case has world wide implications, some court must take jurisdiction. Quote: âoegoing to do anything but make Europeans and Canadians determined to go ahead anywayâ A few very credible scientists believe that CERN is basing their theory of safety on at least one flawed assumption. If the following reasonable and plausible assumptions prove to be correct, then the uncomfortable truth is that the probability of destruction of Earth is actually closer to 100%, though only mother nature currently knows for certain due to our limited understanding of the physics involved. A. LHC Creates black holes as CERN Predicted (1 per second) [1] B. Micro Black holes do not evaporate as LSAG accepts is plausible. [2] C. One or more micro black holes are captured by Earthâ(TM)s gravity as LSAG accepts as plausible. [3] D. Micro Black holes grow exponentially as Dr. Otto E. Rosslerâ(TM)s paper predicts and calculates. [4] If the reasonable and plausible assumptions above prove correct, and Europeans and Canadians are determined to go ahead anyway, then that would be an unfortunate situation. The entire world is in this together after all! Quote: âoeThere is a world issue here. In libel, in risk assessment, and in extradition casesâ Yes, there are also potentially issues with respect to freedom of speech, corporate deception, and mis-representation of facts designed to confuse or mislead the public as to risks involved. The lawsuit also alleges on page 15 of AFFIDAVIT OF LUIS SANCHO IN SUPPORT OF TRO AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION: [5] Quote: âoeCERN has neither asked mankind to validate these experiments, nor has it been open and clear about those risks to the public. On the contrary it has systematically hidden evidence, and hence it is, in my opinion and hopefully that of this Court, liable of criminal negligence and occultation of proofs, as it carries about what amounts to a potential global genocide.â Quote: âoeWould you have any links that you could send any readers and myself to as a short cut?â I would suggest LHCDefense.org for the legal focus. Sincerely, JTankers Administrator, LHCFacts.org References: [1] http://doc.cern.ch/yellowrep/2003/2003-001/p1.pdf [2] http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0304042 [3] http://lhc2008.web.cern.ch/LHC2008/documents/LSAG.pdf [4] http://www.wissensnavigator.com/documents/OTTOROESSLERMINIBLACKHOLE.pdf [5] http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=9

Yeah, I was trying to specifically refer to devices like these that deliver high fields that last a matter of microseconds, but you and Maxwell are of course correct about the oscillating field associated with EM radiation.

Here is a link to the Magnetized Target Fusion Experiments at LANL webpage.

See here http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php/fuseaction/home.story/story_id/12554 for an idea to do exactly that.

• How unlikely is a doomsday catastrophe?

You'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes.

Linear accelerator at Los Alamos

http://lansce.lanl.gov/

The experiment is cool, but as far as I can tell, this is nothing like a black hole in the cosmological sense. Simply reproducing one superficial property of black hole ("light cannot escape") does not make it a gravitational singularity with an event horizon and its associated properties.

For example, I seriously doubt electron-positron conversions in their light cavity would behave at all like said conversions at a real event horizon since the charged particles would be subject to very different kinds of forces from those near a real black hole.

Also, Hawking radiation is related to black hole evaporation.

This would not occur with the lasers in an analogous way because the mechanics of this light bubble "evaporation" is totally different.

While the "obvious" mechanics may be different, the statistical mechanics (and the usefulness of QM-style arguments to model the situations) can have striking similarities. For instance, we might expect the acoustic analogue of Hawking radiation to occur across a supersonic jet's shockwave, and we can try modelling this as the result of an apparent "phonon" pair-production process.

It sounds to me like a case of one subfield (photonics) sexing up their lingo by adopting the lingo of another subfield (general relativity) to get press. IAAP, but not a cosmologists/GR expert, so I'm willing to stand corrected.

Once we're more familiar with these non-gravitational versions of the effect, we'll be more confident that our efforts to try to write a theory of quantum gravity that includes them is modelling them in the right way.

