Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered

[Kevin O'Malley]

Asked & Answered:  Capricious Moderation

We have had some interesting back & forth lately between skeptopaths and
LENRphiles on Free Republic.  Here is the latest:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4004206/posts?page=42#42
To: *Kevmo*

Just heat a body of water in a closed system reliably and you’d have
trillion dollar invention. No one has.

What are your credentials for being this arbitrator of what level of
skepticism is appropriate? Scientific papers published? University degrees?
Successful experiments run?

You act as if you have a lot of go fund me projects looking for suckers.
Any vested interest you should be disclosing?

42 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4004206/posts?page=42#42>
posted on *10/16/2021
8:31:29 PM PDT* by bhl <https://freerepublic.com/~bhl/>

My response was deleted by the admin moderator [it would appear].

My response was something along the lines of pointing out that the closed
system heating water has been replicated more than 150 times, with the link
to various threads on LENR forum and here where the 153 replications were
discussed.
https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5728-how-do-you-convince-a-skeptic/?postID=105777=dolly#post105777
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3963819/posts

I also pointed him to threads where it's been asked & answered multiple
times about moving the goalposts.  Then I repeatedly asked him to leave the
thread because he is a troll.

---

There is a seeming disagreement between the sidebar moderator and the admin
moderator.  The admin moderator has been particularly one-sided and
capricious when it comes to LENR as well as other subjects.


---

Updated No Internal Trolling Rules for FR per Jim Robinson

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3928396/posts

If someone says stop, then stop. Do not enter onto a thread on a topic you
don't like just to disrupt, rattle cages, poke sticks, insult the regulars,
or engage in trolling activities, etc. ~Jim Robinson

The issue isn't whether we allow skepticism, it is whether we allow
hyperskeptics and skeptopaths to ruin the scientific dialog. Such FReepers
as Moonman62, TexasGator, CodeToad, Fireman15, bhl and others who persist
in polluting these threads have been asked to leave, and we are asking that
they open their own threads if they have comments.






https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3977426/posts?page=19#19

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

Comment #18 Removed by Moderator

This topic has a following, people who wish to learn and discuss the
materials presented.

Please refrain from posting anything that doesn’t legitimately address the
issue.

Something is going on in this segment of science. There are a considerable
number of research groups studying the matter.

19 posted on 7/19/2021, 6:45:09 PM by Sidebar Moderator

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies | Report Abuse]


On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:43 PM Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> Thanks for bumping the thread -- T4BTT
>
> LENR seems to have its own set of Anti-Science Truthers. In the last
> couple of years, there has been quite a bit of activity in the area of Low
> Energy Nuclear Reactions. Originally, the field was called Cold Fusion in
> 1989 when Pons & Fleischmann announced their findings prematurely. They
> were ridiculed and blacklisted by scientists who could have lost funding
> for their nuclear projects in 1989, even though some of their findings were
> soon replicated.. You can get the story here:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=263
>
>
> In fact, the only verified instance of Fraud in LENR was when MIT
> scientists fudged their results to show a negative result rather than the
> positive one the data supports.
>
> The ongoing story here on Free Republic has been one where the detractors
> use ridicule, falsehoods, false argumentation, classic fallacies,
> misdirection, and all manner of unscientific and ugly behavior other than
> to discuss the science behind the claims. In order to fight fire with fire,
> I started calling these pathological skeptics “seagulls” but the moderator
> told me not to do that. So the skeptopaths are allowed certain tactics on
> FR but the LENR afficianados are not. It turns out that one of the
> moderators resigned, and his scientific background was lacking in terms of
> being able to properly absorb this material. At one time he even put it on
> the same level as BigFoot without backing it up when confronted:
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2917406/posts?page=3976#3976
>
>
> A

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered

[Kevin O'Malley]

Moving The Goalposts
Skeptopaths constantly move the goalposts for LENR.  This doesn't happen in
any other area of science.

https://www.lenr-forum.com/search-result/66261/?highlight=moving+goalposts



On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 9:23 PM Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> I'm growing weary of the same objections, over and over and over again on
> various internet sites.  So I'm going to post each q here & just send
> links.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Outreach for discussion on Znidarsic-Smith genuine UFO reverse engineering using causal reasoning

[Kevin O'Malley]

If you really want to get down to the "natural forces" behind flying
saucers, just read ONE book:  Renato Vesco's "Intercept UFO".
https://www.amazon.com/Intercept-UFO-Renato-Vesco/dp/B0006WI572

It outlines the aerodynamic theories and technology of Ludwig Prandtl and
Oscar Schrenk & how those approaches to Boundary Layer Control were
implemented.  The key was using Sinterization and suction across the entire
wetted surface of the aircraft, increasing the lift coefficient by 8X.
 The allies won the war, these German weapon secrets were part of the war
booty, and voila!, 2 years later there were prototypes flying all over the
US  -- and crashing, unlike what one would expect from technologists
hundreds of thousands of years ahead of us capable of superluminal speed.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 9:44 AM Don  wrote:

> 2021.10.06
>
> BCC: Scientists and friends
>
>
> *Thank you for being curious about true alien tech.*
>
> I have a huge need to deliver a small corpus of logical connections made
> in mind by causal reasoning.
>
> This is about the control of the natural forces.
>
> ...
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered: Rossi

[Kevin O'Malley]

Here is an updated example of threadjacking by way of bringing up Rossi.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3999491/posts?page=41#41

On 1/19/14, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
> There seems to be another thing that skeptopaths engage in.  They try to
> turn any LENR discussion into Andrea Rossi and his past.  LENR had 14,700
> replications before Andrea Rossi ever showed up on the scene.
>
> And BTW, Wikipedia recently removed all the supposed convictions of fraud
> for Rossi, because the evidence could not support it under a very simple
> response by Rossi that they need to either put up or shut up, so they shut
> up.  Rossi is convicted tax evader.  That's it.  No fraud convictions, if
> Wikipedia is to be believed.
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley 
> wrote:
>
>> How to know you're dealing with a skeptopath:  they won't read the
>> simplest evidence put in front of them.
>>
>> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=32#32
>>
>>
>> To: *tacticalogic*
>>  *"I'd be interested in a practical source of energy, and you keep
>> hawking this like it is. Where's the beef?"*
>>
>> Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all
>> skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific
>> evidence" for cold fusion.
>>
>> First the refrain was "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated".
>>
>> Then, when the researchers "did" improve the repeatability, the refrain
>> became "cold fusion experiments cannot be repeated fifty percent of the
>> time.
>>
>> Then, when repeatability increased past 50%, the refrain became "cold
>> fusion experiments cannot be repeated 100% of the time".
>>
>> Now, as some researchers repeatabiltity numbers approach 100%, the
>> refrain
>> has become "the amount of power is miniscule, even if it "can" be
>> repeated".
>>
>> So, the answer to your question is "the beef is still growing". And an
>> HONEST respondent would admit that.
>>
>> But in the not too distant future, I look forward to when LENR "does"
>> produce usable amounts of power. I wonder what you skeptopaths will say
>> then.
>> 32 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=32#32>posted
>> on *Wed
>> 27 Nov 2013 05:28:54 AM PST* by Wonder
>> Warthog<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Ewonderwarthog/>
>> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=32>|
>> Private
>> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.32;reftype=comment>|
>> To
>> 31 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#31> |
>> View
>> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=32> |
>> Report
>> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=32>]
>> --
>> To: *Wonder Warthog*
>>  *Nah, you're just regurgitating the standard crawfishing that all
>> skeptopaths do when they can no longer claim that there is "no scientific
>> evidence" for cold fusion.*
>>
>> Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm supposed
>> to go find it.
>> 33 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=33#33>posted
>> on *Wed
>> 27 Nov 2013 05:34:11 AM PST* by
>> tacticalogic<http://www.freerepublic.com/%7Etacticalogic/>
>> [ Post Reply <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/reply?c=33>|
>> Private
>> Reply<http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3095784.33;reftype=comment>|
>> To
>> 32 <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/posts?page=38#32> |
>> View
>> Replies <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/replies?c=33> |
>> Report
>> Abuse <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3095784/abuse?c=33>]
>> --
>> To: *tacticalogic*
>>  *"Lemme guess. You can't show me the evidence to back that up, I'm
>> supposed to go find it."*
>>
>> Not quite. I'll give you two starting places. The first is George
>> Beaudette's book "Excess Heat". You can access this either by buying a
>> copy
>> (Amazon)($), or via interlibrary loan (free or $ depending on the
>> policies
>> of your local library.
>>
>> The second is Edmund Storm's collection of summaries of LENR research,
>> which can easily be found with Google search terms ("Edmund Storms" cold
>&

[Vo]:New High-Performance Solid-State Battery Surprises the Engineers Who Created It

[Kevin O'Malley]

New High-Performance Solid-State Battery Surprises the Engineers Who
Created It TOPICS:Battery TechnologyEnergyNanotechnologyUCSD By UNIVERSITY
OF CALIFORNIA - SAN DIEGO SEPTEMBER 24, 2021
https://scitechdaily.com/new-high-performance-solid-state-battery-surprises-the-engineers-who-created-it/
New
Battery Technology Concept Engineers create a high performance
all-solid-state battery with a pure-silicon anode. Engineers created a new
type of battery that weaves two promising battery sub-fields into a single
battery. The battery uses both a solid state electrolyte and an all-silicon
anode, making it a silicon all-solid-state battery. The initial rounds of
tests show that the new battery is safe, long lasting, and energy dense. It
holds promise for a wide range of applications from grid storage to
electric vehicles. The battery technology is described in the September 24,
2021 issue of the journal Science. University of California San Diego
nanoengineers led the research, in collaboration with researchers at LG
Energy Solution. Silicon anodes are famous for their energy density, which
is 10 times greater than the graphite anodes most often used in today’s
commercial lithium ion batteries. On the other hand, silicon anodes are
infamous for how they expand and contract as the battery charges and
discharges, and for how they degrade with liquid electrolytes. These
challenges have kept all-silicon anodes out of commercial lithium ion
batteries despite the tantalizing energy density. The new work published in
Science provides a promising path forward for all-silicon-anodes, thanks to
the right electrolyte. All-Solid-State Battery With a Pure-Silicon Anode 1)
The all solid-state battery consists of a cathode composite layer, a
sulfide solid electrolyte layer, and a carbon free micro-silicon anode. 2)
Before charging, discrete micro-scale Silicon particles make up the energy
dense anode. During battery charging, positive Lithium ions move from the
cathode to the anode, and a stable 2D interface is formed. 3) As more
Lithium ions move into the anode, it reacts with micro-Silicon to form
interconnected Lithium-Silicon alloy (Li-Si) particles. The reaction
continues to propagate throughout the electrode. 4) The reaction causes
expansion and densification of the micro-Silicon particles, forming a dense
Li-Si alloy electrode. The mechanical properties of the Li-Si alloy and the
solid electrolyte have a crucial role in maintaining the integrity and
contact along the 2D interfacial plane. Credit: University of California
San Diego “With this battery configuration, we are opening a new territory
for solid-state batteries using alloy anodes such as silicon,” said Darren
H. S. Tan, the lead author on the paper. He recently completed his chemical
engineering PhD at the UC San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering and
co-founded a startup UNIGRID Battery that has licensed this technology.
Next-generation, solid-state batteries with high energy densities have
always relied on metallic lithium as an anode. But that places restrictions
on battery charge rates and the need for elevated temperature (usually 60
degrees Celsius or higher) during charging. The silicon anode overcomes
these limitations, allowing much faster charge rates at room to low
temperatures, while maintaining high energy densities. The team
demonstrated a laboratory scale full cell that delivers 500 charge and
discharge cycles with 80% capacity retention at room temperature, which
represents exciting progress for both the silicon anode and solid state
battery communities. Silicon as an anode to replace graphite Silicon
anodes, of course, are not new. For decades, scientists and battery
manufacturers have looked to silicon as an energy-dense material to mix
into, or completely replace, conventional graphite anodes in lithium-ion
batteries. Theoretically, silicon offers approximately 10 times the storage
capacity of graphite. In practice however, lithium-ion batteries with
silicon added to the anode to increase energy density typically suffer from
real-world performance issues: in particular, the number of times the
battery can be charged and discharged while maintaining performance is not
high enough. Much of the problem is caused by the interaction between
silicon anodes and the liquid electrolytes they have been paired with. The
situation is complicated by large volume expansion of silicon particles
during charge and discharge. This results in severe capacity losses over
time. “As battery researchers, it’s vital to address the root problems in
the system. For silicon anodes, we know that one of the big issues is the
liquid electrolyte interface instability,” said UC San Diego
nanoengineering professor Shirley Meng, the corresponding author on the
Science paper, and director of the Institute for Materials Discovery and
Design at UC San Diego. “We needed a totally different approach,” said
Meng. Indeed, the UC San Diego led team took a different approach: they

[Vo]:Physicists Create Long Sought ‘Wigner Crystal’

[Kevin O'Malley]

*Physicists Create a Bizarre ‘Wigner Crystal’ Made Purely of Electrons ...
The unambiguous discovery of a Wigner crystal relied on a novel technique
for probing the insides of complex materials.*

*https://www.quantamagazine.org ^

*|
AUGUST 12, 2021 | Karmela Padavic-Callaghan

Posted on *8/13/2021, 11:14:21 AM *

In 1934, Eugene Wigner, a pioneer of quantum mechanics, theorized a strange
kind of matter — a crystal made from electrons. The idea was simple;
proving it wasn’t. Physicists tried many tricks over eight decades to nudge
electrons into forming these so-called Wigner crystals, with limited
success. In June, however, two independent groups of physicists reported in
Nature the most direct experimental observations of Wigner crystals yet.

“Wigner crystallization is such an old idea,” said Brian Skinner, a
physicist at Ohio State University who was not involved with the work. “To
see it so cleanly was really nice.”

To make electrons form a Wigner crystal, it might seem that a physicist
would simply have to cool them down. Electrons repel one another, and so
cooling would decrease their energy and freeze them into a lattice just as
water turns to ice. Yet cold electrons obey the odd laws of quantum
mechanics — they behave like waves. Instead of getting fixed into place in
a neatly ordered grid, wavelike electrons tend to slosh around and crash
into their neighbors. What should be a crystal turns into something more
like a puddle.

One of the teams responsible for the new work found a Wigner crystal almost
by accident. Researchers in a group led by Hongkun Park at Harvard
University were experimenting with electron behavior in a “sandwich” of
exceptionally thin sheets of a semiconductor separated by a material that
electrons could not move through. The physicists cooled this semiconductor
sandwich to below −230 degrees Celsius and played around with the number of
electrons in each of the layers.

The team observed that when there was a specific number of electrons in
each layer, they all stood mysteriously still. “Somehow, electrons inside
the semiconductors could not move. This was a really surprising find,” said
You Zhou, lead author on the new study.

Zhou shared his results with theorist colleagues, who eventually recalled
an old idea of Wigner’s. Wigner had calculated that electrons in a flat
two-dimensional material would assume a pattern similar to a floor
perfectly covered with triangular tiles. This crystal would stop the
electrons from moving entirely.

In Zhou’s crystal, repulsive forces between electrons in each layer and
between the layers worked together to arrange electrons into Wigner’s
triangular grid. These forces were strong enough to prevent the electron
spilling and sloshing predicted by quantum mechanics. But this behavior
happened only when the number of electrons in each layer was such that the
top and bottom crystal grids aligned: Smaller triangles in one layer had to
exactly fill up the space inside bigger ones in the other. Park called the
electron ratios that led to these conditions the “telltale signs of bilayer
Wigner crystals.”

After they realized that they had a Wigner crystal on their hands, the
Harvard team made it melt by forcing the electrons to embrace their quantum
wave nature. Wigner crystal melting is a quantum phase transition — one
that is similar to an ice cube becoming water, but without any heating
involved. Theorists previously predicted the conditions necessary for the
process to occur, but the new experiment is the first to confirm it through
direct measurements. “It was really, really exciting to see what we
actually learned from textbooks and papers in experimental data,” Park said.

Past experiments found hints of Wigner crystallization, but the new studies
offer the most direct evidence because of a novel experimental technique.
The researchers blasted the semiconductor layers with laser light to create
a particle-like entity called an exciton. The material would then reflect
or re-emit that light. By analyzing the light, researchers could tell
whether the excitons had interacted with ordinary free-flowing electrons,
or with electrons frozen in a Wigner crystal. “We actually have direct
evidence of a Wigner crystal,” Park said. “You can actually see that it’s a
crystal that has this triangular structure.”

The second research team, led by Ataç Imamoğlu at the Swiss Federal
Institute of Technology Zurich, also used this technique to observe the
formation of a Wigner crystal.

The new work illuminates the infamous problem of many interacting
electrons. When you put a lot of electrons into a small space, they all
push on each other, and it becomes impossible to keep track of all the
mutually intertwined forces.

Philip Phillips, a physicist at the University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign 

Re: [Vo]:BEC transforms photon frequency

[Kevin O'Malley]

regarding “A “linear BEC” sounds rather like the “hydroton” model of Edmund
Storms”



https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3981264/posts?page=15#15



--

A Bose Einstein Condensate is when a group of atoms start acting like one
atom, in concert.

Lots of hints that what’s going on in LENR is BECs. But the drawback is
that BECs form at such low temperatures. So the trick is to find how BECs
might form at higher temperatures, find evidence for it.

That evidence is slowly arriving.

A Linear BEC would be a linear formation of perhaps only a few atoms,
acting in concert.

Here is where I think there might be an intersection with Ed’s model. When
that vibrating linear BEC runs into an edge dislocation of the matrix... it
BENDS the BEC. It stresses it such that 2 of the captured atoms fuse
together because the Coulomb Barrier is so low inside the BEC.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352900842_Novel_Cold_Fusion_Reactor_with_Deuterium_Supply_from_Backside_and_Metal_Surface_Potential_Control?channel=doi=60dea792299bf1ea9ed6206f=true

Look at Figure 1. Scheme of edge dislocation loops in Pd containing
condensed H/D.

I posted that article here
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3976833/posts

15 
posted on *8/2/2021,
7:37:53 AM* by Kevmo  
[ Post Reply  | Private
Reply

 | To 9  | View
Replies  | Report
Abuse ]

>

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered

[Kevin O'Malley]

Update on moderation, and it just so happens it took place on a
transmutation thread.



-

https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3977426/posts?page=19#19


--
*Comment #13 Removed by Moderator*
--
*Comment #14 Removed by Moderator*
--

--
*Comment #16 Removed by Moderator*
--
*Comment #17 Removed by Moderator*
--
*Comment #18 Removed by Moderator*
--

This topic has a following, people who wish to learn and discuss the
materials presented.

Please refrain from posting anything that doesn’t legitimately address the
issue.

Something is going on in this segment of science. There are a considerable
number of research groups studying the matter.

19 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3977426/posts?page=19#19> posted
on *7/19/2021, 6:45:09 PM* by Sidebar Moderator
<https://freerepublic.com/~sidebarmoderator/>
[ Post Reply <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3977426/reply?c=19>
| Private
Reply
<https://freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3977426.19;reftype=comment>
 | View Replies <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3977426/replies?c=19>
 | Report Abuse <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3977426/abuse?c=19>]

On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 10:03 AM Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> Case in Point.
>
> Moderation is heavy on certain threads in one direction, VERY light on
> LENR threads in the anti-science direction.
>
>
>- Laser induced transmutation on palladium thin films in hydrogen
>atmosphere <https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3968011/posts>
>6/17/2021, 9:20:38 AM · 41 of 41
><https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=41#41>
>Admin Moderator <https://freerepublic.com/~adminmoderator/> to *Kevmo*
>
>Knock it off.
>Post Reply <https://freerepublic.com/perl/post?id=3968011,41> | Private
>Reply
>
> <https://freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?reftype=comment;refid=3968011.41>
> | To 40 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=40#40>
> | View Replies
><https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/replies?c=41>
>
>
>
> https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=41#41
>
>
> --
>
> background
>
> -
>
> Updated No Internal Trolling Rules for FR per Jim Robinson
> https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3928396/posts
> If someone says stop, then stop. Do not enter onto a thread on a topic you
> don’t like just to disrupt, rattle cages, poke sticks, insult the regulars,
> or engage in trolling activities, etc.
>
>
>
> This “freeper” has been asked multiple times to leave these threads.
>
> 40 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=40#40> posted
> on *6/17/2021, 7:00:06 AM* by Kevmo  <https://freerepublic.com/~kevmo/>(some
> things may be true even if Donald Trump said them. ~Jonathan Karl)
> [ Post Reply <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/reply?c=40> | 
> Private
> Reply
> <https://freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3968011.40;reftype=comment>
>  | To 39 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=41#39> | View
> Replies <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/replies?c=40> | Report
> Abuse <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/abuse?c=40>]
>
> To: *Steely Tom*
>
> Science has a protocol. Conservatism has a protocol.
>
> Apparently there is a protocol that overrides both of them, the protocol
> of the gang @$$#0/e.
>
> 38 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=38#38> posted
> on *6/17/2021, 5:07:26 AM* by Kevmo  <https://freerepublic.com/~kevmo/>(some
> things may be true even if Donald Trump said them. ~Jonathan Karl)
> [ Post Reply <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/reply?c=38> | 
> Private
> Reply
> <https://freerepublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3968011.38;reftype=comment>
>  | To 35 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=41#35> | View
> Replies <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/replies?c=38> | Report
> Abuse <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/abuse?c=38>]
>
>
> To: *Seagull*
>
> What does it take to get rid of seagulls on FR?
>
> 30 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=30#30> posted
> on *6/16/2021, 11:54:52 AM* by Kevmo  <https://freerepublic.com/~kevmo/>(some

Re: [Vo]:Thermacore and the missing link to the Kervran effect

[Kevin O'Malley]

That paper is very "vortician".   Right up our alley.


The possible explaining of some controversial effects by a *vortexial* atom
model

Volume 4 Issue 2 - 2020

Marius Arghirescu State Office for Inventions and Trademarks,
Patents Department, Romania Correspondence: Marius Arghirescu, State Office
for Inventions and Trademarks, Patents Department; Romania,
 Email Received: April 23, 2020 | Published: April 30, 2020



Abstract
 In the paper is presented a *vortexial *pre-quantum model of atom, based
on a vortexial type of electron’ and proton’ magnetic moment, resulted in a
cold genesis theory(CGT) as etherono-quantonic vortex ( ) * B r (r ’) (r r
’), Γ =Γ +Γ > µ µµ µ of heavy’ tachyonic etherons (ms ≈10-60 kg; w>c)-
generating the magnetic potential A, and of quantons (mh =h⋅1/ c2
=7.37x10-51 kg)-generating vortex-tubes B ξ that materializes the B-field
lines of the magnetic induction, the proton’s magnetic moment resulting by
a degenerate Compton radius. The model may explain the ‘hydrino’ atom, with
n=½, the tachyonic speed of the electronic neutrino and the Kervran effect
of biological nuclear transmutations. By the multi-vortexial model of
nucleon resulted in CGT, are explained also some astrophysical observation
which sustains the CGT’s hypothesis of pulsatile antigravitic pseudo-charge
and gravitational waves generating at the surface of a ‘black hole type
star by matter→energy conversion, resulting also the possibility of cosmic
dust’s cold forming.

 Keywords

: *vortexial* atom, hydrino, OPERA experiment, Kervran effect, antigravitic
charge, gravitational waves

>

Re: [Vo]:Thermacore and the missing link to the Kervran effect

[Kevin O'Malley]

Thermacore came very close to the big time when they were granted a patent
for a solid state thermal diode.  Hagelstein was one of the inventors.
 Yet another mystery in this field.



https://patents.google.com/patent/US6396191


Thermal diode for energy conversion
Abstract
Solid state thermionic energy converter semiconductor diode implementation
and method for conversion of thermal energy to electric energy, and
electric energy to refrigeration. In embodiments of this invention a highly
doped n* region can serve as an emitter region, from which carriers can be
injected into a gap region. The gap region can be p-type, intrinsic, or
moderately doped n-type. A hot ohmic contact is connected to the n*-type
region. A cold ohmic contact serves as a collector and is connected to the
other side of the gap region. The cold ohmic contact has a recombination
region formed between the cold ohmic contact and the gap region and a
blocking compensation layer that reduces the thermoelectric back flow
component. The heated emitter relative to the collector generates an EMF
which drives current through a series load. The inventive principle works
for hole conductivity, as well as for electrons.


