Re: [Vo]:Energy Catalyzer Wiki : FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH!
On Dec 3, 2011, at 8:56 PM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: I've look a gain, and I'm still suspect about using ZPE, because ZPE is only an energy that you cannot use to go below... by definition. When you get to nuclear sizes that lower limit is very large. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
Am 04.12.2011 05:07, schrieb Horace Heffner: That is because Bill did not call them water thread experiments. My mistake, and bad memory. The above wasser.html reference was indeed about water bridge experiments, not Bill Beaty's air thread experiments, which are a very different thing - thread lengths up to 60 cm. Thank you for confirmation. Yes, it is miraculous that these threads are so sharply focussed. Air Ions behave strangely, this was known before. I think they follow the electrical lines of field, but because they are charged, they also distort the field. It should be expected they repell and distribute, but they dont. Possibly they follow only the strongest maximum in the field, this might explain it partially. Now, an electron beam also does not diffuse, physics is often counterintuitive. I have often made the experince, that 50 cm away from a charged electrode, I can suddenly feel a cool flow and smell ozone. With these air threads this is easily explained. I also by accident pointed with a charged needle on an microamperemeter from 50 cm distance. Suddenly the meter displayed a current and this current was there without cables connected. It was a conventional analog meter and had a plastic glass (plexiglass) at the front. It turned out, that this plexiglass was permanently charged. The charges where embedded into the plastic and it was impossible to remove them. Finally I removed the glass and washed it a minute under warm water. Then they went away. There are also reports that air ions can charge an isolated object meters away. Air ions are not necessarily identical with those ions, that we have in modern physics. It is a historical name, Ion is the greek name for wanderer. The name existed more than hundred years ago, when the modern concept of Ion was unknown. Air Ions are simply charged amounts of air and this can be charged molecules or clusters of molecules or whatever. The precise structure is unknown, because the lifetime is only some minutes. Biophysicists and architectural physicists and weather physicists know more about them than chemists or particle physicists. They are important for climate and there are measurement instruments for them. Here is a company that makes this instruments and they have a very good article about natural air ions: http://www.trifield.com/content/about-air-ions/ For example these ions can exist in a positive negative-mixture without discharging and this can be measured. They behave very strangely and miraculous. I believe there is a lot of fluid dynamic effects involved and in fluid dynamic, which is a multi body problem, there are often effects observed that are counter intuitive. best regards, Peter
Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : Rossi to show e-cat live... like Defkalion...
Am 04.12.2011 08:04, schrieb Alain dit le Cycliste: after defkalion who say they will install a webcam to show an hyperion working http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=587 it seems that rossi agree too for a 24x7 show http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/12/rossi-open-to-live-streaming-video-of-his-e-cat-technology/ Note to MY : I agree that this is not a proof. Best regards (We need you like the DA in US court). He also promised a webcam for the 1MW demo and online power meters and this stuff. The mechanism is this: Somebody asks him could you do this or that, could you invite this honest sceptic or set up a webcam and of course he can not say no. So he says yes this is a nice idea, I will do it. So people are happy and distribute the good news over the internet, and he gets new advertising from this. This does not mean, that he really will do it. His Yes is a yes without value. Same for Defkalion. Peter
[Vo]:can we use such a program?
Software That Listens for Lies: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/04/business/lie-detection-software-parses-the-human-voice.html?_r=1nl=todaysheadlinesemc=tha26 The first link for the next issue of my newsletter. Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
On Dec 4, 2011, at 1:10 AM, Peter Heckert wrote: Am 04.12.2011 05:07, schrieb Horace Heffner: That is because Bill did not call them water thread experiments. My mistake, and bad memory. The above wasser.html reference was indeed about water bridge experiments, not Bill Beaty's air thread experiments, which are a very different thing - thread lengths up to 60 cm. Thank you for confirmation. Yes, it is miraculous that these threads are so sharply focussed. Air Ions behave strangely, this was known before. I think they follow the electrical lines of field, but because they are charged, they also distort the field. It should be expected they repell and distribute, but they dont. Possibly they follow only the strongest maximum in the field, this might explain it partially. I think this follow the field line explanation is totally wrong of course. See my calculation here: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg20519.html Also, note that the beam maintains its integrity even after passing through a grounded ring above a grounded witness pan, i.e. where there are no field lines. Now, an electron beam also does not diffuse, physics is often counterintuitive. An electron beam moves at the speed of light. The air thread moves at about 10 miles per hour, 4.5 m/s. There is an extreme difference in the time lateral forces have to act. I am familiar with air ions. The phenomenon measured by Bill Beaty in the presence of much water vapor, and having nano-amp current, I think is not made of non-polarized air molecules, but of a contiguous string of polarized molecules. Here is one way to tell: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg20467.html Note: the water bridge lost stability in the presence of carbon dioxide, due to ion conduction. Bill Beaty's air bridge worked better in the presence of carbon dioxide. I think this is because it is the structure of the thread that permits proton conduction, and the CO2 molecule works just as well as an H2O molecule in that structure for that purpose. I have often made the experince, that 50 cm away from a charged electrode, I can suddenly feel a cool flow and smell ozone. With these air threads this is easily explained. I also by accident pointed with a charged needle on an microamperemeter from 50 cm distance. Suddenly the meter displayed a current and this current was there without cables connected. It was a conventional analog meter and had a plastic glass (plexiglass) at the front. It turned out, that this plexiglass was permanently charged. The charges where embedded into the plastic and it was impossible to remove them. Finally I removed the glass and washed it a minute under warm water. Then they went away. There are also reports that air ions can charge an isolated object meters away. Air ions are not necessarily identical with those ions, that we have in modern physics. It is a historical name, Ion is the greek name for wanderer. The name existed more than hundred years ago, when the modern concept of Ion was unknown. Air Ions are simply charged amounts of air and this can be charged molecules or clusters of molecules or whatever. The precise structure is unknown, because the lifetime is only some minutes. Biophysicists and architectural physicists and weather physicists know more about them than chemists or particle physicists. They are important for climate and there are measurement instruments for them. Here is a company that makes this instruments and they have a very good article about natural air ions: http://www.trifield.com/content/about-air-ions/ For example these ions can exist in a positive negative-mixture without discharging and this can be measured. They behave very strangely and miraculous. I believe there is a lot of fluid dynamic effects involved and in fluid dynamic, which is a multi body problem, there are often effects observed that are counter intuitive. best regards, Peter Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Energy Catalyzer Wiki : FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH!
Am 04.12.2011 06:56, schrieb Alain dit le Cycliste: I've look a gain, and I'm still suspect about using ZPE, because ZPE is only an energy that you cannot use to go below... by definition. There are new reports that photons where extracted from ZPE: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26813/ This however requires as much energy as the photons contain. I personally believe, that hydrogen atoms can be made from ZPE. The mechanism to do this, is gravity. There is no other mechanism to compress ZPE than gravity. Therefore this can only happen in the intergalactic space in unimaginable large dimensions of absense of matter. This empty space is a billion times larger than the galaxys themselfes. Most people are not aware about this fact, because we always only look to the visible matter, but not the invisible space. Therefore I think, it is impossible to tap the ZPE on earth. But it can be engineered and used as a medium if it exists. Peter
Re: [Vo]:[Vo] : Rossi to show e-cat live... like Defkalion...
