RE: [Vo]:Comments by Duncan, Celani at ICCF16
Thanks to Jed for the update. There are lots of Monday morning quarterbacks around today, so hopefully a few serious ones, with expertise in a very narrow field have focused on saving-the-world from OPEC, instead of a hyped up game that only fan-boys will remember next week. (apologies to cheese-heads). Consider this detail: Rossi told [Celani] we can't let you take a gamma spectrum because that will tell you exactly what reactions are going on, and we cannot reveal that information until we can get a patent. That remark alone is revealing, isn't it! Comment: Revealing ?? well, not really or should I say yes and no. I hope that experts will weigh-in on this detail - of precisely what reactions could possibly have turned up as an obvious signature - one which is truly revealing. Assuming everything else reported by Levi is true - that the reactor was lead shielded and that a positron annihilation meter was allowed, any potential revelation poses a number of difficult questions. We can assume that positrons are out (did not register) and that low energy betas are out (would not get through lead anyway) that alphas are out - yet the signature that Rossi wants hidden is obvious enough on a handheld meter that even if was known, it would given something away in the patenting situation. This pretty much leaves by default the 2.45 MeV signature (for D-D fusion) as the most obvious one which he would not want to share. BUT DEUTERIUM WAS NOT USED. So yes, that one is strange enough to be revealing if it were seen, but the probability is near zero. Are there any others even close (besides 23.5 MeV) ? Problem with any know signature for fusion is that prior art in LENR going back to 1989 has most reactions so well covered that it is almost irrelevant to include it in a patent. And moreover - the known signatures for hydrogen fusion would already include the positron annihilation which did not register. The nickel-to-copper scenario has literally dozens of lesser spectra, none of which are revealing. On his blog, Rossi has already listed the nickel-copper spectra and finding one would help his credibility - not hurt. Bottom line: what signature, even if fully known, could be so revealing that it would really matter for a patent which is already filed? Jones From: Jed Rothwell Rob Duncan was supposed to give one of the keynote addresses. Unfortunately, the blizzard in the U.S. shut down Chicago and he was unable to come. He e-mailed his comments and they were read by Melich. They were excellent. I hope to get a copy soon. Anyway, one thing he said was that the heat in many of these experiments is definitely real. I think he also said it is definitely not chemical..
RE: [Vo]:Comments by Duncan, Celani at ICCF16
* Bottom line: what signature, even if fully known, could be so revealing that it would really matter for a patent which is already filed? OK - delayed flash of the old memory banks . . yes, there is one detail from the recent past that does come to mind, which might show up as revealing. Anyone who follows LENR would have known. But it is relative to the Rusi affair at Purdue (will not attempt to spell the last name, but you know what I am referring to). In that sonofusion experiment, the reactor was seeded with a small amount of radioactive isotope emitter. I think it was californium but it does not matter, but whether it was fully disclosed or not became the issue. The purpose of the 'seed' was as a trigger. My personal belief is that a small seed (tiny - micrograms) can alter the probability field for QM in such a massive way that gigantic effects will follow - but that was not exactly Rusi's claim. He merely found that it worked, and he may or may not have adequately disclosed it up front, depending on who's side you are on. No one doubts that the end effect on the sonofusion neutron emission was many orders of magnitude more than the seed could have accounted for ( 4 orders more, if memory serves). Anyway, moving on - could Rossi have seeded his reactor in the same way? Yes, that would be revealing ! Many medical tracer isotopes would have been available for this purpose. The probability field for QM is poorly understood. However, as a practical matter, why not include it in the patent to begin with? This reaffirms the belief of many of us who read the patent in the context of thousands of other patents over the past 50 years in energy - that Rossi's is among the poorest drafted patents of all time, and in the end, it will provide him zero protection anyway (at least in the USA). The irony is that adding a seed to a Focardi style experiment could be patentable in itself - so WHY NOT PATENT IT FROM THE START? After all, this could be his one and only big advance. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Comments by Duncan, Celani at ICCF16
