[Vo]:two new postings
Dear Friends, Andrea Rossi's deeds continue to be an insoluble intelligence test for me, perhaps I have to find a geriatrist- see please: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/eventually-it-was-m-day-for-rossi.html And I have published a new issue of Informavore's Sunday: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2011/10/informavores-sunday-no-479.html Please read it and help it to get to people who are curious- in our way. Thanks! Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Does anyone have an idea how long time and on what power level input electricity was supplied into device? Rossi said in the raport: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3303693.ece/BINARY/Report+Ecat+Oct28+%28pdf%29 that input power was zero between 12:30 and 18:00. Does this means that input power was supplied only 90 minutes? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/28230378/oct28demo.png –Jouni
Re: [Vo]:First video from the October 28th, 1 MW E-Cat test event
On 2011-10-28 23:41, Akira Shirakawa wrote: Hello group, Two more videos by PESN: Andrea Rossi Reports on 1 MW E-Cat Test October 28 2011 Part 1: http://youtu.be/nc5K090SZFg Part 2: http://youtu.be/1UmoBoAcvxg Part 3: [to be uploaded soon] Part 4: [to be uploaded soon] Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:At least Rossi has shown he has everything needed.
He has two big, big water containers. These would be absolutely sufficient to do a conclusive test with a thin cat.
RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
And let us not forget Occam’s razor. Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset. It seems to me (Occam’s razor) that there is only one truly new phenomenon taking place in this cold fusion effect as opposed to many. After reading some of the proposed theories, I think that Widom and Larsen (WL) may have at least part of the solution. If we can place some pieces of the puzzle, it may help focus the search for the pieces that still don’t fit. There has been documented cases of tritium and He formation in PF cells. There has been widely documented transmutation. As hard as it is for skeptical physicists to accept the possibility of D+D fusion in solid state, it is even more unthinkable that such high coulombic barrier as a nickel nucleus would have could be crossed by a charged particle. This strikes me as supporting evidence for WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. WL hypothesize that ULM neutrons are formed form hydrogen or deuterium (how is a separate issue). A ULM neutron is a relatively stationary neutron. Once it is formed, it will drop into the nearest nucleus almost immediately – as a neutral particle, it is unaffected by the coulomb barrier. The nearest nucleus could be another hydrogen atom causing formation of deuterium. It could be a nickel nucleus giving rise to an isotopic shift in the nickel that ultimately may decay into something else. If deuterium is present, then this process of ULM neutron creation creates them in pairs because deuterium already comes with one neutron – thus you have formed a neutron pair that can fall into a nucleus. There has been evidence of nuclear weight increasing in multiples. These two neutrons could also fall into another hydrogen and make tritium. Now imagine a flood of such ULM neutrons being created. As these get pumped into nearby nuclei, the nuclei will become unstable and decay into daughter elements by fission giving off energy. Whenever a neutron enters a nucleus, the result is an excited nucleus that will need to give off something (as I understand it). If it decays into a proton as at falls to a ground state, it will give off a beta particle and a neutrino to account for the spin. Some nuclei will get a greater and some a lesser number of neutrons. In this neutron rich environment, nearby nuclei may be constantly undergoing neutron transmutation while the nuclei are still excited, or just after fission. Perhaps when lots of ULM neutrons are present, it statistically results in more rapid upswings in nuclear weight that allows the subsequent relaxation to more stable heavy isotopes like copper. It would be an interesting statistical simulator to write. But on startup, the reaction would go from producing no ULM neutrons to a situation where there is a flood of ULM neutrons being created. Between must come the case where there is a low density of ULM neutrons. Perhaps in this case, it is more likely that the fissions occur to lighter weight elements in a process that yields short term gammas, not as prompt radiation, but due to the fissions. This might explain the reported bursts of gamma at the startup and shutdown of the reaction. Also, it is interesting to note that Focardi’s early reports of isotopic analysis of the ash showed substantial generation of light nuclei. Yet Kullander’s analysis of the ash showed Cu and Fe. Possibly in the early days when Focardi reported the results, the catalyst design was not optimized and resulted in lower ULM neutron density. In that case lower neutron density might have biased the reaction to creation of lighter isotopes more likely to fission into lower atomic number; probably also resulting in more gamma. To me it seems that the ULM neutron mechanism is fairly compelling. It is easy to see how it explains formation of deuterium, tritium, helium, and enables the transmutation despite huge coulombic barrier. It means that it is also likely that deuterium and tritium will be found in the gas in the Rossi reaction and creation of these may supply a portion of the heat. I don’t think there has been a report of a test on the gas product of the reaction – I understand that quantitative analysis for deuterium requires specialized equipment. Widom and Larsen have their own theory for how the ULM neutrons form – they posit creation by SPPs (Surface Plasmon Polaritons). I am not convinced of this, but it is an interesting theory and there is some supporting evidence. There is also evidence that suggest possible collective, perhaps BEC, behavior could be implicated in the ULM neutron formation. How these ULM neutrons form could be a harder piece of the theory to identify, but would be key to understanding how to optimize the reaction. There will certainly be interesting reading to come
[Vo]:Fwd: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims
-Original Message- From: New Energy Times no-re...@newenergytimes.com To: FZNIDARSIC fznidar...@aol.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims October 29, 2011 Noble Aspirations Are Not Enough Rossi’s case is certainly extraordinary, and his claim is so bold that many people cannot imagine that he would pull off a scam this big for so long. Or that he would pull the wool over so many people’s eyes. But he has. A blog commenter using the name “Penny Gruber” nailed it: “Rossi is a convicted [criminal guilty of] serial fraud. His discovery is that, with enough chutzpah, one can convince a number of people that an electric tea kettle is a new kind of nuclear reactor.” Fortunately, nobody appears to have given Rossi much money. But Rossi has abused the honest and sincere fans who have given him their moral support and encouragement. There is nothing wrong with wanting a new source of clean nuclear energy or wanting liberation from the petrocacy. I hope Rossi’s fans will remember their own dreams and desires for a better world and continue their enthusiasm for legitimate low-energy nuclear reaction research and technology. CLICK HERE for the rest of the story. This message was sent to fznidar...@aol.com from: New Energy Times | 369-B 3rd St. #556 | San Rafael, CA 94901 Email Marketing by Unsubscribe | Forward To a Friend