US6396191B1

United States

InventorPeter L. Hagelstein
Yan R. Kucherov

--

--
Application US09/721,051 events
1999-03-11
Priority to US12390099P
2000-11-22
Application filed by Eneco Inc

2002-05-28
Application granted
2002-05-28
Publication of US6396191B1

2020-03-06
Anticipated expiration

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 10:53 AM Jones Beene  wrote:

> A neglected paper and fringe theory, which may stand up to closer
> scrutiny, appeared last year from Romania. It addresses the Kervran effect
> and the Mills hydrino with a vortex model somewhat reminiscent of the
> recent "Berry" superconductor theory.
>
> https://medcraveonline.com/PAIJ/PAIJ-04-00204.pdf
>
> The Kervran effect has an overlooked connection to one of the most
> convincing experiments ever in LENR, involving the company Thermacore, Inc
> ... and their work with Randell Mills plus the eventual patent nearly 30
> years ago. The important paper from that era has been removed from the BLP
> site: Thermacore, Inc. "Final Report, SBIR Phase I, Nascent Hydrogen: An
> Energy Source."
>
> The Thermacore Patent, now expired, is 5,273,635 from 1993 Inventors:
> Gernert, Shaubach, and Ernst Note: Randell Mills is NOT listed as
> co-inventor. Nor did they mention the Kervran effect, but the did document
> a characteristic emission line at 54.4 eV which Mills predicted. There was
> no radioactivity. One wonders in hindsight if they would have found calcium
> after the year long run, should they have looked.
>
> Another missed opportunity?
>
> Consider this quote from Thermacore: "Light water electrolytic experiments at 
> Thermacore show positive results. The most outstanding example is a cell 
> producing 41 watts of heat with only 5 watts of electrical input. The cell 
> has operated continuously for over one year..." That is a COP of 8, claimed 
> by experts.
>
> It bears repeating: THE CELL OPERATED CONTINUOUSLY FOR OVER ONE YEAR, and 
> remember, this statement is not coming from some fly-by-night self-promoting 
> entrepreneur, nor even university professors who are ignorant of 
> manufacturing realities - but instead it comes from one of the most 
> well-respected of high-tech firms in the World, in thermal engineering. This 
> is the firm which *invented the heat-pipe* and other related devices.
>
> Yet it all came to naught. Go figure.
>
>
>

[Vo]:A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity

[Kevin O'Malley]

*A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity*

*Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism ^
 *|
5 July 2021 | Hiroyasu Koizumi

Posted on *7/11/2021, 7:26:10 AM*

A Super New Theory to Explain Superconductivity

By UNIVERSITY OF TSUKUBA JULY 10, 2021

Electricity Superconductivity Concept

A researcher at the University of Tsukuba introduces a new theoretical
model of high-temperature superconductivity, in which electrical current
can flow with zero resistance, which may lead to extremely efficient energy
generation and transmission.

A scientist from the Division of Quantum Condensed Matter Physics at the
University of Tsukuba has formulated a new theory of superconductivity.
Based on the calculation of the “Berry connection,” this model helps
explain new experimental results better than the current theory. The work
may allow future electrical grids to send energy without losses.

Superconductors are fascinating materials that may look unremarkable at
ambient conditions, but when cooled to very low temperatures, allow
electrical current to flow with zero resistance. There are several obvious
applications of superconductivity, such as lossless energy transmission,
but the physics underlying this process is still not clearly understood.
The established way of thinking about the transition from normal to
superconducting is called the Bardeen-Cooper-Schrieffer (BCS) theory. In
this model, as long as thermal excitations are kept small enough, particles
can form “Cooper pairs” which travel together and resist scattering.
However, the BCS model does not adequately explain all types of
superconductors, which limits our ability to create more robust
superconducting materials that work at room temperature.

Now, a scientist from the University of Tsukuba has come up with a new
model for superconductivity that better reveals the physical principles.
Instead of focusing on the pairing of charged particles, this new theory
uses the mathematical tool called the “Berry connection.” This value
computes a twisting of space where electrons travel. “In the standard BCS
theory, the origin of superconductivity is electron pairing. In this
theory, the supercurrent is identified as the dissipationless flow of the
paired electrons, while single electrons still experience resistance,”
Author Professor Hiroyasu Koizumi says.

As an illustration, Josephson junctions are formed when two superconductor
layers are separated by a thin barrier made of normal metal or an
insulator. Although widely used in high-precision magnetic field detectors
and quantum computers, Josephson junctions also do not fit neatly the
inside BCS theory. “In the new theory, the role of the electron pairing is
to stabilize the Berry connection, as opposed to being the cause of
superconductivity by itself, and the supercurrent is the flow of single and
paired electrons generated due to the twisting of the space where electrons
travel caused by the Berry connection,” Professor Koizumi says. Thus, this
research may lead to advancements in quantum computing as well as energy
conservation.

Reference: “Superconductivity by Berry Connection from Many-body Wave
Functions: Revisit to Andreev−Saint-James Reflection and Josephson Effect”
by Hiroyasu Koizumi, 5 July 2021, Journal of Superconductivity and Novel
Magnetism. DOI: 10.1007/s10948-021-05905-y
-
arXiv.org > cond-mat > arXiv:2105.02364

https://arxiv.org/abs/2105.02364

Condensed Matter ~~ Superconductivity [Submitted on 5 May 2021] Berry
connection from many-body wave functions and superconductivity:
Calculations by the particle number conserving Bogoliubov-de Gennes
equations

Hiroyasu Koizumi, Alto Ishikawa A fundamentally revised version of
superconductivity theory has been put forward by the present authors since
the standard theory of superconductivity based on the BCS theory cannot
explain superconductivity in cuprates discovered in 1986, and
reexaminations on several experimental results on the conventional
superconductors indicate the necessity for a fundamental revision.

The revision is made on the origin of the superconducting phase variable,
which is attributed to a Berry connection arising from many-body wave
functions. With this revision, the theory can be cast into a particle
number conserving formalism. We have developed a method to calculate
superconducting states with the Berry connection using the particle number
conserving version of the Bogoliubov-de Gennes equations. An example
calculation is made for a model originally built for cuprate
superconductors.

Subjects: Superconductivity (cond-mat.supr-con) Cite as: arXiv:2105.02364
[cond-mat.supr-con] (or arXiv:2105.02364v1 [cond-mat.supr-con] for this
version)

Re: [Vo]:Asked & Answered

[Kevin O'Malley]

epublic.com/perl/mail-compose?refid=3968011.32;reftype=comment>
 | To 31 <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/posts?page=41#31> | View
Replies <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/replies?c=32> | Report
Abuse <https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3968011/abuse?c=32>]







On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 6:43 PM Kevin O'Malley  wrote:

> Thanks for bumping the thread -- T4BTT
>
> LENR seems to have its own set of Anti-Science Truthers. In the last
> couple of years, there has been quite a bit of activity in the area of Low
> Energy Nuclear Reactions. Originally, the field was called Cold Fusion in
> 1989 when Pons & Fleischmann announced their findings prematurely. They
> were ridiculed and blacklisted by scientists who could have lost funding
> for their nuclear projects in 1989, even though some of their findings were
> soon replicated.. You can get the story here:
>
> http://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=263
>
>
> In fact, the only verified instance of Fraud in LENR was when MIT
> scientists fudged their results to show a negative result rather than the
> positive one the data supports.
>
> The ongoing story here on Free Republic has been one where the detractors
> use ridicule, falsehoods, false argumentation, classic fallacies,
> misdirection, and all manner of unscientific and ugly behavior other than
> to discuss the science behind the claims. In order to fight fire with fire,
> I started calling these pathological skeptics “seagulls” but the moderator
> told me not to do that. So the skeptopaths are allowed certain tactics on
> FR but the LENR afficianados are not. It turns out that one of the
> moderators resigned, and his scientific background was lacking in terms of
> being able to properly absorb this material. At one time he even put it on
> the same level as BigFoot without backing it up when confronted:
> http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/2917406/posts?page=3976#3976
>
>
> And even though the Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated hundreds of
> times by more than a thousand scientists, even in mainstream peer-reviewed
> journals.
>
>
> https://springerlink3.metapress.com/content/8k5n17605m135n22/resource-secured/?target=fulltext.pdf=xwvgza45j4sqpe3wceul4dv2=www.springerlink.com
> .
> Jing-tang He
> • Nuclear fusion inside condense matters
> • Frontiers of Physics in China
> Volume 2, Number 1, 96-102, DOI: 10.1007/s11467-007-0005-8
> This article describes in detail the nuclear fusion inside condense
> matters—the Fleischmann-Pons effect, the reproducibility of cold fusions,
> self-consistency of cold fusions and the possible applications
> .
> Note that Jing-tang He found there were 14,700 replications of the Pons
> Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Effect.
> http://www.boliven.com/publication/10.1007~s11467-007-0005-8?q=(%22David%20J.%20Nagel%22)
>
> .
> National Instruments is a multibillion dollar corporation that does not
> need to stick its neck out for “bigfoot stories”. After noting more than
> 150 replications, they recently concluded that with so much evidence of
> anomalous heat generation...
> http://www.22passi.it/downloads/eu_brussels_june_20_2012_concezzi.pdf
> Conclusion
> • There is an unknown physical event and there is a need of better
> measurements and control tools. NI is playing a role in accelerating
> innovation and discovery.
>
>
>
> The current state of the science of LENR is that the Pons Fleischmann
> Anomalous Heat Effect has been replicated and it is an established
> scientific fact. But it is not an established ENGINEERING field because the
> effect is difficult to generate and there is still some lingering stigma
> associated with the field. The level of pathological resistance this field
> receives is unconscionable for those of us who seek scientific answers and
> engineering solutions.
>
> If you find that the thread leads to this post it is because I no longer
> respond to the seagulls, I send all inquiries to this post so that crickets
> are not generated, nor is there an impression left that they have an
> objection worth pursuing. If lurkers feel the objection is worth pursuing,
> they can repost the same question.
> To learn more about LENR, I recommend the LENR-CANR website
> http://lenr-canr.org/
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Kevin O'Malley 
> wrote:
>
>> Basic derision
>>
>> ***That's all the skeptopaths seem to be able to muster.  They can't
>> counteract the science.  They downshift into ridicule because they can get
>> away with it.  It's basically like saying, "hey, look, I can be an asshole
>> and get away with it, so that's what I'm going to do."  It does NOTHING to
>> further the science.  There isn't even an attempt to refute the science
>> behind the claims.
>>
>> The same thing happened to the Wright brothers for 5 years between the
>> time they first flew an airplane in 1903 and the time they had a contract
>> to demo against in 1908.  What happened to those skeptopaths in 1904?  They
>> were utterly discredited, but within a few weeks of the Wright brothers
>> demonstration, they were spouting off yet again about how things should be
>> done differently, better, more to their liking.  It's horse shit.
>>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:How to make money with cold fusion

[Kevin O'Malley]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2435697/posts

How I Made Money from Cold Fusion
Exclusive Article for Free Republic | 1/23/10 | Kevmo
Posted on 1/23/2010, 12:28:49 PM by Kevmo

Freeper gets a fascinating contract listed on Intrade, bets that the
experiment will be replicated, and cashes in.

In 2008, Dr. Yoshiaki Arata performed a fascinating experiment with
Deuterium Gas loaded onto a Palladium matrix, and without any input
power, showed that there was some excess heat. Generating excess heat
in cold fusion cell wasn't a new development -- scientists had been
replicating the Pons-Fleischman effect for 2 decades. What was a new
development was how easily replicable this particular experiment was.
It seemed to me that this would be the easiest way to replicate
anomalous heat production, removing the tired old standby excuse that
the energy input from electrolysis was causing this excess heat,
because there was NO energy input in this experiment. So I proposed to
Intrade that they open up a contract that this experiment would be
replicated in a peer reviewed, scientific Journal.

I also posted a discussion thread on the Intrade forum
http://bb.intrade.com/intradeForum/posts/list/2239.page

"This week, Dr. Yoshiaki Arata demonstrated Cold Fusion in a
reproducible environment. I sent in a suggestion to intrade that a
contract be opened up that it would be replicated in a peer-reviewed
journal by January 1, 2009. I haven't heard yet if there's any
interest."
AZoNano.com Energy Breakthrough as Japanese Physicist Sucessfully and ...
http://www.azonano.com/news.asp?newsID=6472

To my surprise, Intrade opened up this contract in 2008, where it
basically stagnated. Since I was not involved in the peer review
process, my assessment was that the experiment would only take several
weeks to make it through the grueling process, rather than several
months. It was actually someone at Free Republic who set me straight
on that:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2022063/posts?page=164#164

The contract closed at the end of 2008 at zero, meaning that anyone
who bet that the experiment would be replicated and published had lost
their bet.

I found the contract fascinating and asked Intrade to open a new
contract in 2009, which they did. A few months into 2009, there
started to be some replication experiments published by scientists,
but the whole process was outshined by Dr. Pamela Mossier-Boss
publishing her exciting results where she showed that there were
Neutrons being generated in the cold fusion cell at the Navy Space
Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR).

'Cold Fusion' Rebirth? New Evidence For Existence Of Controversial
Energy Source
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090323110450.htm
ScienceDaily (Mar. 23, 2009) — [Researchers are reporting compelling
new scientific evidence for the existence of low-energy nuclear
reactions (LENR), the process once called "cold fusion" that may
promise a new source of energy. One group of scientists, for instance,
describes what it terms the first clear visual evidence that LENR
devices can produce neutrons, subatomic particles that scientists view
as tell-tale signs that nuclear reactions are occurring. The report,
which injects new life into this controversial field, will be
presented March 23 in Salt Lake City, Utah, at the American Chemical
Society's 237th National Meeting. "Our finding is very significant,"
says study co-author and analytical chemist Pamela Mosier-Boss, Ph.D.,
of the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center (SPAWAR) in
San Diego, Calif. "To our knowledge, this is the first scientific
report of the production of highly energetic neutrons from an LENR
device."]

And then the CBS TV newsmagazine 60 Minutes chimed in with their
report on cold fusion on April 19, 2009, pushing the Arata replication
results further into the background. The video and an article
describing it are here:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/04/17/60minutes/main4952167.shtml

I started posting references to replication of Arata's experiment in
the Intrade Forum, saying such things as, "Oh, and the experiment was
a replication of Arata's demonstration last May. So it was in
quantitative fact proof that Arata's demonstration worked as stated. "
>From the PhysOrg article and discussion:
'Cold fusion' rebirth? New evidence for existence of controversial
energy source
http://www.physorg.com/news157046734.html

I transferred as much money as I was willing to lose over to Intrade.
This was harder that I thought it would be, because Intrade does not
accept credit cards. I bought up as many contracts as I could, and
posted that I would pay $5-$6 for a contract that would pay out at
$100. In reality, it's paying 50-60Cents per contract, and the payout
is $10, for some bizarre reasoning that Intrade uses 1/10th of the
actual monetary figures. To my surprise, there were still folks at
Intrade posting that I was "Mental" , or as BobbyE wrote: "I have
trouble getting reality 

Re: [Vo]:Planckian dissipation phenomenon

[Kevin O'Malley]

If time is determined by the speed of light, how would you determine
which packets were generated first?  Would they be going by some other
limiting speed agent other than C?

On 5/12/19, H LV  wrote:
> If one can build a transmitter and a receiver to transmit and detect wave
> packets travelling with sub c group velocity why can't one do the same for
> wave packets with group velocity much greater than c and achieve
> communication which is much faster than c?
> Harry
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2019, 11:51 PM Axil Axil 
>>
>>
>> It should be noted that while Einstein's theory of special relativity
>> prevents (real) mass, energy, or information from traveling faster than
>> the
>> speed of light c (Lorentz et al. 1952, Brillouin and Sommerfeld 1960,
>> Born
>> and Wolf 1999, Landau and Lifschitz 1997), there is nothing preventing
>> "apparent" motion faster than c (or, in fact, with negative speeds,
>> implying arrival at a destination before leaving the origin). For
>> example,
>> the phase velocity and group velocity of a wave may exceed the speed of
>> light, but in such cases, no energy or information actually travels
>> faster
>> than c. Experiments showing group velocities greater than c include that
>> of
>> Wang et al. (2000), who produced a laser pulse in atomic cesium gas with
>> a
>> group velocity of -310c. In each case, the observed superluminal
>> propagation is not at odds with causality, and is instead a consequence
>> of
>> classical interference between its constituent frequency components in a
>> region of anomalous dispersion (Wang et al. 2000).
>>
>> Keith Fredericks has an opinion that strange radiation is a tachyon. This
>> SR quasiparticle might be tachyonic is that it is most likely based on
>> the
>> polariton. The polariton does generate superluminal light in the form of
>> x-waves.
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/lsa2017119
>>
>> Superluminal X-waves in a polariton quantum fluid
>>
>> This article shows that a polariton can naturally produce superluminal
>> light (X-waves) when excited with a pulsed laser.
>>
>> This unexpected behavior of light may explain how Strange radiation (SR)
>> can be considered a tachyon, a superluminal particle.
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

You either send a credible expert, or no one.
***You are credible.  If Kromek gave you training on their gamma
spectrometer, you'd be in the upper echelon of credible testers.
Anyone who gets trained would be able to defend themselves and if not,
Kromek is gonna look real bad.  Simple.

Someone has to break through the bullshit.   All the "credible
experts" are not stepping forward.  If enough ordinary guys get
trained and test positive gammas, it will bell the cat.

Please answer the question of what it would take for YOU to bell the
cat.  $5k for gamma spectrometer training is cheap compared to trying
to get some "credible expert " whose career is gonna be over as soon
as he announces he found gammas.

Those are the 5 elements.  , Willingness, time, capability,
wherewithal and bullshit.


On 5/18/19, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
>
>
>> The simple fact is that whoever goes forward to test gammas and
>> actually finds them will probably find his career over.   That's gotta
>> be worth $100k.  And that's why no one is stepping forward to overcome
>> the ... bullshit.
>>
>
> I doubt that the career would be over, but if that is the situation, no
> credible person will do the job. You are not a credible person, and neither
> am I. No one would believe us even if we did it. So there is no point to
> sending us. You either send a credible expert, or no one.
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

No, it is not easy to see this. It is insane. The person who does this
should not need any training or equipment.
***Such people aren't stepping forward.  My proposal should be easy to
underbid, instead we have ... more bullshit.   You joking around.

The simple fact is that whoever goes forward to test gammas and
actually finds them will probably find his career over.   That's gotta
be worth $100k.  And that's why no one is stepping forward to overcome
the ... bullshit.


On 5/18/19, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
>
> Uhh, Jed I proposed explicitly that YOU would be more suited to go
>> and test but you declined.
>
>
> Okay, you proposed I go. I told you I know nothing about this. Why are you
> repeating this? You have "explicitly proposed" that the wrong person be
> sent to do something he does not have slightest idea how to do, in a type
> of experiment he has never seen. So, your proposal tells us you have no
> clue.
>
>
>
>> I think it'll take $5k to train me.   Applying Allan's incorrection
>> coefficient, it would make the training $50k.
>
>
> If you need any training, you are the wrong person. We need to send someone
> who has spent years measuring gamma rays. Someone in the UK who has all of
> the equipment in a lab at his fingertips.
>
>
>
>>I think it would be
>> several thousand in expenses, most of us don't even think it would be
>> that much so there's no need to apply Allan's incorrection
>> coefficient.  But it's easy to see that we're already at $60k before I
>> step foot on a plane to London.
>
>
> No, it is not easy to see this. It is insane. The person who does this
> should not need any training or equipment.
>
>
>
>> > Plus, if I understand correctly, he is asking for $100,000. That's
>> > about
>> > $97,000 more than anyone needs to do this. That surely is fraud, to use
>> the
>> > word Russ dares not say.
>> ***Jed, you yourself wrote on LENR-Forum that you would do it for
>> $1Million.
>
>
> Yeah. That was a joke, as I said. If you thought I was serious you lack a
> sense of humor. The word "cool" might have tipped you off that I wasn't
> serious. The fact that the sum is outrageous should have tipped you off.
> And my follow up comments would seem facetious to most people:
>
> Me: I am *starting the negotiation* at $1 million. Say yes today, without
> delay, or it goes to $2 million.
>
> Alan: I propose $1M plus a basket full of white kittens, and a barrel of
> blue M's
>
> Me: Driving a hard bargain, are we? Well, two can play that game! I raise
> you. I will do it for *$3 million*. That's my final offer, unless you want
> to pay more.
>
> Does that sound serious to you? Really?!?
>

Re: [Vo]:GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

However, we have no idea who these experts are, what they saw, or what
they said. So that doesn't count. We can't make anything of it. Of
course S have every right to keep this secret, but I suggest we pay
no attention to them until they go public and publish a professional
paper. In my opinion, secret projects have no credibility.
***I suspected as much.   My bullshit detector is going off right and
left.  The simple fact is that anyone who CAN go and measure gamma
rays credibly has not been publicly invited except over at LENR-Forum,
where I was banned after being there for 5 years for accepting this
invitation.   Someone with a BSEE and 20 years' experience isn't
enough for Alan, and he even said that if I had the expertise of
Edward Teller that he wouldn't allow testing.   Again :   Bullshit.


Those are the elements of what it takes to bell the cat: Willingness,
time, capability, wherewithal . Those who have the time and
willingness are low on capability and wherewithal. Those who have the
capabilty and wherewithal are low on willingness and time. Most of us
can develop capability and wherewithal, but we can't really develop
willingness and freed time .


To be candid, there's one more element: Bullshit. When Celani pulled
out his Geiger counter , Rossi climbed all over him because it could
point to what he was using in his cells. Probably bullshit. MFMP
announced they found gammas, Biberian replicated it 48 hours later,
then they went off and tested other stuff without saying a word.
Bullshit. Now we have MFMP coming back on line to send me a private
message because they're not on Vortex-L nor here, how they quietly
referenced the gammas in some peer reviewed thingie, surrounded by a
ton of bullshit. Then we have Alan claiming he has gammas, so I'm
ready to answer the question for myself as to what it would take me to
overcome all the bullshit that's been thrown around over this gamma
issue, and including the bullshit thrown around there. So you have my
answer. It should be easy to underbid me for those who have a higher
tolerance of bullshit. Then everyone's happy, and the cat gets belled.


What's sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander.  It does
not appear to be a joke that I was banned, so you should be banned as
well, for posting fraud.   The serious contenders should be posting
their underbids.  Simple.

Someone with the background goes and tests for gammas , then guess
what -- it'll be the end of their career.  I think they will be
charging far more than $100k for doing something that ends their
career, and we see the absolute result:  SILENCE.   As long as there
is silence, there is no offer to test gammas.   It's just
career-ending bullshit.


On 5/18/19, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
>
>
>> Jed is
>> already posted in as willing to do it for a cool $million.   That
>> makes me look cheap in comparison.
>>
>
> That was a JOKE.
>
>
>
>> Of course I think Someone ELSE should bell the
>> cat, like Jed Rothwell whom I posted as a good candidate, since he's
>> tested cold fusion devices before. He declined.
>
>
> I declined because I know nothing about gamma rays. I am totally
> unqualified to test this claim. Also because I am in the U.S. There must be
> hundreds of people in the UK qualified to do this.
>
>
> The question is "what
>> would it take for ME to bell the cat". This is the answer.
>>
>
> That answer is absurd. It is $97,000 too expensive. A person would be
> insane to pay that much, or to contribute to that effort.
>
> Not only that, but your entire approach is ass-backwards. Putting the cart
> before the horse. No one should contribute any money to your proposed test
> until the following has been done:
>
> 1. They have to INVITE YOU. Obviously!!
>
> 2. Smith & George have to publish a comprehensive report describing their
> instruments, procedures and results. This is essential. People have to know
> what you will see, and how to go about testing it. Let us have no
> surprises.
>
> 3. Various experts should examine their report, critique it, and give
> advice. They should say: "Sure, that looks good. Here's how I would test
> it. Here are the instruments I would take." If they say, "I can't tell" or
> "that doesn't sound like it is working" then no one should pay Kevin
> O'Malley to go look at it. That would be a stupid waste of money.
>
> 4. In the GFM page, O'Malley should list his background, qualifications and
> similar tests he has done in the past. He should post a detailed list of
> the procedures he intends to do, and a detailed lists of expenses. Again,
> no one should contribute a dime until that is made clear. We have no idea
> whether he is qualified, or the right person for the job. Someone else in
> the UK may b

Re: [Vo]:GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

Kevin has not replied to my message, and his intentions are unclear.
***  My initial statements were in public rather than in private.  To
be candid, the paragraph you wrote to me privately right before this
one you're quoting , well that paragraph kinda sets the tone.  And
since it's done in private, I kept my response private.  Now that your
response is public, my response is public.

