On Mar 5, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
When alpha particles pass through material, a series of nuclear reactions can
occur that emit radiation. In addition, bremsstrahlung radiation is emitted
as the
omitted.(:-)
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Eric Walker
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
When alpha particles pass
The TSC theory has such a kinetic energy for the alphas identified
Bob.
- Original Message -
From: Eric Walker
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
I wrote:
If an alpha is born from a [dd
@eskimo.com
Sent: Thu, Mar 6, 2014 1:19 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
I wrote:
If an alpha is born from a [dd]* resonance in which the mass energy is
fractionated among a large number of sinks (e.g., nearby electrons and ion
cores), the 4He daughter would have no or almost
Mark--
Its hard to keep track of who says what in these threads.
Sorry, Thanks for the correction.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 10:52 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob
practical intensity.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 6:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM
, March 06, 2014 6:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 11:10 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
When alpha particles pass through material, a series of nuclear reactions
can occur that emit radiation
-
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented bonding
energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding
-
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented bonding
energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding is limited
@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented bonding
energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding is limited to no
more than about 10 eV, yet you
*Sent:* Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented bonding
energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding is limited to no
more than about 10 eV, yet you propose to require this bonding
nucleus of the QM system or in the spin state of an
electron in that lattice.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, you fail to take
- Original Message -
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
I do not see how the concept of spin has any relevance to the discussion.
Both Rossi and DGT state that nickel isotopes of zero spin
-l
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2014 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
I do not see how the concept of spin has any relevance to the discussion.
Both Rossi and DGT state that nickel isotopes of zero spin will react and
nickel isotopes with non zero spins do
06, 2014 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
I do not see how the concept of spin has any relevance to the discussion.
Both Rossi and DGT state that nickel isotopes of zero spin will react and
nickel isotopes with non zero spins do not. This is both experimental data
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 7:24 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Eric, if the photons were to be emitted in random directions by the excited
He4, then little kinetic energy would be imparted upon the nucleus.I
suspect this is what you are referring to.
Perhaps; I'm not sure.
I
On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:
Bob, you fail to take into account the known and well documented bonding
energy that can exist in a chemical system. This bonding is limited to no
more than about 10 eV ...
Is this the energy required for a
From: Eric Walker
* This is yet another reason, one of many - why consideration of all
the evidence, giving no preference to Pd-D, points to many different routes
to gain in LENR.
Sure… My working assumption is that both NiH
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:15 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
From: Eric Walker
* This is yet another reason, one of many - why consideration of all
the evidence, giving no preference to Pd-D, points to many different routes
to gain in LENR.
From: Eric Walker
This working assumption (of a known fusion reaction) is not justifiable by
facts, logic or common sense.
Sure. That's you're opinion. You're entitled to an opinion.
Sorry to have made this blanket statement in regard to your prior post
specifically, Eric, since
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
No, it’s not opinion when 100% of the available proof is on your side.
That's a pretty strong assessment of the merits of your position. :)
It is fact that LENR is not and cannot be a known fusion reaction, since
it
On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Eric Walker
This working assumption (of a known fusion reaction) is not justifiable by
facts, logic or common sense.
Sure. That's you're opinion. You're entitled to an opinion.
Sorry to have made this blanket statement in
Eric,
Again, I apologize for any inference that this is personal or related precisely
to your prior post. My comment was intended to show only that:
1)LENR is NOT a known nuclear fusion reaction since all known fusion
reactions produce gamma radiation.
2)Since there is a novel
From: Edmund Storms
LENR emits photons. These photons are not as energetic as those produced by
many normal nuclear reactions, hence most do not escape the apparatus.
Where is the documented proof and spectra of these photons?
momentum with near by nuclei, but are not part of the
nuclei.
Bob
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 9:21 AM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Eric Walker
From: Bob Cook
The definition of gamma emission is cropping up again. Jones I assume you
mean any electromagnetic radiation that stems from a nuclear transition of
some sort.
The trend in science, and even in physics, is to avoid the origin, since it
cannot always be known, and to use
to the starting material.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Eric Walker
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 8:26 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:21 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
No, it’s not opinion when 100
, 2014 8:21 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
From: Eric Walker
This working assumption (of a known fusion reaction) is not justifiable by
facts, logic or common sense.
Sure. That's you're opinion. You're entitled to an opinion.