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims
You have to hand it to Krivit: he does not back down or mince his words. If I were him, I would leave myself some wiggle room in case it turns out Rossi is not a fraud. There is no question that Rossi makes it easy for people to attack him. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims
I don't understand the New Energy Times agenda. Very strange that they use Krivit and his continued description of Rossi as a promoter. Now they say it's a good thing nobody has given Rossi much money-- because heaven forbid this technology could have gotten to the public sooner. As I am primarily interested in hydrogen nickel reactions, their spin on it is just insulting. I unsubscribed from their newsletter as a mild protest. Brad On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:17 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: -Original Message- From: New Energy Times no-re...@newenergytimes.com To: FZNIDARSIC fznidar...@aol.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims October 29, 2011 Noble Aspirations Are Not Enough Rossi’s case is certainly extraordinary, and his claim is so bold that many people cannot imagine that he would pull off a scam this big for so long. Or that he would pull the wool over so many people’s eyes. But he has. A blog commenter using the name “Penny Gruber” nailed it: “Rossi is a convicted [criminal guilty of] serial fraud. His discovery is that, with enough chutzpah, one can convince a number of people that an electric tea kettle is a new kind of nuclear reactor.” Fortunately, nobody appears to have given Rossi much money. But Rossi has abused the honest and sincere fans who have given him their moral support and encouragement. There is nothing wrong with wanting a new source of clean nuclear energy or wanting liberation from the petrocacy. I hope Rossi’s fans will remember their own dreams and desires for a better world and continue their enthusiasm for legitimate low-energy nuclear reaction research and technology. CLICK HERE for the rest of the story. This message was sent to fznidar...@aol.com from: New Energy Times | 369-B 3rd St. #556 | San Rafael, CA 94901 Email Marketing by Unsubscribe | Forward To a Friend
Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims
I am also surprised by the actions taken by them. One would think that Krivit would want to encourage Mr. Rossi in his endeavors. It must all be related to Krivit's June trip and the things that transpired between Rossi and he. Dave -Original Message- From: Ecat Builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 10:37 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims I don't understand the New Energy Times agenda. Very strange that they use Krivit and his continued description of Rossi as a promoter. Now they say it's a good thing nobody has given Rossi much money-- because heaven forbid this technology could have gotten to the public sooner. As I am primarily interested in hydrogen nickel reactions, their spin on it is just insulting. I unsubscribed from their newsletter as a mild protest. Brad On Oct 30, 2011, at 7:17 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: -Original Message- From: New Energy Times no-re...@newenergytimes.com To: FZNIDARSIC fznidar...@aol.com Sent: Sat, Oct 29, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: Energy Catalzyer: Extraordinary Scams Require Extraordinary Claims October 29, 2011 Noble Aspirations Are Not Enough Rossi’s case is certainly extraordinary, and his claim is so bold that many people cannot imagine that he would pull off a scam this big for so long. Or that he would pull the wool over so many people’s eyes. But he has. A blog commenter using the name “Penny Gruber” nailed it: “Rossi is a convicted [criminal guilty of] serial fraud. His discovery is that, with enough chutzpah, one can convince a number of people that an electric tea kettle is a new kind of nuclear reactor.” Fortunately, nobody appears to have given Rossi much money. But Rossi has abused the honest and sincere fans who have given him their moral support and encouragement. There is nothing wrong with wanting a new source of clean nuclear energy or wanting liberation from the petrocacy. I hope Rossi’s fans will remember their own dreams and desires for a better world and continue their enthusiasm for legitimate low-energy nuclear reaction research and technology. CLICK HERE for the rest of the story. This message was sent to fznidar...@aol.com from: New Energy Times | 369-B 3rd St. #556 | San Rafael, CA 94901 Email Marketing by Unsubscribe | Forward To a Friend
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: I would suggest that someone over at Rossi's blog ask Rossi for information on Domenico Fiorvanati. State the request simply and politely. He has already said he does not want to reveal this. Fiorvanati met with Lewan and others, and they talked for a long time. Fiorvanati himself said that he and the company do not want to reveal themselves. I know Rossi well enough to predict that he will not change his mind on this. Even though this hurts his credibility, but he does not care about that as much as he cares about controlling and micromanaging the flow of information. Of course it is possible they are hiding the guy's identity because he works for Rossi, or it is a fake name, or for some other nefarious reason. I suppose the reason is what they claim, that the company wants to keep a low profile. That too is plausible. But who knows? Lewan said that whoever Fiorvanati is, he is every inch an engineer. He knows a terrific amount about boilers, steam quality, thermodynamics and so on. He freely talked about the technical issues. It is good to hear that Rossi is working with professionals like him. Even if it is a giant scam, at least it is a well-engineered, safe, giant scam. It probably wouldn't hurt to mention to Rossi the fact that by allowing the pubic to at least verify the professional credentials of Fiorvanati, it ought to go a long way in vindicating Rossi's CF claims. Rossi knows that. We have sent the message to him. It would not hurt to send it again. But then, perhaps Rossi could care less what the general public thinks of his credentials. I see three possibilities here: 1. He could care less. 2. He cares, but he is bound by a secrecy agreement (which is what he claims). 