Re: [Vo]:GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

"The offer to test for gammas was rescinded.
Please donate instead to the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project."

I don't understand why this page is still there.
***Because it all falls within my original intention, which is to bell
the cat.  If in the future I decide to make MFMP a beneficiary of some
other type of fundraising effort, I'll do it the way you have asked
publicly AFTER THIS EFFORT, not in an Ex Post Facto manner.   I set
this one up to answer my own question of what it would take for ME to
bell that cat.  I would encourage others to do so as well.  Jed is
already posted in as willing to do it for a cool $million.   That
makes me look cheap in comparison.


This was my answer to the question of what it would take to bell the
cat for cold fusion. Of course I think Someone ELSE should bell the
cat, like Jed Rothwell whom I posted as a good candidate, since he's
tested cold fusion devices before. He declined. The question is "what
would it take for ME to bell the cat". This is the answer.

This is an exercise in removal of excuses. Not just others' excuses,
but my own as well. The price is deliberately high so that people who
live closer to the site , people who are more qualified, people who
have better equipment could underbid me. They are not doing that. It's
a sign that something is amiss.

It only took me a few keystrokes to get started with the GoFundMe
thing, and I can say unequivocally that it's a relatively painless
process that doesn't take much time. So... there's that removal of
excuses thing going on right there.


Those are the elements of what it takes to bell the cat: Willingness,
time, capability, wherewithal . Those who have the time and
willingness are low on capability and wherewithal. Those who have the
capabilty and wherewithal are low on willingness and time. Most of us
can develop capability and wherewithal, but we can't really develop
willingness and freed time .


To be candid, there's one more element: Bullshit. When Celani pulled
out his Geiger counter , Rossi climbed all over him because it could
point to what he was using in his cells. Probably bullshit. MFMP
announced they found gammas, Biberian replicated it 48 hours later,
then they went off and tested other stuff without saying a word.
Bullshit. Now we have MFMP coming back on line to send me a private
message because they're not on Vortex-L nor here, how they quietly
referenced the gammas in some peer reviewed thingie, surrounded by a
ton of bullshit. Then we have Alan claiming he has gammas, so I'm
ready to answer the question for myself as to what it would take me to
overcome all the bullshit that's been thrown around over this gamma
issue, and including the bullshit thrown around there. So you have my
answer. It should be easy to underbid me for those who have a higher
tolerance of bullshit. Then everyone's happy, and the cat gets belled.

Instead of focusing on getting someone to underbid me, they went ahead
and OVERbid me, saying they would do it for a $million. And then they
turn around and accuse me of being a scam because I posted that I
would do it in a first class fashion. No need to start negotiations at
economy class. But the unsubtle hint is that the invitation to test
has been rescinded.
Help spread the word!


On 5/18/19, AlanG  wrote:
> A week ago I wrote this to Kevin O'Malley off-list, regarding his
> mention of MFMP:
>
> "/MFMP always welcomes donations and we have a 501c3 which could make
> such contributions tax-deductible in the US. I already have a Gamma
> Spectrometer system thanks to past contributions, but the equipment
> needs of a lab are never-ending. If you really want to help us, it must
> be a new GoFundMe campaign, with no mention of Alan Smith or
> Atom-Ecology.//
> 
> //For MFMP to be the beneficiary, we will need to approve the goal and
> specific text of your campaign before you post it. I've included our
> other Directors (Bob Greenyer and Ryan Hunt) in this reply for their
> comments."/
>
> Kevin has not replied to my message, and his intentions are unclear.
>
> AlanG for MFMP
>
> On 5/18/2019 7:47 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
>> I wrote:
>>
>> Plus, if I understand correctly, he is asking for $100,000.
>>
>>
>> Yup. That's what it says. That's chutzpah!
>>
>> It also says:
>>
>> "The offer to test for gammas was rescinded.
>> Please donate instead to the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project.
>>
>>
>> I don't understand why this page is still there.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

Uhh, Jed I proposed explicitly that YOU would be more suited to go
and test but you declined.   Alan S said that it would take $1000 for
a gamma spectrometer, but he's off by 10X.   Let's just apply that
coefficient elsewhere, shall we?

I think it'll take $5k to train me.   Applying Allan's incorrection
coefficient, it would make the training $50k.   I think it would be
several thousand in expenses, most of us don't even think it would be
that much so there's no need to apply Allan's incorrection
coefficient.  But it's easy to see that we're already at $60k before I
step foot on a plane to London.   Again, and as it SAYS on the
GoFundMe page, someone else can do it and I'll happily send them the
money in my stead.


> Plus, if I understand correctly, he is asking for $100,000. That's about
> $97,000 more than anyone needs to do this. That surely is fraud, to use the
> word Russ dares not say.
***Jed, you yourself wrote on LENR-Forum that you would do it for
$1Million.   So if I'm fraudulent at $100k, then you are 10X more
fraudulent.   See how this 10X incorrection coefficient is helpful in
weeding out bullshit?   What would it take for YOU to bell the cat?
You are the one who keeps bringing up the bell-the-cat concept.  So go
ahead and post what it would take, and let me just call you a fraud
already so that we can all be on the same page.





On 5/18/19, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
>  wrote:
>
>
>> His GofundMe campaign seems to be predicated on his raising money based
>> on
>> his coming to the lab to view my work. I repeat he is NOT invited. That
>> puts all his messaging into the realm of worse than bullshit, as when one
>> is raising money on false pretenses there is a different word for that.
>
>
> Plus, if I understand correctly, he is asking for $100,000. That's about
> $97,000 more than anyone needs to do this. That surely is fraud, to use the
> word Russ dares not say.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

It says right on the GoFundMe page, and has said so for several days,
that my invitation was rescinded.  It is yet another stepstone of
bullshit laid down for whomever it is that will bell the cat.

Any money raised outside of this rescinded invitation will be sent to
MFMP.  If they choose to not accept money then I'll post that little
tidbit and decide where else to go.

And if anyone has demonstrated mental instability, it is Russ George.
So... back to your regularly scheduled programming.


On 5/17/19, russ.geo...@gmail.com  wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley seems to be running under some sort of mental instability as
> he is definitely NOT invited to visit the Atom-Ecology/Ecalox lab. His
> GofundMe campaign seems to be predicated on his raising money based on his
> coming to the lab to view my work. I repeat he is NOT invited. That puts all
> his messaging into the realm of worse than bullshit, as when one is raising
> money on false pretenses there is a different word for that. He should cease
> his wrongful exhortations.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Kevin O'Malley 
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2019 8:49 PM
> To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test
> Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
> I received a quote from Kromek, more than 10k Pounds (I don't have the
> symbol for pounds nor euros) and they want to keep thequote to be
> confidential.  This is yet another area where things just don't add up,
> where Alan S says it should be $1000 (one thousand American
> dollars) but the public quote will be well above 10X that amount.
> That's without training.
>
> This is what it costs to get down past the bovine fecal matter.
>
>
> On 5/12/19, JonesBeene  wrote:
>> Why wouldn’t it  would make more sense to contact a company located in
>> London who manufacture or sell gamma spectrometers to do the testing
>> using one of their own experts?
>>
>> There must be  one or more companies located in or near London that
>> would likely  do this testing for free – for the publicity value. For
>> instance here is one:
>>
>> https://www.kromek.com/
>>
>> Based on past attempts to fund LENR through these online sites like
>> GoFundMe, this effort may not generate much interest - and even if it
>> did, wouldn’t it be more credible to use an expert in spectrometry to
>> do the measurements – preferably one associated with the maker of the
>> equipment or with a University?
>>
>>  Jones
>>
>>
>> From: Kevin O'Malley
>>
>> https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6by
>> RPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O
>>
>>> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>>
>>> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
>>> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
>>> sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
>>> measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

I received a quote from Kromek, more than 10k Pounds (I don't have the
symbol for pounds nor euros) and they want to keep the  quote to be
confidential.  This is yet another area where things just don't add
up, where Alan S says it should be $1000 (one thousand American
dollars) but the public quote will be well above 10X that amount.
That's without training.

This is what it costs to get down past the bovine fecal matter.


On 5/12/19, JonesBeene  wrote:
> Why wouldn’t it  would make more sense to contact a company located in
> London who manufacture or sell gamma spectrometers to do the testing using
> one of their own experts?
>
> There must be  one or more companies located in or near London that would
> likely  do this testing for free – for the publicity value. For instance
> here is one:
>
> https://www.kromek.com/
>
> Based on past attempts to fund LENR through these online sites like
> GoFundMe, this effort may not generate much interest - and even if it did,
> wouldn’t it be more credible to use an expert in spectrometry to do the
> measurements – preferably one associated with the maker of the equipment or
> with a University?
>
>  Jones
>
>
> From: Kevin O'Malley
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6byRPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O
>
>> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
>> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
>> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
>> sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
>> measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.
>
>
>

[Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed
Energy Source   Inbox
Unstarred  Kevin O'Malley   Sat, May 11, 2019 at 8:30 PM
7 hidden messages – Show
Unstarred  Kevin O'Malley   Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:16 AM
Add star  AlanG<&&&&&&&&@aol.com>   Mon, May 13, 2019 at 11:54 AM
Reply-To: &&&&&&&@aol.com
To: Kevin O'Malley 
Cc: alan smith <&&&&&&&&@yahoo.co.uk>
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original



Hello Kevin,

I did try to send my message directly to vortex-l, but apparently my
posting rights there have expired after a year or more of inactivity.
You have my permission to re-post my message verbatim on vortex-l, for
which I thank you. Please do NOT quote or include it on any GoFundMe,
Patreon or any similar web site, other than by links to my original
documents.

In case you aren't familiar with MFMP's underlying philosophy of  Live
Open Science, our experiments and publications are in the public
domain and disclosed in real time to the extent possible. We ask only
that you quote our work with attribution AND by link to the original
sources rather than cut-and-paste.

I also personally claim copyright by Creative Commons License, notice
of which you must include and not remove from the original sources if
you do quote them other than by link. See the text and the black box
at this page for further details.

I have included Alan Smith in this reply, since he is an interested
party in your current funding proposal.

Regards,
Alan Goldwater
MFMP

On 5/13/2019 11:16 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
Hello Alan:

Please allow me to post that information on Vortex-L , which is where
you found it and what you are responding to.   And also to post it
elsewhere.

Is there some reason that this information was not updated at MFMP,
and AT the TIME?

Please consider all of our correspondence henceforth to be for
attribution unless you specifically point out , paragraph by
paragraph, what is to be considered private or non-attributable
information.  I have trouble understanding why people prefer to keep
things private when it should be so loudly proclaimed on the
mountaintops.

best regards

Kevin


On 5/12/19, AlanG <&&&&&@aol.com> wrote:


On 5/12/2019 10:01 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
MFMP breathlessly announced that they were detecting Gamma rays.
www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-2/347-gamma
Then their researcher took his toys and went home, saying nothing more.



Kevin, that episode happened over six years ago, when MFMP was just
starting. We later did extensive experiments using gamma spectroscopy,
with at least one positive result:
https://bit.ly/2Hi3ICc
https://bit.ly/2W2Qu48

Our report on that experiment and its analysis received intensive peer
review, resulting in publication by JCMNS
<http://www.iscmns.org/CMNS/JCMNS-Vol21.pdf#page=86>

Alan Goldwater
MFMP

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

Budgetary quote request: Gamma Spectrometer and Training   Inbox
Add star  Kevin O'Malley   Sun, May 12, 2019 at 11:17 AM
To: sa...@kromek.com
Bcc: kevmol...@gmail.com
Reply | Reply to all | Forward | Print | Delete | Show original
Hello Kromek:

I'm interested in purchasing one of your gamma ray spectrometers to
use in an industrial research project.   I have set up a GoFundMe page
to gather the resources to pay for such a project and need a budgetary
quote for  one device and the training necessary to get an ordinary
Electrical Engineer with 20 years experience (but none with Gamma
Spectrometers) to do the testing.



The testing is intended to be done near London.  When testing is done,
I will publish the results and donate the device to an organization
that is looking into furthering the science on energy resources.

Best regards

Kevin O'Malley
Semi-retired Electrical Engineer
phone:

On 5/12/19, JonesBeene  wrote:
> Why wouldn’t it  would make more sense to contact a company located in
> London who manufacture or sell gamma spectrometers to do the testing using
> one of their own experts?
>
> There must be  one or more companies located in or near London that would
> likely  do this testing for free – for the publicity value. For instance
> here is one:
>
> https://www.kromek.com/
>
> Based on past attempts to fund LENR through these online sites like
> GoFundMe, this effort may not generate much interest - and even if it did,
> wouldn’t it be more credible to use an expert in spectrometry to do the
> measurements – preferably one associated with the maker of the equipment or
> with a University?
>
>  Jones
>
>
> From: Kevin O'Malley
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6byRPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O
>
>> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
>> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
>> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
>> sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
>> measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5271-clearance-items/?postID=110493#post110493





Online
kevmol...@gmail.com
Member
Likes Received844
A moment ago
New
#3,781

Alan Smith wrote:
Kev- you have zero idea. For a start you were not specifically
invited, and neither did I invite 'anyone' - I invited specific people
with some relevant scientific background, which I don't think you
have. Also you didn't ask permission to use my image or company
details on a GFM page. The answer to that would have been 'no' in any
case, even if you were Edward Teller. Beyond that you don't need a
gamma spec to count with, and neither would you need S100K to travel
to the UK with a $1000 Geiger counter.

Kev- you have zero idea.

***So you move this attempt to get to the bottom of things to
Clearance Items? How does that further the science?



For a start you were not specifically invited,

***Yes I was. Right here. By you.



and neither did I invite 'anyone' - I invited specific people with
some relevant scientific background,

***For some odd reason, they do not seem to be interested, or they
don't have the "time" or can't be bothered. And when I accept your
invitation, it is moved to Clearance Items. So one way or another, I'm
doing what I can with what I have.



which I don't think you have.

***It says right on the GoFundMe page that I'm more than happy to have
someone else more qualified than me go and do the testing as long as
they report back for everyone to see. None of this MFMP
take-my-toys-home and tell no one what happened nonsense. I have a
BSEE and 20 years experience as an Electrical Engineer, so if that
isn't someone with enough background then you REALLY need to clarify
your invitation.



Also you didn't ask permission to use my image

***Your image is on the web. You gave everyone your permission to
associate you with this Atom-Ecology project.





or company details on a GFM page.

***There are no company details other than what you have provided on
the web. What is the issue here?



The answer to that would have been 'no' in any case,

***So you issue an invitation to test your device. I accept your
invitation but don't have the means. I announce my intention to get
the means, and you retract your invitation, to someone with a very
pro-LENR bent. Something really doesn't add up.



even if you were Edward Teller.

***So, you're retracting accepted invitations from BSEE guys who are
pro-LENR, and if those guys had gigantic qualifications you still
won't accept it. Something doesn't add up.



Beyond that you don't need a gamma spec to count with,

***I got that information straight off the website that announced the
Gammas. Just go ahead and announce what will be needed and I'll try to
acquire it.



and neither would you need S100K to travel to the UK with a $1000
Geiger counter.

***Sure I do. I need to pay for the gamma spectrometer, package and
ship it past customs (probably quite a few questions about why someone
wants to count gamma rays in London, eh?) and then buy the tickets,
get the passport, arrange for transport and hotel accommodations
for... say, ... 3 days. Then it's a second camera, the money for the
software to put together the video, various other things to set up
like a hosting website or somesuch thing, and before you know it,
there goes $50k or whatever.



If there's money left over it gets donated to MFMP. Heck, we could
save a ton of money by getting someone with their own Gamma
spectrometer who lives near London and has his own camera and puts up
the YouTube video, but that isn't happening, is it?



Someone has to bell the cat, and I'm willing to do it. Maybe I'm not
able, but I don't see the ones who ARE able , I don't see them
stepping forward willing to bell the cat.



On 5/12/19, JonesBeene  wrote:
> Why wouldn’t it  would make more sense to contact a company located in
> London who manufacture or sell gamma spectrometers to do the testing using
> one of their own experts?
>
> There must be  one or more companies located in or near London that would
> likely  do this testing for free – for the publicity value. For instance
> here is one:
>
> https://www.kromek.com/
>
> Based on past attempts to fund LENR through these online sites like
> GoFundMe, this effort may not generate much interest - and even if it did,
> wouldn’t it be more credible to use an expert in spectrometry to do the
> measurements – preferably one associated with the maker of the equipment or
> with a University?
>
>  Jones
>
>
> From: Kevin O'Malley
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6byRPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O
>
>> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
>> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
>> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
>> sen

Re: [Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

At one time, National Instruments had an initiative to work with LENR
researchers like Dennis Cravens.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3051476/posts

>From what I can tell, it amounted to nothing.

MFMP breathlessly announced that they were detecting Gamma rays.
www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/follow/follow-2/347-gamma
Then their researcher took his toys and went home, saying nothing more.

Someone needs to bell the cat.   If it isn't going to be guys like
Cravens or folks who know one end of a gamma spectrometer and happen
to live near London, then it is up to guys like me who have very
little means and very little expertise but if the cat gets belled,
then it was doable all along, right?


On 5/12/19, JonesBeene  wrote:
> Why wouldn’t it  would make more sense to contact a company located in
> London who manufacture or sell gamma spectrometers to do the testing using
> one of their own experts?
>
> There must be  one or more companies located in or near London that would
> likely  do this testing for free – for the publicity value. For instance
> here is one:
>
> https://www.kromek.com/
>
> Based on past attempts to fund LENR through these online sites like
> GoFundMe, this effort may not generate much interest - and even if it did,
> wouldn’t it be more credible to use an expert in spectrometry to do the
> measurements – preferably one associated with the maker of the equipment or
> with a University?
>
>  Jones
>
>
> From: Kevin O'Malley
>
> https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6byRPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O
>
>> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
>> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
>> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
>> sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
>> measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.
>
>
>

[Vo]:Re: GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

https://www.gofundme.com/8nmynh-geiger?teamInvite=WC66VANcJqCD05UmM6byRPSAQOc6WHY1zMnMFDuwZkswE1QewWCy5ezPYj5IT06O

On 5/11/19, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
> Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source
>
>
> I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
> to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
> sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
> measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.
>
> Alan Smith and his team claim to be generating Gamma Rays above
> background noise radiation on a chemical fuel cell, which is
> impossible.  He has invited anyone with the means to come and test his
> cells.
>
> http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2018-05-10-3.png
>
> https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5597-atom-ecology/?pageNo=99
>
> http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2018/09/22/have-cold-fusion-will-travel/
>
>   I intend to purchase a Gamma Spectrometer, travel to London and
> visit his laboratory, and test his claim, to see for myself.  I will
> post a video on YouTube , one way or another, whether it debunks his
> claim or supports it.
>
> I do not have to be the one going to London to do this.  Anyone near
> there can use this money and visit the lab , as long as they
> demonstrate they know how to use a spectrometer, per Alan's
> invitation.   When we are done with testing the devices, we will
> donate the spectrometer to the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project or
> use it for further testing/debunking of claims.
>
> The time has come for independent testing of some of these types of
> energy cells.  If they are real, they will be a tremendous energy
> breakthrough.   If they are not real, you will help to stop energy
> related scams.
>

[Vo]:GoFundMe: Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source

[Kevin O'Malley]

Geiger Counter + Lab Tour to Test Atom-Ecology Claimed Energy Source


I'm setting up a GoFundMe campaign to buy a gamma spectrometer and go
to London to test these cells, per Alan's invitation.   It would make
sense for someone more qualified to make the visit , take the
measurements, and generate the YouTube video.   Hint:   Jed.

Alan Smith and his team claim to be generating Gamma Rays above
background noise radiation on a chemical fuel cell, which is
impossible.  He has invited anyone with the means to come and test his
cells.

http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/2018-05-10-3.png

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5597-atom-ecology/?pageNo=99

http://atom-ecology.russgeorge.net/2018/09/22/have-cold-fusion-will-travel/

  I intend to purchase a Gamma Spectrometer, travel to London and
visit his laboratory, and test his claim, to see for myself.  I will
post a video on YouTube , one way or another, whether it debunks his
claim or supports it.

I do not have to be the one going to London to do this.  Anyone near
there can use this money and visit the lab , as long as they
demonstrate they know how to use a spectrometer, per Alan's
invitation.   When we are done with testing the devices, we will
donate the spectrometer to the Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project or
use it for further testing/debunking of claims.

The time has come for independent testing of some of these types of
energy cells.  If they are real, they will be a tremendous energy
breakthrough.   If they are not real, you will help to stop energy
related scams.

[Vo]:Google, University of Maryland File Patent based on ‘High Density Electron Clouds’

[Kevin O'Malley]

Google, University of Maryland File Patent based on ‘High Density
Electron Clouds’
Posted on February 7, 2019 • 12 Comments
Thanks to Max Nozin for referencing a new patent application
(published February 7th, 2019) filed by Google Inc. and the University
of Maryland, College Park on Aug 3, 2017.




This patent reads like one of Axil Axil's posts here on Vortex or
elsewhere.   He's the only one I have seen going on and on about
Plasmon interactions, SPPs (Surface Plasmon Polaritons), and so on.
I expect the phrase SPP BEC to be in wide use within a few weeks







The title is “Enhanced Electron Screening Through Plasmon Oscillations”.

Here is the abstract:

Enhanced Coulomb repulsion screening around light element nuclei is
achieved by way of utilizing electromagnetic (EM) radiation to induce
plasmon oscillations in target structures (e.g., nanoparticles) in a
way that produces high density electron clouds in localized regions of
the target structures, thereby generating charge density variations
around light element atoms located in the localized regions. Each
target structure includes an electrically conductive body including
light elements (e.g., a metal hydride/deuteride/tritide) that is
configured to undergo plasmon oscillations in response to the applied
EM radiation. The induced oscillations causes free electrons to
converge in the localized region, thereby producing transient high
electron charge density levels that enhance Coulomb repulsion
screening around light element (e.g., deuterium) atoms located in the
localized regions. Various systems capable of implementing enhanced
Coulomb repulsion screening are described, and various nanostructure
compositions and configurations are disclosed that serve to further
enhance fusion reaction rates.

http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2=HITOFF=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html=1=1=G=50=PG01=20190043624.PGNR.=dn/20190043624=DN/20190043624

The term ‘high density electron clouds’ is familiar in connection with LENR



The Google/U of Maryland Patent talks about ‘low energy fission’ in
the ‘Field of Invention’ section:

The present invention relates specifically to the generation of the
light-Nuclei elements (LNEs) Lithium, Beryllium and Boron by the
process of low energy fission, breaking down, Carbon, Nitrogen, and
Oxygen (CNOs) with the introduction of instability to the CNOs heavy
stable isotopes through the application high-frequency radio waves at
the NMR frequency, in the presence of a strong magnetic field, of the
targeted source material.

[Vo]:Rare cosmological events recorded in muscovite mica.

[Kevin O'Malley]

Rare cosmological events recorded in muscovite mica.


F. M. Russell, School of Computing and Engineering University of
Huddersfield, HD1 3DH, U.K.

 
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/2f7ad4fe6232404eca928274d022ca00dbd699f1790550d820b93ccbca7c61a7.png

Figure 1. Scan of sheet of muscovite showing the fossil tracks of
charged particles. The  diagram  identifies  the  relevant  parts  of
the  fossil  tracks resulting from a nuclear star. The directions of
the principal atomic chains are shown.Most of the tracks lying in
these directions are due  to  quodons.Some tracks can  be  channelling
 relativistic particles  but  these  usually  show  fans from  nuclear
 scattering events, which quodons cannot create. The direction of
flight of the particle  causing  the  star  is  unknown.  It  results
in  at  least  eighttracks. When  tracks  lie  in  the  (001)-plane
they  are  usually continuous.  For  those  moving  at  an  angle  to
this  plane  they  will intersect  the  potassium  sheets,  where  the
 recording  occurs,  at separated points. The long vertical chains of
dots are of this type. The  fan  shaped patterns  are  caused  by
nuclear  scattering  events that   produced   atomic   cascades   in
which   kink-like   lattice excitations  are  created.  These  fans
are  clustered  around  the principal crystal directions.The sheet of
mica is 15cm x 29cm.

Abstract.

