Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
*I will go way out on the limb here, but I predict that the Nobel-prize-winning laser physicist Steven Chu, who currently serves as President Obama's energy secretary, will no longer seek to remain in the job. Four years as head of the US Department of Energy cannot be easy and Chu, 63, will no doubt want to get back to doing some Nobel level research, with the attraction of the new and successful field of cold fusion hitting the headlines, Chu will find his lab bench hard to resist so he can to get to the bottom of Rydberg matter. * * * *A happy and a prosperous new year to all Vortexians!* * * *Axil* On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 9:13 PM, Robert Leguillon robert.leguil...@hotmail.com wrote: I predict that LENR will see enormous growth and even a see real publication in a peer reviewed journal. I think that transmutations will be nearly universally accepted, but environ of competing theories will be too fluid to balance. I predict that Rossi will not produce his own useful LENR device, unless he is brought onboard by a reputable company. He will be revealed to have exaggerated and misled investors as to the maturity of his product. Happy New Year, all. Now, out with the bubbly! Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:58:59 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please From: hohlr...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 8:26 PM, Mark Iverson-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote: Happy New Year to all, especially Frank and Mary! OXOX, YZ! Happy nuptials! HNY to all! T (bringing Frankincense and Myrrh)
[Vo]:INFORMAVORE's SUNDAY
Dear Friends, Happy New Year of LENR certainties for you all! Please read: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com/2012/01/informavores-sunday-no-488_01.html Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]: wired.uk on defkalion
If there were a movie portraying a world made continually overcast by the environmental engineering of vampires so they could rule the world and keep humans as livestock -- and the sun breaking through anyway to burn them all alive as the climax, then we would be onto something. Short of that, however, truth is stranger than fiction. On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote: The subject line got stripped off the web version. Should be showdown year. (Pick your favorite movie ... High Noon?) -- http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-12/30/cold-fusion-rival Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
[Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:00 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Inconclusive blather. The only thing you can do with inconclusive data -- like Rossi and Defkalion's.
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
lol Harry On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 12:51 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote: Not good Harry, change it somehow. Since Marry and I got engaged I am a whole lot happier. Not even Jones upsets me any more. I predict I will spend another year alone. Happy New Year y'all. Harry
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
I agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That would make a great story. Jed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
RE: [Vo]:How I propose to encode math in vortex discussions
I tried to get a Version of 'Tex the World' that works with Firefox ver9 but there is none. From: Charles HOPE Avital Oliver wrote a lightweight browser plug-in for Firefox which renders LaTeX equations, called TEX http://thewe.net/tex/ THE WORLD. It has since been ported https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/mbfninnbhfepghkkcgdnmfmhhbjmhggn to Google Chrome. It scans every web page for equations between [; and ;] and renders them automatically.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. If we learned nothing else from the experiences with Rossi, it should be that witness and monitor isn't enough. I suppose it may depend on what monitor means -- that's a bit vague. What's needed is for disinterested (*neutral*) investigators with the appropriate capabilities to replicate the work *independently* of the proponent. Having a reporter look over the shoulder of a scientist is always fun and interesting but it is rarely definitive proof that what is going is real and is being honestly and accurately represented. Especially when claims are unexpectedly robust or when independent verification is long delayed, there needs to be suspicion at least of error and in some rare instances, of fraud.