The relevant review paper on the counterparts of Hawking radiation in non-gravitational contexts is
"Analogue Gravity" Barcelo, Liberati & Visser. http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0505065
Scan through the references section at the end and you'll get a feel for the wide range of analogous situations that are being studied, form non-linear optics to signal propagation in Bose-Einstein condensates.

If you're new to the subject, you might want to first limber up with the Wikipedia page on acoustic metrics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_metric

Well, call it a guess, but since it's called Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, I believe that the fundage for the patentable research is coming from the alumni's private money.

Besides, if you want to take issue with a company getting "free" patents with taxpayer money, take a look at the government national laboratories. Los Alamos alone boasts over 1300 patents. I'm not aware of any of the national labs suing businesses, however.

I'm going to respond to this because even though I completely disagree with you, I also disagree with your post being marked flamebait (although adding some evidence to support your point would've been useful). I'm going to presume you're referencing the claims of Cooperstock & Tieu. Unfortunately, their model ultimately requires an unphysical mass distribution (Vogt or Korzynski). It is a good point that for a long time people didn't do full GR simulations, but the end result is just that you need about 30% less dark matter than Newtonian dynamics predicts to explain the observations.

The other major problem of Cooperstock & Tieu's work is while it does address galactic rotation curves, it still fails to address the other observations supporting the existence of dark matter (namely certain galaxy clusters).

Given that your UID/email imply you work in medical research rather than astronomy I'll forgive you for not keeping current on the research, especially given how much press Copperstock & Tieu received. However, you should have learned by now that a single paper is rarely the definitive word in a field of research.

... can be accessed here: http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0510059 . A bit less recent (but even more readable) account is http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0310342 . The first linked article also mentions the approaches featured in the slashdot post (this is an ongoing business for a while). For starters the flow diagrams in the front pages describing the options might be particularly useful.

Plasma Universe is not a theory. It doesn't constitute a single model based on a set of hypotheses. It's an approach, with a distinct methodology and subject emphasis. Plasma Universe may, and indeed does, contain theories on the same subject that contradict each other. It is not a monolith. Methodologically, Plasma Universe is characterized by the following.

(1) General: Consistent application of plasma physics to space phenomena. Particular: Strong emphasis on the role of the electromagnetic force, so often neglected by the mainstream astrophysicists. It is conjectured that it may play a far more important part than does the gravity. Note that Plasma Universe is not limited to a specific set of people. Rather, it's defined by the subject and the approach.

(2) General: The principle of scalability of plasma, meaning that the basic properties of plasma are the same everywhere, at any scale. Particular: Extrapolation of laboratory and near-space experiments, as well as computer simulations based on those, to space phenomena long ago and far away, justified by the principle of scalability. Note that this principle is not an arbitrary assumption but a result of many years of observations, from the microscopic scale up to the planetary scale--as many degrees of magnitude of difference as between the planetary scale and the cluster scale.

(3) General: Preference is given to the "actualistic" approach, as defined by Alfven in opposition to the "prophetic" approach. The former starts in the here-and-now and works its way outward and back in time. The latter proposes a very detailed knowledge about the origin of the universe and works its way in the opposite directions. Particular: As a result, Plasma Universe is stronger in the near-space science, as evidenced even by the now-wide acceptance of the Alfven-Birkeland theory of auroras. But it is fuzzier in the department of cosmology (not to say that the greater detail of the Big Bang theory necessarily means that it's correct). For more on this dichotomy, see the Alfven's paper where he introduces it:

http://plasmascience.net/tpu/downloads/CosmologyAlfven.pdf

(4) Normally, I wouldn't have to say it, since experiment is a necessary part of scientific method--remove experiment, and you've got no science (and I mean it). But seeing the prevalence of purely theoretical approach in the mainstream astrophysics, I want to emphasize that Plasma Universe places a heavy emphasis on experiment. No matter who's the author of a theory--even Alfven himself--even a couple of contrary experiments may be grounds for reconsidering the theory's hypotheses. Plasma Universe does not construct no epicycles. No does it care how beautiful a theory is. As someone once said, the greatest tragedy of science is the slaying of a beautiful theory by an ugly fact.