Sorry to have made
particle. The spin coupling to the electronic
structure is the unknown sauce.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Bob Cook
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 9:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Eric--
You wrote:
I have the general notion
From: Bob Cook
There are nuclear events that occur without emission of gammas. The decay of
Ni-59 is an example. What's different in Ni-59 with respect to most other
radioactive decay?
Bob - It is not gammas alone which are absent in LENR - but gammas and
bremsstrahlung… which of
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not produced by photons.
This is generated by energetic electrons or particles such as alpha emission.
LENR produces neither kind of radiation. Therefore, bremsstrahlung is not an
issue because all the mass-energy is dissipated as photons. The
:04 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
From: Bob Cook
There are nuclear events that occur without emission of gammas. The decay of
Ni-59 is an example. What's different in Ni-59 with respect to most other
radioactive decay?
Bob - It is not gammas alone which
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not
produced by photons.
Who said it was? You brought up photons. I asked for adequate documentation
of intense photon emission - and am still waiting.
This is generated by
05, 2014 11:28 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not
produced by photons.
Who said it was? You brought up photons. I asked for adequate
documentation
of intense photon emission - and am still waiting
On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not
produced by photons.
Who said it was?
I'm not answering a claim. I'm simply giving information. You brought up
photons by talking
In reply to Bob Cook's message of Tue, 4 Mar 2014 21:58:10 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
These local vortex formations provide templates upon which the solitons will
condense. These quantum cavities absorbed both gamma radiation from nuclear
reactions and infrared radiation from the reactor structure
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
Jones--
Alphas would not produce Bremstrallung, if they gain no kinetic energy in
being produced. Energy in the form of angular momentum would not produce
the B word.
Bob- That much is almost true, but you overlook the 800 pound gorilla in the
On Mar 5, 2014, at 1:45 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
Jones--
Alphas would not produce Bremstrallung, if they gain no kinetic energy in
being produced. Energy in the form of angular momentum would not produce
the B word.
Bob- That much is almost
12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not
produced by photons.
Who said it was?
I'm not answering a claim. I'm simply giving information
: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, bremsstrahlung or slowing down radiation is not
produced by photons
to the energy of angular momentum/spin energy in LENR.
Bob
- Original Message -
*From:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:06 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar
There is more than enough evidence to zero in on the prime cause of LENR
both in orthodox science and LENR data. You have not put the work into
utilizing all the data that is available.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 6:15 AM,
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Ed--
You said:
Yes, that is what I'm saying. LENR can not result in a single alpha because
two particles are required to conserve momentum when energy is released.
I note
@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
In reply to Bob Cook's message of Tue, 4 Mar 2014 21:58:10 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
These local vortex formations provide templates upon which the solitons
will condense. These quantum cavities absorbed both gamma
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
In reply to Bob Cook's message of Tue, 4 Mar 2014 21:58:10 -0800:
Hi,
[snip]
These local vortex formations provide templates upon which the solitons
will condense. These quantum cavities absorbed both gamma radiation from
nuclear reactions and infrared
momentum/spin energy in LENR.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
of the energy ends up in the
bullet while linear momentum is conserved.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, we
.
Bob
- Original Message -
*From:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:06 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 12:28 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From
@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, we are discussing a basic and fundamental concept. The energy
generated when mass-energy is released requires emission of at least two
particles for the energy
From: Edmund Storms
Jones, Hagelstein showed that this proposed reaction was not consistent with
what is observed.
We must also realize that Hagelstein is promoting his own theory which is
not consistent with the rest of nuclear physics.
As a result, Takahashi changed his explanation
Jones--
I am not familiar with TSC. Can you give a reference?
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 12:45 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
Jones
@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:37 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Piantelli has seen a 6 MeV proton in a cloud chamber.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
Ed, the energy can be released in the form of a particle, such as an alpha, and
a gamma
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
I am not familiar with TSC. Can you give a reference?
Bob
Go to this page and type TSC in the search box. Many good papers
http://lenr-canr.org/
energy can be converted
into angular momentum.
What is the basis for this lack of acceptance?