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
I predict that the world will formally acknowledge cold fusion aka LENR this year. The evidence will finally be so overwhelming that the physics community can no longer deny it. Of course they will claim that they knew it was happening, but only in the form of LENR and not cold fusion which they have claimed. Mary Yugo will repent of her sins after a long pause and will become one of the best proponents of cold fusion filling all of the forums with glowing reports. Rossi will hire her as his spokeswoman since she can work like the energizer bunny on a cause that is true to her heart. (life is stranger than fiction) Krivit will realize that he was duped by Rossi in June. He was a pawn in Rossi's chess game as he attempted to mislead the competition to gain market share. Steven will become totally angry with Rossi as a result and will refuse to go to Italy to apologize in person at Rossi's expense. Jed will continue to inform the world about the wonders of cold fusion as he has until now. The job will become a lot easier as people will start to believe what he has to say since the process is proven. Science will continue to search for the theory of cold fusion for another 10 years at least. Eventually the cause will be determined, but it will not be easy to prove. Copies of cold fusion devices will become ubiquitous and the selling prices will become much more competitive. The oil producers will make an all out attempt to stop the universal usage of cold fusion devices by claims of danger and radiation. The lobbies will form and be well funded. Science labs will be established to research cold fusion processes and many additional materials will be found that exhibit the effects. Dave -Original Message- From: fznidarsic fznidar...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sat, Dec 31, 2011 10:10 am Subject: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please Jean Mallove made some predictions some years back and missed the mark by a wide margin. I have been waiting a long time for something to happen. What see you next year? Frank Znidarsic
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
MY, that was a general challenge. Not specific to Rossi or DGT. 2012/1/1 Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 9:54 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. If we learned nothing else from the experiences with Rossi, it should be that witness and monitor isn't enough. I suppose it may depend on what monitor means -- that's a bit vague. What's needed is for disinterested (*neutral*) investigators with the appropriate capabilities to replicate the work *independently* of the proponent. Having a reporter look over the shoulder of a scientist is always fun and interesting but it is rarely definitive proof that what is going is real and is being honestly and accurately represented. Especially when claims are unexpectedly robust or when independent verification is long delayed, there needs to be suspicion at least of error and in some rare instances, of fraud. -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
It would be interesting if a form of X-Prize was set up to reward the group that reaches an important LENR goal. The solving of the energy crisis is at least as important as any of the other prizes awarded. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a echnically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR nomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a hallenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor heir experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That ould make a great story. ed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 10:03 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mary Yugo will repent of her sins after a long pause and will become one of the best proponents of cold fusion filling all of the forums with glowing reports. Rossi will hire her as his spokeswoman since she can work like the energizer bunny on a cause that is true to her heart. (life is stranger than fiction) Krivit will realize that he was duped by Rossi in June. He was a pawn in Rossi's chess game as he attempted to mislead the competition to gain market share. $1000 bet to benefit the winner's favorite properly registered non profit charity organization says neither of those will happen in the suggested time frame. Care to wager?
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
Don't go to fast. In 1995 I came back, from Power Gen 95, to my Utility Employer and wrote and impact statement about Clean Energy Technologies device. It was reported, We have liftoff. Motorola offered 60 million for the technology. Miley independently tested it. By now all of the world was to be powered by cold fusion. That was 16 years ago. Nothing has changed. -Original Message- From: Mary Yugo maryyu...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 8:13 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 10:03 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: Mary Yugo will repent of her sins after a long pause and will become one of the best proponents of cold fusion filling all of the forums with glowing reports. Rossi will hire her as his spokeswoman since she can work like the energizer bunny on a cause that is true to her heart. (life is stranger than fiction) Krivit will realize that he was duped by Rossi in June. He was a pawn in Rossi's chess game as he attempted to mislead the competition to gain market share. $1000 bet to benefit the winner's favorite properly registered non profit charity organization says neither of those will happen in the suggested time frame. Care to wager?