Finally, I'd like to emphasize that "mainstream astrophysics" is far from being the same as "mainstream science." Plasma physicists are generally on the side of Plasma Universe. It is supported by IEEE (the largest scientific institution on the planet), the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and elements of NASA. LANL has an entire website devoted to Plasma Universe (http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/TheUniverse.html). IEEE Transactions on Plasma Science links to it from its main page (http://www.ieeetps.org/). More importantly, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. has already devoted seven Special Issues to Plasma Universe, the latest one in August 2007. Here's the editorial:

Dear Sir, you may want to check out the math here: http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0710/0710.0820v2.pdf -> you will understand that it's all about a change in signature from Lorentzian to Euclidian an that it's in this sense that time ceases to exist. regard krisuzu

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Though I don't have a copy of either in front of me at the moment, I believe this topic is covered in either The Electric Sky by Don Scott or The Electric Universe by Wal Thornhill and Dave Talbott. You might want to pick up a copy. Other interesting reads include Lerner's The Big Bang Never Happened, and Arp's Seeing Red. Though they're on slightly different topics.

My understanding is that there is a drift of electrons toward the sun. Yes, a drift. It doesn't take much. Electrical motion is often a very slow process (especially in "dark" currents; IE, currents not in "glow" or "arc" mode) on the order of a few centimeters per hour?

But, in the meanwhile, here are some links to a few abstracts / articles that deal with various bodies as unipolar inductors.

From links found at Plasma-Universe.com:

(Cosmic electric currents and the generalized Bennett relation)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Ap%26SS.144...73C

(Unipolar Induction of a Magnetized Accretion Disk around a Black Hole)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003AstL...29..153S

(A force - free field theory of solar flares I. Unipolar sunspots)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1981ChA%26A...5...77Y

(Electric current in a unipolar sunspot with an untwisted field)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990GeoRL..17.2273O

(Sheath-limited unipolar induction in the solar wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1975Ap%26SS..36..177S

(Establishment of a Lunar Unipolar Generator and Associated Shock and Wake by the Solar Wind)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1967Natur.216..340S

(Unipolar Induction in the Moon and a Lunar Limb Shock Mechanism)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969Moon....1....7S

(The Earth as a unipolar generator)
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0022-3727/11/5/020

(Io, a jovian unipolar inductor)
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1969ApJ...156...59G


I might also point out a great repository of peer-reviewed papers on various subjects related to plasma cosmology:

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

Plasma Physics from Laboratory to Cosmos--The Life and Achievements of Hannes Alfvén
Cosmology in the Plasma Universe: An Introductory Exposition
Introduction to Plasma Astrophysics and Cosmology
Birkeland and the Electromagnetic Cosmology
The Evidence For Electrical Currents in Cosmic Plasma
The Role of Particle Be

Yes, it is much better than conjecture. The article does a poor job of describing the evidence and theory involved. The theory is based on a wide range of data and modeling of the solar wind and the interstellar medium. If you really want to learn more about it I suggest you search astro-ph on heliosphere (http://xxx.lanl.gov/find/astro-ph) -- here's one good paper to read: http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/astro-ph/0606324. Or at least read the wikipedia article on the heliosphere. In fact the heliosphere is bow-shaped as has been understood for some time. The "dent" mentioned is a departure from the roundish shape of the bow shock in the upwind direction -- really asymmetry is a better description. And its based partly on when the two Voyagers crossed the solar wind termination shock and partly on the direction from which particles were detected as Voyager 2 approached the shock.

Yes, it is much better than conjecture. The article does a poor job of describing the evidence and theory involved. The theory is based on a wide range of data and modeling of the solar wind and the interstellar medium. If you really want to learn more about it I suggest you search astro-ph on heliosphere (http://xxx.lanl.gov/find/astro-ph) -- here's one good paper to read: http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf/astro-ph/0606324. Or at least read the wikipedia article on the heliosphere. In fact the heliosphere is bow-shaped as has been understood for some time. The "dent" mentioned is a departure from the roundish shape of the bow shock in the upwind direction -- really asymmetry is a better description. And its based partly on when the two Voyagers crossed the solar wind termination shock and partly on the direction from which particles were detected as Voyager 2 approached the shock.