Bob
- Original Message -
From: David Roberson
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob,
I agree with you
Jones--
Got it, thanks.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 1:51 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook
I am not familiar with TSC. Can you give
as with linear momentum and kinetic energy.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 5:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Dave--
I think there is a large number of particles involved
: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, we are discussing a basic and fundamental concept. The energy
generated when mass-energy is released requires emission of at least two
particles for the energy to be dissipated. I know of no example in nature
where this requirement does not operate when
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 4:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Bob, we are discussing a basic and fundamental concept. The energy generated
when mass-energy is released requires emission of at least two particles for
the energy to be dissipated. I know of no example in nature where
and angular momentum
separate just as with linear momentum and kinetic energy.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 5:01 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Dave--
I think
So your argument is that Hagelstein has generated incorrect arguments simply to
support his own theory. And that no matter what is said about the Takahashi
theory, it must be correct because it does not emit strong gamma and it must be
better than my theory. You apparently do not acknowledge
From: Edmund Storms
So your argument is that Hagelstein has generated incorrect arguments simply
to support his own theory.
They may or may not be incorrect, but they are definitely self-serving.
And that no matter what is said about the Takahashi theory, it must be
correct because
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Yes Dave, that is true, but that is not what is observed. This reaction is
known to happen less than 1% of the time during hot fusion and it produces a 23
MeV gamma that is required to conserve momentum. This reaction is clearly not
observed. We know
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:44 PM, Jones Beene wrote:
From: Edmund Storms
So your argument is that Hagelstein has generated incorrect arguments simply
to support his own theory.
They may or may not be incorrect, but they are definitely self-serving.
Have you read them? I have and the papers
believe some say that your
muscles might tense due to damage of the brain which might be the explanation.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 5:31 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
the lamppost,
success will be impossible.
Ed Storms
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
Sent: Wed, Mar 5, 2014 5:29 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Yes Dave
: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:45 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Ed, I was not suggesting that this reaction is the main one, I was merely
pointing out
It is fact that LENR is not and cannot be a known fusion reaction, since it
is fact that no known nuclear fusion reaction is gamma free. QED.
***Isn't Reversible Proton Fusion (RPF) Gamma free? It's the most common
fusion event in our solar system. I thought you were the one bringing it
up every
Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:45 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Ed, I was not suggesting that this reaction is the main one
Storms
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:45 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Ed, I was not suggesting that this reaction is the main one, I was merely
pointing out that it is possible. Someone made a blanket statement
:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:45 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Ed, I was not suggesting that this reaction
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5, 2014, at 3:45 PM, David Roberson wrote:
Ed, I was not suggesting that this reaction is the main one, I was
merely pointing out
radiation should necessarily be a high
energy photon(s)?
Bob
- Original Message -
*From:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Cc:* Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 3:34 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 5
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
More
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004/2004Focardi-EvidenceOfElectromagneticRadiation.pdf
Evidence of electromagnetic radiation from Ni-H Systems
We report evidence of photon emission in three experiments with hydrogen
loading of Ni
peaks observed
would be nice to know.
Bob
- Original Message -
*From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Wednesday, March 05, 2014 5:26 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
More
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/library/2004
From: Kevin O'Malley
It is fact that LENR is not and cannot be a known fusion
reaction, since it is fact that no known nuclear fusion reaction is gamma
free.
***Isn't Reversible Proton Fusion (RPF) Gamma free? It's
the most
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
I have had a similar notion relative to the Pd-D system. Specifically two
D come together to form a virtual excited He particle with high spin energy
that fractionates its high spin energy to electrons and other coupled
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:01 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote:
I think there is a large number of particles involved in the fractionation
of energy resulting from LENR. Otherwise the structure would be damaged so
as not to produce LENR anymore.
I like this line of approach. It
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
When alpha particles pass through material, a series of nuclear reactions
can occur that emit radiation. In addition, bremsstrahlung radiation is
emitted as the alpha slows down. Hagelstrin describes these processes in
I wrote:
If an alpha is born from a [dd]* resonance in which the mass energy is
fractionated among a large number of sinks (e.g., nearby electrons and ion
cores), the 4He daughter would have no or almost no energy.
This was stated incorrectly. To the extent that there is binding between
the
Jones:
I gather I don't really understand what you're getting at. My responses
are designated by 4 embedded asterisks.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
From: Kevin O'Malley
It is fact that LENR is not and cannot be a
From: Eric Walker
Wikipedia has a discussion of Nickel hydride with several references to recent
papers.
I'm thinking more in relative terms -- I believe it takes quite a lot of energy
to dissolve hydrogen into nickel in comparison to the relative ease with which
hydrogen dissolves
, 2014 6:27 AM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
From: Eric Walker
Wikipedia has a discussion of Nickel hydride with several references to
recent papers.