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
On 2012-01-01 19:03, David Roberson wrote: The oil producers will make an all out attempt to stop the universal usage of cold fusion devices by claims of danger and radiation. I think it will more likely be the greens, climate activists, anti-technology / anti-progress groups, and more in general those who are politically motivated against nuclear energy who will attempt stopping this technology, leveraging on hypothetical dangers for human health and the environment. Oil producers will use it to their benefit (cheaper oil extraction) while slowly phasing out from the fuel sector and at the same time focusing more on other sectors (lubricants/chemical/etc.). Some might even start new businesses in LENR (as they currently do on nuclear energy and photovoltaics, for example). This will allow them to survive longer in the post-peak oil era. Just my 2 cents, S.A.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
A founder of the US Tokamak program proposed just that in 1995: http://www.oocities.org/jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 12:06 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would be interesting if a form of X-Prize was set up to reward the group that reaches an important LENR goal. The solving of the energy crisis is at least as important as any of the other prizes awarded. Dave -Original Message- From: pagnucco pagnu...@htdconnect.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sun, Jan 1, 2012 12:54 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion I agree, Jed. Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. I would be surprised if no one accepted it. That would make a great story. Jed Rothwell wrote: Inconclusive blather. See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibbs/2011/12/31/2012-the-year-of-cold-fusion/
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. Sure. They could visit U. Missouri, SRI or U. Osaka, for example. The technically sophisticated companion can read their papers beforehand to confirm he or she can understand them. They would have to call ahead to be sure an experiment is actually in progress. Most of the time nothing is happening. They are getting ready to do a test, or evaluating the previous test. It is not all that exciting. Unless you understand calorimetry, it does not look like anything. As Ed Storms says, it is like watching paint dry. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
fznidar...@aol.com wrote: In 1995 I came back, from Power Gen 95, to my Utility Employer and wrote and impact statement about Clean Energy Technologies device. It was reported, We have liftoff. Motorola offered 60 million for the technology. Miley independently tested it. By now all of the world was to be powered by cold fusion. That was 16 years ago. Nothing has changed. I do not think it was $60 million. As I recall it was more like $15 million. Nothing changed because Patterson turned down the offer. You have a valid point. If Rossi does not do a proper demonstration and his alliance with a large company falls through, he might be dead in the water. Defkalion might be stalled indefinitely. Others may not be able to replicate the powder. In other words, everything might go wrong. In that case, there will be no public relations breakthrough in 2012, and cold fusion will not become widely known. I doubt things will go that badly, but they sure gone badly in the past, so you never know. Defkalion is behind schedule, as everyone knows. I think they are working to catch up, and in the next quarter they will be able to do the kinds of demonstrations they hoped to do in November. It is not unusual for a project of this nature to be late. The book Empires of Light describes the Niagara Falls electrification project of the 1890s. Despite the best efforts of the best engineers, it was a year late. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
HI David, Loved reading your predictions. Good, well-thought-out predictions tend to make readers want to comment on them and add their own two cents... and yours is no exception. I predict that the world will formally acknowledge cold fusion aka LENR this year. The evidence will finally be so overwhelming that the physics community can no longer deny it. Of course they will claim that they knew it was happening, but only in the form of LENR and not cold fusion which they have claimed. Agreed. Well. maybe it will take two more years down the road! ;-) Mary Yugo will repent of her sins after a long pause and will become one of the best proponents of cold fusion filling all of the forums with glowing reports. Rossi will hire her as his spokeswoman since she can work like the energizer bunny on a cause that is true to her heart. (life is stranger than fiction) Hah! I had never thought of that. Why the hell not! :-) Krivit will realize that he was duped by Rossi in June. He was a pawn in Rossi's chess game as he attempted to mislead the competition to gain market share. Steven will become totally angry with Rossi as a result and will refuse to go to Italy to apologize in person at Rossi's expense. I perceive Krivit's actions as more like that of a cat with nine lives. IOW, Krivit and NET will somehow survive the Rossi embarrassment. I don't know how he will manage to accomplish this, but I predict he will. He will then continue his relentless fight against other injustices in the world. Krivit once told me that after the cold fusion controversy was resolved, he might consider investigating the injustices inherited in the current health-care system. Its possible Krivit might do a world of good investigating that can-o-worms. I suspect Krivit's talents fare best when coming to the aid of all the Dulcineas in the world. Krivit will eventually find other windmills to slay. He may even become famous. Jed will continue to inform the world about the wonders of cold fusion as he has until now. The job will become a lot easier as people will start to believe what he has to say since the process is proven. I believe Jed has already been on record saying he would be more than happy to pass the torch to someone else, once he was assured of the fact that the avalanche was well on its way down the mountain top. I think Jed dreams of taking