Talk-Polywell.org

A new paper claiming the wavefunction cannot be a probabilistic interpretation of something else but an actual physical entity (Nature URL for an article containing a link to the actual paper): http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-theorem-shakes-foundations-1.9392 Paper itself: http://xxx.lanl.gov/pdf...

Interesting: http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-material-superconductor.html Interesting but not really surprising: Superconduction occurs when the distances between the orbitals are less than a critical value as determined by the binding energy of the orbitals. Thus you can have an array of orbit...

Another possible room temperature superconductor. http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-20027078-1.html?tag=mncol;txt Dan Tibbets Apart from te obvious jokes that this discovery can bring, I think this is darn interesting. What it is not, however, is a room-temperature semiconductor. Unless your room...

The material isn't normally superconductive, but can be after immersion in an alcoholic beverage Alcohol enhances pair formation! (j/k) The paper is about a mechanism for ion implantation (doping), likely oxigen implantation, by soaking the material in booze and heating it. Apparently some of the c...

Sounds like he did experiments on other people's theories. In this case, Cop and Ari. No? Unfortunately, that wikipedia paragraph is misleading, as far a I know. Aristotle claimed any movement at any time was due to a force acting at that instant. If it didnt looked like it (an arrow flying) then s...

KitemanSA wrote:As for Galileo, what theory did he propose?

The Law of Inertia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia#Classical_inertia

Googling Frank Znidarsic and following link chains I ended up at this video supposedly related to his work.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr_s28wIOzQ

There are plenty of links about Znidarsic in there if you click on the video description button to expand it.

To reconduct the thread, here are the cliff notes. Note that I am casually jumping from chapter to chapter at random when reading his book so I might not get it completely right as I havent read even half of it. Any misrepresentation is a misunderstanding on my part and not out of malice. Im sure Jo...

How about you telling me which sensors I can be build in my garage from a superconducting wafer? If you have a good idea, I am willing to try it. But please do NOT challenge me with "airy-fairy" ideas which you yourself cannot articulate. I do not know where you got the notion that I was "challengi...

What kind of new small sensors could be developed with the superconducting materials that you are actually able to manufacture? Better accuracy for a given size due to less thermal noise its a given, but even the lack of cooling requirement is an advantage due to less power consumption and compact f...

It has been dificoult to trace the original derivation given that I dont have paid access to the online journals, I lack the books refered to in the papers and the fact that some papers are old (1950's). For now, I will settle with this 1959 paper: http://www.w2agz.com/Library/Classic%20Papers%20in%...

Johan, while this is not a substitute for proper references, in the meantime here you got a short pdf with math slides from MIT course on superconductivity talking about Ginzburg-Landay theory + depairing current. http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineering-and-computer-science/6-763-applied-s...

johanfprins wrote: Thanks, I suspected something like this. Now the "great question": Does this equation come from the Ginzberg-Landau approach or from BCS and its numerous fudge factors?

From Ginzberg-Landau, I believe.

Will dig references and math. No promises.

I will appreciate it if somebody would be kind enough to give me a clear definition of what is meant by a "depairing current" as compared to a "critical current" . Are they they same or are they measured in different ways? Although the preparation technique used for the nanomesh film can be followe...

Johan, I am curious whats your take on the nature of matter regarding which so called "particles" actually exist. I seem to recall reading somewhere that you accept protons, electrons and neutrinos. Neutrons being an entanglement (NOT a superposition) of a proton an electron and a neutrino, or at le...