I'm thinking more in relative terms -- I believe it takes quite a lot of
energy to dissolve hydrogen into nickel
On Mar 4, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
From the experiments on NiH it seems that it is pretty difficult to get
protium inside the lattice--unlike Pd. This seems to point to surface
reactions for Ni and bulk reaction for Pd.
Bob
Bob, all the evidence shows that the nuclear
With palladium, deuterium serves two functions. It produces NAE by cracking
it and it also provides a surface dielectric SPP cover the permeates the
cracks.
Any deuterium that penetrates deeply into the lattice is lost to the
reaction.
With NiH, the NAE is premade, or produced in an ongoing
knowledge of that clearly pertain to behavior separating these
isotopes.
Thanks,
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Mar 4, 2014 9:28 am
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
From:Eric Walker
: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 4, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
From the experiments on NiH it seems that it is pretty difficult to get
protium inside the lattice--unlike Pd. This seems to point to surface
reactions for Ni and bulk reaction for Pd.
Bob
Bob
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
On Mar 4, 2014, at 8:02 AM, Bob Cook wrote:
From the experiments on NiH it seems that it is pretty difficult to get
protium inside the lattice--unlike Pd. This seems to point to surface
reactions for Ni and bulk reaction for Pd.
Bob
Good start on a list. It is clear that the two isotopes are so very
different in nuclear properties that they should be considered different
elements- yet the chemical properties are identical or similar - so the
profound nuclear differences are masked by chemical similarity.
To add: one
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sun, 2 Mar 2014 13:23:09 -0500:
Hi,
[snip]
I was under the impression that DGT started with a 1 Tesla field that they
created themselves, and that the experiment itself increased this to 1.6 T. IOW
a 60% increase. It is common for ferromagnetic materials to
DGT:
After each triggering duty cycle (the triggering sequences producing
excess heat), the magnetic fields at ~18 cm from the reactor at all three
locations rose from ~0.6 Tesla to ~1.6 Tesla (DC peak) during each reaction
period. Such anomalous peak signals were maintained for approximately 3-4
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Tue, 4 Mar 2014 16:54:13 -0500:
Hi,
It seems I got the magnitudes reversed.
However consider the following:-
Below the Curie Temperature Ni behaves as a Ferromagnetic material, and
increases the field strength when a current is applied, as it's magnetic
Here is my take on nickel and the Curie temperature.
First, the Ni/H reactor will not work well if its operating temperature is
below the Curie temperature. A cold reactor will radiate gamma rays.
At low temperatures, the nuclear reaction is not part of the magnetic based
positive feedback loop
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 6:27 AM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
In his Arata replication, Ahern found that an alloy of mostly nickel
with less than 10% Pd takes up more hydrogen than Pd alone.
This is interesting. But now we're talking about an Ni-Pd alloy, and
neither Ni nor Pd.
It might be correct to say that there is one basic cause with many possible
effects.
Take the acceleration in the decay of radioactive isotopes. Such an effect
is a hard one to explain.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:48 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 6:27 AM,
That just the CMFV theory of fusion.
- Original Message -
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2014 6:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Here is my take on nickel and the Curie temperature.
First, the Ni/H reactor will not work well if its
]:Christopher H. Cooper
From: Frank roarty
Again..the nanotube is only going to be active at the openings and
defects.. It is a macro example of the difference between Casimir and dynamic
Casimir effect and we clearly need a robust dynamic effect along with robust
thermal linkage
boundaries.
Fran
From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 3:01 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Interesting. But how does the net field become large unless some mechanism
coordinates the destruction of the balls? Many
wet but
even there he has the potential for water vapor to react with the most active
regions.
Fran
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 3:04 PM
To: vortex-l
Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
What is the course of an open ender positive
in the case of the Pd and
Ni systems.
Bob
- Original Message -
From: Axil Axil
To: vortex-l
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2014 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
What is the course of an open ender positive feedback loop without limit. An
eventual explosion. Nothing
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Christopher H. Cooper
Yes, there is a load of fun in this sort of speculation. One
possibility is that micro sized magnetic balls as described by DGT that
start small and grow to huge power until they explode could produce a
varying magnetic field that would induce a current
1 - 100 of 182 matches
Mail list logo