I would SO love to get a spectrum to analyse - along with detector details, of course. I really think that would tell a better story. On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote: Ø Bottom line: what signature, even if fully known, could be so revealing that it would really matter for a patent which is already filed? OK – delayed flash of the old memory banks … … yes, there is one detail from the recent past that does come to mind, which might show up as “revealing”. Anyone who follows LENR would have known. But it is relative to the “Rusi affair” at Purdue (will not attempt to spell the last name, but you know what I am referring to). In that sonofusion experiment, the reactor was “seeded” with a small amount of radioactive isotope emitter. I think it was californium but it does not matter, but whether it was fully disclosed or not became the issue. The purpose of the ‘seed’ was as a trigger. My personal belief is that a small seed (tiny - micrograms) can alter the “probability field” for QM in such a massive way that gigantic effects will follow - but that was not exactly Rusi’s claim. He merely found that it worked, and he may or may not have adequately disclosed it up front, depending on who’s side you are on. No one doubts that the end effect on the sonofusion neutron emission was many orders of magnitude more than the seed could have accounted for ( 4 orders more, if memory serves). Anyway, moving on - could Rossi have seeded his reactor in the same way? Yes, that would be revealing ! Many medical tracer isotopes would have been available for this purpose. The probability field for QM is poorly understood. However, as a practical matter, why not include it in the patent to begin with? This reaffirms the belief of many of us who read the patent in the context of thousands of other patents over the past 50 years in energy - that Rossi’s is among the poorest drafted patents of all time, and in the end, it will provide him zero protection anyway (at least in the USA). The irony is that adding a “seed” to a Focardi style experiment could be patentable in itself – so WHY NOT PATENT IT FROM THE START? After all, this could be his one and only big advance. Jones
Re: [Vo]:Comments by Duncan, Celani at ICCF16
At 08:58 AM 2/7/2011, Jed Rothwell wrote: Celani's description of the demo was more critical than his discussion with me, yesterday. He was quite upset that they did not let him make nuclear measurements, and I suspect that has colored his thinking. Rossi told him we can't let you take a gamma spectrum because that will tell you exactly what reactions are going on, and we cannot reveal that information until we can get a patent. That remark alone is revealing, isn't it! I don't trust anything Rossi says; once the fraud possibility exists, as it does from many appearances, nothing can be taken at face value, everything must be independently verified. Rossi, if not a fraud, is acting very suspiciously, without a clear non-fraud reason for it. Obviously, if there were suspicious gamma, this would be a nuclear reaction of some kind (though possible, perhaps, a fake with some hot radioisotope inside. Not easy to do, and I don't have the knowledge to quickly come up with a possibility.) On the fraud theory, Rossi prohibited the gamma spectrum measurements to increase the appearance of a nuclear reaction! After all, if it produced no gammas, why not allow the measurements? And if it is producing gammas, then we have nuclear right at the tip of our tongues. If it's assumed that Rossi's purpose is publicity at this point -- and isn't it, rather openly? -- then this fits perfectly. And if the patent is denied? If Rossi applies for a patent, it's denied because he hasn't satisfied the requirements of patents, that is adequate disclosure for someone skilled in the art to produce a working device, he's not protected. Failure to disclose, here, could be destroying his patent rights, not protecting them. If the patent were granted, he'd be protected, from the time of filing, as to any subsequent work by others. So he's playing the game as if the patent will not be granted. He expects that it will not be granted, and, I suspect, he filed it only to gain publicity. Had he seriously desired a patent, he would have made adequate disclosure, from the beginning. Contrary to what you've said, Jed, this doesn't look good. All that it might mean is that Rossi faked a demonstration, well enough to cause some experts to make some noises. Experts will not -- and should not -- speculate on fraud, unless they clearly identify it. They would be expected to couch their comments with plenty of caveats -- assuming that input power was accurately measured, etc. What I've seen from the experts who have reviewed this is such as to make me think that, if there was no fraud, Rossi is working on something huge in import. But there is a big caveat, for two little letters: if.
RE: [Vo]:Comments by Duncan, Celani at ICCF16
From: albedo5 I would SO love to get a spectrum to analyse - along with detector details, of course. I really think that would tell a better story. One thing which might be helpful for future analysis, or in any experiment to confirm Rossi, even without his assistance - is to compile a short list of commonly available medical tracers or other candidate isotopes which could have been used. Criteria: must have decent half life, must be commercially available, must show up through thin lead shielding. Here are a few (with signatures): 1)Californium 252 (used by Rusi) 6.22 MeV 2)Americium 242 (used in smoke detectors etc) 5.6 MeV 3)Radium 226 (watch dials) 4.8 MeV Americium is a prime candidate so far. It is essentially cheap if you go to garage sales where smoke detectors can be found for a buck each. Now I see a bunch of (probably expensive) candidates on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiopharmaceutical I think the enhanced probability - which would be triggered by seeding with micrograms of Americium would be applicable to Fran's posting just now on QED, but it may also apply to other M.O.. Jones