A study of fossil tracks of charged particles recorded in crystals of
muscovite has revealed evidence  of  rare  events  of  cosmological
origin. The  events  are  not  compatible  with  known  particle
interactions with matter. They were recorded during a period when the
crystals were in a metastable state during cooling after growth 13km
water equivalent underground. In this state a phase transition can be
triggered by low energy events in the range 1eV to 10keV, when the
crystals effectively behave as solid-state bubble chambers. At higher
energies the chemical etching technique can be used to reveal massive
damage to the lattice. The rare events show evidence of interaction
with the crystal over a great range of energies. They leave a
distinctive record that is easily recognised.

 Introduction.



The  search  for  evidence  of exotic  events of  cosmological  origin
usually  starts  with assumptions about possible interactions with
ordinary matter. Irrespective of these the detector should offer  a
large  sensitive  volume  and  a moderately long  recording
time.Ideally,  it  also  should  enable detailed  study  of
individual  recorded  events.  An  interesting approach looked  for
fossil evidence of scattering of WIMPs in crystals of muscovite
[1,2].It was based on the possibility that an atom recoiling from  a
scattering  event  might  cause sufficient damage  to  a  lattice that
 it could  be  revealed  by  the technique  of  chemical  etching.
This  technique  is  limited by  the  extent  of  damage  needed  to
allow etching  and  by background recoils generated  over geologic
time  scales  from radioactivity,  nuclear fission and cosmic
radiation.Ifatomic force microscopy is used to determine the depth of
etch pits thenthe lower limit on recoil energies to give an etchable
track is a few tens of keV.This contrasts with the lower limit of
about 1eV for recording in muscovite when in the metastable state
considered here. Crystals of muscovite often show visible
defectsconsisting of a hatch-work of black lineslying in the cleavage
(001)-plane. Many of these lines lie in principal crystallographic
directions at 60ointervals but not all.A study of the properties of
these exceptions showed that some were the fossil tracks of charged
leptons. In particular, somewere the tracks of positrons emitted from
the isotope 40K that occursin the monatomic sheets of potassium
forming part of the crystalstructure. It was found that the recoil of
the nucleus  arising  from  the dominant beta  decay channelcreated  a
 mobile  lattice  excitation  called  a quodon. These quodons cantrap
a charge and propagate unimpeded along chains of potassium atoms for
great  distances.They move  at ~3km/s  and  are the  cause  of  the
majority  of lines lying  in  the  60o directions.Evidence  also  was
found  for  fossil  tracks  due  to  e-p  showers[3].  These  showed
that  the tracks  were  recorded  after  the  crystal  had  grown  but
 the  temperature  was  still  above  700K,  which allowed migration
of atoms to formthe black lines.Therecording process operating in the
metastable state does  not  depend  on  ionisation.  It arises  from a
 phase  transition  triggered  by the  presence  of a positive charge
when the crystal is in a metastable state during cooling.In this state
the lattice needs nucleation sitesto  expel  excess  iron  to  form
the  black ribbons  of  magnetite. The sensitivity  of  this process
is shown by the lower limit of energy of a quodon of about 1eV for it
to be recorded.In effect, the crystals behave as a solid-state bubble

Re: [Vo]:Energy From Fusion In Two Years, CEO Says, Commercialization In Five

[Kevin O'Malley]

My prediction is that for the next 20 years there will be gigantic
fraud scams in Fusion engineering.  Like this one.

Scientists have discovered how to milk the fear and greed of
billionaires and it aint gonna be pretty.

On 1/14/19, Kevin O'Malley  wrote:
> Energy From Fusion In Two Years, CEO Says, Commercialization In Five
>  Jeff McMahon
>
>
>
> https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2019/01/14/private-firm-will-bring-fusion-reactor-to-market-within-five-years-ceo-says/#4b64b0591d4a
>
>

[Vo]:Energy From Fusion In Two Years, CEO Says, Commercialization In Five

[Kevin O'Malley]

Energy From Fusion In Two Years, CEO Says, Commercialization In Five
 Jeff McMahon



https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2019/01/14/private-firm-will-bring-fusion-reactor-to-market-within-five-years-ceo-says/#4b64b0591d4a






Jeff McMahon
Contributor
Green Tech
>From Chicago, I write about green technology, energy, environment.



TAE Technologies will bring a fusion-reactor technology to
commercialization in the next five years, its CEO announced recently
at the University of California, Irvine.

"The notion that you hear fusion is another 20 years away, 30 years
away, 50 years away—it's not true," said Michl Binderbauer, CEO of
the company formerly known as Tri Alpha Energy. "We're talking
commercialization coming in the next five years for this technology."

That trajectory is considerably sooner than Binderbauer described when
he took over as CEO in 2017. It would put TAE ahead of two formidable
competitors. The 35-nation ITER project expects to complete its
demonstration reactor in France in 2025. Vancouver-based General
Fusion Inc. is devoting the next five years, with support from the
Canadian government, to developing a prototype of its fusion reactor.
And the Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced last March
that it expects to bring its fusion reactor to market in ten years.

For more than 20 years TAE has been pursuing a reactor that would fuse
hydrogen and boron at extremely high temperatures, releasing excess
energy much as the sun does when it fuses hydrogen atoms. Lately the
California company has been testing the heat capacity of its process
in a machine it named Norman after the late UC Irvine physicist Norman
Rostoker.


Its next device, dubbed Copernicus, is designed to demonstrate an
energy gain. It will involve deuterium-tritium fusion, the aim of most
competitors, but a milestone on TAE's path to a hotter, but safer,
hydrogen-boron reaction.

Binderbauer expects to pass the D-T fusion milestone within two years.

"What we're really going to see in the next couple years is actually
the ability to actually make net energy, and that's going to happen in
the machine we call Copernicus," he said in a "fireside chat" at UC
Irvine, appearing alongside actor Harry Hamlin (of "Clash of the
Titans" and "LA Law"), who was an early supporter and a co-founder of
the company.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE
Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen is another prominent supporter, and
Alphabet/Google a shareholder.

TAE has been funded so far by more than $500 million in private equity.

"An endeavor as monumental as this requires an upfront commitment of
very substantial proportions, which runs counter to the way most R
money is parceled out," according to the company's website. "With TAE
operating as a private company, we have been able to research,
experiment and iterate more rapidly than our competition."

But TAE is ready now to talk to the government.

"We're in the process of funding and putting that project together
right now," Binderbauer said of Copernicus. "We're working actually
for the first time with the DOE, in some form of a relationship where
they're gonna contribute some in-kind, and this will be a sort of
public-private partnership to pull that off, and then it goes to
commercialization."

Watch Brinderbaur and Hamlin at UC Irvine:


I've covered the energy and environment beat since 1985, when I
discovered my college was discarding radioactive waste in a dumpster.
That story ran in the Arizona Republic, and I have chased electrons
and pollutants ever since, for dailies in Arizona and California, for
al... MORE
By Jeff McMahon, based in Chicago. Follow Jeff McMahon on Facebook,
Google Plus, Twitter, or email him here.

[Vo]:Claim: Hydrogen powered cars for the masses one step closer to reality

[Kevin O'Malley]

Claim: Hydrogen powered cars for the masses one step closer to reality
WUWT ^ | 8/20/17 | Anthony Watts

 
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/11/20/claim-hydrogen-powered-cars-for-the-masses-one-step-closer-to-reality/

UCLA researchers have designed a device that can use solar energy to
inexpensively and efficiently create and store energy, which could be
used to power electronic devices, and to create hydrogen fuel for
eco-friendly cars.

The device could make hydrogen cars affordable for many more consumers
because it produces hydrogen using nickel, iron and cobalt — elements
that are much more abundant and less expensive than the platinum and
other precious metals that are currently used to produce hydrogen
fuel.

“Hydrogen is a great fuel for vehicles: It is the cleanest fuel known,
it’s cheap and it puts no pollutants into the air — just water,” said
Richard Kaner, the study’s senior author and a UCLA distinguished
professor of chemistry and biochemistry, and of materials science and
engineering. “And this could dramatically lower the cost of hydrogen
cars.”

The technology, described in a paper in the journal Energy Storage
Materials, could be especially useful in rural areas, or to military
units serving in remote locations.

“People need fuel to run their vehicles and electricity to run their
devices,” Kaner said. “Now you can make both electricity and fuel with
a single device.”

It could also be part of a solution for large cities that need ways to
store surplus electricity from their electrical grids.

“If you could convert electricity to hydrogen, you could store it
indefinitely,” said Kaner, who also is a member of UCLA’s California
NanoSystems Institute.

Traditional hydrogen fuel cells and supercapacitors have two
electrodes: one positive and one negative. The device developed at
UCLA has a third electrode that acts as both a supercapacitor, which
stores energy, and as a device for splitting water into hydrogen and
oxygen, a process called water electrolysis. All three electrodes
connect to a single solar cell that serves as the device’s power
source, and the electrical energy harvested by the solar cell can be
stored in one of two ways: electrochemically in the supercapacitor or
chemically as hydrogen.

The device also is a step forward because it produces hydrogen fuel in
an environmentally friendly way. Currently, about 95 percent of
hydrogen production worldwide comes from converting fossil fuels such
as natural gas into hydrogen — a process that releases large
quantities of carbon dioxide into the air, said Maher El-Kady, a UCLA
postdoctoral researcher and a co-author of the research.

“Hydrogen energy is not ‘green’ unless it is produced from renewable
sources,” El-Kady said. He added that using solar cells and abundantly
available elements to split water into hydrogen and oxygen has
enormous potential for reducing the cost of hydrogen production and
that the approach could eventually replace the current method, which
relies on fossil fuels.

Combining a supercapacitor and the water-splitting technology into a
single unit, Kaner said, is an advance similar to the first time a
phone, web browser and camera were combined on a smartphone. The new
technology may eventually lead to new applications that even the
researchers haven’t considered yet, Kaner said.

The researchers designed the electrodes at the nanoscale — thousands
of times thinner than the thickness of a human hair — to ensure the
greatest surface area would be exposed to water, which increases the
amount of hydrogen the device can produce and also stores more charge
in the supercapacitor. Although the device the researchers made would
fit in the palm of your hand, Kaner said it would be possible to make
larger versions because the components are inexpensive.

“For hydrogen cars to be widely used, there remains a need for a
technology that safely stores large quantities of hydrogen at normal
pressure and temperature, instead of the pressurized cylinders that
are currently in use,” said Mir Mousavi, a co-author of the paper and
a professor of chemistry at Iran’s Tarbiat Modares University.

Re: [Vo]:Sound Pulses Exceed Speed of Light

[Kevin O'Malley]

They did.   See article below.

Physicists Demonstrate Record Breaking Long-Distance Quantum
Entanglement in Space
Futurism.com ^
Posted on 9/2/2017, 8:35:07 PM by TBP

IN BRIEF

Chinese physicists managed to demonstrate long-distance quantum
entanglement in space, breaking previous records. This development,
made possible by a novel method, could lead to improved information
storage and transfer in the future. SPOOKY ACTION GETS TO SPACE

When it comes to weird science stuff, quantum entanglement is probably
near the top of the list, especially back in the days when Einstein
referred to it as that “spooky action at a distance.” Physicists have
since demonstrated the “spooky” phenomenon to be possible, but now
they want to extend its reach. A new study shows it’s possible for
quantum entanglement to span far longer distances than previously
demonstrated.

“We have demonstrated the distribution of two entangled photons from a
satellite to two ground stations that are 1,203 kilometers [748 miles]
apart,” lead author Juan Yin, physicist at the Science and Technology
University of China in Shanghai, explained in a research paper
published in the journal Science. The previous record for entanglement
distribution reached only 100 kilometers (62 miles).

Yin’s team used the Micius, the world’s first quantum-enabled
satellite which China launched in 2016, to transmit entangled photons
to several ground stations separated by long distances. They managed
to achieve this feat by using laser beams to prevent the light
particles from getting lost as they traveled.

“The result again confirms the nonlocal feature of entanglement and
excludes the models of reality that rest on the notions of locality
and realism,” Yin and his colleagues wrote.

WIDENING POSSIBILITIES

Though quantum entanglement is incredibly complex, it’s possible to
explain it in simple terms. Two or more particles are entangled or
linked when a change in one’s state or properties instantaneously
affects the other’s. What makes this stranger is that this link works
regardless of distance. This phenomenon becomes particularly useful in
storing information — as in the case of using quantum bits (qubits) in
quantum computing.

https://youtu.be/1zD1U1sIPQ4

By proving that quantum entanglement can be maintained in space over
such a long distance, this work paves the way for long-distance
satellite quantum communication and maybe even realize the
possibilities for quantum teleportation. “Long-distance entanglement
distribution is essential for the testing of quantum physics and
quantum networks,” Yin’s team wrote.

Advances in quantum cryptography, which rely heavily on extending
entanglement, could change the way information is stored and
transferred in the future — opening up applications in improved
security in communication and even payment systems.



On 9/3/17, H LV  wrote:
> Why can't one build a detector sensitive to the motion of a group wave so
> that it would be possible to send a signal faster than c?
>
> Harry
>

[Vo]:Sound Pulses Exceed Speed of Light

[Kevin O'Malley]

Sound Pulses Exceed Speed of Light
Live Science ^ | January 12, 2017 | Charles Q. Choi
   https://www.livescience.com/1212-sound-pulses-exceed-speed-light.html

A group of high school and college teachers and students has
transmitted sound pulses faster than light travels—at least according
to one understanding of the speed of light.

The results conform to Einstein's theory of relativity, so don't
expect this research to lead to sound-propelled spaceships that fly
faster than light. Still, the work could help spur research that
boosts the speed of electrical and other signals higher than before.

The standard metric for the speed of light is that of light traveling
in vacuum. This constant, known as c, is roughly 186,000 miles per
second, or roughly one million times the speed of sound in air.
According to Einstein's work, matter and signals cannot travel faster
than c.

PVC science

However, physicist William Robertson at Middle Tennessee State
University in Murfreesboro, along with a high school teacher, two
college students and two high school students, managed to, depending
on how you look at it, transmit sound pulses faster than c using
little more than a plastic plumbing pipe and a computer's sound card.

"This experiment is truly basement science," Robertson told LiveScience.

The key to understanding their results, reported online Jan. 2 in the
journal Applied Physics Letters, is envisioning every pulse of sound
or light as a group of intermingled waves. This pulse rises and falls
with energy over space, with a peak of strength in the middle.

Messing with Light Speed

In an unrelated previous experiment, Robert Boyd at the University of
Rochester used similar principles to make pulses of light travel
backward and faster than c.

Robertson and his colleagues transmitted sound pulses from the sound
card through a loop made from PVC plumbing pipe and connectors from a
hardware store. This loop split up and then recombined the tiny waves
making up each pulse.

This led to a curious result. When looking at a pulse that entered and
then exited the pipe, before the peak of the entering pulse even got
into the pipe, the peak of the exiting pulse had already left the
pipe.

If the velocities of each of the waves making up a sound pulse in this
setup are taken together, the "group velocity" of the pulse exceeded
c.

"I believe that this is the first experimental demonstration of sound
going faster than light," Robertson said. Past research has proven it
possible to transmit electrical and even light pulses with group
velocities exceeding c.

Common thing?

Robertson explained this faster-than-light acoustic effect is likely
commonplace but imperceptible.

"The loop filter that we used splits and then recombines sound along
two unequal length paths," he said. "Such 'split-path' interference
occurs frequently in the everyday world."

For example: "When a sound source is located near a hard wall, some
sound reaches the listener directly from the source whereas some sound
travels the longer path that bounces the sound off the wall. The
sounds recombine at the listener," Robertson said. However, the
weakness of the signals and the fact that any resultant differences in
timing are very slight "mean that we would never be able to hear this
effect."

None of the individual waves making up the sound pulses traveled
faster than c. In other words, Einstein's theory of relativity was
preserved. This means one could not, for instance, shout a message
faster than light.

Still, this research might have engineering applications. Robertson
explained that although it is not possible to send information faster
than light, it seems these techniques could make it possible to route
slower-than-light signals in electronic circuits faster than before.

Re: [Vo]:LENR as a superconductor

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 8/12/17, Axil Axil  wrote:

  What we see in that polariton
> condensate is how the universe functioned during the first few seconds at
> the beginning of the universe before the universe cooled.
 ***That's disheartening.   It would mean there is very little chance
of stabilizing such a condition to be able to harness it for energy.

Re: [Vo]:Large list of Rossi Patents -- Exhibit 29

[Kevin O'Malley]

The Wright brothers were in a similar position for about 5 years after
they were the first to fly.  Were they scam artists?   They sure as
hell were accused of being such.   Their only stipulation for
demonstrating flight was that, once they did so, the observer would be
buying airplanes from them.   Sounds pretty reasonable today, doesn't
it?

But they had no takers until 1908.   Then they did their 2 famous
demos to people willing to pay and all of a sudden their patents were
flying through the patent office, the press was favorable, they
weren't scam artists any more, the whole drill.

Let's say for purposes of argument that Rossi decides to give a demo
that answers his critics.   He invites you, Jed, the Amazing Randi,
and one other known critic to test his black box with your own tools.
 You just can't open the box.   Would you do it?   Then let's say the
demo really catches on, Rossi gets as famous as the Wrights would
these patent applications be viewed in the same light as how you are
presenting them right now?   Nope.   They would sail through the
patent office with flying colors.

On 8/10/17, JonesBeene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> That long list is a little deceiving. For instance, Rossi has only the
> single granted patent and it is for a heat transfer device.
>
> That one is US 9115913b1 and it appears not to be cited … which is ironic
> for such a long listing since it is the only document that would  give any
> legal protection.
>
> Many of the applications are revisions leading up to the single granted
> patent, which patent experts have said is notable for its cartoon-like,
> substandard drawings. It’s a joke, really.
>
> If offered either an overpriced Café Latte at Starbucks or all of Rossi’s IP
> – go with the coffee. There is a bit of free energy there.
>
>
>
> From: Kevin O'Malley
>
> Exhibit 29 is a large list of mostly unpublished patent applications by
> Rossi. The titles might be interesting to some
> and probably deserve a dedicated thread.
>
> https://drive.google.com/drive…Ktdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk
>
> [snip]
>
>
>

[Vo]:Large list of Rossi Patents -- Exhibit 29

[Kevin O'Malley]

Thanks to LENR Forum

https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5177-a-large-list-of-rossi-patents/?postID=52692=patents#post52692


#1
In 207-29 Exhibit 29 there is a large list of mostly unpublished
patent applications by Rossi. The titles might be interesting to some
and probably deserve a dedicated thread.
https://drive.google.com/drive…Ktdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk

12/736,193 September 16, 2010 Method and Apparatus for Carrying Out
Nickel and Hydrogen Exothermal Reaction
61/626,287 September 26, 2011 High Efficiency Heat Generator
61/629,960 December 2, 2011 High Efficiency Heat Generator of Second Generation
61/744,570 October 1, 2012 High Efficiency Heat Generator with Rossi-Effect
61/795,938 October 31, 2012 Process and Apparatus to Make Heat at High
Temperature with Reactions between Metals and Hydrogen
61/796,007 November 1, 2012 Control System for a Thermal Power
Assembly Made by More Modules
61/796,008 November 1, 2012 High Efficiency Thermal Power Generator System
61/848,143 December 22, 2012 New Theory Regarding Reactions between
Nickel, Lithium, Hydrogen: Weak Interaction Energy
61/855,456 May 16, 2013 System of Activator and Reactor to Improve the
cop of LENR Reactors
61/957,873 July 15, 2013 Direct Conversion of Photons into Electric
Energy During a LEHR Process
61/958,962 August 12, 2013 Additive for Exothermic Reactions
61/960,510 September 20, 2013 System to Increase Pressure
61/960,810 September 27, 2013 Irradiation System to Increase the Rossi-Effect
Unknown October 1, 2013 (mailing date) Enrichment of 62 and 64 Ni
Isotoped Process and Apparatus
61/961,286 October 10, 2013 White Dwarf Derived Theory, Process, Apparatus
Unknown October 15, 2013 (mailing date) Particular Application with
Fast Reactions of the Rossi-Effect
61/961,813 October 24, 2013 Particular Resistive Electric Heater
61,961,814 October 24, 2013 Gas Operated Energy Catalyzer
61/961,864 October 25, 2013 High Efficiency Thermal Power Generator System
Unknown October 26, 2013 (mailing date) Process and Apparatus to Make
Heat at High Temperature with Metals and Hydrogen
61/961,994 October 29, 2013 Vacuum Enhanced Reactor
61/962,001 October 29, 2013 X Rays Transparent Reactor
Unknown November 5, 2013 (mailing date) Direct Conversion of Photons
into Electric Energy
61/962,366 November 6, 2013 Gas Operated Energy Catalyzer
Unknown November 10, 2013 (mailing date) High Efficiency Heat
Generator with Rossi-Effect
61/962,530 November 12, 2013 Control System for a Thermal Power
Assembly Blade by More Modules
61/963,594 December 9, 2013 Particular Induction Electric Heater
Unknown December 20, 2013 (mailing date) New Theory regarding
Reactions between Nickel, Lithium, Hydrogen: Weak Interaction Energy
and in a Mirror Effect Reactor
Unknown January 27, 2014 (mailing date) Electric Oven with Radiating
External Wall
61/967,660 March 24, 2014 3D Printing Production System for Energy Catalyzers
61/967,664 March 24, 2014 X-Ray Transparent Reactor and its
Application in a Jet Engine
61/967,781 March 27, 2014 High Pressure Electric Heater with Heat Exchanger
61,967,784 March 27, 2014 Resistive Electric Heater Made Only by
Resistive Ceramics
Unknown April 18, 2014 (mailing date) High Power Density Energy Catalyzer
61/996,282 May 5, 2014 System of Activator and Reactor to Improve COP
of LENR Reactors
61/996,415 May 8, 2014 Gas Energy Catalyzer with Ceramic Honeycat
61/996,731 May 15, 2014 System to Avoid Catastrophic Effect on Energy Catalyzers
61/997,244 May 27, 2014 System to Avoid Biased Reactions in an Energy Catalyzer
Unknown June 4, 2014 (mailing date) Particular Integration of Solar
Energy with Energy Catalyzers
62/071,455 September 25, 2014 Nuclear mechanism underlying the “rossi effect”
62/071,456 September 25, 2014 Irradiation system to increase the Rossi effect
62/071,603 September 29, 2014 Lithium and nickel isotopes enrichment systems
62/122,050 October 10, 2014 White dwarf derived theory, process, and apparatus
62/122,154 October 14, 2014 Apparatus to produce heat with nickel and lithium
Unknown October 15, 2014 (mailing date) Particular Application with
Fast Reactions of the Rossi Effect
62/123,147 November 10, 2014 X Rays Transparent Reactor with 1 HEV Excitation
Unknown October 21, 2014 Gas Operated Energy Catalyzer
62/122,832 October 23, 2014 High Efficiency Thermal Power Generator System
Unknown October 26, 2014 Process and Apparatus to Make Heat at High
Temperature with Metals and Hydrogen
Unknown October 27, 2014 Particular Resistive Electric Heater
Unknown October 27, 2014 Vacuum Enhanced Reactor
Unknown November 1, 2014 Enrichment of 62 and 64 Ni Isotopes Apparatus
and Process
62/123,196 November 10, 2014 Gas Operated Energy Catalyzer
62/123,057 November 6, 2014 Direct Converter of Photons into Electric Energy
62/123,195 November 10, 2014 Control System for a Thermal Power
Assembly Made by More Modules
62/122,978 November 4, 2014 High Efficiency Heat Generator with Rossi-Effect
62/123,396 November 17, 2014 Resistive 

[Vo]:Thermionic LENR patent 20170213611

[Kevin O'Malley]

Openly mentions LENR and Andrea Rossi...


METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR HIGH EFFICIENCY ELECTRICITY GENERATION USING LOW
ENERGY THERMAL HEAT GENERATION AND THERMIONIC DEVICES
Document Type and Number:
United States Patent Application 20170213611 Kind Code: A1

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2017/0213611.html

Abstract:
A system and method are provided for generating electric power from
relatively low temperature energy sources at efficiency levels not
previously available. The present system and method employ recent
advances in low energy nuclear reaction technology and
thermionic/thermotunneling device technology first to generate heat
and then to convert a substantial portion of the heat generated to
usable electrical power. Heat may be generated by a LENR system
employing nuclear reactions that occur in readily available materials
at ambient temperatures without a high energy input requirement and do
not produce radioactive byproducts. The heat generated by the LENR
system may be transferred through one or more thermionic converter
devices in heat transfer relationship with the LENR system to generate
electric power.