On Dec 3, 2011, at 10:04 PM, Alain dit le Cycliste wrote: after defkalion who say they will install a webcam to show an hyperion working http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=17t=587 it seems that rossi agree too for a 24x7 show http://www.e-catworld.com/2011/12/rossi-open-to-live-streaming- video-of-his-e-cat-technology/ Note to MY : I agree that this is not a proof. Best regards (We need you like the DA in US court). The problem is webcam of what? If it the same full of holes type procedures used in the past then it is useless. Having a stationary webcam is of much less value than having an honest journalist like Mats Lewan, or even better a group of journalists, free to run around videoing. It is far more important that Rossi post his experimental plan in advance, so criticism arrives in time to make a difference, than to have a fixed web cam that makes no difference. The 24/7 option is a big improvement, however. There might be time to fix minor problems, like the location of the thermocouples. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Energy Catalyzer Wiki : FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH! FLAT EARTH!
On Dec 4, 2011, at 3:46 AM, Peter Heckert wrote: Am 04.12.2011 06:56, schrieb Alain dit le Cycliste: I've look a gain, and I'm still suspect about using ZPE, because ZPE is only an energy that you cannot use to go below... by definition. There are new reports that photons where extracted from ZPE: http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/26813/ This however requires as much energy as the photons contain. I personally believe, that hydrogen atoms can be made from ZPE. The mechanism to do this, is gravity. There is no other mechanism to compress ZPE than gravity. Therefore this can only happen in the intergalactic space in unimaginable large dimensions of absense of matter. This empty space is a billion times larger than the galaxys themselfes. Most people are not aware about this fact, because we always only look to the visible matter, but not the invisible space. Therefore I think, it is impossible to tap the ZPE on earth. But it can be engineered and used as a medium if it exists. Peter It appears we are too far in disagreement on this to have sensible conversation. In any case, my position on this is here: http://mtaonline.net/~hheffner/NuclearZPEtapping.pdf You may find interesting the following references therein: 1 H. E. Puthoff,, “Everything for Nothing,” New. Sci. vol. 127 (28 July 1990): p. 52. 2 H. E. Puthoff,, “Ground State of Hydrogen as a Zero-Point- Fluctuation-Determined State,” Phys. Rev. D vol. 35 (1987): p. 3266. 3 D. C. Cole and H. E. Puthoff,, “Extracting Energy and Heat from the Vacuum,” Phys. Rev. E vol. 48 (1993): p. 1562. 4 H. E. Puthoff, “The Energetic Vacuum: Implications for Energy Research,” Spec. in Sci. and Tech. vol. 13 (1990): p. 247. 5 Timothy Boyer, “The Classical Vacuum,” Scientific American August 1985: p. 70. 6 Walter Greiner and Joseph Hamilton, “Is the Vacuum Really Empty?,” American Scientist March-April 1980: p. 154. Hal Puthoff's papers (and other EarthTech staff's) can be found at: http://www.earthtech.org/ specifically at: http://www.earthtech.org/index.php/publications Hal was a member of this list at one time, as was Scott Little. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
Am 04.12.2011 13:40, schrieb Horace Heffner: I am familiar with air ions. The phenomenon measured by Bill Beaty in the presence of much water vapor, and having nano-amp current, I think is not made of non-polarized air molecules, but of a contiguous string of polarized molecules. Here is one way to tell: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg20467.html Note: the water bridge lost stability in the presence of carbon dioxide, due to ion conduction. Bill Beaty's air bridge worked better in the presence of carbon dioxide. I think this is because it is the structure of the thread that permits proton conduction, and the CO2 molecule works just as well as an H2O molecule in that structure for that purpose. Yes the CO2 effect in water is easyly explained: CO2 dissolves in water and makes it conductive. The current will increase. This causes breakdown of voltage and electrostatic forces. If the HV supply is stron enough to maintain the voltage, the water will boil and this interrupts the thread. I have observed the air threads in dry air. Of course they are not visible, but the effects can be observed. The air blow, if directed on easy to move objects like hair or feathers or wool moves them. I believe this are threads in air, that are charged and also are electrically conductive. This means, as soon as the tread is interrupted, there will be a strong voltage difference at the interrupted position. This generates electrostatic forces that again close the gap. It is very similar to the water thread mechanism, it is a flow-force equilibrium. The currents in air are microamperes and nanoamperes, I have measured them too. This is more easy to do than most people think. You can easily use a DVM to measure nanoampere currents. Typically a DVM has an inner resistance of 10 MOhm. If it displays a voltage of 1 millivolt, then this equals a current of 0.1 nanoamperes. The instrument must be protected with a neonbulb and filter capacitors , to avoid destruction by HV and to avoid mismeasurements caused by RF frequencies. 100 Nanoampere * 10 kV = 1 mW. This is enough energy to make a considerable air blow. Calculate the mechanical equivalent. I have done these experiments and I think experiments have more evidency than calculations, sorry ;-). best regards, Peter
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:09 AM, Peter Heckert wrote: Am 04.12.2011 13:40, schrieb Horace Heffner: I am familiar with air ions. The phenomenon measured by Bill Beaty in the presence of much water vapor, and having nano-amp current, I think is not made of non-polarized air molecules, but of a contiguous string of polarized molecules. Here is one way to tell: http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l@eskimo.com/msg20467.html Note: the water bridge lost stability in the presence of carbon dioxide, due to ion conduction. Bill Beaty's air bridge worked better in the presence of carbon dioxide. I think this is because it is the structure of the thread that permits proton conduction, and the CO2 molecule works just as well as an H2O molecule in that structure for that purpose. Yes the CO2 effect in water is easyly explained: CO2 dissolves in water and makes it conductive. The current will increase. This causes breakdown of voltage and electrostatic forces. Yes, this was nicely explained in the video - an excellent presentation. If the HV supply is stron enough to maintain the voltage, the water will boil and this interrupts the thread. The video you referenced earlier said that boiling (at least light boiling) did not disrupt the water bridge. In fact when the water was cooled with ice the water bridge it became unstable. It was stable all the way up to and including boiling conditions. I will try to use the term water bridge for the thick suspended water bridge experiments, vs air thread for Bill Beaty's experiments. I think water thread far better describes Bill Beaty's experiments, and that was the source of my earlier confusion. I have observed the air threads in dry air. Of course they are not visible, but the effects can be observed. The air blow, if directed on easy to move objects like hair or feathers or wool moves them. This sounds more like actual ion breeze, not and air thread similar to Bill Beaty's. I've done similar experiments. I believe this are threads in air, that are charged and also are electrically conductive. This means, as soon as the tread is interrupted, there will be a strong voltage difference at the interrupted position. This generates electrostatic forces that again close the gap. This could be disproved by the circuit I provided. It is very similar to the water thread mechanism, it is a flow- force equilibrium. The currents in air are microamperes and nanoamperes, I have measured them too. This is more easy to do than most people think. You can easily use a DVM to measure nanoampere currents. Typically a DVM has an inner resistance of 10 MOhm. If it displays a voltage of 1 millivolt, then this equals a current of 0.1 nanoamperes. Yes. This is what Bill Beaty did. I've used this technique myself, but not in this application. The instrument must be protected with a neonbulb and filter capacitors , to avoid destruction by HV and to avoid mismeasurements caused by RF frequencies. 100 Nanoampere * 10 kV = 1 mW. This is enough energy to make a considerable air blow. Calculate the mechanical equivalent. I have done these experiments and I think experiments have more evidency than calculations, sorry ;-). The experiments are meaningless if they are not of actual air threads, but merely ion breezes. best regards, Peter Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