Interesting, but this is worth far more badass points at the retirement community.

The LANL network tht got hacked was unclassified.

Here is an official email to the employees (sorry, but the links don't work outside the lab):

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Michael R. Anastasio, DIR, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/5-2679
Symbol: DIR-07-324
Date: November 9, 2007

SUBJECT: RECENT HACKING EVENT A REMINDER TO BE CYBER SECURITY
AWARE

For years the Laboratory has been the target of daily, relentless
attacks by hackers by means of SPAM, random pinging, robotic
campaigns, and various other determined, focused, sophisticated
efforts. The Laboratory receives more than 50,000 attacks each
day, and on some days the number reaches half a million. The vast
majority are unsuccessful, but defending against the attacks is
complicated by the difficulty in distinguishing the serious
attacks from all the rest.

Occasionally, a new computer worm or virus comes through the
Laboratory's unclassified network firewall undetected, resulting
in the compromise of computers. Recently, malicious and
determined hackers have accessed the Lab's unclassified Yellow
Network and removed a significant amount of unclassified
material. The exact nature of the stolen information is under
forensic investigation.

The affected computers have been disconnected from the Internet
and the hacker's software has been disabled. The Laboratory's
Red, or classified, network is "air-gapped" from all
unclassified networks and was not affected.

This recent occurrence is a reminder that awareness is the first
and most important layer of defense against fast-spreading worms
that target known vulnerabilities. The threat of comprehensive,
malevolent attacks is continuous and high.

Here are some things you can do to help protect our network and
your computer from infection:

* Don't open unknown e-mail attachments or click on suspicious
links.
* Ensure that your computer has the most recent operating
system security patches.
* Ensure your antivirus application is installed, functioning,
and updated with the latest software.
* Ensure that your computer scans all files for viruses.

To better recognize a possible computer security incident and how
to promptly report it to your OCSR (Organizational Computer
Security Representative) and line manager, please take a moment
to refresh your understanding of cyber security issues by
reviewing cyber security training
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/training/training.shtml

Cyber Security Team Contact Information - Web:
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/
Phone: 665-1795 - Fax: 665-1799 - Email: cybersecurity @lanl.gov

You may also access a recent Security Smart on cyber security at
http://int.lanl.gov/security/documents/security-smart/comp_resp_0707.pdf

The LANL network tht got hacked was unclassified.

Here is an official email to the employees (sorry, but the links don't work outside the lab):

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Michael R. Anastasio, DIR, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/5-2679
Symbol: DIR-07-324
Date: November 9, 2007

SUBJECT: RECENT HACKING EVENT A REMINDER TO BE CYBER SECURITY
AWARE

For years the Laboratory has been the target of daily, relentless
attacks by hackers by means of SPAM, random pinging, robotic
campaigns, and various other determined, focused, sophisticated
efforts. The Laboratory receives more than 50,000 attacks each
day, and on some days the number reaches half a million. The vast
majority are unsuccessful, but defending against the attacks is
complicated by the difficulty in distinguishing the serious
attacks from all the rest.

Occasionally, a new computer worm or virus comes through the
Laboratory's unclassified network firewall undetected, resulting
in the compromise of computers. Recently, malicious and
determined hackers have accessed the Lab's unclassified Yellow
Network and removed a significant amount of unclassified
material. The exact nature of the stolen information is under
forensic investigation.

The affected computers have been disconnected from the Internet
and the hacker's software has been disabled. The Laboratory's
Red, or classified, network is "air-gapped" from all
unclassified networks and was not affected.

This recent occurrence is a reminder that awareness is the first
and most important layer of defense against fast-spreading worms
that target known vulnerabilities. The threat of comprehensive,
malevolent attacks is continuous and high.