a long vacation. However, I also suspect Jed would soon become bored and would soon find another worthy cause to take up. IOW, we should continue to keep an eye on any future endeavors Jed might feel inclined to pursue. Science will continue to search for the theory of cold fusion for another 10 years at least. Eventually, the cause will be determined, but it will not be easy to prove. Agreed. However, I think it will take far more than 10 years. Perhaps 20 - 30 years, and then... maybe we will understand the true potential power of the monster we are only now in the process of unearthing from the crypt. Hopefully our children and grandchildren will be wise enough to realize what we are in possession of. Hopefully, prudent efforts will be undertaken to assure that we don't blow up the planet in all the ensuing enthusiasm to unleash more free energy. Remember ACC's comment about quasars: Industrial Accidents. Copies of cold fusion devices will become ubiquitous and the selling prices will become much more competitive. No doubt, there will be many Wall-Mart specials. The oil producers will make an all out attempt to stop the universal usage of cold fusion devices by claims of danger and radiation. The lobbies will form and be well funded. Well-funded any such campaigns may be, they will not survive. The general population will see to that. The cost of fossil fuels will continue a relentless decline. Eventually, technological innovation will allow the cost of manufacturing synthetic petroleum products to undercut to cost involved in extracting fossil fuels. At that point, the fossil fuel industry will pass into the history books. Science labs will be established to research cold fusion processes and many additional materials will be found that exhibit the effects. Remember... quasars! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:Electromagnetic Composites at the Compton Scale
Electromagnetic Composites at the Compton Scale http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1110/1110.0034v1.pdf I. INTRODUCTION In recent years there have been a number of experimental observations that are dicult to explain within our nowstandard models of atomic and nuclear physics and cosmology. The case of so-called \dark matter is an example. It appears that only a small fraction of the mass of the universe is constructed from ordinary protons, neutrons, and electrons. So, many cosmologists have turned to some relic elementary particle as the candidate to complete the mass de cit. Strange observations such as the excess heat from the earth and \cold fusion are still other examples. We have wondered if there might be con gurations of nucleons and electrons that would not be directly observable in the same way as are the ordinary nucleon atomic systems. This consideration was the genesis of the work presented here. The possibility of new electromagnetic bound states in which the magnetic and electric forces are treated equally and are of comparable size was suggested in our recent paper [1]. For example, the electrostatic force between two electrons e2=r2 is comparable with the dipole-dipole magnetic force 2 e =r4 at a distance rc, where c is the electron Compton wavelength. In fact, a number of bound states involving two electron-like particles were found as solutions to the Dirac equation. However, none of these states involved nucleons because the nuclear magnetic moments are too small to produce binding. Yet, it seemed plausible that composites that included nucleons might be possible at the Compton scale. These composites might resemble normal atoms perhaps with different characteristics, but would be, of course, much smaller than atoms. In this paper, we propose simple composite systems that include nucleons but are still bound together by comparable electric and magnetic forces. These entities make up a three-body system which is too complicated to treat rigorously in a quantum mechanical manner, so we present a simple Schrodinger model (one which is consistent with its Dirac equation origin) to get quantitative estimates of the system's size and binding energy. Clearly, without a quantum electrodynamical formulation for these composites, their existence is unproven; however, since these entities appear plausible, we will look at the consequences as if they do exist. We rst describe several model calculations for these three-body systems and determine whether bound states appear possible. Second, we examine the situations in which these composites might be expected to be formed. Finally, we connect the characteristics of the proposed composite particles to a number of anomalous observations over the past years. In later papers, we will consider some of these anomalous observations in detail.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Yes, but watching paint dry is ultra-exciting if the payoff is trillion$. Gibbs appears to be happy writing Forbes filler-pieces. He should get more creative. Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. It would be Win-Win-Win. The lab would get invaluable publicity. Forbes would have a story that goes viral. Gibbs would become a star journalist. Jed Rothwell wrote: pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Forbes has deep enough pockets to send Mark Gibbs, along with a technically sophisticated companion, to a lab claiming CF or LENR anomalous energy or transmutation evidence. He should publicly issue a challenge to CF/LENR researchers to allow him to witness and monitor their experiments. Sure. They could visit U. Missouri, SRI or U. Osaka, for example. The technically sophisticated companion can read their papers beforehand to confirm he or she can understand them. They would have to call ahead to be sure an experiment is actually in progress. Most of the time nothing is happening. They are getting ready to do a test, or evaluating the previous test. It is not all that exciting. Unless you understand calorimetry, it does not look like anything. As Ed Storms says, it is like watching paint dry. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:56 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. You'd think so. So why has it not happened? Gibbs doesn't seem in any way reluctant to write in detail about LENR and related claims.