Some relevant quotes of interest from Bill Beaty at: http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airexp.html The threads can survive in a zero-field region. I made a crude thread gun and passed a thread through an accelerator ring composed of an aluminum bundt pan. I didn't expect this to work, since the hole in the pain is shielded and relatively field-free. Yet the thread did come out the other side. Once I've set up a thread- emitter, I find that I can cup my hands very closely around the path of the invisible thread, yet this does not eliminate the furrow in the fog. Evidentally the threads either have enough inertia to survive the zero-field regions temporarily, and to traverse several inches of zero-field space... or they need no fields at all once they have been created. Their behavior is not simply that of ionized wind. They act WEIRD! At the tip of the fiber I could see streams of mist moving inwards in 3D from all directions, as if the tip of the fiber was the mouth of a tiny suction hose (like gasses surrounding a black hole!) I can see a tiny time-delay when I wiggle a long fingertip-thread, so the speed of the effect might be around 10mph or so, not instantaneous I connected a microamp meter in series with the plate. It indicated zero. When I let the other HV wire create one furrow in the mist, the meter indicated zero UA. When I brought the cable close, so there were maybe 50 to 70 furrows being drawn along the mist, the meter started flickering, indicating approx. 0.5uA. These ion-streams, if that's what they are, are each delivering an electric current in the range of 10 nanoamperes or less. Jeeze. No wonder nobody ever notices them. I made a crude oscilloscope using a thread as the writing beam. By applying 4KV 60Hz to a metal sphere adjacent to a thread, I managed to spread it's fog-mark out into a 2cm line. When I move my hand in the DC field, the thread moves. When I move my hand quickly, the thread sweeps across the fog, leaving a beautiful sine wave mark which was produced by the AC voltage on the metal sphere. What if the power line waveform had glitches? They would be visible! It's an electromechanical oscilloscope with no vacuum required. If the thread was merely a stream of charged air, would a 60Hz e-field be able to move it sideways through the atmosphere like this? While messing with airthreds at the Dale T. lab, I discovered that wet fingers produce them. Dry fingers only produce them if there are bits of clothing-lint or knuckle-hairs (or sharp burrs on fingernails.) However, when I wet one of my fingers to make shirt- lint adhere, I discovered that lint was unnecessary, and strong airthreads would form just from the wet surface. THIS IMPLIES THAT THESE THREADS ARE COMPOSED OF MICROSCOPIC DROPLETS. I bet this effect is the same as that electrospray or spitting cusp phenomenon that develops whenever a charged sphere electrode is held over a water surface. The water surface humps up and forms a sharp cusp-shape which spews droplets. When I used a soda straw and blew upon a thread with all my might, the dot in the mist only moved a little. The 5mm dot was changed to a 10mm x 30mm blotch. INCREDIBLY BIZARRE! The air blast either causes the thread to spread out into a narrow fan, or it causes it to vibrate at high speed so that the thread tip traces out an oblong blotch in the mist. These threads are robust! Not at all like smoke, they are more like carbon-fiber spiderwebs under high linear tension. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
Am 04.12.2011 14:30, schrieb Horace Heffner: Some relevant quotes of interest from Bill Beaty at: http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airexp.html The threads can survive in a zero-field region. I made a crude thread gun and passed a thread through an accelerator ring composed of an aluminum bundt pan. I didn't expect this to work, since the hole in the pain is shielded and relatively field-free. Yet the thread did come out the other side. Once I've set up a thread-emitter, I find that I can cup my hands very closely around the path of the invisible thread, yet this does not eliminate the furrow in the fog. Evidentally the threads either have enough inertia to survive the zero-field regions temporarily, and to traverse several inches of zero-field space... or they need no fields at all once they have been created. Their behavior is not simply that of ionized wind. They act WEIRD! If the thread is electrically conducting, like a high resistance wire, it is never in a zero field region, because there is always a voltage drop along the conductive thread. The thread will carry its own field with it. Its impossible to surpress the field. Let's assume we have 1 m of thread length and 10 kV. This equals 100V per centimeter and is enough to move air molecules. In an air ion measuring instrument, the positive and negative air ions are separated in a 60 V field and counted separately. The thread will carry its own field with it. It is reasonable to assume that a needle will inonize molecules that are easy to ionize. These are charged and repelled and form a conductive path in air that has a current and a voltage drop along it. This might be radioactive molecules or water molecules. The thread does therefore not consist out of arbitrary air molecules but consists out of a nonrepresentative collection of conductive molecules. Of course this can be water molecules. If true, this mechanism could be used to collect radioactive gases out of the athmosspere. Peter
[Vo]:translation
See please: *Dear Italo:** I cannot open a camera on our test room, because we make also confidential operations. Only a plant in regular operation in our Customers’ concerns is possible. Warm Regards, A.R.* * * Translated in English this is: you will not see soon working E-cats Reason- they cannot stop the ... webcam when making confidential operations as mixing pixie dust and aqua Tofana to nickel. Should we believe this? -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Speaking of MAHG
Hi Jones, Yes I did pitch this idea to Moller but his reply indicated that I needed to be a serious investor before he and Frolov could Commit any further energy into this pursuit. He is presently engaged in other work that would preclude much near term effort on his part. I wanted to sputter the NI-H powder on the inside of the MAHG and only use Tungsten as the disassociator/heater across which the stream would pass like atomic welding - at the time of these communications - circa April 2010, I was still pushing the idea of an external hydrogen circulation to force more Casimir translations of gas atoms through the powder [H-M]. You gave me some additional insight when you convinced me the circulation was unnecessary as the random motion of heated gas was already more than enough to push the atoms and molecules to migrate rapidly through the Casimir tapestry of geometries. We are both uniquely aware of the inverse foundation between skeletal cats like Rayney nickel and nano powders both resulting in nano geometry but Then I read the Cornell report that catalytic action only occurs at openings and defects in nanotubes and it hit me! Catalytic action is simply rapid change in the value of vacuum energy density. The 2005 paper by Naudts said the hydrino was relativistic but he never said how it became so. The energy density was the answer and we already had reports of modified half lives to support it. If the paradox twin approaching an even horizon could remotely measure his greatly accelerated earthbound twin's vacuum energy density it would appear decreased from his perspective, Exactly the same way energy density appears reduced to us in Casimir theory but without displacing the longer vacuum wavelengths. The wavelengths actually dilate their ratio of space to time to fit between the suppression boundaries changing the inertial frame for any gas atoms that happen to occupy the same suppressed region -of course you don't get something for nothing so the exterior boundaries will all contribute a retardation zone where these wavelengths instead compress to an increased density but dispersed over a much larger and shallow region before the isotropy can reassert itself. Such a scenario supports the claims of anomalous cooling and radioactive half life increase being much smaller than corresponding claims of anomalous heat and half life decrease. I spent some time in an environmental lab testing capacitor banks for destructive resonance, the banks were subjected to change in acceleration [jerk] via shaker tables one axis at a time. I was amazed at how little energy could send these capacitors rolling out of the banks minus their legs when a destructive frequency occurred. Your suggestion regarding the circulation and Horace's dismissal of my dilation factors made me realize catalytic action couldn't be just time dilation as this was not significant enough. So combining all three concepts I came to the conclusion that the suppression sets up a certain average energy density and then the hydrogen atoms are jerked back and forth along the temporal axis [from our perspective] like the capacitor bank on a vibration table only instead of tearing the legs off capacitors, this natural force provides a discount on molecular disassociation levels, accelerates - slingshots atoms between different inertial frames and is responsible for catalytic action. In the case of anomalous heat and radioactive decay it is just a super form of catalytic action combined with a second natural force like the tendency of hydrogen to form h2 engineered into an endless loop. I don't deny LENR ash but think a lesser interim step like Lyne and Moller posit of h1h2 oscillation or Haisch and Moddels Lamb pinch is required to make those less probable reactions possible. Regards Fran Jones Beene Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:08:02 -0800 Say Terry, Since you followed that forum for a number of years, and since we discussed at the time that the MAHG device could have been vastly improved had nickel, rather than tungsten, been sputtered on the anode wall (at least under the teachings of Mills' theory)... and given this was before we were generally aware of the paradigm-shifting value of nano anything ... ... yes, sputtering does produce a small percentage of porosity in the nano range (this is still part of the long 'setup' to the original question) ... so, what are the chances that Andrea was tuning into that forum, and what are the chances that what he did early on, basically, was to make his E-Cat in the configuration of an RF tube, like MAHG but with nano-nickel applied to the anode (as we begged Moller to do)... and that the so-called central heater element is now being identified as a cathode heater for the RF filament - and given that we now know that RF is being used IOW - the E-Cat is NOT inconsistent with a MAHG tube, and we might have essentially suggested to AR all of the details that he
RE: [Vo]:translation
Peter sez: Dear Italo: I cannot open a camera on our test room, because we make also confidential operations. Only a plant in regular operation in our Customers' concerns is possible. Translated in English this is: you will not see soon working E-cats Reason- they cannot stop the ... webcam when making confidential operations as mixing pixie dust and aqua Tofana to nickel. Should we believe this? Rossi continues to do little to dissuade his skeptics. But then, I suspect he could care less what the skeptics think of him. It's still not clear to me if Rossi's actions are deliberately intentional, or whether it is just another Rossi quirk. Only Tinkerbelle knows for sure. ;-) Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:translation