Inventors:
Cox, Rodney T. (North Plains, OR, US)
Walitzki, Hans (Portland, OR, US)
Application Number:
13/893318
Publication Date:
07/27/2017
Filing Date:
05/13/2013
View Patent Images:
Download PDF 20170213611 PDF help
Export Citation:
Click for automatic bibliography generation
Assignee:
Borealis Technical Limited (London, GB)
International Classes:
G21D7/04; G21D1/00; G21G1/02; H01J45/00
Attorney, Agent or Firm:
BOREALIS TECHNICAL LIMITED (23545 NW SKYLINE BLVD NORTH PLAINS OR 971339204)
Claims:
1. A high efficiency electric power generating system comprising one
or more low energy nuclear reaction generating means for producing a
reliable source of heat and one or more thermionic converter means in
heat transfer relationship with said low energy nuclear reaction
generating means for receiving said reliable source of heat, wherein
said thermionic converter means is configured to efficiently generate
electric power from said reliable source of heat at an efficiency
within the range from about 10% of Carnot to about 80% of Carnot
efficiency.

2. The electric power generating system of claim 1, wherein said low
energy nuclear power reaction generating means is designed to use low
cost reactants to safely produce a heat generating reaction.

3. The electric power generating system of claim 1, wherein said
thermionic converter means comprises at least a pair of electrodes
separated by a gap, and each one of said pair of spaced electrodes has
an Avto metal surface configuration on a surface of said electrode
facing said gap.

4. The electric power generating system of claim 3, wherein said
thermionic converter means further comprises a first active area in
thermal contact between said low energy nuclear reaction generating
means and one of said electrodes and a second active area in thermal
and electrical contact between another of said electrodes and electric
power destination means.

5. The electric power generating system of claim 1, wherein said
source of heat comprises a heat transfer fluid selected from heat
transfer fluids comprising liquids and gasses.

6. The electric power generating system of claim 1, wherein said low
energy nuclear reaction generating means comprises barrier means
designed and positioned to contain any radioactivity produced when
said source of heat is produced.

7. The electric power generating system of claim 1, comprising a
plurality of low energy nuclear reaction generating means positioned
to be in heat transfer relationship with said one or more thermionic
converter means.

8. The electric power generating system of claim 1, wherein a
plurality of thermionic converter means is positioned to be in heat
transfer relationship with said one or more low energy nuclear
reaction generating means.

9. A high efficiency method for generating electric power from heat
comprising: a. providing at least one low energy nuclear reaction
generator and activating said low energy nuclear reaction generator to
produce a low energy nuclear reaction between reactants selected to
produce a supply of heat; b. providing at least one thermionic
converter in heat transfer relationship with said low energy nuclear
reaction generator, wherein said thermionic converter is designed to
convert heat energy from said supply of heat to electric energy at an
efficiency in the range from about 10% of Carnot to about 80% of
Carnot; c. directing said supply of heat from said low energy nuclear
reaction generator to said thermionic converter; d. transferring heat
from said supply of heat through said thermionic convert to cause heat
energy from said supply of heat to be converted to a supply of
electrical energy; and e. directing said supply of electrical energy
to an electric power destination.

10. The method of claim 9, wherein said thermionic converter converts
heat energy from said 

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

[Kevin O'Malley]

The ash-swapping accusation is one of those continental
divide/watershed issues.   Either he swapped the samples or there was
evidence of transmutation.   There is no middle ground.

These kinds of no-middle-ground issues are good for determining the
truth of the scenario, because it is easily testable the next time
around.   Just inspect the box before the test and don't let Rossi
anywhere near the black box during testing, ever.   Camera on it the
whole time.  If Rossi can swap samples under those conditions then he
truly deserves the title of Greatest Conman/Magician EVER.

On 7/28/17, Alain Sepeda  wrote:
> no need to swap powder, just need to put some other before the test, that
> will be mixed.
> anyway the behavior of Rossi during the test, shows either incompetent
> fraud, or incredible manipulation to look as a fraudster, and deter the
> investor.
>
> The important point about Lugano is not the evident mistake on emissivity
> (band vs full), but that it was not seriously answered, by credible
> explanation, by other tests... against either it is just a fraud, or a
> manipulation to look like a fraud.
>
> In both case I'm sad.
>
> 2017-07-28 21:25 GMT+02:00 bobcook39...@hotmail.com <
> bobcook39...@hotmail.com>:
>
>> Alain--
>>
>>
>>
>> You suggest that the poor Swedish and Italian professors doing the Lugano
>> test  ash evaluation were fooled by a mysterious swap of “ash” by Rossin
>> or
>> an accomplice at the end of the test.
>>
>>
>>
>> With all due respect I do not agree.
>>
>>
>>
>> To prepare a fake ash sample would be very difficult with known
>> technology
>> IMHO.  This conclusion  reflects the highly skewed isotopic ratios of Ni
>> reported by the professors..
>>
>>
>>
>> Bob Cook
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From: *Alain Sepeda 
>> *Sent: *Thursday, July 27, 2017 10:40 PM
>> *To: *Vortex List 
>> *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a key point to rule out the theories of Rossi's defenders.
>>
>> If IH was sincere, and enthusiastic as it is clear, this remove the
>> theories that they tried to fake a negative result. What was fake was the
>> methods, like in Lugano.
>>
>>
>>
>> Even if you swallow the theories that it works, the way the test was
>> conducted would have been manipulated to deter the investor, and defraud
>> him of his intellectuel property.
>>
>> As Rossi said about the way he pretend to have deterred a Swedish team,
>> it
>> would be a "magnificence". I don't swallow that theory, but even if true,
>> it is even more disgusting.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have been fooled, and the skeptic can play it easy to say we were
>> warned
>> by past results and never coming serious test. I don't regret as it was
>> to
>> verify, but we have the verification, BASTA!
>>
>>
>>
>> only thing more painful than to be fooled is to be attacked when you face
>> reality, by more fooled than me, and by friends and respected people,
>> among.
>>
>>
>>
>> LENR is a fractal tragedy. a fractal fiasco.
>>
>> Some LENR supporters are not more scientific and realist than Huizenga or
>> Parks.
>>
>>
>>
>> It have to stop.
>>
>>
>>
>> as you can read elsewhere I see the only exit in making PdD research with
>> modern instrumentation as used in accumulator technology research.
>>
>> This is my model for what woudl be a good LENR research:
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms14020
>>
>>
>>
>> I have few doubt we can move to NiH for industrial applications, and I
>> even hope we can move to biological LENR, graphene, or many metal alloys,
>> but first need to to have a theory, and my sad opinion is we need to
>> temporarily throw out theorists and physicists, until there is much data
>> they can work on. Urgency is for chemists and nanoscience experts.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-07-28 1:09 GMT+02:00 Eric Walker :
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> There is further corroborating evidence to suggest that IH were sincere,
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

[Kevin O'Malley]

Eric:
Thank you for sending that PM to Kirk.

Like I said over there, maybe I'm wrong about you after all.

Try to "suffer" through that compliment, ok?

On 7/27/17, Eric Walker <eric.wal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 4:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> You engage in mind reading, you assign a
>> motive that I make it personal when anyone can review the comments on
>> that thread and see that it is not personal.
>>
>
> https://www.lenr-forum.com/forum/thread/5271-clearance-items/?postID=67028#post67028
>

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

[Kevin O'Malley]

Both sides submitted bills to the Court of about $7.5 million each
***I find that surprising, Jones.   I expected IH's legal bills to be
at least double that of Rossi's.   I wonder how they got their top
notch firm so cheap?   What does this mean:  This similarity of bills
looks like collusion on their part...

On 7/27/17, Jones Beene  wrote:
> Anyone who thinks Rossi "won" is living in fantasy land.
>
> The only big winners were the attorneys for both sides.
>
> Both sides submitted bills to the Court of about $7.5 million each,
> hoping the judge would assess those costs to the other side. This
> similarity of bills looks like collusion on their part - but there is no
> reason to believe that they were paid substantially less by their clients.
>
> That means most of the initial $11 million which Rossi got from IH was
> lost to him in the filing of the lawsuit. But he is not home-free. Rossi
> gets to keep his junk IP and apparently the Swedes love him, so he may
> resurface over there if he can stand the winters.
>
> Rossi was not charged with perjury for his deposition - at least not
> yet. IH believes he should have been charged - and that could still
> happen. No agreement with IH will protect him from perjury.
>
> As for the legal fees of IH plus the other money they paid to Rossi up
> front - that is probably over $20 million, BUT they offloaded all of
> that expense and more to a British Investment firm - which has actually
> gone up in value since they made the $50 million investment in IH/Cherokee.
>
> If you are "following the buck" in all of this, here is how it stands:
>
> 1) Rossi has a net of about $4 million ($11 million minus attorneys fees)
> 2) Darden has a net of about $30 million ($50 million from Woodford
> minus $20 million)
> 3) The attorneys have a net of about $15 million
> 4) Woodford Patient Capital Trust is up about 14% from when they
> invested in IH
>
> In a way, it looks like Darden is in fact the biggest winner here ...
> but in one of the never-ending mysteries of capitalism - the big loser
> is not apparent... other than the vorticians who wasted hundreds of
> hours posting and reading a "show about nothing"
>
> ... with apologies to Jerry, his nothing was at least funny...
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Why Rossi 'won'

[Kevin O'Malley]

You're one to talk, Eric.   You are among the most unreasonable
moderators over at LENR-Forum with your acknowledged "Yes some farm
animals are more equal than others" and other bullshit you throw on
top of Pro-LENR enthusiasts and all the outright insults you allow by
the skeptopath crowd.

You should just post that your forum is so heavily biased and one-sided.

Right now I'm in trouble with you over there because you're allowing
the skeptopath Shanahan to derail the basic Peer Reviewed Replications
thread that I posted.   You engage in mind reading, you assign a
motive that I make it personal when anyone can review the comments on
that thread and see that it is not personal.



On 7/27/17, Eric Walker  wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> I'll propose another reason for the recent silence:  disappointment at an
> extractive settlement and a realization that it is a mostly futile
> excercise to continue to debate with what remain of the hard core of
> Rossi's followers who haven't yet decamped after becoming familiar with the
> contents of the lawsuit docket.  No need to postulate the eating of crow,
> except in those instances where someone made a prediction about the outcome
> of the lawsuit.  Few people that I recall expressed much confidence in any
> particular outcome.
>
> So we are left with two groups of people following developments, even more
> divided than before the lawsuit, with each somehow further confirmed in
> their impressions.
>
> Regards,
> Eric
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

 Over at EcatWorld



Bob Greenyer • 9 hours ago


I am now within a whisker of stating that LENR as in "Low Energy
Nuclear Reactions" (however they are caused) are real and testable
based on specific data. With reference to ECCO, without knowing for
certain that it is producing excess heat until after a test, the
feedstock/fuel/ash data points to Suhas being able to perform LENR.



Kevmo  to   Bob Greenyer • 26 minutes ago
So let's say you get past that whisker's width and state categorically
that it is LENR. How does MFMP replicate it and get others to
replicate this result?

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

I admit to being wrong, when I'm wrong.   That's step 10 for all you
friends of Bill.

And since I said pretty much EXACTLY the same thing you did, doesn't
that make you wrong?   The only one who's shown malice on this thread
is you.

On 7/21/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 5:18 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You're saying EXACTLY the same thing I and others were saying on the
>> link provided, jerk.
>>
>
> At this point I do not CARE what you have to say: because the bottom line
> is, you injected 'it's a scam' into the thread, right at the beginning. For
> that alone, you are just wrong AND malicious AFAIC. On top of being the
> usual sort who will never admit to being wrong, no matter what.
>
>
> But back to the IMPORTANT things. Like *somebody*, somewhere, finally
> coming up with a cold fusion steam engine that churns out impressive
> quantities of energy, independent of the wastrel, polluting corporate
> utilities.
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

You're saying EXACTLY the same thing I and others were saying on the
link provided, jerk.



On 7/21/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>
> What you said sounded nothing of the sort; so don't B.S. us, OK? And as for
> the 'logic' of this thing: while banks are forever run by greedy assholes
> and can be expected to ALWAYS make pin-headed 'business' decisions, the
> *timing* of this particular blindside seems AFAIC wholly suspicious... and
> IMO speaks of outside interference. But how that then morphs into a
> 'scamming' of a perennially underfunded volunteer undertaking like the MFMP
> stretches the very concept.
>
> So again: I think you're trying to 'pull a fast one' here, to cover for
> your initial bad attitude.
> Like the ruling-class oligarchy and its minions: NEVER admit you're wrong.
> Right?
>
> In any case: I hope this guy and his team make it to Europa -- and to a new
> lab. And DON'T start 'pulling a Rossi' on the World.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> What?   You're the one who started with the personal bullshit.
>> >> Buying real estate to help out an experimenter's debt situation is
>> >> pretty far afield from what MFMP's stated mission is declared.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > You *accused* them of scamming. YOU started this, bub.
>> > But I have lots of experience with your type, understand... so don't
>> think
>> > you're going to be able to misdirect anything here.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Kevin O'Malley
>> >> > <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Occham's Razor applies in scientific politics as well as it applies
>> to
>> >> >> other inductive pursuits.  And I'm not the one prevaricating, I'm
>> >> >> trying to get PAST the evasion.   Why are you even here with your
>> >> >> attitude?
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > 'I know you are -- but what am I??'
>> >> >
>> >> > I expect such juvenile games from people who start off poisoning the
>> >> well,
>> >> > like you did.
>> >> >
>> >> > So be it.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley
>> >> >> > <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like
>> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> duck, etc., it's probably a duck.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That's the kind of bullshit, status-quo prevarication we get in
>> >> Politix
>> >> >> all
>> >> >> > the time, eh? Shame on you for trying it here. It's not unlike
>> >> >> > kicking
>> >> >> > someone in the head when they're already down: it's too easy, and
>> >> >> > it's
>> >> >> not
>> >> >> > fair play. Why are you even here, with an attitude like that..?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Frankly Bub, this thing is NOT quacking like a duck as far as I
>> >> >> > can
>> >> >> > see,
>> >> >> > based on a few videos and articles. I'm hoping we're actually
>> seeing
>> >> >> > what
>> >> >> > many of us hope we are seeing. HOW these things always end up
>> >> >> > failing
>> >> >> > in
>> >> >> > the end, is what *I* want to know. The MFMP guy speaks elsewhere
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > 'dark
>> >> >> > forces'... and being the subject of 'dark forces' myself -- I
>> *KNOW*
>> >> >> > they
>> >> >> > really DO exist. So AFAIC: there IS likely a conspiracy to derail
>> >> >> > ALL
>> >> >> cold
>> >> >> > fusion research.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > And I wonder who'd be behind THAT effort...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > For that matter: who burned down Tesla's lab..? I'll give you
>> >> >> > three
>> >> >> > guesses. That's all you'd need.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-
>> >> >> >> regarding-ecco-device/
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as
>> >> >> >> > some
>> >> sort
>> >> >> of
>> >> >> >> > scam..? That sort of thinking is AFAIC simply more ritual
>> >> >> >> > abuse
>> >> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> Occam's
>> >> >> >> > poor razor. Considering the HUGE amount of work AND resources
>> >> people
>> >> >> >> > put
>> >> >> >> > into these sorts of things, *you* people really should be
>> >> >> >> > compelled
>> >> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > *give them reasonable benefit of the doubt* -- until
>> >> >> >> > 'something
>> >> >> >> > comes
>> >> >> >> > up'
>> >> >> >> > to -- justifiably -- indicate otherwise.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Sheesh. Misanthropists.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi-Gullstrom paper published on July 18 on Arxiv.org

[Kevin O'Malley]

Maybe whoever is trying to develop the device alongside Rossi next
time shouldn't fund his competitors.Don't piss him off.   That
kind of thing.   Let Fred Flinstone keep his job.

On 7/20/17, Axil Axil  wrote:
> This trillion $$ invention only works if Rossi is there at the controls to
> adjust it minute by minute. It is a device that only Rossi can use.
>
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:00 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
>> What's wrong with this picture?
>>
>> Great inventor presents crappy-looking experiment along with brain-dead
>> theory... while at the same time,  he has just completed successful test
>> of
>> the most valuable energy device of all time - producing an average
>> megawatt
>> of power over a year at a gain of at least 6:1.
>>
>> Yet this trillion $$ invention sits in a warehouse somewhere, gathering
>> dust.
>>
>> ...uh... What am I missing?
>>
>>
>>  Nick wrote:
>>
>> E-Cat QX Picture Posted in New Rossi-Gullstrom Paper (COP of 2000
>> reported
>> with Calorimetry) | E-Cat World
>> 
>>
>>
>> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1703.05249.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

I didn't accuse Suhas of scamming, although that's a distinct
possibility.   It looks to me like the lawyers and bankers that have a
hold over Suhas might be running a scam and I was urging MFMP to use
caution.   At the very least, buying real estate is  pretty far afield
from what MFMP's mission statement projects.

And in the link provided, I'm not the only one saying such things.
So pipe down, bub.   Argue the facts, not personality "types" and pure
bullshit.

On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What?   You're the one who started with the personal bullshit.
>> Buying real estate to help out an experimenter's debt situation is
>> pretty far afield from what MFMP's stated mission is declared.
>>
>
>
> You *accused* them of scamming. YOU started this, bub.
> But I have lots of experience with your type, understand... so don't think
> you're going to be able to misdirect anything here.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Occham's Razor applies in scientific politics as well as it applies to
>> >> other inductive pursuits.  And I'm not the one prevaricating, I'm
>> >> trying to get PAST the evasion.   Why are you even here with your
>> >> attitude?
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > 'I know you are -- but what am I??'
>> >
>> > I expect such juvenile games from people who start off poisoning the
>> well,
>> > like you did.
>> >
>> > So be it.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley
>> >> > <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> >> > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a
>> >> >> duck, etc., it's probably a duck.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > That's the kind of bullshit, status-quo prevarication we get in
>> Politix
>> >> all
>> >> > the time, eh? Shame on you for trying it here. It's not unlike
>> >> > kicking
>> >> > someone in the head when they're already down: it's too easy, and
>> >> > it's
>> >> not
>> >> > fair play. Why are you even here, with an attitude like that..?
>> >> >
>> >> > Frankly Bub, this thing is NOT quacking like a duck as far as I can
>> >> > see,
>> >> > based on a few videos and articles. I'm hoping we're actually seeing
>> >> > what
>> >> > many of us hope we are seeing. HOW these things always end up
>> >> > failing
>> >> > in
>> >> > the end, is what *I* want to know. The MFMP guy speaks elsewhere of
>> >> > 'dark
>> >> > forces'... and being the subject of 'dark forces' myself -- I *KNOW*
>> >> > they
>> >> > really DO exist. So AFAIC: there IS likely a conspiracy to derail
>> >> > ALL
>> >> cold
>> >> > fusion research.
>> >> >
>> >> > And I wonder who'd be behind THAT effort...
>> >> >
>> >> > For that matter: who burned down Tesla's lab..? I'll give you three
>> >> > guesses. That's all you'd need.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-
>> >> >> regarding-ecco-device/
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as some
>> sort
>> >> of
>> >> >> > scam..? That sort of thinking is AFAIC simply more ritual abuse
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> Occam's
>> >> >> > poor razor. Considering the HUGE amount of work AND resources
>> people
>> >> >> > put
>> >> >> > into these sorts of things, *you* people really should be
>> >> >> > compelled
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > *give them reasonable benefit of the doubt* -- until 'something
>> >> >> > comes
>> >> >> > up'
>> >> >> > to -- justifiably -- indicate otherwise.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Sheesh. Misanthropists.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

What?   You're the one who started with the personal bullshit.
Buying real estate to help out an experimenter's debt situation is
pretty far afield from what MFMP's stated mission is declared.

On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Occham's Razor applies in scientific politics as well as it applies to
>> other inductive pursuits.  And I'm not the one prevaricating, I'm
>> trying to get PAST the evasion.   Why are you even here with your
>> attitude?
>>
>
>
> 'I know you are -- but what am I??'
>
> I expect such juvenile games from people who start off poisoning the well,
> like you did.
>
> So be it.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a
>> >> duck, etc., it's probably a duck.
>> >>
>> >
>> > That's the kind of bullshit, status-quo prevarication we get in Politix
>> all
>> > the time, eh? Shame on you for trying it here. It's not unlike kicking
>> > someone in the head when they're already down: it's too easy, and it's
>> not
>> > fair play. Why are you even here, with an attitude like that..?
>> >
>> > Frankly Bub, this thing is NOT quacking like a duck as far as I can
>> > see,
>> > based on a few videos and articles. I'm hoping we're actually seeing
>> > what
>> > many of us hope we are seeing. HOW these things always end up failing
>> > in
>> > the end, is what *I* want to know. The MFMP guy speaks elsewhere of
>> > 'dark
>> > forces'... and being the subject of 'dark forces' myself -- I *KNOW*
>> > they
>> > really DO exist. So AFAIC: there IS likely a conspiracy to derail ALL
>> cold
>> > fusion research.
>> >
>> > And I wonder who'd be behind THAT effort...
>> >
>> > For that matter: who burned down Tesla's lab..? I'll give you three
>> > guesses. That's all you'd need.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-
>> >> regarding-ecco-device/
>> >>
>> >> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as some sort
>> of
>> >> > scam..? That sort of thinking is AFAIC simply more ritual abuse of
>> >> Occam's
>> >> > poor razor. Considering the HUGE amount of work AND resources people
>> >> > put
>> >> > into these sorts of things, *you* people really should be compelled
>> >> > to
>> >> > *give them reasonable benefit of the doubt* -- until 'something
>> >> > comes
>> >> > up'
>> >> > to -- justifiably -- indicate otherwise.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sheesh. Misanthropists.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

Occham's Razor applies in scientific politics as well as it applies to
other inductive pursuits.  And I'm not the one prevaricating, I'm
trying to get PAST the evasion.   Why are you even here with your
attitude?

On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:03 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a
>> duck, etc., it's probably a duck.
>>
>
> That's the kind of bullshit, status-quo prevarication we get in Politix all
> the time, eh? Shame on you for trying it here. It's not unlike kicking
> someone in the head when they're already down: it's too easy, and it's not
> fair play. Why are you even here, with an attitude like that..?
>
> Frankly Bub, this thing is NOT quacking like a duck as far as I can see,
> based on a few videos and articles. I'm hoping we're actually seeing what
> many of us hope we are seeing. HOW these things always end up failing in
> the end, is what *I* want to know. The MFMP guy speaks elsewhere of 'dark
> forces'... and being the subject of 'dark forces' myself -- I *KNOW* they
> really DO exist. So AFAIC: there IS likely a conspiracy to derail ALL cold
> fusion research.
>
> And I wonder who'd be behind THAT effort...
>
> For that matter: who burned down Tesla's lab..? I'll give you three
> guesses. That's all you'd need.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-
>> regarding-ecco-device/
>>
>> On 7/20/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as some sort of
>> > scam..? That sort of thinking is AFAIC simply more ritual abuse of
>> Occam's
>> > poor razor. Considering the HUGE amount of work AND resources people
>> > put
>> > into these sorts of things, *you* people really should be compelled to
>> > *give them reasonable benefit of the doubt* -- until 'something comes
>> > up'
>> > to -- justifiably -- indicate otherwise.
>> >
>> > Sheesh. Misanthropists.
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

Because if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a
duck, etc., it's probably a duck.

http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/14/mfmp-plan-and-proposal-regarding-ecco-device/

On 7/20/17, Che  wrote:

>
> Why would anyone think this guy is having the World on, as some sort of
> scam..? That sort of thinking is AFAIC simply more ritual abuse of Occam's
> poor razor. Considering the HUGE amount of work AND resources people put
> into these sorts of things, *you* people really should be compelled to
> *give them reasonable benefit of the doubt* -- until 'something comes up'
> to -- justifiably -- indicate otherwise.
>
> Sheesh. Misanthropists.

Re: [Vo]:Fwd: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video

[Kevin O'Malley]

Last I was looking into this, it seemed like there was a scam being
run on MFMP.   It took all this rigmarole to get the guy to work with
you on a replication?