3. He is covering up a scam. #3 seems far-fetched but there is no hard evidence for any of these three. You can pick one and say your intuition favors it, but anyone who says they know for sure which it is should be asked to supply an independently verifiable reason for saying that. The default answer is not fraud or legitimate. It is, I don't know. Actually, I wouldn't stop with Rossi. I'd widen the circle. Ask ANYONE who has had close ties to Rossi if they know who Fiorvanati is. And if they don't know ask them if they might know the name of someone who might know. It might be worth it to contact Manutencoop's personnel department . . . That sounds like the kind of sleuthing Krivit loves to do. He is good at it, too. I myself would not do this because this is none of my business. If these people want to keep a low profile, and if Rossi wants to making himself look like a crook, so be it. Of course I am curious, and if Fiorvanati's credentials can be found in plain view, from a credible source, I would love to see them. But I do not want to poke around trying to learn things that people want to keep secret. I think we should simply report that they are hiding their identities, we should give their reasons for doing this, and we should state the obvious which is that this policy makes them look like a gang of crooks and scheming frauds. It does! With the best will in the world, anyone can see that it does. Krivit thinks he is the only one who sees this, but it was obvious to me during the test, which is why I posted the message Dismaying rumors . . . even before it ended. I use words like dismaying where Krivit would scream blatant fraud!!! It is a matter of emphasis. The content of what I reported is exactly the same as what Krivit reported, but I left it up to the reader to decide how serious this is. At the time I was not sure this was happening. The rumor was confirmed a few hours later. As I predicted, Lewan and others described what happened. Lewan's account is not at all gullible and it does not soft-pedal Rossi's secrecy. Krivit says it does but I think anyone can see that Lewan has not covered up anything. Eventually, I suspect we will ascertain Fiovanati's professional status. Maybe. Maybe not. I can report that he is a skilled, knowledgeable engineer. That does not preclude the possibility that he is a fraud. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
How would that explain the absence of radioactive elements of random half life times? 2011/10/30 Higgins Bob-CBH003 bob.higg...@motorolasolutions.com And let us not forget Occam’s razor. Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset. It seems to me (Occam’s razor) that there is only one truly new phenomenon taking place in this cold fusion effect as opposed to many. After reading some of the proposed theories, I think that Widom and Larsen (WL) may have at least part of the solution. If we can place some pieces of the puzzle, it may help focus the search for the pieces that still don’t fit. ** ** There has been documented cases of tritium and He formation in PF cells. There has been widely documented transmutation. As hard as it is for skeptical physicists to accept the possibility of D+D fusion in solid state, it is even more unthinkable that such high coulombic barrier as a nickel nucleus would have could be crossed by a charged particle. This strikes me as supporting evidence for WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. WL hypothesize that ULM neutrons are formed form hydrogen or deuterium (how is a separate issue). A ULM neutron is a relatively stationary neutron. Once it is formed, it will drop into the nearest nucleus almost immediately – as a neutral particle, it is unaffected by the coulomb barrier. The nearest nucleus could be another hydrogen atom causing formation of deuterium. It could be a nickel nucleus giving rise to an isotopic shift in the nickel that ultimately may decay into something else. If deuterium is present, then this process of ULM neutron creation creates them in pairs because deuterium already comes with one neutron – thus you have formed a neutron pair that can fall into a nucleus. There has been evidence of nuclear weight increasing in multiples. These two neutrons could also fall into another hydrogen and make tritium. ** ** Now imagine a flood of such ULM neutrons being created. As these get pumped into nearby nuclei, the nuclei will become unstable and decay into daughter elements by fission giving off energy. Whenever a neutron enters a nucleus, the result is an excited nucleus that will need to give off something (as I understand it). If it decays into a proton as at falls to a ground state, it will give off a beta particle and a neutrino to account for the spin. Some nuclei will get a greater and some a lesser number of neutrons. In this neutron rich environment, nearby nuclei may be constantly undergoing neutron transmutation while the nuclei are still excited, or just after fission. Perhaps when lots of ULM neutrons are present, it statistically results in more rapid upswings in nuclear weight that allows the subsequent relaxation to more stable heavy isotopes like copper. It would be an interesting statistical simulator to write. ** ** But on startup, the reaction would go from producing no ULM neutrons to a situation where there is a flood of ULM neutrons being created. Between must come the case where there is a low density of ULM neutrons. Perhaps in this case, it is more likely that the fissions occur to lighter weight elements in a process that yields short term gammas, not as prompt radiation, but due to the fissions. This might explain the reported bursts of gamma at the startup and shutdown of the reaction. ** ** Also, it is interesting to note that Focardi’s early reports of isotopic analysis of the ash showed substantial generation of light nuclei. Yet Kullander’s analysis of the ash showed Cu and Fe. Possibly in the early days when Focardi reported the results, the catalyst design was not optimized and resulted in lower ULM neutron density. In that case lower neutron density might have biased the reaction to creation of lighter isotopes more likely to fission into lower atomic number; probably also resulting in more gamma. ** ** To me it seems that the ULM neutron mechanism is fairly compelling. It is easy to see how it explains formation of deuterium, tritium, helium, and enables the transmutation despite huge coulombic barrier. It means that it is also likely that deuterium and tritium will be found in the gas in the Rossi reaction and creation of these may supply a portion of the heat. I don’t think there has been a report of a test on the gas product of the reaction – I understand that quantitative analysis for deuterium requires specialized equipment. ** ** Widom and Larsen have their own theory for how the ULM neutrons form – they posit creation by SPPs (Surface Plasmon Polaritons). I am not convinced of this, but it is an interesting theory and there is some supporting evidence. There is also evidence that suggest possible collective, perhaps BEC, behavior could be implicated in the ULM neutron
[Vo]:Video: validation of New Energy Source from nickel -hydrogen reaction by Rowan University in 2008.