Here are some things you can do to help protect our network and
your computer from infection:

* Don't open unknown e-mail attachments or click on suspicious
links.
* Ensure that your computer has the most recent operating
system security patches.
* Ensure your antivirus application is installed, functioning,
and updated with the latest software.
* Ensure that your computer scans all files for viruses.

To better recognize a possible computer security incident and how
to promptly report it to your OCSR (Organizational Computer
Security Representative) and line manager, please take a moment
to refresh your understanding of cyber security issues by
reviewing cyber security training
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/training/training.shtml

Cyber Security Team Contact Information - Web:
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/
Phone: 665-1795 - Fax: 665-1799 - Email: cybersecurity @lanl.gov

You may also access a recent Security Smart on cyber security at
http://int.lanl.gov/security/documents/security-smart/comp_resp_0707.pdf

The LANL network tht got hacked was unclassified.

Here is an official email to the employees (sorry, but the links don't work outside the lab):

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Michael R. Anastasio, DIR, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/5-2679
Symbol: DIR-07-324
Date: November 9, 2007

SUBJECT: RECENT HACKING EVENT A REMINDER TO BE CYBER SECURITY
AWARE

For years the Laboratory has been the target of daily, relentless
attacks by hackers by means of SPAM, random pinging, robotic
campaigns, and various other determined, focused, sophisticated
efforts. The Laboratory receives more than 50,000 attacks each
day, and on some days the number reaches half a million. The vast
majority are unsuccessful, but defending against the attacks is
complicated by the difficulty in distinguishing the serious
attacks from all the rest.

Occasionally, a new computer worm or virus comes through the
Laboratory's unclassified network firewall undetected, resulting
in the compromise of computers. Recently, malicious and
determined hackers have accessed the Lab's unclassified Yellow
Network and removed a significant amount of unclassified
material. The exact nature of the stolen information is under
forensic investigation.

The affected computers have been disconnected from the Internet
and the hacker's software has been disabled. The Laboratory's
Red, or classified, network is "air-gapped" from all
unclassified networks and was not affected.

This recent occurrence is a reminder that awareness is the first
and most important layer of defense against fast-spreading worms
that target known vulnerabilities. The threat of comprehensive,
malevolent attacks is continuous and high.

Here are some things you can do to help protect our network and
your computer from infection:

* Don't open unknown e-mail attachments or click on suspicious
links.
* Ensure that your computer has the most recent operating
system security patches.
* Ensure your antivirus application is installed, functioning,
and updated with the latest software.
* Ensure that your computer scans all files for viruses.

To better recognize a possible computer security incident and how
to promptly report it to your OCSR (Organizational Computer
Security Representative) and line manager, please take a moment
to refresh your understanding of cyber security issues by
reviewing cyber security training
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/training/training.shtml

Cyber Security Team Contact Information - Web:
http://int.lanl.gov/security/cyber/
Phone: 665-1795 - Fax: 665-1799 - Email: cybersecurity @lanl.gov

You may also access a recent Security Smart on cyber security at
http://int.lanl.gov/security/documents/security-smart/comp_resp_0707.pdf

IBM and Los Alamos National Laboratory announced something faster months ago. Roadrunner is 1.3 petaFlops peak vs 0.839 petaFlops peak for the NEC. See http://www.lanl.gov/roadrunner/ for many details on the Roadrunner system design.

But all I'm seeing right now is a Richard-Hoaglandish theme: whining about being Kept Quiet By The Establishment(TM) while pointing out "amazing" and "undeniable" details in fuzzy images instead of writing serious scientific papers that include testable predictions.

or tried to, anyway. It seems to be related to the
paper the article talks about.

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-ph/0104033

It's more of an information theory paper, it seems to me, and
not so easy to relate to any verifable theory of the
universe/multiverse.

