: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 3:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 13:37:54 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
And if one considers ZPE interactions then one
Robin,
I couldn't agree more when you state I think that if the ZPE exists,
then it is responsible for all other forces.
Best Regards
Fran
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Robin,
I couldn’t agree more when you state “I think that if the ZPE exists,
then it is responsible for all other forces.”
Best Regards
Fran
In reply to Axil Axil's message of Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:57:11 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
Beside iron, I cannot think of another element that can be detected using a
gamma spectrum beside thorium.
He wouldn't allow use of the spectrometer while the device *was in operation*.
IMO that implies that either
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:25:37 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
Yes, Piantelli's patent is certainly more enabling than Rossi's...
I think the most interesting statement in the patent excerpt is:
...heating is needed to cause lattice vibrations, i.e. phonons, whose energy
is
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com In reply to Axil Axil's message
Beside iron, I cannot think of another element that can be detected using a
gamma spectrum beside thorium.
RvS: He wouldn't allow use of the spectrometer while the device *was in
operation*. IMO that implies
But Rossi did allow what Levi said was a positron detector during
operation... Apparently they expected to see positron annihilation.
One note on this, set against the reported Celani rad-burst anecdote at
the demo in Bologna:
If you remember the Celani story, both of his rad-meters got pegged
jone...@pacbell.net
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 6:45 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
But Rossi did allow what Levi said was a positron detector during
operation... Apparently they expected to see positron annihilation.
One note
Beene
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
But Rossi did allow what Levi said was a positron detector during
operation... Apparently they expected to see positron annihilation.
One note on this, set against the reported Celani rad-burst anecdote at
the demo in Bologna
Villa Bianchini reports are available on-line.
VB reports begin before the ignition.
--
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 7:25 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST
-Original Message-
From: Mattia Rizzi
Villa Bianchini reports are available on-line.
It can be found here:
http://ebookbrowse.com/levi-bianchini-and-villa-reports-pdf-d62074366
The person who will probably most enjoy reading this, based on a theory of
operation is Fran Roarty, if he
not detect the
photons that you were
referring to?
-Mark
_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 12:03 PM
To:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 1, 2011 12:03:13 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
-Original Message-
From: Mattia Rizzi
Villa Bianchini reports are available on-line.
It can be found here:
http://ebookbrowse.com/levi-bianchini-and-villa-reports-pdf
Mark,
Good point. However, neutron detectors generally are designed to register
only neutrons, otherwise the results would be ambiguous.
At any rate, the “axial beam” suggestion is probably not valid anyway - so
we are essentially back to the problem of either a “new physics” nuclear
reaction,
eventually ends up as heat?
How's that tickle your taste-buds? :-)
-Mark
_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 1:11 PM
To:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi
, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Mark,
Good point. However, neutron detectors generally are designed to register
only neutrons, otherwise the results would be ambiguous.
At any rate, the “axial beam” suggestion is probably not valid anyway - so
we are essentially back to the problem
:RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Mark,
Good point. However, neutron detectors generally are designed to register
only neutrons, otherwise the results would be ambiguous.
At any rate, the “axial beam” suggestion is probably not valid anyway - so
we are essentially back
From: noone noone
*
* The Rossi effect does produce radioactivity! It produces gamma rays! They
are just low energy and do not penetrate the 2cm of shielding.
That is not the conclusion of the experts.
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
That is not the conclusion of the experts.
How often have the experts been wrong regarding LENR?
T
-buds? :-)
-Mark
_
From: Jones Beene [mailto:jone...@pacbell.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 1:11 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Mark,
Good point. However, neutron detectors
In reply to Jones Beene's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 07:04:26 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
But Rossi did allow what Levi said was a positron detector during operation.
There is even a video of its screen - showing counts, which were about
background level. Apparently they expected to see positron
think he has lied. He seems to be a sincere and honest person.
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 1, 2011 2:24:15 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
From:noone noone
Ø
Ø
In reply to noone noone's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 13:53:40 -0700 (PDT):
Hi,
[snip]
The Rossi effect does produce radioactivity! It produces gamma rays! They are
just low energy and do not penetrate the 2cm of shielding.
...note that X-rays are indistinguishable from low energy gamma rays. In
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
That is not the conclusion of the experts.
How often have the experts been wrong regarding LENR?
Touché ...
However, VB look to be very qualified in gamma measurement, and they take
into account the shielding, and most of all, they do not deny
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:02 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
...note that X-rays are indistinguishable from low energy gamma rays. In short
it's quite possible that X-rays are being produced, and being mistaken for
gamma
rays.
The only difference is the origin of the radiation. Gamma rays
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
Answer: none. Would we all not be better off in every possible way if the
reaction were both gainful and non-nuclear?
Yes. But the anecdotal evidence tends to point to reactor initiation
by positron annihilation. However,
.
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 1, 2011 3:06:49 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
That is not the conclusion of the experts.
How often have
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 13:37:54 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
And if one considers ZPE interactions then
one might have to ignore the COE since we have no way of measuring ZPE!
Testing COE requires that
ALL energy inputs and outputs, of ANY kind, must be measurable.