David, You make a very timely point. Although many of us were disappointed by the shroud of secrecy suddenly wrapped around the long touted 1MW test of Rossi it is still additional information that will help us to unlock the principles behind these anomalies. The 1st and 2nd Rowan confirmations were what convinced me that the Black Light Process was legitimate. Although Mills describes everything in terms of catalytic action there is growing evidence of a relationship between Casimir geometry and catalytic action. Change in Casimir geometry may in fact be the basis for catalytic action as indicated by a recent report by Peng Chen at Cornell http://www.physorg.com/news159199255.html study that catalytic action only occurs at openings and defects in nanotubes. This reinforces the working theory that nano powders and skeletal catalysts achieve the same geometry through an inverse method of packing geometry of powder grains versus leaching pits where a softer metal is removed from an alloy of itself with a harder metal. Rossi uses Powder grains larger than most nano powders but the roughness of his powder grains appear to make up for this oversize grain by the way these textured grains interlock to form a bulk material. Most researchers agree that some form of agitation is also required to maintain anomalous operation which would equate to Rossi's need for the signal generator to keep stimulating the reactor. My thought is that the agitation changes the Casimir geometry creating catalytic action upon any gas atoms inside the geometry. The black light plasma is not mentioned in the Rossi experiments but still I think it is present, In fact, I think it is present whenever a researcher mentions condensed hydrogen clusters, IRH, fractional hydrogen or hydrinos along with the odd Balmer line shift of the frequency spectrum. As pointed out by Mill's Similar frequency shifts might be expected from hydrogen being ejected from the sun's corona at fractions of C but if you substitute tritium in his thought experiment you realize that the half life would be extended by such an excursion while the claims for condensed forms of hydrogen in a lattice are mostly for accelerated half lives. This agrees with a paper by professor Jan Naudts On the hydrino state of the relativistic hydrogen atom. http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0507193v2; that the hydrino is actually relativistic and is also supported by Casimir theory that vacuum energy density is actually changed by Casimir geometry - note the density is decreased instead of the typical increase we observe when an object approaches C or equivalently the gravity felt as said object approaches an event horizon. Since we tend to think of our own slow spatial velocities as negligible relative to C the idea that any relativistic action could occur inside a bulk material here on earth seems unlikely because we are conditioned to expect relativistic motion to be either spatial or equivalent accelerations on the scale produced by a black hole. The big hint here is that most claims of significant half life modifications due to catalytic actions or Casimir geometry have been for accelerated half lives. This means that we outside the reactor appear to be approaching C relative to the low vacuum energy density observer inside the active geometry of the bulk material inside the reactor. Since we outside the reactor are almost at a full stop regarding spatial displacement the most plausible explanation is that the low density observer is experiencing negative equivalent acceleration [antigravity] and aging rapidly relative to us outside the reactor. Basically we are to the hydrino as the Paradox twin approaching C is to us. Regards Fran David ledin Sat, 29 Oct 2011 21:44:07 -0700 Validation of New Energy Source from nickel -hydrogen reaction by Rowan University in 2008. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DfjOIoPwolg
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
My first impression of the Widom and Larsen theory was enthusiastic and it seemed to explain many of the observations. We may eventually prove that it is correct, but I see at least one major issue that it poorly explains. What happens to the energetic gammas that are generated by the transitions between states? They seem to gloss over that detail and talk about some unusual mechanism that converts them into infrared radiation. It would be an incredible coincidence for all of these gammas to be consumed in this way. At least a small fraction of them would escape. Horace Hefner has explained quite convincingly that gammas of the energy that are released would have little problem penetrating the 5 cm shield. Have you had an opportunity to give that issue serious consideration? I find the lack of gamma emissions an issue that has to be understood and explained very well. If this hurdle can be surmounted, I vote for W L. Dave -Original Message- From: Higgins Bob-CBH003 bob.higg...@motorolasolutions.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 9:46 am Subject: RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag? And let us not forget Occam’s razor. Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset. It seems to me (Occam’s razor) that there is only one truly new phenomenon taking place in this cold fusion effect as opposed to many. After reading some of the proposed theories, I think that Widom and Larsen (WL) may have at least part of the solution. If we can place some pieces of the puzzle, it may help focus the search for the pieces that still don’t fit. There has been documented cases of tritium and He formation in PF cells. There has been widely documented transmutation. As hard as it is for skeptical physicists to accept the possibility of D+D fusion in solid state, it is even more unthinkable that such high coulombic barrier as a nickel nucleus would have could be crossed by a charged particle. This strikes me as supporting evidence for WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. WL hypothesize that ULM neutrons are formed form hydrogen or deuterium (how is a separate issue). A ULM neutron is a relatively stationary neutron. Once it is formed, it will drop into the nearest nucleus almost immediately – as a neutral particle, it is unaffected by the coulomb barrier. The nearest nucleus could be another hydrogen atom causing formation of deuterium. It could be a nickel nucleus giving rise to an isotopic shift in the nickel that ultimately may decay into something else. If deuterium is present, then this process of ULM neutron creation creates them in pairs because deuterium already comes with one neutron – thus you have formed a neutron pair that can fall into a nucleus. There has been evidence of nuclear weight increasing in multiples. These two neutrons could also fall into another hydrogen and make tritium. Now imagine a flood of such ULM neutrons being created. As these get pumped into nearby nuclei, the nuclei will become unstable and decay into daughter elements by fission giving off energy. Whenever a neutron enters a nucleus, the result is an excited nucleus that will need to give off something (as I understand it). If it decays into a proton as at falls to a ground state, it will give off a beta particle and a neutrino to account for the spin. Some nuclei will get a greater and some a lesser number of neutrons. In this neutron rich environment, nearby nuclei may be constantly undergoing neutron transmutation while the nuclei are still excited, or just after fission. Perhaps when lots of ULM neutrons are present, it statistically results in more rapid upswings in nuclear weight that allows the subsequent relaxation to more stable heavy isotopes like copper. It would be an interesting statistical simulator to write. But on startup, the reaction would go from producing no ULM neutrons to a situation where there is a flood of ULM neutrons being created. Between must come the case where there is a low density of ULM neutrons. Perhaps in this case, it is more likely that the fissions occur to lighter weight elements in a process that yields short term gammas, not as prompt radiation, but due to the fissions. This might explain the reported bursts of gamma at the startup and shutdown of the reaction. Also, it is interesting to note that Focardi’s early reports of isotopic analysis of the ash showed substantial generation of light nuclei. Yet Kullander’s analysis of the ash showed Cu and Fe. Possibly in the early days when Focardi reported the results, the catalyst design was not optimized and resulted in lower ULM neutron density. In that case lower neutron density might have biased the reaction to creation of lighter isotopes more likely to fission into lower atomic number;
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
What happens to the energetic gammas that are generated by the transitions between states? Good question Dave. That's why I had it with the Casimer geometries, the shrunken atom, and Widom and Larsen. I have my own ideas about this downshifting (following the lead of David Noever) and they lead directly to a cold fusion light bulb and a cold fusion device that produces electrical energy. If Rossi proves successful it will help me a lot with my efforts. Frank
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
“Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset.” Why does deuterium kill the Rossi Reaction (Ni-H)? Why is high hydrogen pressure required to maintain the Ni-H reaction? Why is a catalyst(secret) needed in the Rossi Reaction? How is the catalyst activated by heat? Why is high temperature required over the curie point of nickel? Why does the Rossi reaction only self-sustain for six hours or less; what is consumed? What causes run-away reactions and meltdown? Why is there no residual radioactivity (nuclear waste)? Why can copper (and other transition metals) replace nickel in the reaction? Why are there many secret catalysts alternative elements possible in the Rossi reaction? Why are tubules required as custom nano-engineered nano-structures on the surface of the micro powder? Why is no tritium created by the Rossi process? … All of the above strikes me as evidence to disqualify the WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. . On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 9:43 AM, Higgins Bob-CBH003 bob.higg...@motorolasolutions.com wrote: And let us not forget Occam’s razor. Dr. Ed Storms, in his book, makes a good point that any theory of the mechanism should explain all of the experimental evidence, not just a convenient subset. It seems to me (Occam’s razor) that there is only one truly new phenomenon taking place in this cold fusion effect as opposed to many. After reading some of the proposed theories, I think that Widom and Larsen (WL) may have at least part of the solution. If we can place some pieces of the puzzle, it may help focus the search for the pieces that still don’t fit. ** ** There has been documented cases of tritium and He formation in PF cells. There has been widely documented transmutation. As hard as it is for skeptical physicists to accept the possibility of D+D fusion in solid state, it is even more unthinkable that such high coulombic barrier as a nickel nucleus would have could be crossed by a charged particle. This strikes me as supporting evidence for WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory. WL hypothesize that ULM neutrons are formed form hydrogen or deuterium (how is a separate issue). A ULM neutron is a relatively stationary neutron. Once it is formed, it will drop into the nearest nucleus almost immediately – as a neutral particle, it is unaffected by the coulomb barrier. The nearest nucleus could be another hydrogen atom causing formation of deuterium. It could be a nickel nucleus giving rise to an isotopic shift in the nickel that ultimately may decay into something else. If deuterium is present, then this process of ULM neutron creation creates them in pairs because deuterium already comes with one neutron – thus you have formed a neutron pair that can fall into a nucleus. There has been evidence of nuclear weight increasing in multiples. These two neutrons could also fall into another hydrogen and make tritium. ** ** Now imagine a flood of such ULM neutrons being created. As these get pumped into nearby nuclei, the nuclei will become unstable and decay into daughter elements by fission giving off energy. Whenever a neutron enters a nucleus, the result is an excited nucleus that will need to give off something (as I understand it). If it decays into a proton as at falls to a ground state, it will give off a beta particle and a neutrino to account for the spin. Some nuclei will get a greater and some a lesser number of neutrons. In this neutron rich environment, nearby nuclei may be constantly undergoing neutron transmutation while the nuclei are still excited, or just after fission. Perhaps when lots of ULM neutrons are present, it statistically results in more rapid upswings in nuclear weight that allows the subsequent relaxation to more stable heavy isotopes like copper. It would be an interesting statistical simulator to write. ** ** But on startup, the reaction would go from producing no ULM neutrons to a situation where there is a flood of ULM neutrons being created. Between must come the case where there is a low density of ULM neutrons. Perhaps in this case, it is more likely that the fissions occur to lighter weight elements in a process that yields short term gammas, not as prompt radiation, but due to the fissions. This might explain the reported bursts of gamma at the startup and shutdown of the reaction. ** ** Also, it is interesting to note that Focardi’s early reports of isotopic analysis of the ash showed substantial generation of light nuclei. Yet Kullander’s analysis of the ash showed Cu and Fe. Possibly in the early days when Focardi reported the results, the catalyst design was not optimized and resulted in lower ULM neutron density. In that case lower neutron density might have biased the
[Vo]:iReport
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-696792 an 'iReport' about the eCat posted on CNN. Harry
[Vo]:Associated Press- Three Days of the Condor- Rossi Cold Fusion Coverage
Greetings Vortex, Redford s movie: Three Days of the Condor is about encrypted oil well locations and a CIA research group decoding this fact. They are all killed except Redford, since the de-coding wasn t desired by the head of the CIA. There is also a comment on oil being linked to currency. world power and stability. So this makes me wonder about our free pressthe AP. and a lack of desire to cover Cold Fusion. Is there a desire to kill Cold Fusion and preserve the status quo. It has been many years since I saw the movie..I will have to revisit it and see if the info above is correct. Comments are welcomed. Ron Kita, Chiralex Here is a story which I believe is true. The source may have been my friend Dr Gene Mallove. Marty Flieschman was at a very private meeting in San Francisco. Upon returning to his hotel room later in the evening. Flieschman got a phone call: Hello Marty..this is Edward Teller. I have a question that concerns us. Can you build a nuclear bomb with this technology. Martys response. NoTellers comment: Thanks Marty...thats all I wanted to know. How Teller knew where Fleischman was ..is a mystery, but think about it
Re: [Vo]:Associated Press- Three Days of the Condor- Rossi Cold Fusion Coverage
His name is Martin Fleischmann and I seriously doubt this conversation took place. My main reason for this is that no one knows for sure whether CF can be weaponized. I strongly suspect that it can if it has not already happened. T
Re: [Vo]:iReport
On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-696792 an 'iReport' about the eCat posted on CNN. OMG! But I suspect the world will wait a long time for the A.P. story. It appears, at least, that we've all been cheated of progress once again. The test was for a customer - his first name was Colonel - who immediately hooked up the 20-ft container it was placed in and drove it away. So, he just wrote AR a check and hooked the container up to his F250 and drove away? So, there wasn't a single investigative reporter who hopped on their Vespa and followed him? Are we to believe that it now resides in that vast warehouse next to the Lost Ark of the Covenant? This is artistic! T
Re: [Vo]:iReport
On a whim, I googled Fioravanti hoping this might be the name of the mystery company. http://www.fioravanti.it/ This is a architectural/design firm so I doubt it. However, because they design the body of cars it got me thinking that the mystery company might be an automobile company, such as Ferrari. This would be consistent with Rossi's hint that the company tends to do a lot of work in secret. Then again many companies to do some of their best work in secret. Harry On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 12:47 PM, Harry Veeder hveeder...@gmail.com wrote: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-696792 an 'iReport' about the eCat posted on CNN. OMG! But I suspect the world will wait a long time for the A.P. story. It appears, at least, that we've all been cheated of progress once again. The test was for a customer - his first name was Colonel - who immediately hooked up the 20-ft container it was placed in and drove it away. So, he just wrote AR a check and hooked the container up to his F250 and drove away? So, there wasn't a single investigative reporter who hopped on their Vespa and followed him? Are we to believe that it now resides in that vast warehouse next to the Lost Ark of the Covenant? This is artistic! T
Re: [Vo]:Associated Press- Three Days of the Condor- Rossi Cold Fusion Coverage
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: His name is Martin Fleischmann and I seriously doubt this conversation took place. Something like that took place. I do not know what Teller talked about, but he did call out of the blue when Fleischmann was mysteriously delayed in San Francisco. Fleischmann and Mallove both described the event. Teller attended the NSF/EPRI meeting soon after that. His comments are in the transcripts: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/EPRInsfepriwor.pdf My main reason for this is that no one knows for sure whether CF can be weaponized. Nobody I know is sure. It seems somewhat unlikely because it is not a chain reaction; i.e. one nuclear event does not directly and rapidly trigger the next. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:iReport
Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: The test was for a customer - his first name was Colonel - who immediately hooked up the 20-ft container it was placed in and drove it away. So, he just wrote AR a check and hooked the container up to his F250 and drove away? So, there wasn't a single investigative reporter who hopped on their Vespa and followed him? Are we to believe that it now resides in that vast warehouse next to the Lost Ark of the Covenant? True or not, it is hilarious. Ah, I wish I had the movie rights for the history of cold fusion. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:iReport
The i-reporter i-reported: The test was for a customer - his first name was Colonel . . . I doubt that was his name. Unless he is like Major Major Major Major in Catch 22. During WWII there was some discussion of promoting Gen. Marshall to a Field Marshall which would have made him Marshall Marshall. I recall someone said that would sound silly so they shelved the idea. Might have been Marshall himself. - Jed
[Vo]:Unidentified subject!