[Vo]:New 'Cold Fusion Now' Video - E. Storms on ..Metals that Work
Courtesy of coldfusionnow.wordpress.com Edmund Storms on The Nuclear Active Environment and Metals That Work coldfusionnow.wordpress.com http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SorcxYf8VYg He discusses Rossi, F-P, Piantelli, Ni-H, Pd-H Title: WordPress.com New post on Cold Fusion Now Edmund Storms on The Nuclear Active Environment and Metals thatWork by Ruby Carat Dr. Edmund Storms, cold fusion energy scientist and author of The Science of Low Energy Nuclear Reaction, spoke to Cold Fusion Now last summer. This segment has Dr. Storms discussing the idea of the Nuclear Active Environment, an idea that consolidates elements of the cold fusion/LENR/LANR/CANR reaction, through both geometry and processes, in an attempt to describe the reaction theoretically. Cold Fusion Now 2012! Related Videos with Edmund Storms On: Federal Support and the 'Rossi Effect' October 28, 2011 Biological Transmutation October 27, 2011 Transition October 24, 2011 Related Posts Edmund Storms on the Rossi device: "There will be a stampede." Ca$h Flow interview with James Martinez March 4, 2011 Status of Cold Fusion 2010 by Ruby Carat November 19, 2010 Ruby Carat | January 1, 2012 at 10:45 AM | Tags: cold fusion, Edmund Storms, Kiva Labs, LENR, Nuclear Active Environment | Categories: People, Science, Video | URL: http://wp.me/pYQbF-2TK Comment See all comments Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2012/01/01/edmund-storms-on-the-nuclear-active-environment-and-metals-that-work/ Thanks for flying with WordPress.com
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
So why doesn't he throw down the gauntlet? How hard is that?? Mary Yugo wrote: On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 11:56 AM, pagnu...@htdconnect.com wrote: Anyone who has CF/LENR tech that they are confident in would certainly be happy to have it showcased in Forbes. You'd think so. So why has it not happened? Gibbs doesn't seem in any way reluctant to write in detail about LENR and related claims.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: \The Year of Cold Fusion\
I agree Gibbs is just writing filler pieces but the way he bends the facts and creates straw men to aggravate LENR proponents into doing his homework is infuriating, We never said it was fusion or that it was known physics -both of which premises he assumes to support his skeptical platform while ignoring the unexplained transmutations being recorded - I guess data that doesn't fit known physics can't be considered or he might have to earn his paycheck and actually read some of the papers. Fran
Re: [Vo]:New 'Cold Fusion Now' Video - E. Storms on ..Metals that Work
After the talk they show the gas loaded Ni experiment in his lab. Worth seeing. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:How I propose to encode math in vortex discussions
Download and install GreaseMonkey (you can search via FireFox addons)
or go here:
http://www.greasespot.net/
Once GreaseMonkey is installed and FireFox is restarted, click on the
userscript on this page: http://thewe.net/tex/
And the following should be real pretty.
[;e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0;]
- Brad
[Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
Here is an article published in November: Defkalion: 'We have Rossi’s formula' http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece I should have paid closer attention to this. In this article, Xanthoulis says they got the formula from mass spec data taken by U. Padua. I think the data is here, in a paper linked to this article: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3358646.ece/BINARY/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf They say they did not directly examine powder from Rossi. Assuming that is true, I think their work would be considered developed independently, like a PC compatible BIOS in 1980. They still have to pay royalties in the event Rossi gets a patent, but it would not be theft of intellectual property. In the early 1980s companies developed BIOS's with groups of programmers who had never seen IBM's source code or program notes. They developed it by observing program behavior. As I recall, BIOS was protected only by copyrights back then, not patents, so an independently developed version was free and clear. As I said, with a patent they would need to pay royalties no matter what, even if you independently discover something. When Ford tried to develop a hybrid car, they kept running into Toyota's patents for the Prius, and in the end decided to license them. This article also describes Defkalion's version of the issue that led to a falling out with Rossi: According to Xanthoulis, Rossi could not run the reaction more than 24 hours, and when Defkalion required a 48 hour test it supposedly led to a conflict with Rossi. 'It’s very simple but they didn’t think about it. (...) We solved the problem. Because the problem is that he cannot spread the reaction all over the pipe, and all the heating is concentrated in the middle', Xanthoulis told Ny Teknik. I took a second look at this article because I was surprised by this statement in the recent Wired UK article, and I am trying track it down: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. However, to maintain 'fair play', Defkalion's scientists say they developed their technology without using this information. I still do not know what this refers to. The tests at U. Padua were conducted with Rossi's knowledge. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation. If there was subterfuge, it is no wonder Rossi is upset. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: If there was subterfuge, it is no wonder Rossi is upset. But Rossi is also guilty of subterfuge. He has copied the geometry of Defkalion. Note that Defkalion stated they were surprised at what they saw when the October 6th demo Ottoman was opened. They were surprised that Rossi had copied their configuration. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=285p=3316#p3316 We were surprised to see our old designs used in public testing. We were confused why our old designs were implemented wrongly, as well as witnessing insufficient use of instruments and testing protocols. We also identified confidential (yet shown in public) special instruments designed in collaboration with Rossi and prepared by Defkalion. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=297 Your declaration that we don’t have the technology is in contradiction to your recent attempts to entice away our scientists which was not concluded successfully. We stress again that it is a pity that our designs were applied wrongly, demonstrating in public, immature prototypes with wrong protocols and instruments as explained in our communication on Monday, 10th October. Defkalion's kernel is rectangular, not cylindrical. They have found a way to wafer the kernel in such a way that the reaction is spread over a greater area. T
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote: Defkalion's kernel is rectangular, not cylindrical. They have found a way to wafer the kernel in such a way that the reaction is spread over a greater area. Here's the thread on Defkalion's geometry. I suspect that since they called it the Ottoman an older design, this describes their later refinements: http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18t=599 T
RE: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
I remember reading some of this stuff. Regarding the following statement from DGT: ... We were surprised to see our old designs used in public testing. We were confused why our old designs were implemented wrongly, as well as witnessing insufficient use of instruments and testing protocols. We also identified confidential (yet shown in public) special instruments designed in collaboration with Rossi and prepared by Defkalion. http://www.defkalion-energy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4t=297 Your declaration that we don't have the technology is in contradiction to your recent attempts to entice away our scientists which was not concluded successfully. We stress again that it is a pity that our designs were applied wrongly, demonstrating in public, immature prototypes with wrong protocols and instruments as explained in our communication on Monday, 10th October. It should be obvious to anyone that any kind of official statement issued by DGT in regards to whatever relationship they have (or had) with Rossi will be strategically parsed in such a manner as to infer that their line of products are superior to anything manufactured by Rossi Co. It also wouldn't hurt to infer that the competition isn't handling what fiddleybits they may have in their possession in a correct manner either. DGT's comments strike me as SOP, product placement in action: Accept no imitations other than the genuine article. Not having direct access I think it's difficult for any of us to determine whether DGT or Rossi is ahead in the game. DGT strikes me as better organized, company wise. The organization is probably being run like a disciplined corporation. I think it helps gives the impression to the casual observer that DGT is probably better funded and better equipped than Rossi Co. Whether that is true or not is anyone's guess. Nevertheless, DGT get points for that. Meanwhile, Rossi probably runs his business more in the style of a micromanager, with a heavy pinch of intuition and street smarts thrown in. Rossi gets points for possessing intuition and street smarts. I just hope both of these adversaries have enough of what they really need in order to fulfill contractual obligations. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
[Vo]:COLD FUSION - The Answer to all our energy problems ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3eOWIvb6vMnoredirect=1 Hey Frank Z you get a nice mention.
Re: [Vo]:COLD FUSION - The Answer to all our energy problems ?
He's off by a factor of ten on the amount of money that has been spent on hot fusion research. The assertion that the theory is now known is nonsense. It may be that one of the many theories out there is correct, but that doesn't mean it is known which of those theories it is. On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.comwrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=b3eOWIvb6vMnoredirect=1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3eOWIvb6vMnoredirect=1 Hey Frank Z you get a nice mention.