On 7/19/17, Che  wrote:
> So... what do people think about the ECCO cold fusion project from an
> Indian team? The MFMP seem impressed by a claimed COP of 8.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: YouTube 
> Date: Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:15 PM
> Subject: Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project just uploaded a video
> To: Trotskisty 
>
>
> Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project
> 
> has uploaded Slowly slowly catch the monkey
> 
> After reviewing the decisio...
> --
>
> Martin Fleischmann Memorial Project
> 
> has uploaded Slowly slowly catch the monkey
> 
> 
>
> Slowly slowly catch the monkey
> 
> 
> Martin
> Fleischmann Memorial Project
> 
>
> After reviewing the decision made, Suhas agrees to work with us on
> replication.
> © 2017 YouTube, LLC 901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066
> You were sent this email because you chose to receive updates from Martin
> Fleischmann Memorial Project
> .
> If you don't want these updates anymore, you can unsubscribe here
> .
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi vs. Darden Settlement Agreement Published

[Kevin O'Malley]

Rossi – IH Settlement Published: Rossi Gets Back All Rights to E-Cat,
IH no Longer Involved
Posted on July 18, 2017 • 96 Comments

http://e-catworld.com/2017/07/18/rossi-ih-settlement-published-rossi-gets-back-all-rights/


Rossi Interview with Mats Lewan

Settlement Agreement:
https://animpossibleinvention.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/settlement-agreement.pdf


On 7/18/17, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were
> generating linear BECs?   I can see they might be Luttinger Liquids,
> but let's say it went one step further, not into a solid state of
> matter but into the Condensate state of matter.Are there telltale
> signs of a BEC?
>
> On 7/18/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically
>>> impossible.
>>>
>>> ***Someone should tell the guys who are working towards that goal.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor
>>
>>
>> I think the problem with this sort of thinking, is that the assumption is
>> to assume we need only be looking at essentially 'known' states of matter
>> -- whilst totally overlooking the HUGE (essentially INFINITE) 'phase
>> space'
>> of possibilities which 'emergent' physical relations hand us.
>>
>> Someone is not 'thinking outside the box'...
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Wouldn't that be fascinating if High Temp Superconductors were
generating linear BECs?   I can see they might be Luttinger Liquids,
but let's say it went one step further, not into a solid state of
matter but into the Condensate state of matter.Are there telltale
signs of a BEC?

On 7/18/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> wrote:
>>
>> There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically
>> impossible.
>>
>> ***Someone should tell the guys who are working towards that goal.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor
>
>
> I think the problem with this sort of thinking, is that the assumption is
> to assume we need only be looking at essentially 'known' states of matter
> -- whilst totally overlooking the HUGE (essentially INFINITE) 'phase space'
> of possibilities which 'emergent' physical relations hand us.
>
> Someone is not 'thinking outside the box'...
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern  wrote:

There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically
impossible.

***Someone should tell the guys who are working towards that goal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor

On 7/18/17, Axil Axil  wrote:
> Leif Holmlid sites  J. E. Hirsch when he describes metallic hydrogen as a
> superconductor. Holmlid et al have verified that the hydrogen trapped in
> the microcavities present in iron oxide are superconductors. Hirsch now
> believes that all superconductivity in high Tc cuprates as well as all
> other superconductors are hole superconductors.
>
> https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.07452
> Towards an understanding of hole superconductivity
> Fig. 1. (Color online) Cluster with more than 100 hydrogen atoms squeezed
> in palladium crystal defect with superconducting properties measured by
> SQUIDS (Lipson et al. , 2005; Miley et al. , 2007) is generated, see Figure
> 1 in Miley et al. (2008).
> [image: Fig. 1. (Color online) Cluster with more than 100 hydrogen atoms
> squeezed in palladium crystal defect with superconducting properties
> measured by SQUIDS (Lipson et al. , 2005; Miley et al. , 2007) is
> generated, see Figure 1 in Miley et al. (2008).]
>
> The detection by MFMP of the x-ray burst is experimental evidence that hole
> superconductivity is present at temperatures near 1000C.
>
> The detection of this radiation burst can be cited as verification of the
> existence of high temperature superconductivity produce by a hole
> superconductor as cited by Holmlid.
>
> This bremsstrahlung like radiation has no K line spikes that always appears
> in this continuum.
>
> The characteristic x-ray emission which is shown as two sharp peaks in the
> illustration at left occur when vacancies are produced in the n=1 or
> K-shell of the atom and electrons drop down from above to fill the gap. The
> x-rays produced by transitions from the n=2 to n=1 levels are called
> K-alpha x-rays, and those for the n=3→1 transition are called K-beta
> x-rays.
>
> http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/quantum/xrayc.html
>
> The lack of these K line spikes indicate that the bremsstrahlung like
> radiation was generated by something other than an interaction of high
> energy electrons impacting on a metal lattice.
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:13 AM, Brian Ahern  wrote:
>
>>
>> There are no room temperature superconductors. They are theoretically
>> impossible. All reports of them have never been corroborated.
>> The explanation would take hours, but Keith Johnson solved the problem in
>> 1983 in the  Journal of Synthetic Metals volume 5.
>>
>> There are numerous magnetic anomalies that seem like a Meisner Effect,
>> but
>> they do not share all of the attributes.
>>
>> --
>> *From:* Jed Rothwell 
>> *Sent:* Monday, July 17, 2017 1:56 PM
>> *To:* Vortex
>> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled
>>
>> I wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I do not think there is experimental evidence for this, I suppose
>>> because
>>> it would be difficult to test for.
>>>
>>
>> Difficult because, presumably, in the cathode only microscopic domains of
>> nuclear-active spots superconduct. Not the whole cathode. I think that
>> finding a tiny amount of superconducting material in a sample that is 99%
>> not superconducting would be difficult.
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/17/17, bobcook39...@hotmail.com  wrote:
  Bremsstrahlung is associated with the slowing of  a charged
> particle which enters a substance at a velocity greater than the speed of
> light in the medium.
Velocity greater than C?   I thought there was nothing that could move
faster than C?  Except perhaps INFORMATION, i.e. tachyons and spooky
actions at a distance.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/17/17, Brian Ahern  wrote:

>
> The sad reality is that nobody has succeeded in producing 1.0 watts of
> excess energy with a COP > 1.5 on a repeatable and demonstrated platform.
>
 ***What about the NANOR?   And also, what about those 153 peer
reviewed replications of Pons Fleischmann Anomalous Heat Event that
Jed cites?

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/16/17, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

>
> multiple independent instruments are also more convincing than just two.
 ***That is why I criticized MFMP's dropping this line of inquiry due
to personal circumstances, not due to lack of promise of earlier
results.

It turns out that Matthieu had all the equipment.  Right now MFMP is
raising money for REAL ESTATE to help out Suhas/ECCO.   Just imagine
where we would be in results if MFMP had raised $182k to purchase lab
equipment to continue this gamma ray inquiry in Matthieu's absence.

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

So then a gamma ray detection followed by a replication within 48
hours would be very significant, wouldn't you say?   That's why I'm
disappointed MFMP didn't pursue this line of inquiry.


On 7/15/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>
>> There is no known chemical interaction that leads to
>> hydrogen/deuterium generating gammas when mixed with nickel/palladium.
>>   Even if there is no excess heat, it MUST be a nuclear phenomena.
>>
>
> People familiar these detectors tell me that a one-off event that does not
> repeat is probably an instrument glitch, or an extraterrestrial event. We
> can't say it MUST be a nuclear phenomenon until we see it happen often,
> with multiple instruments and things like TOF verification.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

Biberian's results seem iffy to you, though they came within 48 hours
of the gamma ray finding of MFMP.   And then MFMP just dropped the
inquiry due to some personal constraints rather than the lack of
promise in the inquiry.   You essentially admit to not clicking on the
link due to a typo.  MFMP got to within an inch of the holy grail and
then went off to chase white rabbits down their holes, and you
criticize... me?   No wonder interest in LENR is at an alltime low.

There is no known chemical interaction that leads to
hydrogen/deuterium generating gammas when mixed with nickel/palladium.
  Even if there is no excess heat, it MUST be a nuclear phenomena.
Even the skeptopath Kirk Shanahan acknowledges this, and he is one to
throw out all 153 of those peer reviewed replication papers that you
published.



On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> > What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the
>> >> gamma rays within 48 hours?
>>
>
> There is no one by the name "Hans Biberian." That's why I did not recall
> any details. I guess you mean Jean-Paul Biberian. J-P. Biberian's results
> seem iffy to me.
>
>
>
>> > Not familiar with that.
>> ***You didn't even click on the link that we're discussing?
>>
>
> I discussed Celani's report with him in detail, and published accounts of
> it. So I know about that one. He did not have an opportunity to repeat it
> so I wouldn't draw any conclusions. Most of the others are iffy, in my
> opinion, but I don't know much about gamma detection.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the
>> gamma rays within 48 hours?
>>
>
> Not familiar with that.
***You didn't even click on the link that we're discussing?
http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/16-progress-blog/347-gamma


>
> I don't know much about gamma detection but experts tell me that brief,
> one-off incidents are often instrument glitches.
***In this case it would be a two-off.   And none of those involved
bothered to discuss instrument glitches or anything of the sort, they
just dropped the line of inquiry due to personal circumstances without
telling us what was going on.

>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

What leads you to doubt Hans Biberian's "replication" of finding the
gamma rays within 48 hours?

On 7/14/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Well, are you happy with how they handled this gamma ray thing?   They
>> just dropped it.
>
>
> I doubt there are any gamma rays, so I wouldn't fret about this. Anyway,
> researchers always get to decide what they are going to do. If you aren't
> interested in what they chose to do, don't contribute.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/347-gamma

On 7/13/17, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I updated their blog entry for them.
>
> http://www.quantumheat.org/#comment-8874
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

Well, are you happy with how they handled this gamma ray thing?   They
just dropped it.  The closest thing to the holy grail they ever came
and just decided they wanted to chase white rabbits instead.

On 7/13/17, Esa Ruoho <esaru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If Kevin's so unhappy with what they're doing, how about Kevin you go and
> support them some more, okay? Sell that car, re-mortgage that house twice
> and throw money at them. Otherwise, sell all your belongings and move to
> live with them and guide (financially and direction-wise) their process so
> they get where you want them to go.
> Or find an investor. Right?
>
>
> On 14 July 2017 at 03:43, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I updated their blog entry for them.
>>
>> http://www.quantumheat.org/#comment-8874
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> http://linkedin.com/in/esaruoho // http://twitter.com/esaruoho //
> http://lackluster.bandcamp.com //
> +358403703659 // http://lackluster.org // skype:esajuhaniruoho // iMessage
> esaru...@gmail.com //
> http://esaruoho.tumblr.com // http://deposit4se.tumblr.com //
> http://facebook.com/LacklusterOfficial //
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

I updated their blog entry for them.

http://www.quantumheat.org/#comment-8874

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/13/17, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> You asked; they answered. What's your problem?
***My problem is that it took them 4 years to do it and they don't
address how they prioritize scientific pursuits.   It's willy nilly.



>> We should see their reasoning for supporting some
>> research over other research if they want us to continue to support
>> them.
>
>
> Are you supporting them?
***Yes

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/13/17, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
  What do you expect them to do?
***I expect them to inform us on the blog they chose to inform us.
It would have cost them 10 minutes of their time.   They have gone
off on 4 or 5 external trips, chasing down chimera that had less
chance than this.   We should see their reasoning for supporting some
research over other research if they want us to continue to support
them.   If they can spend time going around the world, they can spend
the time updating us.  It has turned out exactly as I said, they
dropped this line of inquiry and blithely went on to something else.

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

Then you have confirmed it:  That promising line of inquiry was
dropped.   You should at least post what you just said on the MFMP
website and ask for anyone who might be interested in furthering this
line of inquiry to get involved.  It wasn't dropped due to lack of
progress, it was dropped due to personal circumstance.

On 7/13/17, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us> wrote:
> The experiment reported in your link was done by Mathieu Valat in
> France, with support from Jean-Paul Biberian. Mathieu was unable to
> continue that work due to the burden of supporting a family. However, he
> has recently re-commissioned his concentric-tube calorimeter and gamma
> spectrometer in a new lab. Due to his employment restrictions, he is no
> longer able to pursue this work under the MFMP umbrella, but we hope he
> will publish any significant findings in the future.
>
> Research is a slow, methodical process, with each step refining the
> parameters and adding to the body of knowledge. In each of our projects,
> we try to build on what we learned in previous work. Thus Mathieu's
> report led me to acquiring a gamma spectrometer and other detectors for
> low-energy gamma. This in turn enabled the detection in GS5.2 of
> brehmsstralung gamma emission. My current project has a similar goal,
> looking for photon emission from prepared samples of Nickel and other
> metals exposed to hydrogen, so the work goes on.
>
> On 7/13/2017 6:59 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>> Alan:
>>
>> The original gamma finding was never updated in 2013.   MFMP simply
>> went silent on it.
>>
>> http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/16-progress-blog/347-gamma
>>
>>
>> On 7/12/17, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us> wrote:
>>> Every experiment we run since 2013 has gamma spectrometry in place as
>>> well as a sensitive Geiger-Muller pancake detector and several neutron
>>> bubble detectors. All the spectral data and G-M counts are published in
>>> near real time and made permanently available for open viewing and
>>> analysis. Just follow the links I posted.
>>>
>>> As a general rule, we try to avoid drawing conclusions from our data
>>> unless it is clearly unusual, and only then after extensive analysis and
>>> discussion by the Crowd. This includes you of course, and I encourage
>>> you to look at the gamma data from GS5.3 and GS5.4 which ran earlier
>>> this year. If you see anything that looks unusual or otherwise worth
>>> discussion, let us all know.
>>>
>>> *AlanG / MFMP*
>>>
>>> On 7/12/2017 4:44 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>>>> The issue is:What have you been doing with that gamma ray thing.  All
>>>> the rest fits into what I called "whatever it is".
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us
>>>> <mailto:a...@magicsound.us>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>  On 7/11/2017 10:24 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>>>>>  The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by
>>>>> Hans
>>>>>  Biberian.   And then they just faded away onto whatever it is
>>>>> they've
>>>>>  been doing for 4 years.
>>>>  Kevin, your comment suggests that you haven't been paying
>>>>  attention or even bothering to search. Just this year, we
>>>>  performed four serious experiments as a group and individually,
>>>>  including an in-depth detailed field test of the me356 reactor.
>>>>  Our goal is the practice of Live Open Science, and nothing is
>>>>  hidden, no matter what we find.
>>>>
>>>>  My current research in Ni-Ag (Live Doc - watch for updates) can be
>>>>  seen at https://goo.gl/rTDz87
>>>>
>>>>  Below is a partial list of links to our previous work over the
>>>>  past five years, in roughly chronological order.
>>>>  *
>>>>  **AlanG / MFMP*
>>>>
>>>>  Dogbone->Glowstick genesis
>>>>  &
>>>>  Glowstick Sealing Evernote (AG)
>>>>  https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WYUhFZDJhNjRVTm8/view
>>>>
>>>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WYUhFZDJhNjRVTm8/view>
>>>>
>>>>  Ni Etching Evernote
>>>>  http://www.evernote.com/l/AXeIG29QrzhC3KVjl9Qf9aJsigzQ671dDG0/
>>>>  <http://www.evernote.com/l/AXeIG29QrzhC3KVjl9Qf9aJsigzQ671dDG0/>
>>>>
>>>>  Dogbone Evernote (Ryan Hunt)
>

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

Alan:

The original gamma finding was never updated in 2013.   MFMP simply
went silent on it.

http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/16-progress-blog/347-gamma


On 7/12/17, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us> wrote:
> Every experiment we run since 2013 has gamma spectrometry in place as
> well as a sensitive Geiger-Muller pancake detector and several neutron
> bubble detectors. All the spectral data and G-M counts are published in
> near real time and made permanently available for open viewing and
> analysis. Just follow the links I posted.
>
> As a general rule, we try to avoid drawing conclusions from our data
> unless it is clearly unusual, and only then after extensive analysis and
> discussion by the Crowd. This includes you of course, and I encourage
> you to look at the gamma data from GS5.3 and GS5.4 which ran earlier
> this year. If you see anything that looks unusual or otherwise worth
> discussion, let us all know.
>
> *AlanG / MFMP*
>
> On 7/12/2017 4:44 AM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>> The issue is:What have you been doing with that gamma ray thing.  All
>> the rest fits into what I called "whatever it is".
>>
>> On Tuesday, July 11, 2017, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us
>> <mailto:a...@magicsound.us>> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/11/2017 10:24 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>>> The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by Hans
>>> Biberian.   And then they just faded away onto whatever it is
>>> they've
>>> been doing for 4 years.
>> Kevin, your comment suggests that you haven't been paying
>> attention or even bothering to search. Just this year, we
>> performed four serious experiments as a group and individually,
>> including an in-depth detailed field test of the me356 reactor.
>> Our goal is the practice of Live Open Science, and nothing is
>> hidden, no matter what we find.
>>
>> My current research in Ni-Ag (Live Doc - watch for updates) can be
>> seen at https://goo.gl/rTDz87
>>
>> Below is a partial list of links to our previous work over the
>> past five years, in roughly chronological order.
>> *
>> **AlanG / MFMP*
>>
>> Dogbone->Glowstick genesis
>> &
>> Glowstick Sealing Evernote (AG)
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WYUhFZDJhNjRVTm8/view
>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WYUhFZDJhNjRVTm8/view>
>>
>> Ni Etching Evernote
>> http://www.evernote.com/l/AXeIG29QrzhC3KVjl9Qf9aJsigzQ671dDG0/
>> <http://www.evernote.com/l/AXeIG29QrzhC3KVjl9Qf9aJsigzQ671dDG0/>
>>
>> Dogbone Evernote (Ryan Hunt)
>>
>> https://www.evernote.com/pub/marpooties/projectdogbone#st=p=ca649d5c-7e11-47e8-9299-a0483fb38972
>>
>> <https://www.evernote.com/pub/marpooties/projectdogbone#st=p=ca649d5c-7e11-47e8-9299-a0483fb38972>
>>
>> Higgins_Dogbone_drawings
>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B0yO8n6-0MjNakxTNW9xbHBFaEU
>> <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0B0yO8n6-0MjNakxTNW9xbHBFaEU>
>>
>> Higgins Spec7 (GS5.2)  Analysis http://goo.gl/DOiXYe
>>
>> QuantumHeat Dogbone blog
>>
>> http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/active-experiments/pdb
>>
>> <http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/experiements/active-experiments/pdb>
>>
>> Dogbone Live Doc
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F12E3BEtjr8PTm7-t-uWDF0OSNrdO9biuD5GJWoHWhE/
>>
>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F12E3BEtjr8PTm7-t-uWDF0OSNrdO9biuD5GJWoHWhE/>
>> or
>> goo.gl/JzCLRg <http://goo.gl/JzCLRg>
>>
>> Dogbone Analysis - Excess Heat calc. http://goo.gl/0rP40x   (Higgins)
>>
>> Dogbone Analysis paper (Higgins)
>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2TWU5Vk80VkxwYVU/view
>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5Pc25a4cOM2TWU5Vk80VkxwYVU/view>
>>
>> Core Heater notes (w/coil shadow)
>>
>> https://www.evernote.com/pub/alang152/dogbonecoreheater#st=p=313ebf33-5c4b-49e5-94a6-05f983b2eed6
>>
>> <https://www.evernote.com/pub/alang152/dogbonecoreheater#st=p=313ebf33-5c4b-49e5-94a6-05f983b2eed6>
>> or
>> goo.gl/4YLDgM <http://goo.gl/4YLDgM>
>>
>> GS2 data archive
>>
>> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BxxJkjesxe4kfktqTHMxQ0Vxb3M0N0tVZDVPNHQtWGhOeXN4SUJ3TUdmYlhsTkE3eFoxUFk
>>
>> <https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BxxJkjesxe4kfktqTHMxQ0Vxb3M0N0tVZDVPNHQtWGhOeXN4SUJ3TUdmYlhsTkE3eFoxUFk>
>> o

Re: [Vo]:MFMP activities

[Kevin O'Malley]

The issue is:What have you been doing with that gamma ray thing.  All the
rest fits into what I called "whatever it is".

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017, AlanG <a...@magicsound.us> wrote:

> On 7/11/2017 10:24 PM, Kevin O'Malley wrote:
>
> The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by Hans
> Biberian.   And then they just faded away onto whatever it is they've
> been doing for 4 years.
>
> Kevin, your comment suggests that you haven't been paying attention or
> even bothering to search. Just this year, we performed four serious
> experiments as a group and individually, including an in-depth detailed
> field test of the me356 reactor. Our goal is the practice of Live Open
> Science, and nothing is hidden, no matter what we find.
>
> My current research in Ni-Ag (Live Doc - watch for updates)  can be seen
> at https://goo.gl/rTDz87
>
> Below is a partial list of links to our previous work over the past five
> years, in roughly chronological order.
>
> *AlanG / MFMP*
>
> Dogbone->Glowstick genesis
> &
> Glowstick Sealing Evernote (AG)  https://drive.google.com/file/d/
> 0Bz7lTfqkED9WYUhFZDJhNjRVTm8/view
>
> Ni Etching Evernote
> http://www.evernote.com/l/AXeIG29QrzhC3KVjl9Qf9aJsigzQ671dDG0/
>
> Dogbone Evernote (Ryan Hunt) https://www.evernote.com/pub/
> marpooties/projectdogbone#st=p=ca649d5c-7e11-47e8-9299-a0483fb38972
>
> Higgins_Dogbone_drawingshttps://drive.google.com/
> drive/folders/0B0yO8n6-0MjNakxTNW9xbHBFaEU
>
> Higgins Spec7 (GS5.2)  Analysishttp://goo.gl/DOiXYe
>
> QuantumHeat Dogbone bloghttp://www.quantumheat.org/
> index.php/en/experiements/active-experiments/pdb
>
> Dogbone Live Dochttps://docs.google.com/
> document/d/1F12E3BEtjr8PTm7-t-uWDF0OSNrdO9biuD5GJWoHWhE/
> or
> goo.gl/JzCLRg
>
> Dogbone Analysis - Excess Heat calc.http://goo.gl/0rP40x   (Higgins)
>
> Dogbone Analysis paper (Higgins)https://drive.google.com/file/d/
> 0B5Pc25a4cOM2TWU5Vk80VkxwYVU/view
>
> Core Heater notes (w/coil shadow)https://www.evernote.com/pub/
> alang152/dogbonecoreheater#st=p=313ebf33-5c4b-49e5-94a6-05f983b2eed6
> or
> goo.gl/4YLDgM
>
> GS2 data archivehttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/
> 0BxxJkjesxe4kfktqTHMxQ0Vxb3M0N0tVZDVPNHQtWGhOeXN4SUJ3TUdmYlhsTkE3eFoxUFk
> or
> goo.gl/db2Ogl
>
> GS3 data archivehttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/
> 0BxxJkjesxe4kfm9pVEhvU3RKNzR6ZEcxUktYYThPRXBHZHBPOFBCV1RiMzdmbU45RW13cm8
> or
> goo.gl/MyX0Jh
>
> GS4 data archivehttps://drive.google.com/drive/folders/
> 0BxxJkjesxe4kfnczTEJoV1RnQnphNTFQVUhUc29LQTlqOGxpamVfbDBxT3gwa01OdUI4Z28
> or
> goo.gl/o4z9bE
>
> GS5.2 Live Dochttp://www.quantumheat.org/
> index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/515-glowstick-5-2
> or
> http://goo.gl/z5aoBY
>
> GS5.3 data archivehttps://drive.google.com/open?id=
> 0BxxJkjesxe4kSzg4YXVwNHNpTEk
> or
> goo.gl/QUhKJb
>
> GS5.3 TN7200 spectra on CloudDrive http://gofile.me/2yOri/eFGRuYs82
> missing 17Jan2017
>
> GS5.3 Calibration Video on CloudDrivehttp://gofile.me/2yOri/8yXLpcGSf
>
> GS5.4 live dochttps://goo.gl/2jqpjm
>
> GS5.4 data archivehttps://goo.gl/W1i0pY
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Fusion events, and other nuclear exchanges.