First time poster here, but have been reading voraciously for a long time now, and I've been wondering why Rossi has been using those RFG's.. I found something that might explain it. It seems RFG's can be used to dissociate water, and produce hydrogen, and burn it.. Here is the link, and was wondering what other's thoughts on this might be? It makes sense to me that in fact the E-Cat might be utilizing something along these lines.. Just a thought.. http://www.engineeringservicesoutsourcing.com/ref/eng/fut/uni/kanzius_salt_water_energy.html -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux
Re: [Vo]:Unidentified subject! RFG's if you please...
LOL, sorry for the missing subject. -BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux --- On Sun, 10/30/11, Dusty Bradshaw d_bra...@bellsouth.net wrote: From: Dusty Bradshaw d_bra...@bellsouth.net Subject: [Vo]:Unidentified subject!
[Vo]:New Forbes article by Gibbs
Mark Gibbs: Believing in Cold Fusion and the E-Cat http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/10/30/believing-in-cold-fusion-and-the-e-cat/ It captured quite well the honest disappointment of the great test that was flat as pancake.
Re: [Vo]:New Forbes article by Gibbs
Mark Gibbs wrote: Allow me to digress for a moment to ask all of you who sent me messages in tones ranging from polite through to downright rudeasserting that cold fusion has actually been successfully duplicated: If an experiment that demonstrates cold fusion has really been replicated in the real world by real scientists then why would the scientific community ignore something so profound? Everyone agrees that cold fusion would be a game changer and in itself would be a hugely important scientific discovery so why would anyone in the scientific community ignore an important, successful, and replicable experiment? Allow me to quote the Scientific American, January 1906, saying almost the same thing in close to the same words, regarding heavier than air flying machines in Dayton, Ohio: If such sensational and tremendously important experiments are being conducted in a not very remote part of the country, on a subject in which everyone feels the most profound interest, is it possible to believe that the enterprising American reporter, who, it is well known, comes down the chimney when the door is locked in his face -- even when he has to scale a fifteen-story skyscraper to do so -- would not have ascertained all about them and published them broadcast long ago? - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Jed, I am among. I simply meant to say that Fioravanti can have a legal degree in engineering, but he does not need to be registered among the Ordine degli Ingegneri to make a report for his employer. On the other hand if he is a consultant then it is very likely that he will (or has by now) make a full report with legal value (i.e. equivalent to a contract with related acquittance) he needs to have the registration id from the Ordine. In any case many with engineering diploma do not care to register unless strictly required, because: 1) you need to pass an exam. 2) you need to pay each year. But are called Ingegnere even if the correct term would be Dottore in Ingegneria so reading Ing. in front of a name does not imply being registered to the Ordine degli Ingegneri unless the document is a public contract. HTH mic Michele Comitini pointed out that Fioravanti does not have to be registered: Also if the customer does not need a certification of the plant with legal value, for instance because Fioravanti works for the customer, there is no need for him to be on the register to do an internal report. I am not sure what you mean. Perhaps you mean that Fioravanti would not need a license as long as he is not working to install or certify a boiler for a customer. I assume he is licensed because he is referred to in the document as Engineer and Ing. I assume that is similar to the English P.E. (professional engineer) which people append to the name. That means you have a license. It is like MD (medical doctor). You would get into legal trouble if you say you are PE or MD but you are not. Assuming he is a PE then he would get into trouble for signing a fraudulent report under any circumstances, for any purpose, whether it is internal for his own company or for a customer. In the U.S. he would get in trouble. Just because you are a PE, I do not know if that means you are registered anywhere, in Italy. I do not know how that works. I believe all U.S. PE and MDs are registered, and probably they are all on line these days. Retired MDs are not. Their license to practice is lapsed. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Jed, sorry I deleted a piece of the first sentence... I wrote: I am among those that don't have a clear writing as yours... mic 2011/10/30 Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com: Jed, I am among. I simply meant to say that Fioravanti can have a legal degree in engineering, but he does not need to be registered among the Ordine degli Ingegneri to make a report for his employer. On the other hand if he is a consultant then it is very likely that he will (or has by now) make a full report with legal value (i.e. equivalent to a contract with related acquittance) he needs to have the registration id from the Ordine. In any case many with engineering diploma do not care to register unless strictly required, because: 1) you need to pass an exam. 2) you need to pay each year. But are called Ingegnere even if the correct term would be Dottore in Ingegneria so reading Ing. in front of a name does not imply being registered to the Ordine degli Ingegneri unless the document is a public contract. HTH mic Michele Comitini pointed out that Fioravanti does not have to be registered: Also if the customer does not need a certification of the plant with legal value, for instance because Fioravanti works for the customer, there is no need for him to be on the register to do an internal report. I am not sure what you mean. Perhaps you mean that Fioravanti would not need a license as long as he is not working to install or certify a boiler for a customer. I assume he is licensed because he is referred to in the document as Engineer and Ing. I assume that is similar to the English P.E. (professional engineer) which people append to the name. That means you have a license. It is like MD (medical doctor). You would get into legal trouble if you say you are PE or MD but you are not. Assuming he is a PE then he would get into trouble for signing a fraudulent report under any circumstances, for any purpose, whether it is internal for his own company or for a customer. In the U.S. he would get in trouble. Just because you are a PE, I do not know if that means you are registered anywhere, in Italy. I do not know how that works. I believe all U.S. PE and MDs are registered, and probably they are all on line these days. Retired MDs are not. Their license to practice is lapsed. - Jed
[Vo]:ZPE as the source of energy enabling nuclear reactions
