Some point agains WL by AUL Lomax are ok, but they also are against DD
fusion.
gamma are expected in both cases. WL give a strange solution, but DD give
none... especially if you take into account Ni+H, W+D,... and also the
strange LENR that WL have gathered (ligtnings, rocks breaking, wires
At 12:08 AM 4/10/2012, Eric Walker wrote:
On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Abd ul-Rahman
Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Â
W-L theory allows for a farrago of proposed
reactions, so one can pick and choose for a
large and complex field, to find a reaction that
There are not a lot of shallow offshore locations in Japan, so they are
looking into the prospects for floating wind turbines. This has been in the
news lately.
See:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-29/floating-windmills-in-japan-help-wind-down-nuclear-power-energy.html
QUOTES:
Japan,
starts today...
http://www.iscmns.org/work10/
10th International Workshop on Anomalies in
Hydrogen Loaded Metals
10-14 April 2012
Harry
At 03:42 AM 4/10/2012, Alain Sepeda wrote:
Some point agains WL by AUL Lomax are ok, but they also are against DD fusion.
Depends. What is DD fusion?
There is a known set of reactions which can be called DD fusion.
That is not what is happening in the FPHE. Obviously.
The Storms review
At 05:16 PM 4/9/2012, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax mailto:a...@lomaxdesign.coma...@lomaxdesign.com wrote:
Interpretations of work can involve theory. McKubre is an
electrochemist, not a nuclear physicist. While his opinions about
theory may not exactly be irrelevant, neither should
http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981250151
Jump the vid to 4:45 when the crew PTZs to the unidentified objects.
Interesting is the look on the faces of the flight director and others
at the end of the vid just prior to the daily briefing.
T
At 08:26 AM 4/10/2012, Harry Veeder wrote:
starts today...
http://www.iscmns.org/work10/
Abstracts at http://www.iscmns.org/work10/Abstracts.pdf
I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of the
possibility of multiple causes of cold fusion. Some systems show life
after death and others do not; Rossi…yes, the Brillouin Energy system…no. A
single cause should show the same type of behavior.
What does (Lattice
How about $40/kg cargo into LEO? This tech could have vastly larger capasity
and speed than with Space Elevator. And it is a little bit cheaper, well in
reach of current engineering and does not require exotic nanomaterials that do
not exist in required scale nowhere near in the future if
It would be interesting to know if some of these (and maybe other bursty)
phenomena were due to self-sustaining generation of micro-fractures -
i.e., some kind of tipping into a phase transition.
Also, it would interesting to know if the protons seen long after energy
production stops in
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an indicator of the
possibility of multiple causes of cold fusion.
I do not think life after death is significant. I think the causes are
prosaic. With bulk material, it is caused by highly loaded Pd
At about 6:10-6:20 into the video, the astronaut makes the following
statement when referring to two of the objects:
...they're the ones we had the late 'Tally-Ho' on...
Tally-Ho? Must be NASA-speak for Nothing important, just another 'visitor'
spacecraft sighting!
:-)
Seriously, what could
Defkalion on their forum gave a similar explanation,
talking about the heat caused by H2 breaking before loading and,
recombination after degasing...
2012/4/10 Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com
Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
I am interested in the “life after death” phenomena as an
this is an essential point.
Good-mannered versus bad-mannered LENR.
I keep repeating myself.
I'm not not a an nuclear physicist, but do not need to be one.
This is a question of reasoning
There are several theories for the good-mannered category.
Say Godes and Piantelli and W-L.
Piantelli
If the proton was produced by free neutron decay, an electron would have
also been produced. These electrons were not seen in the Piantelli’s cloud
chamber. Could this mean that Piantelli’s reaction is different from the
neutron centric Brillouin Energy system’s reaction?
On Tue, Apr 10,
No chance. Requires massive budget, and technology that isn't yet
available. Electromagnetic catapults have never achieved the high
velocities required, not to mention the mega-engineering to create a
track 100's of km long that is levitated 20km above the earth by a
huge magnetic field, and yet
'life-after-death' is probably not an apt term.
to me it is more of a post-mortem analysis, ie analyzing the reactant after the
process has stopped.
Higher order transmutations or not.
As to the basics of the effect, it becomes increaingly clera to me, that
a) this is a grid-effect
b) that
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 4:22 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:
Seriously, what could 'TH' stand for in this context?
From wikipedia:
Air traffic control
This phrase has since been used by civilian pilots in response to
traffic advisories provided by air traffic controllers
At 01:01 PM 4/10/2012, Axil Axil wrote:
I am interested in the life after death
phenomena as an indicator of the possibility of
multiple causes of cold fusion. Some systems
show life after death and others do not;
Rossi
yes, the Brillouin Energy system
no. A
single cause should show the
On 4/10/2012 4:39 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote:
Defkalion on their forum gave a similar explanation,
talking about the heat caused by H2 breaking before loading and,
recombination after degasing...
It can't possibly be recombination! Both the power and energy far
exceeds that in many cases, as
First, I have to say I am not sure Piantelli's observations are real.
Maybe he had faulty instruments. But, if he did see protons, and they
were from decaying neutrons (sequestered in some decay-attenuating niche),
then, he should have seen electrons (and probably some X-rays), I think.
But,
FYI:
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-carbon-nanotubes-weird-world-remote.html
This is a new phenomenon we're observing, exclusively at the nanoscale, and
it is completely contrary to our intuition and knowledge of Joule heating at
larger scales-for example, in things like your toaster, says
pagnucco,
some philosophical
musings:
The blind man-metaphor seems about right.
LENR raised a lot
of questions for me.
Even the
blasphemical question of the identity of atoms, which is a hypothesis,
based on statistical measures.
No individual atom
has ever been weighed precisely.
It is a
I think rail assisted launch is a lot more realistic right now than a space
elevator. However, an 80 mile $60 billion tube is too big of a project at this
point. A much more feasible approach would be to find a mountain over a mile
high with the right angle and build it so the g forces are
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote:
If the proton was produced by free neutron decay, an electron would have
also been produced. These electrons were not seen in the Piantelli’s cloud
chamber. Could this mean that Piantelli’s reaction is different from the
dare I say it?
cool.
harry
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Mark Iverson markiver...@charter.net wrote:
FYI:
http://phys.org/news/2012-04-carbon-nanotubes-weird-world-remote.html
This is a new phenomenon we're observing, exclusively at the nanoscale, and
it is completely contrary to our
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this just some kind of Inductive Heating? I
don't see why this would be something new.
The article makes it appear as if they stumbled on the effect, but the
abstract (click link at end of article)makes it clear they were
looking for the effect because some new models of joule heating
predicted it.
harry
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:21 PM, Jojo Jaro jth...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
a...@lomaxdesign.comwrote:
No, not at all. Where did you get that idea? Heat is not missing, except
when we look at what would be required to generate the observed levels of
helium following the W-L pathways. The third missing observable
Inductive heating usually requires a time changing current in order to heat the
nearby conductor. Maybe the current in this case is more like a series of
quantum pulses which might have the time varying property required. A great
deal of the effect would depend upon the relative magnitude of
Could some of he missing energy by escaping by means of neutrinos? If a new
unknown reaction is taking place, it might follow entirely unusual pathways.
My two cents worth.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed,
32 matches
Mail list logo