On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gamma's were also seen at reaction shutdown. What produces those gammas?
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 9:35 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I believe gammas are generated and then absorbed into the BEC, sliced
>> and diced into X rays.   That is, the vast majority of the gammas.
>> Some poke their heads through, especially in the initial phase where
>> it's an endothermic reaction starting the whole thing.   That's why
>> Celani saw Gammas at Rossi's demo, but only at the outset.
>>
>> On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Gamma rays are not generated in LENR reactions because the reaction
>> energy
>> > is completely drained by the entanglement of the SPP BEC that is in
>> > place
>> > on the nanoparticles that produce the LENR reaction.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> I have thought for a long time that there have been multiple LENR
>> >> reactions.   When you let loose a gamma inside a lattice and it hits
>> >> those other nickel (or palladium) atoms, it generates fission
>> >> reactions.   The ash analysis results have been all over the board.
>> >>
>> >> On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > I now believe that there is multiple LENR reaction types. For
>> >> > example,
>> >> > Rossi has developed a low temperature LENR reaction and has tested
>> >> > it
>> >> > in
>> >> > the yearlong IH test. The mechanism for this type of LENR reaction
>> >> > is
>> >> based
>> >> > on magnetic flux line focusing by the hexagonal based lattice of
>> >> > mica.
>> >> This
>> >> > reaction mechanism follows along the lines that was shown to be
>> >> > effective
>> >> > in the Golden Balls of D. Cravins where the magnetic flux lines of a
>> >> SmCo5
>> >> > magnet is focused by the hexagonal based lattice of graphite.
>> >> >
>> >> > See
>> >> >
>> >> > https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
>> >> >
>> >> > This article explains how magnetism can be focused into skyrmion
>> >> > magnetic
>> >> > textures involving topological, non-topological and instanton
>> >> > droplets
>> >> > driven by spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular
>> magnetic
>> >> > anisotropy and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction
>> >> >
>> >> > During the year long test, Rossi has stumbled on the plasma phase
>> >> > LENR
>> >> > reaction and has built the QuarkX reactor to take advantage of this
>> >> > reaction type. Rossi has come to believe correctly that the plasma
>> type
>> >> > LENR reaction is superior to the low temperature LENR reaction type
>> and
>> >> has
>> >> > in effect tossed the low temperature technology in the trash as
>> >> > noncompetitive.
>> >> >
>> >> > The QuarkX technology is very difficult because it demands very high
>> >> > temperature structural materials. This requires specialized
>> >> > expertise
>> >> > in
>> >> > material science and extensive testing to ensure the robustness of
>> this
>> >> > material under extreme stress over time.
>> >> >
>> >> > The plasma based LENR reaction is centered on the production of
>> >> > nanoparticles produced by the condinsation of metal vapor.
>> >> > Polaritons
>> >> > naturally form on those nanoparticles that convert the spin of
>> infrared
>> >> > photons into powerful magnetic fields.
>> >> >
>> >> > By the way, I believe that the SunCell is using the plasma phase
>> >> > LENR
>> >> > reaction. Like Rossi, R. Mills has stumbled on this reaction type
>> >> > and
>> >> > is
>> >> > attempting to bring it to market.
>> >> >
>> >> > I am saying that if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like
>> >> > a
>> >> nail.
>> >> > If Mills encounters unexplained plasma based high energy reactio

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

I believe gammas are generated and then absorbed into the BEC, sliced
and diced into X rays.   That is, the vast majority of the gammas.
Some poke their heads through, especially in the initial phase where
it's an endothermic reaction starting the whole thing.   That's why
Celani saw Gammas at Rossi's demo, but only at the outset.

On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Gamma rays are not generated in LENR reactions because the reaction energy
> is completely drained by the entanglement of the SPP BEC that is in place
> on the nanoparticles that produce the LENR reaction.
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have thought for a long time that there have been multiple LENR
>> reactions.   When you let loose a gamma inside a lattice and it hits
>> those other nickel (or palladium) atoms, it generates fission
>> reactions.   The ash analysis results have been all over the board.
>>
>> On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I now believe that there is multiple LENR reaction types. For example,
>> > Rossi has developed a low temperature LENR reaction and has tested it
>> > in
>> > the yearlong IH test. The mechanism for this type of LENR reaction is
>> based
>> > on magnetic flux line focusing by the hexagonal based lattice of mica.
>> This
>> > reaction mechanism follows along the lines that was shown to be
>> > effective
>> > in the Golden Balls of D. Cravins where the magnetic flux lines of a
>> SmCo5
>> > magnet is focused by the hexagonal based lattice of graphite.
>> >
>> > See
>> >
>> > https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
>> >
>> > This article explains how magnetism can be focused into skyrmion
>> > magnetic
>> > textures involving topological, non-topological and instanton droplets
>> > driven by spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic
>> > anisotropy and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction
>> >
>> > During the year long test, Rossi has stumbled on the plasma phase LENR
>> > reaction and has built the QuarkX reactor to take advantage of this
>> > reaction type. Rossi has come to believe correctly that the plasma type
>> > LENR reaction is superior to the low temperature LENR reaction type and
>> has
>> > in effect tossed the low temperature technology in the trash as
>> > noncompetitive.
>> >
>> > The QuarkX technology is very difficult because it demands very high
>> > temperature structural materials. This requires specialized expertise
>> > in
>> > material science and extensive testing to ensure the robustness of this
>> > material under extreme stress over time.
>> >
>> > The plasma based LENR reaction is centered on the production of
>> > nanoparticles produced by the condinsation of metal vapor. Polaritons
>> > naturally form on those nanoparticles that convert the spin of infrared
>> > photons into powerful magnetic fields.
>> >
>> > By the way, I believe that the SunCell is using the plasma phase LENR
>> > reaction. Like Rossi, R. Mills has stumbled on this reaction type and
>> > is
>> > attempting to bring it to market.
>> >
>> > I am saying that if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a
>> nail.
>> > If Mills encounters unexplained plasma based high energy reaction, it
>> > is
>> > human nature to reform and modify your existing thinking to incorporate
>> > that reaction into those existing theories. Mills would naturally
>> > resist
>> > rejecting all his ideas formed over a lifetime and that are central to
>> the
>> > survival of his company whether they are valid or not to impartially
>> > include a these new experimental results.
>> >
>> > On top of that, it is in the commercial interest of Mill’s company to
>> avoid
>> > any nuclear based theory that would restrict his ability to patent his
>> > experimental results or taint his work with the onus associated with
>> LENR.
>> >
>> > To top things off, sooner or later, someone will test the plasma type
>> LENR
>> > reaction for muon generation, and when the government finds out that
>> muons
>> > are being produced in massive amounts, then the government will take
>> > over
>> > the LENR tech and produce a muon activated thorium based large scale
>> > centralized grid connected gigawatt level fission power station.
>> >
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

I have thought for a long time that there have been multiple LENR
reactions.   When you let loose a gamma inside a lattice and it hits
those other nickel (or palladium) atoms, it generates fission
reactions.   The ash analysis results have been all over the board.

On 7/11/17, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I now believe that there is multiple LENR reaction types. For example,
> Rossi has developed a low temperature LENR reaction and has tested it in
> the yearlong IH test. The mechanism for this type of LENR reaction is based
> on magnetic flux line focusing by the hexagonal based lattice of mica. This
> reaction mechanism follows along the lines that was shown to be effective
> in the Golden Balls of D. Cravins where the magnetic flux lines of a SmCo5
> magnet is focused by the hexagonal based lattice of graphite.
>
> See
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep16184
>
> This article explains how magnetism can be focused into skyrmion magnetic
> textures involving topological, non-topological and instanton droplets
> driven by spin-transfer torque in materials with perpendicular magnetic
> anisotropy and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya Interaction
>
> During the year long test, Rossi has stumbled on the plasma phase LENR
> reaction and has built the QuarkX reactor to take advantage of this
> reaction type. Rossi has come to believe correctly that the plasma type
> LENR reaction is superior to the low temperature LENR reaction type and has
> in effect tossed the low temperature technology in the trash as
> noncompetitive.
>
> The QuarkX technology is very difficult because it demands very high
> temperature structural materials. This requires specialized expertise in
> material science and extensive testing to ensure the robustness of this
> material under extreme stress over time.
>
> The plasma based LENR reaction is centered on the production of
> nanoparticles produced by the condinsation of metal vapor. Polaritons
> naturally form on those nanoparticles that convert the spin of infrared
> photons into powerful magnetic fields.
>
> By the way, I believe that the SunCell is using the plasma phase LENR
> reaction. Like Rossi, R. Mills has stumbled on this reaction type and is
> attempting to bring it to market.
>
> I am saying that if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
> If Mills encounters unexplained plasma based high energy reaction, it is
> human nature to reform and modify your existing thinking to incorporate
> that reaction into those existing theories. Mills would naturally resist
> rejecting all his ideas formed over a lifetime and that are central to the
> survival of his company whether they are valid or not to impartially
> include a these new experimental results.
>
> On top of that, it is in the commercial interest of Mill’s company to avoid
> any nuclear based theory that would restrict his ability to patent his
> experimental results or taint his work with the onus associated with LENR.
>
> To top things off, sooner or later, someone will test the plasma type LENR
> reaction for muon generation, and when the government finds out that muons
> are being produced in massive amounts, then the government will take over
> the LENR tech and produce a muon activated thorium based large scale
> centralized grid connected gigawatt level fission power station.
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 11:55 AM, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> If that is true then Rossi either lacks the ability to interpret his own
>> data or he intentionally misrepresented his data.
>>
>> Harry
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> You're probably right.   But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for
>>> some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by
>>> both sides to administer the test.
>>>
>>> On 7/10/17, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the
>>> device
>>> > in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is
>>> very
>>> > likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his
>>> claim.
>>> >
>>> > Harry
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> OJ Simpson...
>>> >>> > Obviously he was 

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

The gamma ray finding of MFMP was replicated within 48 hours by Hans
Biberian.   And then they just faded away onto whatever it is they've
been doing for 4 years.


On 7/10/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 8:03 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think the key is to just find nuclear products when you throw hydrogen
> and nickel together.   There is no chemical reaction that is supposed to
> lead to nuclear products.   3 years ago, MFMP found gamma rays and then
> just blithely started chasing ghosts.
>
> To keep such a risky public research project on-course would require that
> it constantly allow for the democratic, 'Open Source' equivalent of 'peer
> review'.
>
> I seems perhaps this component is what the MFMP is missing. Perhaps not. I
> barely follow this stuff, sadly.
> But I DO know political-economy more than most.
>
> More than Jed, for sure.
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

You sound like someone who doesn't want to see LENR succeed.   Seems
about the right position, for a communist.

On 7/11/17, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 7:12 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Mary Yugo said he was contacted by investors looking to verify Rossi.
> He told them what to test for, and Rossi never had anything to do with
> them.   The only way Rossi is going to find an investor now is to have the
> darned thing tested with true independence, like an investor bringing you
> along.   So this is a healthy thing.
>
>
>
> A significant portion of Humanity has other ideas about the health value of
> letting capitalist 'investors' run amok across the surface of the Planet --
> 'legally' or otherwise. Anyone seeing the involvement of vulture
> capitalists in heterodox fyzix research as being a 'healthy thing' -- given
> the wretched history of it all -- really should go see a doctor.
>
> Better to end up on Patreon, or somesuch.
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

That's the whole point of having an independent 3rd party.
Apparently Rossi has the ability to change reality perception when
he's around, similar to Steve Jobs.

On 7/11/17, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If that is true then Rossi either lacks the ability to interpret his own
> data or he intentionally misrepresented his data.
>
> Harry
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 3:55 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> You're probably right.   But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for
>> some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by
>> both sides to administer the test.
>>
>> On 7/10/17, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the
>> > device
>> > in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is
>> very
>> > likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his
>> claim.
>> >
>> > Harry
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>> OJ Simpson...
>> >>> > Obviously he was guilty.
>> >>> ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud.   You just agreed
>> >>> with
>> >>> the legal standard.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I cannot judge legal standards. By scientific standards and by common
>> >> sense standards he is guilty of fraud.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> > All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes.
>> >>> ***Bullshit.  Plenty of others have read the report and came to
>> >>> different conclusions than you did.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Not as far as I know. Some people such as Axil refuse to read the
>> report.
>> >> Others people claim they read it and reached different conclusions,
>> >> but
>> >> they have not given any reasons. A few are so gullible they believe
>> >> the
>> >> post hoc lies about invisible heat exchangers that do not show in
>> >> photographs. Such "conclusions" are so irrational they have no place
>> >> in
>> a
>> >> serious discussion.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>  At least his next intended victims
>> >>> > have the court docket to warn them off.
>> >>> ***Well if you were to write a point by point delineation of all the
>> >>> scientific claims that are fraud then his next "intended victims"
>> >>> would have that.
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> I have no idea what his next scheme will be. Perhaps it will be the
>> >> QuarkX? Rossi told Lewan in the interview that he is setting up in
>> Sweden
>> >> where people want to invest. I suppose that means he has begun a new
>> >> scam,
>> >> but maybe he made that up and there are no investors.
>> >>
>> >> - Jed
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

That would be just like him.

On 7/11/17, Jones Beene  wrote:
>
> Wait a minute. There is still Randell Mills to deal with, and he says he
> can not only heat up a cup of coffee but evaporate it in a burst of
> hydrinos in seconds. He has better credentials than any of us, and he
> has followers who are more loyal than Rossi's.
>
> Prediction: Very soon, Mills will acknowledge that his new device is
> producing radioactivity, BUT he will claim that actually he expected
> this outcome all along; and LENR is his from the start.
>
> He could be right. Bring it on, Randy... 
>
>
> Brian Ahern wrote:
>
>  > I agree with Frank's assessment.
>
>  > From: Frank Znidarsic ...  That's where this has all come to. No
> device was developed to heat a cup of coffee, as Mallove was requested
> to produce.  27 years later there is no cup of warm coffee.  I worked on
> this technology hard for some time.  I felt it was coming.  I am now
> embarrassed by my optimistic comments.
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Russ:

No one asked you to join this discussion.   You don't like it, just
ignore it.   Huge duhh factor.

On 7/11/17, Russ George <russ.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Doesn’t someone here have a toilet plunger to help the damned vortex flush
> out all the turds that are stuck here. This endless trollification by the
> unflushable malcontents that did not get their free feed in the trial are
> festering into a terrible stench. Give it a f*ckng break or at least go see
> your doctors and get some new meds, there are remarkably good meds for
> senile agitation these days.
>
>
>
> From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 9:03 PM
> To: Vortex
> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled
>
>
>
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com <mailto:kevmol...@gmail.com> > wrote:
>
>
>
> The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case.
>
>
>
> Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is
> the reason. It might be because they determined Rossi has no more money.
> There is no point to suing someone who cannot pay. Here is another possible
> reason. Lawyers tell me that it was mainly a contract dispute, and I.H.'s
> counter-suit regarding the contract was weak.
>
>
>
> I myself have no idea why they settled. However, I am sure the Penon report
> is not "credible" in this universe according to our laws of physics. It was
> a gross violation of thermodynamics, as Smith pointed out. Also because
> Florida is not located in a vacuum in outer space. I am pretty sure of
> that.
>
>
>
> Perhaps the people at I.H. worried that a jury might be as gullible as you
> are, and the jury might think the Florida could be in a vacuum, because what
> do those scientists know, anyway? They are a bunch of elitist know-it-alls
> with their "laws" of "physics." They are so sure of themselves, they think
> that when you take photo of a 15,000 pound machine with pipes running to the
> ceiling, the image has to show up in the camera! Why can't it be
> invisible??? Huh? You tell me! And it was equipped with an anti-gravity
> machine which is why the mezzanine didn't collapse. You didn't think of
> THAT, did you, Mr. Elite Scientist.
>
>
>
> - Jed
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Unless you took part in the lawyers' negotiations, you do not know that is
> the reason.
***You don't have to be involved at that level.   If the report was a
slam dunk either way it would have compelled the outcome of the case.
 It wasn't a slam dunk for Rossi enough for him to move forward to get
$89M and it wasn't a slam dunk enough for IH to keep in there.




  However, I am sure the Penon report
> is not "credible" in this universe according to our laws of physics. It was
> a gross violation of thermodynamics, as Smith pointed out. Also because
> Florida is not located in a vacuum in outer space. I am pretty sure of
> that.
***If it was that much of a slamdunk, then IH would have ridden it all
the way to the goal line.   They didn't.


>
> Perhaps the people at I.H. worried that a jury might be as gullible as you
> are, and the jury might think the Florida could be in a vacuum, because
> what do those scientists know, anyway?
***Apparently those scientists are as arrogant as you are but they
don't meet your 3rd grade qualification.


They are a bunch of elitist
> know-it-alls with their "laws" of "physics." They are so sure of
> themselves, they think that when you take photo of a 15,000 pound machine
> with pipes running to the ceiling, the image has to show up in the camera!
***Again, it should have been a slam dunk to hear you tell it.   But
it was NOT a slam dunk.


> Why can't it be invisible??? Huh? You tell me! And it was equipped with an
> anti-gravity machine which is why the mezzanine didn't collapse. You didn't
> think of THAT, did you, Mr. Elite Scientist.
***You make it sound so simple.   So much of a slam dunk.   If it were
that simple, that much of a slam dunk, IH wouldn't have settled.
There is a huge duhh factor here that any third grader can see.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

The report was credible enough for IH not to move forward on their case.

I'm glad to see you got a start on delineating all the scientific
charlatanism in that report and in the case.

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're probably right.   But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for
>> some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by
>> both sides to administer the test.
>>
>
> You mean the report that claims the laboratory was in a perfect vacuum, and
> the flow was EXACTLY the same, to the nearest 1,000 liters, for days on
> end.
>
> The report lacks credibility, to say the very least.
>
> - Jed
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/10/17, Jed Rothwell  wrote:


>
> I cannot judge legal standards.
***Then stop using a legal term.   It's like saying that by scientific
standards and by common sense standards your neighbor is guilty of
armed robbery.   If there were "scientific standards" to begin with,
we wouldn't be in this mess:  LENR would be ubiquitous, Hot Fusion
would be dead, some guys at MIT would be just now getting out of jail,
and we'd all be driving nonpolluting LENR cars.   When there are no
standards in place it's like a junkie complaining that a drug dealer
ripped him off--who's he gonna go to, the police?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t=j==s=web=3=rja=8=0ahUKEwi29OvZ3f_UAhUKS2MKHZa_BUkQFgg3MAI=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.insideedition.com%2Fheadlines%2F12185-police-woman-called-911-to-complain-about-her-drug-dealer=AFQjCNGC4fSNv4LfafSJ-RaV4tx2r9g64g

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

You're probably right.   But there is evidence he had a COP > 1 for
some length of time according to the report by the person chosen by
both sides to administer the test.

On 7/10/17, H LV <hveeder...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rossi was suing IH for millions of dollars, so he had to prove the device
> in Florida worked as he claimed. If the trial proceeded I think it is very
> likely that the preponderance of the evidence would not support his claim.
>
> Harry
>
> On Mon, Jul 10, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> OJ Simpson...
>>> > Obviously he was guilty.
>>> ***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud.   You just agreed with
>>> the legal standard.
>>>
>>
>> I cannot judge legal standards. By scientific standards and by common
>> sense standards he is guilty of fraud.
>>
>>
>>
>>> > All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes.
>>> ***Bullshit.  Plenty of others have read the report and came to
>>> different conclusions than you did.
>>>
>>
>> Not as far as I know. Some people such as Axil refuse to read the report.
>> Others people claim they read it and reached different conclusions, but
>> they have not given any reasons. A few are so gullible they believe the
>> post hoc lies about invisible heat exchangers that do not show in
>> photographs. Such "conclusions" are so irrational they have no place in a
>> serious discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>>>  At least his next intended victims
>>> > have the court docket to warn them off.
>>> ***Well if you were to write a point by point delineation of all the
>>> scientific claims that are fraud then his next "intended victims"
>>> would have that.
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea what his next scheme will be. Perhaps it will be the
>> QuarkX? Rossi told Lewan in the interview that he is setting up in Sweden
>> where people want to invest. I suppose that means he has begun a new
>> scam,
>> but maybe he made that up and there are no investors.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On 7/9/17, Jed Rothwell  wrote:
OJ Simpson...
> Obviously he was guilty.
***Then obviously Rossi is Not Guilty of Fraud.   You just agreed with
the legal standard.


> All I did was read the Penon report. That's all it takes.
***Bullshit.  Plenty of others have read the report and came to
different conclusions than you did.


 At least his next intended victims
> have the court docket to warn them off.
***Well if you were to write a point by point delineation of all the
scientific claims that are fraud then his next "intended victims"
would have that.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

 Jed Rothwell
5:36 PM (5 hours ago)



Nope. The legal system does not sue scientists for publishing fraudulent or
idiotic reports.
***The legal system brings its resources to bear upon scientists who scam
others with fraudulent reports.

 One reason is that no one can tell fools and frauds apart. When I first
saw Penon's data I though Penon and Rossi were fools, and I could see they
were copying data from one day to the next, which is borderline fraud, but
I never imagined they were engaged in wholesale fraud. The full report plus
the report from Murray are proof of that.
***You keep saying proof and you keep using the legal term 'fraud'.   If
you had proof of your neighbor committing armed robbery, the police would
round him up.   What you have is evidence that didn't even stand up in a
civil court.   It is far from proof and in fact it is proof that Rossi
could not be convicted of the crime.   So it's just you huffing and puffing
at this point.


If the legal system were to arrest scientists for stupid mistakes and bad
reports, most scientists would be in jail. As Bohr said, an expert is
someone who has made every possible mistake.
***They only go after those who use those stupid mistakes and deliberately
bad reports to scam investors.   That's what fraud is.   Not what you keep
saying it is.

The police also do not investigate people who pretend to have heat
exchangers and who do bad calorimetry.
***They would if it were proof of fraud.


 There are dozens of dishonest people selling fake over-unit engines
(perpetual motion machines). Even when they take large sums of money from
the public, the police do not bother them, as far as I know. Perhaps they
should, but they don't.
***As far as I know there have been some charlatan pseudoscientists put in
jail for defrauding the public.


  Kevmo: All the other stuff would be icing on the cake.   But Rossi is not
up on charges.   The standard of proof for civil cases (fraud in this case)
is "preponderance of evidence" and IH couldn't make the case.

Jed:  I don't know if they could or not.
***They settled!   That means they couldn't make the case!




The main point I want to make is that regardless of what the legal system
rules are, or preponderance of this or that, anyone with technical
knowledge can see from the Penon report that Rossi is a fraud.
***If that is such a strong case then IH would have had a slam dunk and
also the authorities would be rounding up Rossi as a fraud.


If you can't see that, you don't have technical knowledge. Or you blinded
by wishful thinking. Insofar as this is a technical debate based on
scientific & engineering laws, divorced from the legal system and its
standard of proof, there is no doubt Rossi is a liar and a fake.
***That's the problem with science.   Like when Al Gore said "there was no
controlling legal authority", in science there is no controlling authority
when someone is a liar and a fake.   For instance, when MIT fraudulently
changed their data to show a null result rather than a positive Anomalous
Heating Event.   There's no one to say:  "Those guys are frikken liars and
we're putting them in jail".   But such is not the case with the legal
community, and people are regularly put in jail for defrauding investors.
 So if I were you I'd start choosing a different term than fraud to
describe Rossi, maybe something like scientific charlatan, which is the
same term I would use for those MIT jerks.

 .

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

I think the key is to just find nuclear products when you throw hydrogen
and nickel together.   There is no chemical reaction that is supposed to
lead to nuclear products.   3 years ago, MFMP found gamma rays and then
just blithely started chasing ghosts.

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:32 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> As soon as they verify a LENR experiment that many who have the means can
>> do in our garages, the cat is out of the bag.
>>
>
> That may never happen. It may be that cold fusion is inherently difficult,
> like making a fuel cell or performing an appendectomy. We may never see a
> method that can be done in a garage by a non-expert. Let us hope cold
> fusion can succeed without this.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 4:29 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> ​
>
> The Penon report?!?
>
​***ALL of it.   The Penon report, the supposed heat exchanger, all of it.
  If the Penon report is as fraudulent as you make it out to  be, then
Rossi would be up on charges for that.   All the other stuff would be icing
on the cake.   But Rossi is not up on charges.   The standard of proof for
civil cases (fraud in this case) is "preponderance of evidence" and IH
couldn't make the case.  The standard of proof for criminal cases is
higher, "beyond a reasonable doubt".   So if you can't meet the lower
standard, you can't meet the higher standard.   Therefore, there is legal
proof that Rossi is NOT a fraud.  ​




> Either you haven't read it or your interpretation of it is the extreme
> opposite or what Murray, Smith and I think of it. I have never seen such
> blatant, in-your-face fraud. If this report does not convince you Rossi is
> a crook, nothing will.
>
​***If it is so blatant and in-your-face fraud, then Rossi should be up on
charges and IH should have pressed forward.   They didn't, because it is
neither blatant nor in-your-face.   ​


>
>
>
>> ​
>>
>
> You cannot "file charges" based on the laws of thermodynamics
>
​***I didn't say it was based on science, it was based upon LEGAL
principles.   The Legal case against Rossi is proof that he is not a fraud.
   If the scientific case is so blatant then you should write a paper on
it.   It would be easy, if you're so right.