It's a hole Jim, but not as we know it. This 'hole' exists/ed in the universe. Nothing on our world is comparable with it and language to try to deal with it ("a hole can exist on an object") fails here. The term 'hole' is a good way to describe what's seen but doesn't add to understanding it, in the PDF it's called a "cold spot".

Here's a link to the original paper:

http://xxx.lanl.gov/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.0 908v2.pdf

Related links: * LDX@MIT
* Physics of magnetically confined fusion [pdf]
* The main principles of magnetic fusion
* Magnetic fusion experiments at LANL
* High density magnetic fusion
* Has a good bit on magnetic confinement
* Can a magnetic field be used to contain plasma?
* International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
* What's happening in fusion?
* Design of magnetic fields for fusion experiments [pdf]
* Wikipedia article on the topic
* Magnetized target fusion bibliography
* Plasma physics bibliography
* Databases for plasma physics

* Plasma physics laboratories
* List of plasma physicists
* Plasma on the internet

Related links: * LDX@MIT
* Physics of magnetically confined fusion [pdf]
* The main principles of magnetic fusion
* Magnetic fusion experiments at LANL
* High density magnetic fusion
* Has a good bit on magnetic confinement
* Can a magnetic field be used to contain plasma?
* International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor
* What's happening in fusion?
* Design of magnetic fields for fusion experiments [pdf]
* Wikipedia article on the topic
* Magnetized target fusion bibliography
* Plasma physics bibliography
* Databases for plasma physics

* Plasma physics laboratories
* List of plasma physicists
* Plasma on the internet

In a perfect world, you're right. However, you have losses in the substations and the various transformers along the way. You also have the fact that electricity is not an on-demand power production system, so it has to always run with significant headspace to current usage. That headspace is wasted energy. The ICE, on the other hand, leaves its unneeded fuel in the tank.

Every technical article I've read has shown that the electric car (not the hybrid, but plug-ins) is, in terms of its usage of the total available chemical energy in the fuel burned, for an equivalent vehicle in terms of passenger capacity, cargo space, range and general performance, less efficient than the ICE. I may be wrong, and I don't have the cites handy (if I remember correctly, it was in IEEE Spectrum a few years back). It's also possible that I am operating on old data.

There are also many things that a plug-in electric is just plain bad at. Any off-road or heavy haulage for one. Bio-Diesel doesn't have that problem.

Bio-Diesel is also completely compatible with all the current transportation infrastructure we have (fuel distribution and gas stations). Plug-in electric requires a massive, entirely new, infrastructure.

One thing I am sure of, at least where I live, the power generation and grid can't keep up with current use, and the same crowd that are big advocates of electric cars, are actively opposing the only project likely to fix that.

The response to my post has been fascinating. It's clear to me that this isn't about science, economics, or even fashion. This is a politico-religious movement bordering on a cult.

For the record: I think that we need to abandon petroleum for personal transportation. I believe that as a matter of national security, and, ultimately, justice in the world. The Petroleum economy supports despotism around the world, and arms those who seek to destroy our way of life. However, I'm not a fanatic would shout down or sneer at those who believe differently. I even like hybrids. I just think that the bio-diesel hybrid is the answer, not the plug-in electric.

You can buy Diesels that work fine on bio-diesel today. They can also run on regular diesel when bio-diesel is not available.

Why would everyone want to give the power generation companies even more control over their lives? Doesn't anyone remember the battles Surfrider fought against PG&E and Edison?

It may be easier to make clean power centrally, but it is also easier for those large utilities to bribe (sorry, give contributions to) politicians. They have no reason to shift to alternative fuels. If anything, they could use our greater dependence on them to justify more strip mines, and lobby for lower safety and environmental standards in the coal mining industry, more damming of rivers, and huge ocean wave, tide, and wind power projects.

If you have adequate local (meaning at your home) generation capacity, then maybe a plug-in is the answer. However, there's still that really nasty battery to deal with.

