In reply to Jones Beene's message of Tue, 10 May 2011 15:38:31 -0700:
Hi,
Good work Robin!
However, would you not agree with me that this reaction, however desirable,
is unlikely due to VB finding zero gammas?
Jones
Little less likely than a n-B10 reaction.
It has the additional benefit that
I wrote:
Local radioactivity in Sapporo has risen significantly above normal
background, sometimes an order of magnitude. Not enough to be dangerous but
enough to measure easily.
I should have said local radioactivity has at times risen . . . It is not
permanent. I think it is back to
Harry and all,
One more point regarding a hypothetical proton-only energy release
mechanism, in the context of Rossi - one where we want to find an energetic
reaction that produces no radioactivity; but we know that actual proton
fusion would not fit the measurements, and that the proton does not
At 12:29 PM 5/8/2011, Terry Blanton wrote:
Our favorite blogger implies
today that UoB is about to speak . . .
or, at least, that's how I interpreted it.
http://22passi.blogspot.com/
If it purrs like a duck . . .
No hint of a University of Bolgna report at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nURJGTEyNAgfeature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxejzUCeSYofeature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nqa2fbDjwhw
Kind of nifty to have someone highlight sentences from the articles and whatnot.
Hello group,
On a thread about Rossi-Focardi's Energy Catalyzer in the Italian forum
EnergeticAmbiente.it [1], skeptic users are puzzled by a statement
coming from people involved in the latest E-Cat calorimetry measurements
(it's assumed it's from either Rossi or Levi), which in English
Andrea Rossi
May 10th, 2011 at 3:57 PM
http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=488cpage=2#comment-38124
Dear Mr Fabian Schifter:
You can write to this blog, I read it more times a day.
Warm regards,
A.R.
- - - -
Gilbert Schmidt
May 10th, 2011 at 7:00 PM
Starting last week, I have
I skimmed that one too quickly :
I due time we will make a press conference,
when the 1 MW plant in the concern of our USA Customer will be in operation.
Does that mean a 1MW USA plant? Or that the
At 11:05 PM 5/10/2011, Mark Iverson wrote:
Abd wrote:
Well, if it were that easy to make neutrons, we'd be making them
all the time.
Perhaps not... Spectroscopy is everywhere and its only specific
wavelengths of light that are
absorbed/emitted. What if the conditions in the lattice are such
From memory only, I thought I had read a couple of months ago that Rossi
is making a 1 MW plant for Defkalion, and then one for a customer in
Florida. Anyone else remember something like this?
Craig Haynie
Manchester, NH
On Wed, 2011-05-11 at 11:30 -0700, Alan J Fletcher wrote:
I skimmed that
At 11:52 PM 5/10/2011, you wrote:
The same personality trait which shows up as sloppiness is also what
makes him say low level heat is useless! Forget about anything less
than a kilowatt! He does not want to fool around with
difficult-to-measure reactions that are only of scientific interest.
As far as I remember R. stated that he is assembling the 1MW plant in USA
and then he will ship it to Greece. But who knows ? Day by day he seems to
change his mind.
It's quite hard to keep track of the story
Just out of curiosity ... what is the current count of e-kitties built so
far ?
At 01:36 AM 5/11/2011, Joshua Cude wrote:
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:53 PM, Wm. Scott Smith
mailto:scott...@hotmail.comscott...@hotmail.com wrote:
Bohr orbit. It takes energy -- a lot of energy, apparently, -- to
bring an electron and a proton into close proximity.
Actually it takes the
I think itb is even more interesting how many E-cats were
combined were linked together and tested for continuous
operation-successfully? The maximum number of e-felines
in a *clutter of cats*.
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Andrea Selva
andreagiuseppe.se...@gmail.com wrote:
As far as I
I thought the plc control (blue box) were being built in Florida, and
the 1 mw unit would also be tested in Florida then shipped to Greece.
All from memory so this information could be incorrect
On May 11, 2011, at 1:41 PM, Craig Haynie cchayniepub...@gmail.com
wrote:
From memory only, I
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/sts/staff/chang/boiling/index.htm
The Myth of the Boiling Point
Hasok Chang
Department of Science and Technology Studies
University College London
18 October 2007
Introduction
We all learn at school that pure water always boils at 100°C (212°F), under
normal
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Both, yes. I've argued Smaller is Better, but only for exploratory
research. Once you have something that you can reproduce, then making
it bigger and stronger becomes the new goal. You *start* with the
small system and explore the hell out of it, you don't just
BTW the page The Myth of the Boiling Point
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/sts/staff/chang/boiling/index.htm
was created when Hasok Chang worked at University College London.
He now works at the University of Cambridge.
http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/people/chang/
Harry
- Original Message
From:
For the absent-minded amongst us - Quantum flubber would be a hypothetical
ball of very small radius which bounces higher and higher on every iteration
for a few femtoseconds and then disappears.
Some years ago, physicists at IBM demonstrated a version of it in a famous
computer model... well...
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 9 May 2011 11:49:36 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
However, it still needs energy to tunnel into the boron nucleus - which, in
QM terms, is ?borrowed in advance? from the large amount available in the
end. This makes it true LENR, not hot fusion. It is the best of
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Mon, 9 May 2011 16:25:38 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Rossi has clearly lost that bet.
There is NO SUCH THING as stable copper-62 !!
Obviously another typo.
[snip]
Regards,
Robin van Spaandonk
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Mon, 09 May 2011 19:11:08 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
WOW! Am I reading this patent right? Rossis patent seems to bet everything on
Ni62 to cu as THE important reaction.
Note All the other Ni isotopes, on the other hand, will generate unstable Cu,
and,
In reply to Roarty, Francis X's message of Mon, 09 May 2011 19:42:20 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
So Rossi let us go ahead and think the cu was outside the SS reactor while it
was actually the sealed inner reactor filled with Ni powder and a resistive
heater. Water flows around the copper reactor inside a
In reply to Drowning Trout's message of Mon, 9 May 2011 19:13:05 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
Could a copper reactor tube even be able to handle the heat (1100F?) and
pressure (25 bar?) of H2?
I don't think that would be an issue if the outer tubes are strong enough, since
it is all of them together that
To put my relativistic spin on this I would say the coulomb barrier exerts less
of a barrier to an approaching proton that is offset on the time axis - In my
working man's model we all share the fabric of space time where our electrons
approach the surface of this space fabric while the
The following is an announcement for the Philadelphia Tesla Science
Conference to be held on July 7 - 10, 2011.
The schedule of talks is listed below. For more details please visit
www.teslasciencefoundation.org.
Thanks,
David Rosignoli
*Registration is only $100 ($50 for students or for
26 matches
Mail list logo