Note
In reply to Michele Comitini's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 21:32:59 +:
Hi,
[snip]
Don't bash me this is just a wild guess! :D
An idea on catalyst used by Rossi can be derived by the fact that in
previous ventures he worked on the
production of hydrocarbons and other fuels? Hydrogen
In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 18:11:37 -0400:
Hi,
[snip]
On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 6:02 PM, mix...@bigpond.com wrote:
...note that X-rays are indistinguishable from low energy gamma rays. In
short
it's quite possible that X-rays are being produced, and being mistaken
@eskimo.com
Sent: Sun, May 1, 2011 6:45:38 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
In reply to Mark Iverson's message of Sun, 1 May 2011 13:37:54 -0700:
Hi,
[snip]
And if one considers ZPE interactions then
one might have to ignore the COE since we have no way
On Sun, 01 May 2011 13:12: Jones Beene wrote
[snip]The leap of faith is to suggest that Reifenschweiler works to increase
the decay rate of a nucleus not known to decay[/snip]
Jones - You only mention Reifenschweiler effect which decelerates
radioactive decay by about 25% while there are also
it Puthoff who suggested that the reason the electron doesn't
collapse into the
nucleus is due to ZPE?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: mix...@bigpond.com [mailto:mix...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 3:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi
Has anyone read this before? It was posted on the Rossi blog a long time ago. I
think it is a big clue about the function of the catalyst.
Also, please don't run up to his blog and suggest he delete it to protect his
IP. The world needs all the info they can get so this technology can be
On 2011-05-01 00:43, noone noone wrote:
Has anyone read this before? It was posted on the Rossi blog a long time
ago. I think it is a big clue about the function of the catalyst.
Also, please don't run up to his blog and suggest he delete it to
protect his IP. The world needs all the info they
-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa
That is a confirmation of what Focardi hinted in his latest radio
interview [1]: that the catalyst might be something that improves
adsorption of atomic hydrogen rather than that of molecular hydrogen.
In essence this is what a spillover
On 2011-05-01 01:34, Jones Beene wrote:
[...]
Even so, it is very likely that the Rossi breakthrough is a spillover catalyst
that gives far more than the 10x the effect of Arata/Zhang.
Interesting, thanks very much for the info. So in the end Rossi didn't
really reveal anything special,
As I stated before in the Cat-E patent, Rossi ash contains no element
heavier the zinc. Rossi has stated that he does not use precious metals in
the Cat-E.
The logical conclusion is that that there is no spill over catalyst mixed in
with the nickel catalyst.
The source of hydrogen ionization
On 2011-05-01 02:23, Axil Axil wrote:
As I stated before in the Cat-E patent, Rossi ash contains no element
heavier the zinc. Rossi has stated that he does not use precious metals
in the Cat-E.
Do you think the patent can be trusted? After all it's written in the
least useful possible way
-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa
Do you think the patent can be trusted? After all it's written in the
least useful possible way ...
Very observant, Akira.
You should hear good US patent attorneys lambast this document as some kind
of joke. This document could be a complete
Rossi would never give the nickel catalyst to anyone if the “secret” could
be chemically deduced from the nickel powder.
The “secret” is not associated with the nickel powder.
Rossi said:
*“I understand you get fun, we don’t: we work on this in a factory totally
dedicated to this, and we
, but I do not think he is lying. I think he is
telling the truth.
From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, April 30, 2011 5:23:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
As I stated before in the Cat-E
this for
years.
From: Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, April 30, 2011 6:02:19 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
-Original Message-
From: Akira Shirakawa
Do you think the patent can be trusted
clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Rossi would never give the nickel catalyst to anyone if the “secret” could be
chemically deduced from the nickel powder.
The “secret” is not associated with the nickel powder.
Rossi said:
“I understand you get fun, we don’t: we work on this in a factory totally
From: Axil Axil
* The internal heater can generate a 1000 times more H- ions that any spill
over catalyst element could possible produce.
Where did you come up with that?
First, let's be clear. Spillover is NOT the negative ion. It is monatomic
and uncharged.
An internal heater
.
I do not have pity for liars, but I do not think he is lying. I think he is
telling the truth.
--
*From:* Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Sat, April 30, 2011 5:23:46 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi
*From the 2010 Piantelli patent an important section is excerpted for your
convenience as follows:*
* *
*[quote] The H- ions can be obtained by treating, under particular operative
conditions, hydrogen H2 molecules that have been previously adsorbed on said
transition metal surface, where the
I see no claim of a high rate of H- formation - where is it?
From: Axil Axil
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 6:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
From the 2010 Piantelli patent an important section is excerpted for your
Sent: Sat, April 30, 2011 6:25:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Rossi said:
“We know exactly why and how to make H after the injection of H2 and know
exactly how difficult is to use this radical before H2 recombination. This is
one of the most important parts
Axil janap...@gmail.com
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Sent:* Sat, April 30, 2011 6:25:15 PM
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
Rossi said:
*“We know exactly why and how to make H after the injection of H2 and know
exactly how difficult is to use this radical
On 2011-05-01 03:30, Axil Axil wrote:
[...]
*The H-ion is the active agent in both the Piantelli and Rossi process
which itself is just a variation of the Piantelli process.[...]
Wow.
I've never read Piantelli's patent (and now I realize I should have),
which is quite clear and descriptive.
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about the Rossi CATALYST?
*From the 2010 Piantelli patent an important section is excerpted for your
convenience as follows:*
* *
*[quote] The H- ions can be obtained by treating, under particular
operative conditions, hydrogen
phenomena.
thru NON_LINEAR and a HARMONIC phenomena.
For the theorists out there, what do you make of that statement?
-Mark
_
From: Axil Axil [mailto:janap...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2011 6:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Old, but MAJOR clue about
The hydrogen is not ionized. I really think it's worth the time to
read another member's theory:
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflationFusion2.pdf
T
54 matches
Mail list logo