YMMV, but I'm more of a fan of biofuels than electric.

los alamos has a press release response to this. The laptop did not contain sensitive info. Indeed it would be highly unusual for a laptop with sensitive info to leave the Los Alamos site on travel. Moreover, what Los Alaoms considers "sensitive" info is a much higher standard than you would think. For example, if an employee has someones resume on their computer and that resume, despite being a public document, perhaps taken off Monster.com or Nature.jobs, has a birthdate in it, then it's treated as sensitive information. Think about that next time you hear "sensitive" info being lost at Los alamos.

The current scratch resistant coatings are problematic. I want Optically Transparent, Scratch-Resistant, Diamond-Like Carbon Coatings on my iPhone.

These have been around for a while, but they're a pain in the arse to get working well.
It works like a stirling engine.
You have a hot part and a cold part, and you use the expansion and contraction of a fluid to to work.
The idea is that you can drive a resonant chamber by using a thermal difference to create a difference in pressure.
You can either use a standing wave or a travelling one.

You need to ensure that you don't take enough energy out to stop the resonance, which is the biggest problem.

And that's about it.

Here are some links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine
http://www.lanl.gov/mst/engine/

According to Wikipedia, burning coal will yield around 1.5% of its mass in gallium.

That may be bogus information. It comes from Wikipedia, which got it from LANL's periodic table.

But sources that talk about commercial recovery of gallium from fly ash have far lower numbers. See U.S. Patent #4,686,031, "Beneficiation of gallium in fly ash", which talks about starting from concentrations in the 100ppm (0.01%) range. The state of West Virginia says that the mean concentration of gallium in West Virginia coals is 6.45 ppm. Fly ash is more concentrated than coal, of course, because burning removes the carbon but leaves the non burnable minerals.

If fly ash, which is cheap, contained 1.5% gallium, nobody would be bothering with extracting it from bauxite.

What "bullshit" is it that you don't believe? Do you doubt that the sun's corona is plasma? Do you doubt that the affects of gravity on plasmas are negligible compared to the affects of electric and magnetic forces on the same plasmas? I think you have a lot of catching up to do before you can make informed posts on this issue. here, check out this web site hosted by Los Alamos and maintained by Anthony Peratt of Los Alamos National Laboratory: http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/TheUniverse.html

First of all, let's face it: you'll be dead never mind if it's a portal or not. The fact that my energy will somehow exit on the other end offers little comfort, knowing that to be alive, I need to also have my structure preserved.

Well, actually, you could wear a life preserver.

To quote the paper: "It is interesting that, using only normal matter, we may in principle counteract tidal forces encountered in extreme situations. This might also find application in trips near neutron stars or small black holes (without falling in) where an adjustable-radius, actively-oriented life preserver might enable you to venture closer than would otherwise have been the case and still return safely home from the adventure."

http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/0704.2529

It doesn't work...

wget http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/99060 07.pdf

--12:56:04-- http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/99060 07.pdf
                      => `9906007.pdf'
Resolving proxy... 192.168.53.42
Connecting to proxy|192.168.53.42|:3128... connected.
Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden
12:56:06 ERROR 403: Forbidden.

It doesn't work...

wget http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/99060 07.pdf

--12:56:04-- http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/99060 07.pdf
                      => `9906007.pdf'
Resolving proxy... 192.168.53.42
Connecting to proxy|192.168.53.42|:3128... connected.
Proxy request sent, awaiting response... 403 Forbidden
12:56:06 ERROR 403: Forbidden.

I read this paper about 5 or 6 years ago and it bears directly on the parent article and Bell's inequality.

http://xxx.lanl.gov/ftp/quant-ph/papers/9906/99060 07.pdf

Since I can't read the parent paper outside of the abstract it is hard to say. But I think that these two papers disagree in their conclusions.

http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php/fuseaction/home .story/story_id/10251

I mean, even being in grad school gets you a decent stipend and a fee waiver - and a post-doc usually pays enough (in fact, when I was at a certain national labs, physics post-docs were earning 75-100k).

I was going to suggest this was an exaggeration, but a quick check suggests you aren't too far off the mark. My goodness.