> and an idiotic report that would fail a junior high school class.
>
​***These independent reports associated with Rossi have fooled PhD
physicists, not junior high schoolers.   Your exaggerations just don't meet
with reality on the ground.​




> It is not a crime to publish fake data.
>
​***It is a crime to use fake data to defraud investors.  Some of these
frauds who have pushed the envelope of fake data ended up in prison.   That
is where Rossi should be if what you are saying is the verifiable truth,
but such is not the case because all that stuff is tied up in a bow as
evidence sworn in, and the law is not pursuing it.  ​




> You would have to show intent and various legal proof that I do not
> understand.
>
​***If you don't understand it then you're just as bad as these people you
rail against for not reading the Penon report.   It is simple reasoning to
proceed from "preponderance of evidence" burden of proof having failed to
"beyond a reasonable doubt" obviously failing.   To see the whole thing in
reverse, just look at OJ Simpson.   The authorities failed to prove he
murdered 2 people even with extraordinarily strong DNAjklkjevidence,
but the civil suit found him to be guilty of causing their deaths.   If the
civil suit had come first and he was found not guilty, no one would have
moved forward on the criminal case.   ​




> I.H. apparently decided not to pursue the civil law suit. Since I know so
> little about the law, whatever their lawyers advised I would go along with.
> But that changes nothing about the scientific content of the report. It is
> fraudulent nonsense. I cannot imagine why you and others do not see this,
> but based on your reaction, I begin to see why the Flat Earth Society still
> exists.
>
​***Based on your reaction, you have succumbed to the emotion surrounding
this case.   If all that stuff is so provably fraudulent then IH would have
moved forward.   It is NOT provable.   ​My

​suggestion is to use your emotional state to generate something for
everyone to benefit from:  write a report delineating every instance of
scientific fraud entered into the docket as evidence.   If life gives you
lemons, make lemonade.  ​

>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

It is proof that he isn't a fraud.   All the evidence is there, tagged and
bagged, ready to go for the police to file charges.   All it takes is for
someone to drop a dime on Rossi.   Maybe you'll get some kind of reward for
it.

On Sun, Jul 9, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges.
>
>
> Only if it were a serious crime. Most crimes are not even investigated,
> for lack of police personnel. Also, the police would have to understand the
> report. I doubt many of them do. The large number of Rossi supporters who
> see nothing wrong with the report demonstrate that it is easy to bamboozle
> the public with fake data.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: Fw: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

[Kevin O'Malley]

The classic case is the Aztecs.   They were taken out over a few short
months in a military engagement from a vastly outnumbered force, not by
disease.

On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 5:20 AM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> wrote:

> The Spanish had cholera. It was 100 times as effective as gunpowder.
>
>
> ------
> *From:* Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, July 7, 2017 7:04 PM
> *To:* vortex-l
> *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned
>
> One of the cool things about cold fusion in a 500 year outlook is that it
> makes for a very ineffective weapon.   Even fire is a more effective weapon.
>
> You know why potatoes became a crop of choice in Europe?   Because when a
> king's army sieged your castle and burned your crops, there were still
> potatoes in the ground that you could eat and you wouldn't starve to death.
>
>
> Why did the Spanish overtake a continent with a few thousand men while the
> Vikings were vanquished 500 years earlier?   Because the Spanish had
> FIREarms.   They had harnessed gunpowder (for evil purposes, albeit).
>
> In 500 years there will be LENR cars, widespread cheap desalination, and
> Cold Fusion powered spacecraft.
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If I succeed at promoting cold fusion and it becomes generally used, I
>>> shall play an important role in changing the world more than Marxism and
>>> Capitalism combined.
>>>
>>
>> That sounds like hyperbole, but I mean it. I think that Marxism and
>> capitalism are both on their way out. As we have discussed here, I think
>> robots and intelligent computers will compel us to adapt a new form of
>> economy that is neither capitalist or communist.
>>
>> Capitalism began around the year 1500, gradually replacing feudalism.
>> Communism began around 1850. Both are now in their twilight. I expect that
>> by 2100 we will have a new economic system. Unlike every previous system it
>> will not mainly depend on the exchange of human labor for goods and
>> services. It remains to be seen what it will be like. I hope it will be
>> better for everyone, and better for the ecology, but you never know how
>> things will turn out.
>>
>> If cold fusion succeeds I expect it will last much longer than 500 years,
>> and ultimately it will have a larger impact than capitalism had. If the
>> human race survives for millions of years -- as I hope it will -- over the
>> next few million years cold fusion should have roughly the same impact as
>> the discovery of fire. Unless something better is discovered.
>>
>> People who have not read history have the notion that institutions such
>> as capitalism, nation states, universities, corporations and so on have
>> been part of society forever and they will always be with us. Actually,
>> they are recent inventions and there is no reason to think they will
>> continue centuries into the future. They will continue as long as people
>> find them useful.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

If Rossi's report proves he is a thief then he would be up on charges.

On Friday, July 7, 2017, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> Axil Axil  > wrote:
>
> I don't remember writing a post that personally attacked Jed.
>>
>
> Yeah? Who the hell are you accusing of "spin, astroturfing and propaganda
> produced by I.H." if not me? Who else? If you are not accusing me, you are
> accusing other people who support I.H., which is just as bad. You have not
> even READ THE EVIDENCE and yet you are sure that we are spinning
> propaganda!
>
> Whoever you are attacking with these false allegations, take it elsewhere.
>
>
>
>> Both Rossi and IH descended into a war of words, IH more effectively that
>> Rossi.
>>
>
> Bullshit. Rossi is a fraud who tried to steal $267 million from I.H. There
> was no "war of words" because I.H. said practically nothing during the
> entire lawsuit. Nothing! All they did was defend their interests.
>
>
>
>> I hope that the gatekeepers and prominent actors in LENR will guard
>> against any damage that IH is tempted to do to LENR in the same way that
>> they did regarding Defkalion.
>>
>
> I.H. has done a lot of good supporting many researchers. The only person
> who has hurt cold fusion in the last few years is Rossi. YOU can't judge
> because you don't even have the guts to look at Rossi's own report which
> proves he is a thief.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

The Gamma Ray thing happened in 2013, that was the link I posted.   I am
glad to see someone at MFMP taking this seriously.

On Friday, July 7, 2017, Mark Jurich  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> Yes, we (MFMP) did pursue the “Gamma Ray Thing” (we made an
> unsuccessful replication attempt, and I myself have not given up on it),
> and we cannot say there was excess heat, because the apparent excess heat
>   was less than the error of the crude calorimeter measurement…
>
>
>
> … I am still trying to convince the group to take another crack at it,
> with a more sophisticated radiation measurement that requires some building
> and a small amount of funding.
>
>
>
> Kevin writes:
>
> That means you have not been pursuing it.   It's been 4 years and
> basically no mention on the MFMP blog.
>
>
>
> I assume here that “you” means MFMP.  MFMP’s Bob Higgins is currently
> performing a series of automated experiments (at least 2 are completed)
> which utilize a NaI Detector (as well as other detectors), also looking for
> the “Gamma Ray Thing” (X-ray signal).  As far as I’m aware, nothing has
> shown up, so far.  Have you been following the experiments on LENR-Forum?
> Each experiment not showing any signal, is interesting information.  We
> still don’t know if the signal could have been an artifact unless we
> reproduce it…
>
>
>
> The Signal (or Gamma Ray Thing), occurred in February of 2016.  The
> replication attempt ended in late May, 2016.  The analysis ended about a
> month after that.  It’s been about 12 months since then. During those 12
> months, MFMP has spent time building Neutron Detectors, beefing up the
> experiment automation for the subsequent experiment (not a replication
> attempt but using the same NaI Detector setup) using the built-up equipment
> (reported on QuantumHeat.Org, but no signal seen), prepping for the Me356 &
> Ecco Tests and performing the Me356 Test (amongst other things)…
>
>
>
> … If “you” meant myself, I’ve been spending every bit of my available time
> in those 12 months, working on a follow-up experiment with a better shot at
> seeing the signal once again, if the group doesn’t see it. I suppose that
> there will come a time when the group realizes that this is the direction
> we should go in, and we all work towards that goal.  In the meantime,  I
> think it’s important for me to give MFMP the space/time it needs to pursue
> other directions it deems as fruitful, until we are all back on the same
> page.  If not, I am happy to continue towards the goal of increasing the
> success of seeing the signal when we are ready to do it.  If there is
> anyone else out there interested in helping out, I am quite open to any
> suggestions and can put you to good use, if desired!  It’s going to require
> yet another round of funding, I’m afraid…
>
>
>
> Kevin further writes:
>
> Even if there is no excess heat, it still was the most promising lead
> -- there is actually an endothermic reaction that lets out radiation.   The
> fact you can throw H2 and Nickel atoms together and end up with a nuclear
> product would change EVERYTHING.
>
>
>
> I agree that this was the most promising lead so far and is the reason I
> have not lost sight of it (and won’t).  I see this signal (if real) as a
> precursor to excess heat, or a bifurcation that leads to no excess heat.
> We have the resources to understand it, if we can only replicate it.  We’ve
> taken a few shots at replication under different conditions using similar
> detection, without success.  Either the signal was an artefact, we need to
> improve the recipe leading up to the event or we need to build a better
> mouse trap.
>
>
>
> Mark Jurich
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

The last time a battle of this magnitude took place, it was the Wright
brothers and all the slimy weasels like Curtiss who were trying to steal
their IP.   It went on for a long time with no end in sight until the
guvmint stepped in for the sake of the war effort in Europe, so we could
make airplanes.   I don't see those dynamics in play any more, what with
the advent of nuclear weapons.  There hasn't been an existential war for
America since 1945, which ended coincidentally, with nuclear weapons.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 3:57 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 6:51 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yup, this is just the first battle in the patent wars.   It will last
>> decades until some billionaire steps in.
>>
>
> Oligarchic 'Capitalism' (parasitism) does not HAVE decades.
>
> But maybe none of the rest of us do, either.
>
>
>
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

[Kevin O'Malley]

One of the cool things about cold fusion in a 500 year outlook is that it
makes for a very ineffective weapon.   Even fire is a more effective weapon.

You know why potatoes became a crop of choice in Europe?   Because when a
king's army sieged your castle and burned your crops, there were still
potatoes in the ground that you could eat and you wouldn't starve to death.


Why did the Spanish overtake a continent with a few thousand men while the
Vikings were vanquished 500 years earlier?   Because the Spanish had
FIREarms.   They had harnessed gunpowder (for evil purposes, albeit).

In 500 years there will be LENR cars, widespread cheap desalination, and
Cold Fusion powered spacecraft.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> I wrote:
>
>
>> If I succeed at promoting cold fusion and it becomes generally used, I
>> shall play an important role in changing the world more than Marxism and
>> Capitalism combined.
>>
>
> That sounds like hyperbole, but I mean it. I think that Marxism and
> capitalism are both on their way out. As we have discussed here, I think
> robots and intelligent computers will compel us to adapt a new form of
> economy that is neither capitalist or communist.
>
> Capitalism began around the year 1500, gradually replacing feudalism.
> Communism began around 1850. Both are now in their twilight. I expect that
> by 2100 we will have a new economic system. Unlike every previous system it
> will not mainly depend on the exchange of human labor for goods and
> services. It remains to be seen what it will be like. I hope it will be
> better for everyone, and better for the ecology, but you never know how
> things will turn out.
>
> If cold fusion succeeds I expect it will last much longer than 500 years,
> and ultimately it will have a larger impact than capitalism had. If the
> human race survives for millions of years -- as I hope it will -- over the
> next few million years cold fusion should have roughly the same impact as
> the discovery of fire. Unless something better is discovered.
>
> People who have not read history have the notion that institutions such as
> capitalism, nation states, universities, corporations and so on have been
> part of society forever and they will always be with us. Actually, they are
> recent inventions and there is no reason to think they will continue
> centuries into the future. They will continue as long as people find them
> useful.
>
> - Jed
>
>

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

[Kevin O'Malley]

There is one conclusion that can be drawn.  Rossi submitted all kinds of
information to the court docket, under oath.   The claim against him was
fraud.

The legal burden of proof in a civil case is "preponderance of the
evidence".   IH obviously couldn't even meet that level of proof.

The legal burden of proof in a criminal case is much higher, "beyond a
reasonable doubt".   So if IH couldn't meet the lower standard there is no
chance Rossi is going to be prosecuted for fraud with all that juicy
evidence.  In effect, it is legal proof that Rossi is not a criminal fraud.


On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Alain Sepeda  wrote:

> from recent data, taking any conclusion on Rossi's claims is at best
> risky, and to be honest, baseless.
>
> 2017-07-07 3:01 GMT+02:00 Axil Axil :
>
>> What the Rossi experiments has shown over many years is that LENR in a
>> lattice is not workable because the reaction cannot be controlled. This
>> lack of control makes the E-Cat technology untenable. Rossi has
>> realized this and Rossi is will to let this knowhow fadeaway. The LENR
>> reaction wants to operate at the boiling point of the metal lattice
>> (nickel) which is 3000K. LENR is based on activation of nanoparticles in a
>> dusty plasma. Rossi has struggled to control the LENR reaction at low
>> temperatures but he always fails because LENR would invariably get to 3000K
>> and meltdown his reactor. So Rossi finally decided to use reactor
>> structural material that doesn't melt at 3000K. This material must be an
>> insulator that does not melt at 3000K. Mills has stumbled on the same
>> reaction and his SunCell runs at the vapor point of silver at only 2200C.
>> Mills has solved the meltdown problem is another way, he justs runs
>> everything as a liquid without any containment. Holmlid is on to the same
>> LENR mechanism. There is nothing unusual with metalized hydrogen. In the
>> LENR reaction, metalized hydrogen acts like any
>> other metallic nanoparticle.
>>
>>
>> Using a lattice for LENR is a losing proposition. The dusty plasma
>> approach to the LENR reaction is the only way to go. I beleive that Rossi
>> has settled on a high temperature  tube material that works: boron nitride,
>> a transparent isolator whose melting point is 3000C.
>>
>>
>> Alan Smith wrote:
>> 
>>
>> *I do remember. BTW, eye witness accounts claim that the tube itself is
>> transparent, and the electrodes bright silver colour. nothing is visible in
>> the gap. I have no idea about sealing or anything else - except that the
>> plasma can apparently be made 'any colour you like'. The example shown was
>> glowing **yellow** when energised for short periods. That's all the info
>> I have.*
>>
>>
>> Unlike most other observers of Rossi, I know that the QuarkX works
>> because its reported behavior fits in with my understanding of how LENR
>> works.
>>
>>
>> For example:
>>
>>
>> New research into polariton condensates has revealed a side emission
>> channel that produces light whose frequency is proportional to the density
>> of the polariton aggregation...for example, the dense polariton condinsate
>> produces a higher frequency light (blue) and a less dense condinsate will
>> produce red light. Rossi must have a way to control the density of the
>> polariton population.
>>
>>
>> See
>>
>>
>> https://phys.org/news/2016-06-…einstein-condensates.html
>> 
>>
>>
>> They tackled this problem by highly exciting exciton-polaritons, which
>> are particle-like excitations in a semiconductor systems and formed by
>> strong coupling between electron-hole pairs and photons. *They observed
>> high-energy side-peak emission *that cannot be explained by two
>> mechanisms known to date: Bose-Einstein condensation of exciton-polaritons,
>> nor conventional semiconductor lasing driven by the optical gain from
>> unbound electron hole plasma.
>>
>>
>>
>> The details on this side channel are here
>>
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/srep25655
>> High-energy side-peak emission of exciton-polariton condensates in high
>> density regime
>>
>> In summary, eyewitness reports of QuarkX operating characteristics fit my
>> technical expectations perfectly in very many ways.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Jones Beene  wrote:
>>
>>> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
>>> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
>>> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
>>> other than dismissal, which is final."
>>>
>>> No agreements were included... so unless they present something
>>> otherwise in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No
>>> money changes hands.
>>>
>>> As for the future of the 

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Rossi is the latest LENR guy who has $signs in his eyes.   Patterson was a
solid example of that.   I like the hope that MFMP offers to circumvent
that problem.   As soon as they verify a LENR experiment that many who have
the means can do in our garages, the cat is out of the bag.

MIT Professor Hagelstein was going to sell NANORs for a few thousand
dollars but that appears to have gone nowhere.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:02 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Celani detected gamma rays when Rossi's reactor got started, and Rossi
>> came down hard on him for bringing a Geiger counter.   So yes, there was a
>> Nuclear event occuring in Rossi's apparatus for at least that short time.
>>
>
>
> Right. And the heat. And the steam. All the witnesses and glowing (pun
> intended) reports. Etc. So it is most reasonable to assume that Rossi did
> not get as far as he did by simple fraudulent calculation, afterthought --
> as some people here so easily now assume (no doubt because it simplifies
> their mental processes on the subject into convenient, manichean black &
> white imagery).
>
> And so why then, is 'LENR' -- cold fusion -- a dead letter, now..? If it
> such a real, material phenomenon?
>
> All this proprietary secrecy is what is *really* leaving everyone in the
> lurch, here. And it amazes (uh, not really) that so many people here just
> do not want to draw the proper conclusions about involving 'private
> interests' in basic scientific research -- simply because money is
> otherwise so very hard to come by, in this Neoliberal age of oligarchic
> plundering of our entire society.
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I with the crook will be prevented to be a nuisance again...
>>>> whoever you think it is (I have an opinion).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I truly doubt matters are that simple.
>>>
>>> Was there, or was there not, cold fusion occurring, in Rossi's
>>> apparatus? At any time?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

 … I am still trying to convince the group to take another crack at it,
with a more sophisticated radiation measurement that requires some building
and a small amount of funding.
***That means you have not been pursuing it.   It's been 4 years and
basically no mention on the MFMP blog.

Even if there is no excess heat, it still was the most promising lead --
there is actually an endothermic reaction that lets out radiation.   The
fact you can throw H2 and Nickel atoms together and end up with a nuclear
product would change EVERYTHING.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Yup, this is just the first battle in the patent wars.   It will last
decades until some billionaire steps in.

On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> As produced by IH, the spin, astroturfing and propaganda that LENR has
> seen is just a foretaste of the effort that will be put forward by the
> oil/gas/coal/wind/solar industries when LENR goes public. Grid yourself for
> the storms ahead. Jeremiah 1:17 You therefore gird up your loins, and
> arise, and speak to them all <http://biblehub.com/jeremiah/1-17.htm>
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 2:18 PM, David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> This entire episode leaves me with a sour taste within my mouth.
>> Perhaps it is time to take a rest from researching LENR until matters
>> improve.  So much hope dashed!
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
>> To: Vortex <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
>> Sent: Wed, Jul 5, 2017 6:20 pm
>> Subject: Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled
>>
>> Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If Rossi has managed to be the great magician that his detractors claim,
>> his next set of investors might think about bringing a thermometer to the
>> test.
>>
>>
>> No can do. He invited me to a test. I said I would bring a thermometer. *
>> He told me I would not be allowed to do that. So I never went.
>>
>> It does not take a master magician to fool people when you do not allow
>> them to do elementary confirmations of your claims. However, Rossi did not
>> fool people as much as you might think. He did not begin to fool the people
>> from NASA. The people at I.H. were on to him long before the 1-year test
>> began, as you see in the case file depositions. Rossi and his supporters
>> claim that I.H. suddenly refused to pay after the test ended, and they were
>> supportive before that. I know for a fact that is not true. They complained
>> about him long before that.
>>
>> - Jed
>>
>>
>> * I was also planning to bring a liter graduated cylinder and some other
>> tools to confirm the calorimetry. Rossi refused to allow independent
>> measures of any parameter, so that was that. The late Jim Patterson also
>> tried to stop me from measuring the flow rate and temperature. I never
>> trusted him again. He changed his mind and agreed to let me do it. Then he
>> distributed my report without permission in his PR package! A class act.
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Status Quo Ante Bellum, as I predicted.   It is a mystery why IH didn't
accept this offer a long time ago.

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Jed Rothwell  wrote:

> The judge issued an "order of dismissal." It says "this matter is
> dismissed with prejudice," "all parties shall bear their own fees and
> costs" and "all pending motions are denied as moot."
>
> This is Item 333, here:
>
> https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/0BzKtdce19-wyb1RxOTF6c2NtZkk
>

Re: [Vo]:Rossi versus Darden trial settled

[Kevin O'Malley]

Frustratingly, they never pursued the Gamma ray thing.   They just dropped
it without explanation.

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:43 PM, Axil Axil <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:

> A gamma ray burst was detected in a MFMP experiment just before excess
> heat began. So yes, a nuclear event occurred in the MFMP's apparatus for at
> least that short time.
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 8:57 PM, Kevin O'Malley <kevmol...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Celani detected gamma rays when Rossi's reactor got started, and Rossi
>> came down hard on him for bringing a Geiger counter.   So yes, there was a
>> Nuclear event occuring in Rossi's apparatus for at least that short time.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 3:20 PM, Che <comandantegri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 12:55 PM, Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I with the crook will be prevented to be a nuisance again...
>>>> whoever you think it is (I have an opinion).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I truly doubt matters are that simple.
>>>
>>> Was there, or was there not, cold fusion occurring, in Rossi's
>>> apparatus? At any time?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: [Vo]:Interest in cold fusion has waned

[Kevin O'Malley]

 There was a software package called "cold fusion" which can obscure the
results as well as the interest.  LENR needs to repackage their name.
Maybe something like Anomalous Heating Event.

Re: [Vo]:Picking up the pieces

[Kevin O'Malley]

Abd was speculating just like the rest of us.  The most probable outcome
was Status Quo Ante Bellum, but Rossi was focused on getting his IP back.
So he probably did so, since IH supposedly considered it worthless.

That's kind of weird how one side considers something worthless while the
other side considers something worthwhile but the side that thinks it's
worthless spends 5-10X in lawyer fees to keep the worthless thing.Just
one of the things that didn't jibe in this case.

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jones Beene  wrote:

> According to Abd... "All claims dropped on both sides. It is as if the
> suit was never filed. All parties bear their own costs. The action of the
> Agreement was the consent of counsel to settlement without any court order
> other than dismissal, which is final."
>
> No agreements were included... so unless they present something otherwise
> in a joint statement, IH retains the original E-Cat License. No money
> changes hands.
>
> As for the future of the litigants, it looks like IH paid about $11
> million ++ for a License which according to them is worthless insofar as it
> was never shown to produce excess heat. Add to that the attorney fees and
> we see why many observers consider IH to be the big loser in this.
>
> That assumes the IP is really worthless, but it may have value in a
> surprising way, even if Rossi could never make it work. Here is the granted
> patent, and there are a number of applications not granted.
>
> https://www.google.com/patents/US9115913
>
> Darden raised much more than his losses on the Rossi fiasco and there is a
> small chance that he could make lemonade out of the Rossi lemons, using
> some of it. An interesting development in all of this will be the course
> that IH takes from here on with the remaining money. They are known to have
> been funding others in LENR all along.
>
> Of course IH could abandon the field altogether, but maybe they have a
> vision which transcends Rossigate. Possibly the best thing that could
> happen is for Randell Mills to demonstrate strong gain in that SunCell
> device. If it turns out that Mills device is arguably nuclear - it will not
> be covered by the hydrino IP. There have already been "inside" rumors that
> recent delays in the "Mills' Roadshow" are due to radioactivity showing up.
> This is expected in LENR but not in hydrino-tech and it could change the IP
> landscape.
>
> Footnote. Rossi's IP covers "Group 10 catalysts" which are nickel,
> palladium and platinum. It does not cover silver, which is being used by
> Mills and is Group 11. Silver is easily activated and perhaps it is
> activated by dense hydrogen. Mills' IP would not cover nuclear reactions.
> This puts him in a bind. If silver is required, but becomes activated, then
> there is an IP storm brewing.
>
> If I were advising Darden, it would be to look at quickly expanding the IP
> to fill the gap which exists when Mills can no longer hide the
> radioactivity of the SunCell.
>
>
>