There are presently several threads exploring the different potential nuclear paths behind this anomaly. I know Hefner's deflation theory, WL ultra-low momentum (ULM) neutron theory and various Beta decay theories are all more plausible to explain the level of energy derived then say MAHG theory but I think they all share a common source of Zero Point energy that makes these statistically unlikely events become likely enough to actually occur. I am convinced the initiating environment is the change in Casimir geometry caused by acoustic or voltage agitation of the geometry and the effect this has on gas atoms experiencing the proportional change in Casimir force [catalytic action]inside these changing geometries - whether the agitation moves the gas atoms into different sized regions or the regions themselves actually reshape is unimportant. Although MAHG theory depends heavily on the bond state of gas atoms and their temperature relative to the disassociation threshold, the Haisch and Moddel patent utilizes what they refer to as a Lamb Pinch on a noble gas to exploit this same environment of rapidly changing Casimir geometry WITHOUT any need for bond disassociation. This same environment might therefore lend itself directly to the nuclear theories by accelerating or deflating gases that experience these changes in Casimir force or it may work in tandem with a MAHG like process acting as a bootstrap to boost the number of nuclear type reactions by further exciting the gases into a plasma state. The sensitivity of the Mills and Rossi device to temperature control is the reason I favor this interim stage where H1 and H2 exploits HUP to create an endless chemical reaction of moving gas atoms back and forth between H1H2 to produce the plasma needed as a springboard to enable the nuclear paths. Fran
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Michele Comitini michele.comit...@gmail.com wrote: But are called Ingegnere even if the correct term would be Dottore in Ingegneria so reading Ing. in front of a name does not imply being registered to the Ordine degli Ingegneri unless the document is a public contract. I think what you are saying is that the Ing. in front of his name is not a formal, legal designation. In the U.S., adding PE (Professional Engineer) is a criminal offense if you are not actually a Professional Engineer. As I said, it is like going around claiming you are an MD (Medical Doctor). If you have a degree in engineering, it is perfectly okay to call yourself Engineer but not PE. Any fool can call himself a Programmer even if he has no degree at all relating to programming. Me, for example. As far as I know it is not a criminal offense to add PhD to your name even if you do not have a doctorate. There may be some laws against it, but they are not enforced. Rossi calls himself Dr. Rossi in this document. He has a fake PhD from a diploma mill in California, according to his own web page. On several occasions Rossi said he does not have a PhD, he is only an engineer. . . . There is a big dispute in the U.S. at present about whether it is okay to pretend you are a retired military officer and you have medals for valor in war. This is the so-called stolen valor issue. The Supreme Court will rule on this. People who do this say they have the right of free speech to do this. It is a complicated question. In my opinion, they should be allowed as long as they do not use this to defraud people for money, free hotel rooms, food or other goods and services. It is a nutty thing to do, and reprehensible, but people have the right to be nutty. - Jed
[Vo]:1MW Steam outlet tubes - update required?
Hi, jugding from this video at 0:02 they added one steam outlet tube: http://youtu.be/uFiJb2UhzqY The dimensions of the container are 5.0m x 2.6m x 2.6m This is mentioned in the final report: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3303693.ece/BINARY/Report+Ecat+Oct28+%28pdf%29 I downloaded this image of the steam outlet: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3264397.ece/BINARY/original/DSC_0015_400px.jpg and scaled it up until the container was 26 cm wide. Then I measured the diameter of the blue tube, it was 9 mm. So the outer diameter is 9 cm. So the real tube inner diameter must be at least 8 cm. So the crossectional area is 16*3.14 cm^2 = 50.24 cm^2 The old calculations must be corrected, these where based on 33 cm^2, so far I remember. Because we have now 2 tubes the total crossectional area must be a little bit more than 100 cm^2. Also we have now not 1 MW, but we have 479 kW. *So the old steam speed calculation is about factor 6 or 7 too high and must be corrected!* I did not calculate precise values. Possibly other people have already done this, but I think, this must be considered. Best, Peter
Re: [Vo]:Rossi Rides into Sunset : answered a few questions from the saddle
# Hampus October 30th, 2011 at 3:54 PM Hi Great work. 1. How many 1 megawatt plants can you sell in one year do you think? 2. When is the next sell? 3. When will the home plants be available for pursued? I know time is of the essence, that’s why my questions are so rash. Thanks for you answers the mean alot for me. Hampus Ericsson # Andrea Rossi October 30th, 2011 at 5:56 PM Dear Hampus: 1- From 30 to 100 for the first year is what we are already ready to make, but we will get exponentially faster in time 2- done 3- this is a more complicated issue, because we need complex certifications Warm Regards, A.R. --- # # Serdar S. Celebi October 30th, 2011 at 8:15 AM Dear Dr. Rossi, We, Turkish cold fusion team – in 1989, are interested in your E-Cat system and specially in the test results of 1 MW E-Cat unit. According to the first evaluation of your results on 28th October 2011, it seems that you are successful even if you get approximately the half of the suggested amount- 1MW- . But at this point, I have some questions to make the matter clear. From the viewpoints of engineering and economics, as you know the evaluation of the efficiency of the system should be made overall. I mean, 1.What is the magnitude of the energy that is consumed for providing Ni/Catalyst system (probably including the supplement of electromagnetic wave) which is used in your process? This energy should be considered in the calculation of overall energy efficiency of the system if the amount of that energy is not negligible compared to energy input -as heat- to the unit at initial. This point can be very important if a special synthetic isotope of Nickel is used or formed in your process at initial and also if the activity life time /stability of Ni- Catalyst is low. 2.What is production/operation cost of Ni/Catalyst system and also what is it’s activity life time? And specially the cost of this catalyst on the base of it’s active life time (hydrogen cost can be neglected) should be taken into account for unit cost of energy output in your unit. Thank you very much for your response in advance. Kind regards, Prof. Serdar S. Celebi (Ph.D. in Chemical Eng.) # Andrea Rossi October 30th, 2011 at 2:39 PM Dear Prof. Serdar S. Celebi: 1- About 200 Wh/MW 2- 1 Euro/MW Warm Regards, A.R.