Re: [Vo]:Forbes: The Year of Cold Fusion
Forbes is all about business and investing. I've been a subscriber 25 years. This is my take: Gibbs is alerting readers that there is a probability that energy stocks could quickly lose value due to a Cold Fusion device impacting traditional energy demand. Some believe it is a zero percent chance, and others think it approaches 100%. And like Who Shot JR, many people already have significant insider knowledge. Many investors only exposure to new science is through business media. So exposure in a respected business magazine, even insubstantial blather, can cause smart investors to take action. For instance, putting in stop loss orders, buying potential Rossi Partner stocks (GE,LMT,SI,DRC?), or buying long term short positions (LEAPS) on certain sectors. And private research and insider trading will also impact the volatility of energy stocks. Jed's insider has yet to be identified (?) but there are hundreds of companies that employ analysts who might be interested in profiting from the truth or fiction behind LENR. It will be an interesting time for the stock market. Gibbs could give more evidence that LENR is about to go commercial, but only Rossi and DKG have products announced and neither are guaranteed to be successful. - Brad
Re: [Vo]:New \'Cold Fusion Now\' Video - E. Storms on ..Metals that Work
I like that he spoke in generalities- I completely agree with what he outlined regarding the environment disassociating the molecules into atoms but he probably would not commit to my posit based on Naudts, Moller and Lyne that it is the change in Casimir force that performs the disassociation. Where Storms proceeds immediately to the reduced columb barrier I would advise a more cautious approach where this disassociation force can be over unity and even runaway as nature constantly puts h2 back together and releases more energy than his heaters have to externally provide thanks to gas motion relative to the change in geometry. IOW the normally unexploitable random motion of gas due to HUP can be harnessed to reduce the disassociation threshold -a Heisenberg trap. We don't see this at macro scale but Naudts insight that the hydrino is relativistic means these atoms are in different inertial frames due to the varying the suppression of larger virtual particles and it is this variety of different inertial frames [fractional or Rydberg states] that could explain how nature allows an HUP trap to exist. Fran
Re: [Vo]:COLD FUSION - The Answer to all our energy problems ?
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 10:12 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote: He's off by a factor of ten on the amount of money that has been spent on hot fusion research. The assertion that the theory is now known is nonsense. It may be that one of the many theories out there is correct, but that doesn't mean it is known which of those theories it is. On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat aussieguy.e...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=b3eOWIvb6vMnoredirect=1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3eOWIvb6vMnoredirect=1 Hey Frank Z you get a nice mention. This video was created by AlienScientist, He has a youtube channel http://www.youtube.com/user/AlienScientist and a website http://www.alienscientist.com/. I have been a big fan of AlienScientist for the last couple of years he is very knowledgeable and is responsible for getting me interested in pre-rossi Cold Fusion, he has several videos about Frank Znidarsic theories. I Highly recommend his videos, also Seattle4truth has a whole series on Frank Z broken down for the layman http://goo.gl/Unsn7
[Vo]:Anyone have the paper A. Carnera, S. Focardi, A. Rossi, to be published on Arxiv?
Does anyone know where the following paper can be located? A. Carnera, S. Focardi, A. Rossi, to be published on Arxiv It is referenced in the following paper. http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=53 I think it is a paper that Arxiv rejected. I think the paper would be very interesting to read.