On 2011-12-04 16:19, Peter Gluck wrote: Translated in English this is: you will not see soon working E-cats Reason- they cannot stop the ... webcam when making confidential operations as mixing pixie dust and aqua Tofana to nickel. Should we believe this? That he doesn't want the general public to know when/where/how he (and his associates) works on his devices is understandable in my opinion, given the shroud of secrecy he's put on this particular aspect so far. Also, switching off periodically a webcam supposed to be online 24/7 would raise many unwanted questions. Wouldn't it be better if a *real* customer made a live video feed available rather than Rossi, anyway? Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:desktop hot fusion concept
I propse that the primary motive force responsible for the tracks in the CO2 mist is not an air stream impacting on the mist. An air thread serves as an electrical bridge, but it is the local charging of the mist and the subsequent self repulsion among the charges that is primary force behind the parting of the mist. Harry On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: Some relevant quotes of interest from Bill Beaty at: http://amasci.com/weird/unusual/airexp.html The threads can survive in a zero-field region. I made a crude thread gun and passed a thread through an accelerator ring composed of an aluminum bundt pan. I didn't expect this to work, since the hole in the pain is shielded and relatively field-free. Yet the thread did come out the other side. Once I've set up a thread-emitter, I find that I can cup my hands very closely around the path of the invisible thread, yet this does not eliminate the furrow in the fog. Evidentally the threads either have enough inertia to survive the zero-field regions temporarily, and to traverse several inches of zero-field space... or they need no fields at all once they have been created. Their behavior is not simply that of ionized wind. They act WEIRD! At the tip of the fiber I could see streams of mist moving inwards in 3D from all directions, as if the tip of the fiber was the mouth of a tiny suction hose (like gasses surrounding a black hole!) I can see a tiny time-delay when I wiggle a long fingertip-thread, so the speed of the effect might be around 10mph or so, not instantaneous I connected a microamp meter in series with the plate. It indicated zero. When I let the other HV wire create one furrow in the mist, the meter indicated zero UA. When I brought the cable close, so there were maybe 50 to 70 furrows being drawn along the mist, the meter started flickering, indicating approx. 0.5uA. These ion-streams, if that's what they are, are each delivering an electric current in the range of 10 nanoamperes or less. Jeeze. No wonder nobody ever notices them. I made a crude oscilloscope using a thread as the writing beam. By applying 4KV 60Hz to a metal sphere adjacent to a thread, I managed to spread it's fog-mark out into a 2cm line. When I move my hand in the DC field, the thread moves. When I move my hand quickly, the thread sweeps across the fog, leaving a beautiful sine wave mark which was produced by the AC voltage on the metal sphere. What if the power line waveform had glitches? They would be visible! It's an electromechanical oscilloscope with no vacuum required. If the thread was merely a stream of charged air, would a 60Hz e-field be able to move it sideways through the atmosphere like this? While messing with airthreds at the Dale T. lab, I discovered that wet fingers produce them. Dry fingers only produce them if there are bits of clothing-lint or knuckle-hairs (or sharp burrs on fingernails.) However, when I wet one of my fingers to make shirt-lint adhere, I discovered that lint was unnecessary, and strong airthreads would form just from the wet surface. THIS IMPLIES THAT THESE THREADS ARE COMPOSED OF MICROSCOPIC DROPLETS. I bet this effect is the same as that electrospray or spitting cusp phenomenon that develops whenever a charged sphere electrode is held over a water surface. The water surface humps up and forms a sharp cusp-shape which spews droplets. When I used a soda straw and blew upon a thread with all my might, the dot in the mist only moved a little. The 5mm dot was changed to a 10mm x 30mm blotch. INCREDIBLY BIZARRE! The air blast either causes the thread to spread out into a narrow fan, or it causes it to vibrate at high speed so that the thread tip traces out an oblong blotch in the mist. These threads are robust! Not at all like smoke, they are more like carbon-fiber spiderwebs under high linear tension. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:translation
If Rossi's operations are, as it sometimes seems, similar in nature to Steorn's, then it may be sometime before he does another inconclusive demonstration of some type -- if there even is another. Steorn, in their now deleted forum, between increasingly long periods of no news, repeatedly promised various sorts of public and/or internet video tests, and revelation of who their non-existent clients were. From time to time they released exorbitant plans for new devices that never came to fruition. They're still doing it with their recent announcement of a new inductive water heater, though now, nobody except the silliest people, believes them.
[Vo]:OT:MiB
NASA satellite hits car... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgTyiaDmytwob=av3e Harry
Re: [Vo]:translation
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 12:39 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: If Rossi's operations are, as it sometimes seems, similar in nature to Steorn's, then it may be sometime before he does another inconclusive demonstration of some type -- if there even is another. Steorn, in their now deleted forum, between increasingly long periods of no news, repeatedly promised various sorts of public and/or internet video tests, and revelation of who their non-existent clients were. From time to time they released exorbitant plans for new devices that never came to fruition. They're still doing it with their recent announcement of a new inductive water heater, though now, nobody except the silliest people, believes them. Stop that. Its Silly http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0f2aFhZ3Uk Harry
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies:
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
Too bad this is probably like iPhone4S Siri in that it won't work well on foreigner's accent and speech pattern, otherwise Rossi's speech would be a perfect test candidate. On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:30 AM, Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com wrote: Software That Listens for Lies: ..
[Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
We have the great luck that we don't know liers. LOL From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Not in LENR I want to tell. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: We have the great luck that we don't know liers. LOL *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *Sent:* Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:43 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.comwrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Not in LENR I want to tell. So Rossi is not in LENR? From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program? Not in LENR I want to tell. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: We have the great luck that we don't know liers. LOL From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
Short of engaging Dr. Lightman (Tim Roth): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_me I have found watching eye movement to be effective: http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. T
[Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=uviXoafHWrU Rossi's face: GOTHCA! -Messaggio originale- From: Terry Blanton Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:22 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? Short of engaging Dr. Lightman (Tim Roth): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_me I have found watching eye movement to be effective: http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. T
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Yes he is, but I have read many messages here saying he is NOT lying and I thought I have prejudices against him for the following story: He claims to be the discoverer of an absolutely new and original Ni-H LENR method and denies any connection with the achievements of the past. Newton has used a rather clumsy metaphor *“If I have seen further it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants”* (don’t try this it is risky even for acrobats- but metaphors have not much to do with practice and common sense they are poetical and symbolistic. Andrea Rossi on the contrary, answered to my question on Krivit’s blog saying: *“My process has nothing to do with the process of Piantelli, The proof is that I am making operating reactors; he is not.”* I was shocked, did not believed this statement and disliked strongly the logic and the ethics on which it is based. But it is probably my fault and bias. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: Not in LENR I want to tell. So Rossi is not in LENR? *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *Sent:* Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:11 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program? Not in LENR I want to tell. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.comwrote: We have the great luck that we don't know liers. LOL *From:* Peter Gluck peter.gl...@gmail.com *Sent:* Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:43 PM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.comwrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Short of engaging Dr. Lightman (Tim Roth): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_me I have found watching eye movement to be effective: http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. Look again at the stable! stable! stable! video.
[Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Yes he is, but I have read many messages here saying he is NOT lying and I thought I have prejudices against him for the following story: Rossi is lying and we have some facts about it. In an interview (March) he said that he’s not asking money and that he will be paid ONLY when the 1MW reactor was delivered. In the same time, he asked a lot of money to Defkalion for his “technology”, with a deadline around June. QUOTES: “I am assuming all the risks. No one is risking any money except me,” said the Italian engineer Andrea Rossi “I get paid (by Defkalion) only when the installation is delivered and if it works. I do not want people to spend any money until I have started and tested my one-megawatt plant,” said Rossi. But yeah, now comes Jed Rothwell saying that this is not lying and that every businessman like Edison and Jobs done that. Yeah. From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:25 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program? Yes he is, but I have read many messages here saying he is NOT lying and I thought I have prejudices against him for the following story: He claims to be the discoverer of an absolutely new and original Ni-H LENR method and denies any connection with the achievements of the past. Newton has used a rather clumsy metaphor “If I have seen further it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants” (don’t try this it is risky even for acrobats- but metaphors have not much to do with practice and common sense they are poetical and symbolistic. Andrea Rossi on the contrary, answered to my question on Krivit’s blog saying: “My process has nothing to do with the process of Piantelli, The proof is that I am making operating reactors; he is not.” I was shocked, did not believed this statement and disliked strongly the logic and the ethics on which it is based. But it is probably my fault and bias. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:14 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: Not in LENR I want to tell. So Rossi is not in LENR? From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program? Not in LENR I want to tell. Peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: We have the great luck that we don't know liers. LOL From: Peter Gluck Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 7:43 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? We have the great luck that we don't know liers. Thank you for signalling the book. peter On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, ecat builder ecatbuil...@gmail.com wrote: We're not there yet.. but a 100% accurate lie detector would change everything. This book is a fun read on the subject: The Truth Machine by James Halperin http://www.amazon.com/Truth-Machine-Speculative-Novel/dp/0345410564 - Brad Software That Listens for Lies: -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
Lying is one thing, but the subject is also important... I won't be surprised if, during industrialization, rossi said that it works, while he had a big problem... that is common in business. We call that the demo effect... the method to detect liars is not only to detect the uncontrollable first milliseconds emotions signs, but also to detect the counter-measures that good liars have developed, sign of sociopathy. a good liar, instead of emitting early emotion, will control himself and will emit nothing or smokescreen... normal liars are not so competent. if you see me lying in normal life, you will instinctively detect it, even without method. as an amateur actor I have methods to lie to myself (Stanislavsky method) so I can look sincere, but I don't know if I emit the early warning in case of surprise. by the way that big surprise is the secret of good actors that try to surprise the partner and keep surprised, but to look sincere they believe in their story, and are trained by repetition... so if you want to look at the real emotion of someone, look at the instinctive reaction on big surprises... by the way you don't detect lie, but real emotions, and can sometime guess the incoherence with affirmation... 2011/12/4 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. Look again at the stable! stable! stable! video.
Re: [Vo]:How to make a 100 kV Lenard valve for deuterium fusion - idea
In reply to Peter Heckert's message of Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:36:18 +0100: Hi, [snip] The other problem is, where to get deuterium in pressurized bottles ;-) [snip] That one isn't really a problem. Electrolysis can easily produce high gas pressures. You could do the entire experiment in the D collecting side of a DC electrolysis setup. Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.comwrote: Yes he is, but I have read many messages here saying he is NOT lying and I thought I have prejudices against him for the following story: Rossi is lying and we have some facts about it. In an interview (March) he said that he’s not asking money and that he will be paid ONLY when the 1MW reactor was delivered. In the same time, he asked a lot of money to Defkalion for his “technology”, with a deadline around June. Rossi also received money from Ampenergo as per this article in NyTeknik and the related interview: http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece But another interesting question is what he may received from secret investors. He gets offers every day on his blog and even on other people's blogs! One can only imagine what he gets offered in private.
Re: [Vo]:How to make a 100 kV Lenard valve for deuterium fusion - idea
Am 04.12.2011 21:57, schrieb mix...@bigpond.com: In reply to Peter Heckert's message of Sat, 03 Dec 2011 01:36:18 +0100: Hi, [snip] The other problem is, where to get deuterium in pressurized bottles ;-) [snip] That one isn't really a problem. Electrolysis can easily produce high gas pressures. You could do the entire experiment in the D collecting side of a DC electrolysis setup. The problem is, the athmosphere must be absolutely dry. I have seen D2O costs about 1-3 Euro per milliliter. Possibly it works with dry D2O steam? The other problem is, when I get 2-3 Watt energy out of it, will I survive the neutrons and gammas? This is not cold fusion or LENR. Neutrons and radiation are expected ;-) Peter
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Mattia Rizzi mattia.ri...@gmail.com wrote: But yeah, now comes Jed Rothwell saying that this is not lying and that every businessman like Edison and Jobs done that. Yeah. I have said repeatedly that I know nothing about Rossi's business affairs, and I have no idea whether he is lying or not. I said that as far as I know know, he has never lied about the engineering aspects of his machines. Perhaps he has, but I have not caught him. Please do not distort what I say. I know nothing about his business dealings. Frankly, I do not care about them, and I do not want to know. I think people should mind their own business and stop asking nosy questions about Rossi. I have advised him to do things differently and be more open, but I have never asked him about contracts or business or anything of that nature. Regarding truth and lies -- Defkalion says they have the technology, and Rossi says they do not. Clearly, one is lying, or the other is, or they both are. They cannot both be telling the truth. I will not speculate about who is telling the truth in this matter. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: But another interesting question is what he may received from secret investors. He gets offers every day on his blog and even on other people's blogs! One can only imagine what he gets offered in private. Yes, one can imagine, but as Fats Waller said, one never knows, do one? I don't find this interesting. I think it pointless. You know nothing about Rossi's business, so this is mere empty speculation, gossip, and snooping into other people's private business. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:national research program for cold fusion
I've been reading the LENR library ... (mainly looking at theory) and note that Duncan gave an outsider's view of cf history at http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/DuncanRanoutsider.pdf ICCF 15, 2009 (Of course ... he warns against media-release of scientific dicoveries ... ) - Original Message - Rob Duncan, vice chancellor of research at the University of Missouri going to establish a national research program that would help scientists study cold fusion . http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2011/dec/03/mu-research-chief-wants-cold-fusion-puzzle-solved/
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: But another interesting question is what he may received from secret investors. He gets offers every day on his blog and even on other people's blogs! One can only imagine what he gets offered in private. Yes, one can imagine, but as Fats Waller said, one never knows, do one? I don't find this interesting. I think it pointless. You know nothing about Rossi's business, so this is mere empty speculation, gossip, and snooping into other people's private business. You're entitled to your opinion but I think Rossi has made himself a public figure. Also, catching him in obvious lies, such as that he is entirely self funded, is legitimate. After all, Rossi uses that claim to help him convince people that his E-cat really works. Rossi may have been caught lying about technical and engineering issues in the Stable! Stable! video. At least he was lying by omission because he never admitted adjusting the heater power during a run and especially not during a run which needed less anemic steam generation. Rossi probably also lied about self-destruct mechanisms and on the cheap isotope enrichment. He lied about providing video coverage of the megawatt test. I can't recall offhand but he's been caught in other various infelicities if not outright lies as well. The other thing you need to consider is that generally people either lie or they don't. If they do, it's because they don't mind doing it and they can lie about any assertion which they make. Liars tend to be not reliable about anything.
[Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
I just posted a slideshow from Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny of NASA Langley Research Center from the September 22 LENR Workshop. http://www.ecatplanet.net/content.php?133-LENR-Presentation-by-Joseph-Zawodny-2011 Its a 35 page PowerPoint presentation that covers history, theory, ramifications, and more. - Brad
[Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
I guess that the qualifications of Michael A. Nelson will annoy some people: Energy Investigator (Last 5 years as a hobby) SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors, Rossi 2011/12/4 Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com http://newenergytimes.com/v2/**government/NASA/20110922NASA-** Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdfhttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/**government/NASA/20110922NASA-** Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdfhttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/**government/NASA/20110922NASA-** Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdfhttp://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
On 2011-12-05 01:44, ecat builder wrote: I just posted a slideshow from Dr. Joseph M. Zawodny of NASA Langley Research Center from the September 22 LENR Workshop. http://www.ecatplanet.net/content.php?133-LENR-Presentation-by-Joseph-Zawodny-2011 Its a 35 page PowerPoint presentation that covers history, theory, ramifications, and more. This version is better than Krivit's edited .pdf one. Cheers, S.A.
[Vo]:Krivit article on NASA Forum
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/04/slides-from-sept-22-nasa- lenr-innovation-forum-workshop/ Quote: “Rossi changed the game totally.” the witness said. “From the test plan, the device, everything. There was nothing there that we had agreed on. He had a 30 liter reservoir in there and he wouldn’t even let us see what was in the box or weigh the box.” On the second day, when the former NASA staff member asked Rossi if his device had an internal reservoir, Rossi became enraged. Quantum’s engineers left but NASA engineers offered to come back in a few days to give Rossi time to fix the flow. Rossi declined their offer. He said he was “too busy.” End quote. Earlier in another thread I wrote: It is far more important that Rossi post his experimental plan in advance, so criticism arrives in time to make a difference, than to have a fixed web cam that makes no difference. The 24/7 option is a big improvement, however. There might be time to fix minor problems, like the location of the thermocouples. I don't know which is more ridiculous, to put it mildly, my expectations as expressed above or Rossi's treatment of NASA. I am no doubt foolish to have any positive expectations of Rossi. I'd like to just forget about this segment of LENR history, but it is like trying to ignore a train wreck in progress. It is grotesque, horrific, and continuously unfolding, perhaps a tragedy of great proportions. I'd love to have the movie rights though. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
On 2011-12-05 01:48, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote: http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Bushnell-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Nelson-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf http://newenergytimes.com/v2/government/NASA/20110922NASA-Zawodny-GRC-LENR-Workshop.pdf I wonder why these can't be downloaded off the NASA GRC website. This is a honest question. Cheers, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I don't find this interesting. I think it pointless. You know nothing about Rossi's business, so this is mere empty speculation, gossip, and snooping into other people's private business. You're entitled to your opinion but I think Rossi has made himself a public figure. Also, catching him in obvious lies, such as that he is entirely self funded, is legitimate. I agree. If you catch him in a lie, this will be newsworthy, and you should report it. However, you have not caught him in a lie. You have engaged in fatuous, groundless speculation about his business even though you know nothing about it. I find this uninteresting. I can't recall offhand but he's been caught in other various infelicities if not outright lies as well. About some things, but not others. The other thing you need to consider is that generally people either lie or they don't. That is incorrect. They often tell half-truths, or they see things in different ways. I think you say this because you have a bad habit of oversimplifying and seeing things in black in white which are actually in shades of grey. It often happens that people think they are telling the truth but other people think they are lying. It is often impossible to know, even years later when the full historical record is available -- even when the event is famous and well documented -- such as IBM's market decline in the 1980s, the discovery of the polio vaccine, the discovery of DNA and the role of Pauling and Franklin, or what happened in the Battle of Midway. Read two or three history books describing Midway, for example, and try to determine a critical question: whether the Admiral Nagumo was decisive or dithering; and after the decisive U.S. attacks whether he acted as if he were determined to win, or whether he in cowardly retreat, and led by the nose by Adm. Yamaguchi. Everyone there, on both sides, from his commanding officer Yamamoto on down, had different opinions. His own officers and friends said one thing; those who blamed him for the defeat said another. His actions and orders are preserved, but depending on who you read, his orders were lies, evasions, or the best response to an impossible situation imposed on him by Yamamoto. You can read a full description of this in the new book Shattered Sword which describes this and dozens of other well established facts that turn out to be questionable or myths. I guarantee you will be confused. You would need a time machine and the ability to read minds to know the answer. If they do, it's because they don't mind doing it and they can lie about any assertion which they make. Liars tend to be not reliable about anything. That depends on many things such as: what you ask them, whether they have some motivation to lie, whether it is in their best interests to tell the truth, and whether they are rational or irrational. Some people lie for a reason, some because they are delusional, some just for the fun of it. Some lie to help themselves and some feel a compulsion to lie even when telling the truth is in their best interest. People are complicated, and inscrutable. Most people that you suppose are lying turn out to be telling one aspect of the truth. The real truth is forever unknowable, because people are not omniscient. History books are never fully right, and seldom completely wrong. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Speaking of MAHG
Fran, Well, this situation sounds like Moller/Naudin/Frolov are still in denial about the bone-headed measurement errors of the old work. No surprise. Moller does not want to go there for fear of compromising the cash flow to his other profit centers. He is a top fund raiser, as you discovered, and we can only hope that he has not sold out in terms of doing good science. Too bad, as they did not appreciate what they had, apparently. This will happen when you main goal is to monetize every single advance. But the irony is that Rossi may have jumped in and monetized what they should have 7 years ago. The photos here can demonstrate the similarity of MAHG to E-Cat in physical size and shape: http://jlnlabs.online.fr/mahg/photos.htm An interesting point is that the MAHG device is based on a revamped RF vacuum tube, when in fact, in operation, the gas pressure is at several bar. Rossi claims much higher gas pressure, but I am not sure if his is actually documented. RF will propagate at high gas pressure, of course, and in fact glow discharge seems to be enhanced at the operating frequency of MAHG. The 15 kHz frequency is in the low ultrasonic range, and has been seen in a number of claimed gainful (or very efficient) devices: most recently the Joule Thief or the Stiffler or Kugushov circuits, but before that- Stanley Meyer, and importantly - a number of cavitation LENR devices and Bearden's MEG. Not sure about Griggs. Probably others are in this low ultrasound range. Coincidence? There are dozens of videos on YouTube of CFL lamps operating to produce significant light at 100 times less input power than specs (milliwatt range). In most of them the video cam will pick up the ultrasonic hum (very annoying) which is not evident to the builder, until he sees the video. It is just above audible. From: francis Hi Jones, Yes I did pitch this idea to Moller but his reply indicated that I needed to be a serious investor before he and Frolov could commit any further energy into this pursuit.
Re: [Vo]:Krivit article on NASA Forum
Who would play Andrea Rossi in the movies do you think? I would vote for Bill Nighy. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0631490/ On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: .. I don't know which is more ridiculous, to put it mildly, my expectations as expressed above or Rossi's treatment of NASA. I am no doubt foolish to have any positive expectations of Rossi. I'd like to just forget about this segment of LENR history, but it is like trying to ignore a train wreck in progress. It is grotesque, horrific, and continuously unfolding, perhaps a tragedy of great proportions. I'd love to have the movie rights though.