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
Hi, On 30-10-2011 16:11, Jed Rothwell wrote: 3. He is covering up a scam. #3 seems far-fetched but there is no hard evidence for any of these three. You can pick one and say your intuition favors it, but anyone who says they know for sure which it is should be asked to supply an independently verifiable reason for saying that. The default answer is not fraud or legitimate. It is, I don't know. Actually, I wouldn't stop with Rossi. I'd widen the circle. Ask ANYONE who has had close ties to Rossi if they know who Fiorvanati is. And if they don't know ask them if they might know the name of someone who might know. It might be worth it to contact Manutencoop's personnel department . . . That sounds like the kind of sleuthing Krivit loves to do. He is good at it, too. A thought that occurred to me: seen the bizarre position which Krivit has moved himself in towards Rossi, could it mean that if Krivit is not reporting in the (near) future about any leads regarding Fioravanti, that Krivit could have found information about Fioravanti and the company which supports Rossi's claims? Kind regards, MoB
Re: [Vo]:Forget John Galt, who is Domenico Fioravanti?
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Sun, 30 Oct 2011 11:11:46 -0400: Hi, [snip] OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: I would suggest that someone over at Rossi's blog ask Rossi for information on Domenico Fiorvanati. State the request simply and politely. I wonder if this is related? http://www.fioravanti.it/ (Power source for sports cars?) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Some calculations, discussion and accurate temperature graph
Man on Bridges manonbrid...@aim.com wrote: However the title Professor is to my knowledge not a protected title, so anyone could use it. Here in Atlanta, anyone can call himself a Bishop. See Bishop Eddie Long. - Jed
RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
David Roberson wrote: I recall an old phrase attributed to Sherlock Holmes along the lines of Once all of the probable answers have been proven wrong, then it must be the improbable. Someone among the vortex will correct my phrase and that is a good thing. My wording is incorrect, but that is not the important issue. Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. -S.H.
Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
Thanks, I knew I could count on the vortex! -Original Message- From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 10:54 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag? David Roberson wrote: I recall an old phrase attributed to Sherlock Holmes along the lines of “Once all of the probable answers have been proven wrong, then it must be the improbable”. Someone among the vortex will correct my phrase and that is a good thing. My wording is incorrect, but that is not the important issue. “Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer.” -S.H.
RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag?
Dave Roberson asks: “What happens to the energetic gammas that are generated by the transitions between states? They seem to gloss over that detail and talk about some unusual mechanism that converts them into infrared radiation. It would be an incredible coincidence for all of these gammas to be consumed in this way. At least a small fraction of them would escape.” Although I cannot give you a quantitative answer, I would suggest the following possibility: There are numerous (and obvious) evidences that the basic elements which make up an atom (i.e., p+, e-) have an oscillatory character about them; e.g., the entire field of absorption/emission spectroscopy, lamb shift, and numerous other ‘flavors’ of spectroscopy. What happens when you shine light of a non-resonant frequency at a target atom? Most likely, nothing… Why? Because the oscillations occurring in the atom and the light hitting it are not harmonically related. One of the crucial reasons the mainstream physics community uses to dismiss LENR is that one cannot overcome the coulomb barrier at such low temperatures. That may be true if you’re trying to interact with the atom in a brute force way… i.e., hitting it with a sledge-hammer. The principle way in which physicists have learned about nuclear physics has been thru the use of various kind of particle accelerators. Make no mistake, a particle accelerator *IS* an atomic/nuclear sledge-hammer. The entire nuclear physics community is thus trained into thinking that that’s the only way to get two nuclei to interact – with a sledge-hammer. My suggestion as to your question, is that once certain conditions come about in the LENR (and perhaps Ni-H) systems, there is a resonant condition (or conditions, plural) present which drastically changes the branching ratios to favor other interactions. Which would also explain why it was so difficult to reproduce in the early years…. i.e., it takes very specific oscillatory frequencies, and so 99.99% of the time, regardless of what you do to your experiment, you never achieve the proper harmonic relationships for the effect to manifest. Another clue that is hinting at this suggestion is that one can get very large amplitude responses from a system by putting in very LOW amounts of energy **that is harmonically related** to the oscillation one is trying to affect inside the nucleus. So I would posit that one can get a proton to interact with the Nickel nucleus at low energy IF one knows how to bring the two objects into some kind of harmonic/resonant relationship… and the coulomb barrier is then a non-issue. Perhaps it needs to be in a harmonic relationship with BOTH the electrons of the Ni atom as well as what’s going on in the nucleus… which makes it all the more difficult to accomplish. -Mark
[Vo]: Some more Sherlockiana...
You’re most welcome… been a Holmes fan since college days… 30 yrs ago! A few other bits of Sherlockiana… Although Holmes said, “Elementary, Watson”, and “My dear Watson”, Holmes never said, “Elementary, my dear Watson.” Sherlock had a smarter, older brother… Mycroft Holmes. Holmes never wore his deer-stalker cap in London… he only wore it when on a case that took him out of the big city. The deer-stalker cap is the one that looks like two baseball caps; one oriented forward as usual, and the other backwards.. i.e., it has two ‘visor’ portions, with one in front and one sticking out the back… no doubt to cause the rain dripping from your cap to fall on the back of your coat and not run down the back of your neck and under your coat. Finally, of all the TV/movie renditions of Holmes and Watson that I’ve seen, I think the PBS Mystery series with Jeremy Brett and Edward Hardwicke as Holmes and Watson, was the closest to what I remember from reading all 56 short stories and 4 novels that Conan Doyle wrote. Jeremy Brett did a very good Holmes… -m From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 8:07 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag? Thanks, I knew I could count on the vortex! -Original Message- From: Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint mailto:zeropo...@charter.net zeropo...@charter.net To: vortex-l mailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Oct 30, 2011 10:54 pm Subject: RE: [Vo]: Is the ECAT out of the bag? David Roberson wrote: I recall an old phrase attributed to Sherlock Holmes along the lines of “Once all of the probable answers have been proven wrong, then it must be the improbable”. Someone among the vortex will correct my phrase and that is a good thing. My wording is incorrect, but that is not the important issue. “Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer.” -S.H.