Re: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula
So where is the data obtained from the mass spec data taken by U. Padua? Is it in the paper, A. Carnera, S. Focardi, A. Rossi, to be published on Arxiv From: Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Sunday, January 1, 2012 7:04 PM Subject: [Vo]:Defkalion described how they got Rossi's formula Here is an article published in November: Defkalion: 'We have Rossi’s formula' http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3353181.ece I should have paid closer attention to this. In this article, Xanthoulis says they got the formula from mass spec data taken by U. Padua. I think the data is here, in a paper linked to this article: http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3358646.ece/BINARY/Rossi-Focardi_paper.pdf They say they did not directly examine powder from Rossi. Assuming that is true, I think their work would be considered developed independently, like a PC compatible BIOS in 1980. They still have to pay royalties in the event Rossi gets a patent, but it would not be theft of intellectual property. In the early 1980s companies developed BIOS's with groups of programmers who had never seen IBM's source code or program notes. They developed it by observing program behavior. As I recall, BIOS was protected only by copyrights back then, not patents, so an independently developed version was free and clear. As I said, with a patent they would need to pay royalties no matter what, even if you independently discover something. When Ford tried to develop a hybrid car, they kept running into Toyota's patents for the Prius, and in the end decided to license them. This article also describes Defkalion's version of the issue that led to a falling out with Rossi: According to Xanthoulis, Rossi could not run the reaction more than 24 hours, and when Defkalion required a 48 hour test it supposedly led to a conflict with Rossi. 'It’s very simple but they didn’t think about it. (...) We solved the problem. Because the problem is that he cannot spread the reaction all over the pipe, and all the heating is concentrated in the middle', Xanthoulis told Ny Teknik. I took a second look at this article because I was surprised by this statement in the recent Wired UK article, and I am trying track it down: However, Defkalion spokesman Alexandros Xanthoulis told Swedish science magazine NyTeknik that they know exactly what the catalyst is. In a piece of subterfuge, a spectroscopic examination was carried out on an E-Cat being while it was being tested without Rossi's knowledge. However, to maintain 'fair play', Defkalion's scientists say they developed their technology without using this information. I still do not know what this refers to. The tests at U. Padua were conducted with Rossi's knowledge. Perhaps this is a misinterpretation. If there was subterfuge, it is no wonder Rossi is upset. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:Jed and others 2012 predictions please
I support more or less your predictions. many (not all) Green will try to oppose LENR because it is agains their agenda. it is breaking their plot to make a better world by reducing comfort, energy, consumption, sins, and corruption of the nature. it is breaking their agenda to use climate fear to reduce energy use. It make the fight against Nuke use less, killing thus one of their marketing department. it will also be opposed by all the rats that use those green ideas to make crony business with unjustified subsidies, manipulated markets, inefficients solutions, manipulated consumers. indirectly it will be opposed by all green lobby on false medicine, false fear , because this big success of science and failure of fearful consensus pseudo-science will move the mind of (the occidental rich) population to love science again, instead of fearing it today. (note that in non occidental countries, green are not that dangerous) the oil companies won't be the worst opponents because they have time to adapt (oil is a today's energy, unlike wind and sun, and even 3G+ nuke and clean coal). oil corrupted countries however will panic, but it will save their population from corruption, after a bloody revolution period. despite visible opposition, all business, including losers like oil and nuke, will embrace LENR, trying to establish a network of pattents and regulation to privatize it. anyway LENR is so simple to copy and build that it will spread in poor countries without regulation, like digital CD copy. it will be easy to use it to resolve real problems like desalinization, home energy, because units can be small unlike nuclear energy. by the way hydrogen technology will get much more common, cheap and simple. in europe/Canada and a little in US, LENR will be slowed temporarily by green if Defkalion and other serious competitors are not quick enough to sell their unit to individuals before the lobbies block them... however if the units are sold to individual it will be hard to over-regulate them, because the population won't believe (by interest and observation) the fear-monger. the government will anyway discretely, despite the lobbies, try to use LENR to reduce deficit and poverty. also cash flow for green will be reduced with the end of climate fear and globally technology fear... green fatigue that is happening today will accelerate that anticlerical transition movement. media green brainwashing will slow. slowly the politicians will follow the population, and break with the dying lobbies... slowly we will hear the truth about climate, whatever it is, with a dying IPCC, unlocking the freedom of speech, and a questioning becoming without any strategic importance nor motivated lobby... and by the way, as usual, media and science will never admit nor be accused of bad behavior on LENR. it will became normal science like aerodynamic... 2012/1/1 Akira Shirakawa shirakawa.ak...@gmail.com On 2012-01-01 19:03, David Roberson wrote: The oil producers will make an all out attempt to stop the universal usage of cold fusion devices by claims of danger and radiation. I think it will more likely be the greens, climate activists, anti-technology / anti-progress groups, and more in general those who are politically motivated against nuclear energy who will attempt stopping this technology, leveraging on hypothetical dangers for human health and the environment. Oil producers will use it to their benefit (cheaper oil extraction) while slowly phasing out from the fuel sector and at the same time focusing more on other sectors (lubricants/chemical/etc.). Some might even start new businesses in LENR (as they currently do on nuclear energy and photovoltaics, for example). This will allow them to survive longer in the post-peak oil era. Just my 2 cents, S.A.