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
Actually I am happy to see that NASA is cogent that these seemingly disparate efforts are all based on the same underlying principles. Between the power points of Bushnell and Nelson we see the Papp engine, Mills hydrino, W-L theory and Rossi being considered as a group which as a student of ZPE I feel is correct. Fran Daniel Rocha Sun, 04 Dec 2011 17:15:51 -0800 I guess that the qualifications of Michael A. Nelson will annoy some people: Energy Investigator (Last 5 years as a hobby) SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors, Rossi
[Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/04/slides-from-sept-22-nasa- lenr-innovation-forum-workshop/ Quote: “Rossi changed the game totally.” the witness said. “From the test plan, the device, everything. There was nothing there that we had agreed on. He had a 30 liter reservoir in there and he wouldn’t even let us see what was in the box or weigh the box.” On the second day, when the former NASA staff member asked Rossi if his device had an internal reservoir, Rossi became enraged. Quantum’s engineers left but NASA engineers offered to come back in a few days to give Rossi time to fix the flow. Rossi declined their offer. He said he was “too busy.” End quote. I keep giving Rossi the benefit of the doubt. Things keep going down hill. I have to ask myself, would I buy a used car from this man? inline: Scowl.jpg Photo from video by Mats Lewan of Ny Teknik. Look Rossi gave Lewan after Rossi was videoed with his hand on or near the controls during a test. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. 2011/12/5 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net http://blog.newenergytimes.**com/2011/12/04/slides-from-** sept-22-nasa-lenr-innovation-**forum-workshop/http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/04/slides-from-sept-22-nasa-lenr-innovation-forum-workshop/ Quote: I keep giving Rossi the benefit of the doubt. Things keep going down hill. I have to ask myself, would I buy a used car from this man? Photo from video by Mats Lewan of Ny Teknik. Look Rossi gave Lewan after Rossi was videoed with his hand on or near the controls during a test. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~**hheffner/http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:How to make a 100 kV Lenard valve for deuterium fusion - idea
In reply to Peter Heckert's message of Sun, 04 Dec 2011 22:23:08 +0100: Hi, [snip] The problem is, the athmosphere must be absolutely dry. I have seen D2O costs about 1-3 Euro per milliliter. Possibly it works with dry D2O steam? Pass the gas through a cold trap first? (cooled by liquid Nitrogen?) (or a desiccant?) The other problem is, when I get 2-3 Watt energy out of it, will I survive the neutrons and gammas? No. Run a Geiger counter next to it, and if you start to get high counts turn off the high voltage. BTW exactly which reactions are you looking for, and do you expect them to be brought about by high energy electrons or high energy ions? (If the former, please explain.) Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
Interesting. Long on theory. Short on data.
Re: [Vo]:Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:47 PM, Ahsoka Tano wrote: Who would play Andrea Rossi in the movies do you think? I would vote for Bill Nighy. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0631490/ A good choice. Roberto Benigni would be a good choice too, as actor or director. http://www.lifeinitaly.com/italian-movies/roberto-benigni.asp He's great at irony. Hard to tell if this should be a Ingmar Bergman like approach or a Woody Allen kind of farce. Too early to tell I guess. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ingmar_Bergman Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: I don't find this interesting. I think it pointless. You know nothing about Rossi's business, so this is mere empty speculation, gossip, and snooping into other people's private business. You're entitled to your opinion but I think Rossi has made himself a public figure. Also, catching him in obvious lies, such as that he is entirely self funded, is legitimate. I agree. If you catch him in a lie, this will be newsworthy, and you should report it. However, you have not caught him in a lie. You have engaged in fatuous, groundless speculation about his business even though you know nothing about it. I find this uninteresting. Rossi lied when he said he was self-funded when in fact he had received funds from Ampenergo. Either that or Casserino lied. Rossi had a reason to lie, Casserino did not. http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3179019.ece Many people argued that Rossi's scheme could not be a scam because there was no way he could profit from it if it were. In fact there are countless ways, one of which is to take plenty of money from Ampenergo. Rossi also tried to get money from NASA and from Defkalion but apparently failed. We don't know who else he tried to solicit for money and how it came out. We do know that Rossi is offered money all the time on blogs and forums.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. The video speaks for itself. Are you saying the video was faked? Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: I guess that the qualifications of Michael A. Nelson will annoy some people: Energy Investigator (Last 5 years as a hobby) SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors, Rossi I only saw the first PDF. Is someone claiming those things (SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors) work? If so what's the evidence? Where's the independent testing?
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
Why are you asking me? 2011/12/5 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: I guess that the qualifications of Michael A. Nelson will annoy some people: Energy Investigator (Last 5 years as a hobby) SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors, Rossi I only saw the first PDF. Is someone claiming those things (SEARL, Papp Engine, Over unity electric motors) work? If so what's the evidence? Where's the independent testing? -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
What video? I am talking about what happened to when NASA personnel visited Rossi. 2011/12/5 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. The video speaks for itself. Are you saying the video was faked? Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/ -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: http://blog.newenergytimes.**com/2011/12/04/slides-from-** sept-22-nasa-lenr-innovation-**forum-workshop/http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/04/slides-from-sept-22-nasa-lenr-innovation-forum-workshop/ ... On the second day, when the former NASA staff member asked Rossi if his device had an internal reservoir, Rossi became enraged. Quantum’s engineers left but NASA engineers offered to come back in a few days to give Rossi time to fix the flow. Rossi declined their offer. He said he was “too busy.” ... Gee, why would Rossi not want to talk about a reservoir in his box?
Re: [Vo]:Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.netwrote: Hard to tell if this should be a Ingmar Bergman like approach or a Woody Allen kind of farce. Too early to tell I guess. On the balance, I think Rossi is hilarious, especially when gets angry, scowls, or rants on about snakes and clowns.
Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you asking me? I'm asking anyone who knows.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:51 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: What video? I am talking about what happened to when NASA personnel visited Rossi. Oh! Sorry! 2011/12/5 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. The video speaks for itself. Are you saying the video was faked? Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: What video? I am talking about what happened to when NASA personnel visited Rossi. 2011/12/5 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. If Krivit is lying about what NASA people said or did or saw and heard, you can bet they will set him straight publicly. And probably quickly. I would guess he has a credible source.
Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program?
On Dec 4, 2011, at 10:22 AM, Terry Blanton wrote: Short of engaging Dr. Lightman (Tim Roth): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_me I have found watching eye movement to be effective: http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. T We need to know if he is right handed or left handed. Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
RE: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides
It was merely a statement as to what Nelson had previously investigated. There was no claim as to merits. It its certainly worth looking at all three presentations. My take away is that NASA has spent three to four years looking into LENR on their own. Some of the Piantelli info I've never seen revealed in the past, and it's fascinating. There appear to be photos of transmuted nickel and a real history of Ni-H successes. Even if Rossi were conning investors (who can really tell right now?), he could still be a net positive for drawing attention to a real anomaly. Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 18:55:30 -0800 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Nasa LENR slides From: maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you asking me? I'm asking anyone who knows.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
Why are you so sure of his honesty? 2011/12/5 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:51 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.comwrote: What video? I am talking about what happened to when NASA personnel visited Rossi. 2011/12/5 Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net On Dec 4, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote: Or Krivit is simply lying or telling half truths and is being caught with pats now that these slides are available. He ddin't post the full slides until ecatbuilder uploaded them. If Krivit is lying about what NASA people said or did or saw and heard, you can bet they will set him straight publicly. And probably quickly. I would guess he has a credible source. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Daniel Rocha danieldi...@gmail.com wrote: Why are you so sure of his honesty? Krivit's? First, I have no reason to doubt it. It seems likely that NASA people did that, saw that and said that. It's consistent with Rossi's history. Second, if Krivit is lying about what NASA saw and said, he's going to get caught and very soon. He doesn't seem stupid therefore I don't think he'd risk it. Rossi on the hand, strikes me as what the French call louche. On his blog and in interviews, he's evasive, tangential, and seems, to my view, insincere. His behavior to date corresponds entirely with that impression. He could have removed most if not all doubt about his demonstrations and he consistently did the opposite each and every time. Rossi can get away with it for now because he holds secrets nobody so far has been able to inspect. If Krivit lied about what other people told him, they could call him on it and make him look like a crook. It isn't so much a matter of trusting him. It's that it would be easy for him to get caught if he lied about what he was told and I don't think he's so excruciatingly stupid as to try it.
Re: [Vo]:Re: Krivit article on NASA Forum
On 11-12-04 09:53 PM, Mary Yugo wrote: On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 6:23 PM, Horace Heffner hheff...@mtaonline.net mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net wrote: http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/12/04/slides-from-sept-22-nasa-lenr-innovation-forum-workshop/ ... On the second day, when the former NASA staff member asked Rossi if his device had an internal reservoir, Rossi became enraged. Quantum's engineers left but NASA engineers offered to come back in a few days to give Rossi time to fix the flow. Rossi declined their offer. He said he was too busy. ... Gee, why would Rossi not want to talk about a reservoir in his box? Becomes angry when questioned about details of the device This is, of course, one of the classic hallmarks of the scammer. (Jed may want to jump in at this point and explain why Rossi's anger when pressed over details is really quite reasonable...)
RE: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
The only set of slide notes in the presentation said the following about WLT: The theory makes specific, testable predictions. Predictions that can be inexpensively verified. -mark
Re: [Vo]:Re: can we use such a program?
On Dec 4, 2011, at 10:24 AM, Mattia Rizzi wrote: And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embeddedv=uviXoafHWrU Rossi's face: GOTHCA! -Messaggio originale- From: Terry Blanton Sent: Sunday, December 04, 2011 8:22 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:can we use such a program? Short of engaging Dr. Lightman (Tim Roth): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie_to_me I have found watching eye movement to be effective: http://www.blifaloo.com/info/lies_eyes.php And, no, AR does not display any of the bodily traits of deception. T For some interpretations the handedness of the individual must be known. Rossi writes with his right hand, as evidenced by this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1v=YrTz5Bq6dsA Best regards, Horace Heffner http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com wrote: Interesting. Long on theory. Short on data. Long on obfuscation. A few things that struck me about that presentation: Slide 13: Zawodny is up front about the energy needed for electron capture by a proton, which is more than you can say for WL. They say it is: inhibited by 0.78 MeV. [...] Then, a couple of lines further down, they try to explain where the energy might come from: Field results from a breakdown of the Born-Oppenheimer Approximation via a coupling of Surface Plasmon Polaritons to a collective proton resonance in the metal hydride. Say what? That's just gibberish. I seriously doubt that Zawodny has any idea what that sentence means, if it means anything at all. A physical effect is allowed by a breakdown in a mathematical approximation? What that sentence does is make people's eyes glaze over, and think it sounds sophisticated enough that it must be true. But how exactly is concentrating 780 keV energy into a site where the bonds are a million times weaker than that made plausible by a breakdown of an approximation? It's like a mechanic telling a naive customer their car needs new muffler bearings. Slide 14: gamma rays get thermalized by heavy electrons Right, that's the patent WL just got. Heavy electrons are the new lead. But that's just about the easiest thing to test. Fire gamma rays at a LENR foil and see if they're absorbed. NASA has been working on this for years, and they don't have data to show that this works? Please. And *all* the gamma rays? None escape to indicate the signature for all those proposed reactions? The heavy electrons that are captured by protons are not around to absorb gamma rays, so they have to be absorbed by *other* heavy electrons. That's gonna require some density to make sure all the gammas are absorbed. Slide 15: In the chain of events in the Li-Be-He cycle, they admit the first step (electron capture) requires energy (as mentioned above), and claim some mechanism to provide it. But further down the list, the 4He + n - 5He is proposed with no mention that it is also highly endothermic. It also requires about 735 MeV, but there is no mechanism suggested this time that might provide that energy. In fact, they like to claim that the neutrons are ultra low momentum, so where exactly does the energy for this step come from? Slide 16: This slide is full of vague justifications for the theory, but as MY said, no hard data at all. And the best line is: Simplicity: Only need one theory to explain all the LENR data as well as a few other long standing anomalies They call 3 miracles simple. First they can provide 780 keV to induce electron capture by, as Calvin of Calvin and Hobbes put it when asked to explain Newton's law in his own words: Yakka Foob Mog. Grug pubbawup sink wattoom gazork. Chumble spuzz. Then they provide 735 keV by an unmentioned mechanism to induce neutron capture by 4He, and finally all gammas associated with the various proposed reactions are absorbed by heavy electrons. Simple. Slide 26: 6p + 3e -- 6Li + 28 MeV (and neutrinos) is called getting energy from the *weak* interaction. Sure the weak interaction is involved in the electron capture, but that *consumes* energy. Building 6Li out of 3 protons and 3 neutrons is where the energy comes from, and that's all about the *strong* interaction. (There are many intermediate steps, but those are the starting and ending particles, and all the energy released is from the strong force.) This may be quibbling, but they make such a big deal about tapping the weak force. The weak interaction may be critical to the process, but is it so hard to identify the source of the energy correctly? Slide 9: -- The summary of evidence for LENR is a perfect indication of the complete absence of evidence: Metal hydrides of both H D • High H loading required • Not just 4He being produced • Full range of elemental transmutations • Energy input needed • Forcing at resonant hydride frequencies is effective • Sporadic detection of neutron or gamma radiation Not a definitive thing in there. Sporadic detection of neutron or gamma radiation? If there's gamma radiation, they should be able to nail down the reactions. And high H loading? Only in the electrolysis experiments. It doesn't seem to have to be high in gas loading experiments. Honestly, if a talk so devoid of hard results or plausible mechanisms were presented in any other field, it would be laughed off stage. One can only hope this is not representative of much of the research that goes on at NASA.
Re: [Vo]:LENR Presentation by Joseph Zawodny, NASA Langley Research Center Edit
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: The only set of slide notes in the presentation said the following about WLT: “The theory makes specific, testable predictions. Predictions that can be inexpensively verified.” Well, one prediction it makes is that heavy electrons absorb gamma rays with near perfect efficiency. That should be testable. Not much else is. And they say they've been working at this for several years. If these predictions are so easy to test, why hasn't NASA done it?
Re: [Vo]:How to make a 100 kV Lenard valve for deuterium fusion - idea
- Original Nachricht Von: mix...@bigpond.com An: vortex-l@eskimo.com Datum: 05.12.2011 03:31 Betreff: Re: [Vo]:How to make a 100 kV Lenard valve for deuterium fusion - idea BTW exactly which reactions are you looking for, and do you expect them to be brought about by high energy electrons or high energy ions? (If the former, please explain.) I dont know. It is known that fusion with pyroelectric crystals in a low pressurized Deuterium gas works. This has been shown. It generates some 1000 neutrons on each stroke. My thought is to improve the efficiency of this process. Generate 100 keV electrons or protons in a vacuum and shoot them directly in a lossless way into a /pressurized/ deuterium /stream/. I dont aim to discover something new, I just try to improve the efficiency of this known process. Both electrons or protons could be tried by reversing the polarity or by using AC high voltage. Peter
